Drug War Issues
We have a trio of corrupt cops this week, including a former sheriff and a former police chief. Let's get to it:
In Rockingham, North Carolina, a former Rockingham police chief was indicted last Tuesday on charges he stole thousands of dollars in seized drug money. Robert Vorhees, a 21-year veteran, had resigned in February, citing medical reasons, but city officials said they discovered "significant irregularities" in financial records and a checking account at a local bank where Vorhees apparently deposited money. He has now been indicted on charges he embezzled more than $38,000.
In Pine City, Minnesota, a Pine County sheriff's deputy was arrested last Friday on charges he stole narcotic pain pills on multiple occasions. Deputy Justin Stoddard is accused of taking pain pills from a Pine City home in October when he stopped by to warn residents about narcotics thieves purportedly casing the neighborhood. He is also accused of taking oxycodone from a residence while investigating a custody dispute a month earlier. He faces seven criminal counts, including theft of a controlled substances and official misconduct.
Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.
Comments
U.S. Senate: Outrageous Proposed Surveillance BILL
Revised Senate bill lets feds read your e-mail Without Warrants
Sen. Patrick Leahy’s hasreworked his privacy bill H.R. 2471 toutedto protect Americans' e-mail privacy (into a surveillance bill) that will allow the FBI, police and more than 22 federal agencies without probable cause or warrant to access Americans’ private email and other communications –-using only a subpoena. Alleged seized evidence may be introduced in court against Americans in U.S. Civil; Criminal and Administrative prosecutions. Police and federal agencies can take out of context any innocent—hastily written email, fax or phone call record to allege a crime or violation was committed to cause a person’s arrest, fines and or civil asset forfeiture of their property. There are more than 350 laws/violations that can subject property to Government forfeiture that require only a civil preponderance of evidence.
Some idiot might send you an email that appears to include you as a participant in a crime or conspiracy: the Feds can without a warrant introduce that email as evidence in court against you or your business. A Senate vote on Sen. Patrick Leahy’s warrant-less access bill is scheduled before November 30, 2012.
A corrupt U.S. Government Administration or agency may without a warrant or probable cause search the email of any American or corporation politically at odds with the U.S. Government. Hitler used his Gestapo to target for blackmail, arrest and asset forfeiture, German Citizens and Corporations that opposed the Nazi party. The U.S. “Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000” (effectively eliminated) the “five year statue of limitations” for Government Civil Asset Forfeiture: the statute now runs five years (from the date) government or a police agency allege they “learned” an asset became subject to forfeiture. It is foreseeable should (no warrant) government electronic surveillance be allowed; police will relentlessly sift through business and Citizens’ (government retained Internet data), emails and phone communications to discover possible criminal or civil violations.
Under U.S. federal civil asset forfeiture laws, a person or business need not be charged with a crime for government to forfeit their property. Most U.S. Citizens, property and business owners that defend their assets against Government Civil Asset Forfeiture claim an “innocent owner defense.” This defense can become a criminal prosecution trap for both guilty and innocent property owners. Any fresh denial of guilt made to government when questioned about committing a crime “even when you did not do the crime” may (involuntarily waive) a defendant’s right to assert in their defense—the “Criminal Statute of Limitations” past for prosecution; any fresh denial of guilt even 30 years after a crime was committed may allow U.S. Government prosecutors to use old and new evidence, including information discovered during Civil Asset Forfeiture Proceedings to launch a criminal prosecution. For that reason: many innocent Americans, property and business owners are reluctant to defend their property and businesses against Government Civil Asset Forfeiture.
Annually U.S. Government seizes Billions in assets without filing criminal charges. Increasingly local police are turning their criminal investigations over to Federal Agencies to receive an 80% rebate of forfeited assets. Federal Government is not required to charge anyone with a crime to forfeit property.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZC1.htmlRe: waiving Criminal Statute of Limitations: see USC18, Sec.1001, James Brogan V. United States. N0.96-1579. U.S. See paragraph (6) at:
Can Canadians Hold Out Against Their Government's Forceful Efforts to Wiretap Their Lives?
It was recently reported: the Canadian Government intends to resurrect (Commons Bill C-30) that Canadians earlier this year rejected. Canadians discovered that (Commons Bill C-30) touted to protect children on the Internet—would also give any Canadian police officer—without a warrant—the power to request Internet service providers turn over customers’ information (see section 17 of C-30); allow Canadian police to seek into Canadians’ private computers. C-30 was strongly opposed by Canadians in April 2012. Canadians further discovered Canada had signed with the United States an array of (Asset Forfeiture Sharing Agreements) for Canada to share Canadian and Americans’ assets civilly or criminally confiscated using Asset Forfeiture laws that result from U.S. and Canada sharing information gleaned from electronic surveillance of Canadian / American Citizens’ communications, e.g., emails, faxes, Internet actively, phone records.
You may read more about Sen. Patrick Leahy’s reworked privacy bill H.R. 2471 at CNET:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/?tag=nl.e703&s_cid=e703
Fourth Amendment to our Constitution
What ever happened to the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution? It reads:
" The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Add new comment