The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I forgot about this and watched a documentary last night about it, and it still rages me that this happens.
http://www.geocities.com/ CapitolHill/ Senate/9552/asset.html
(remove spaces naturally)
http://www.geocities.com/ CapitolHill/ Senate/9552/asset.html
(remove spaces naturally)
Page:
\ | /
-O-
/ | \
That should be better !!
-O-
/ | \
That should be better !!
\ | /
- O -
/ | \
- O -
/ | \
=(
It's shining here as well !!
and count yourself lucky if the sun is shining where you are.
pff.
As far as I'm concerned, unless the officials are lying about their motives for forfeiture, and have fabricated evidence to prove it, anyone unjustly having their assets taken in this way would have them back with the use of a decent lawyer, who would take the case for free because of the fact that it's an open and shut case, worth a decent sum of the money and a chance to embarass the government.
It states quite clearly the circumstances under which assets can be siezed, and all are linked to clear criminal activities on part of the possession's owners. If the owners have not committed an offence, their assets cannot be siezed, and if they are, open and shut case for up-start lawyer time.
Americans always publicise how unjust some of their laws are, even when they are not unjust, it is simply because they have fallen victim to it.
And as far as the work of "support groups" goes, groups like those petitioning for the reform of marajuana laws hardly add credence to these very hard to believe claims of asset forfeiture. I'm not just taking the official line and deeming it to be correct, the victims side just isn't at all believable.
As far as I'm concerned, unless the officials are lying about their motives for forfeiture, and have fabricated evidence to prove it, anyone unjustly having their assets taken in this way would have them back with the use of a decent lawyer, who would take the case for free because of the fact that it's an open and shut case, worth a decent sum of the money and a chance to embarass the government.
It states quite clearly the circumstances under which assets can be siezed, and all are linked to clear criminal activities on part of the possession's owners. If the owners have not committed an offence, their assets cannot be siezed, and if they are, open and shut case for up-start lawyer time.
Americans always publicise how unjust some of their laws are, even when they are not unjust, it is simply because they have fallen victim to it.
And as far as the work of "support groups" goes, groups like those petitioning for the reform of marajuana laws hardly add credence to these very hard to believe claims of asset forfeiture. I'm not just taking the official line and deeming it to be correct, the victims side just isn't at all believable.
Not at all, but neither have you suddenly done the work of support groups and civil liberties groups by looking at one sight and proclaiming your version as the only correct one - yet again.
To be honest mate, I can't be bothered locking horns today with you.
The sun is out and I'm in a good mood.
Have an enjoyable day
To be honest mate, I can't be bothered locking horns today with you.
The sun is out and I'm in a good mood.
Have an enjoyable day
Oh, I forgot. Everything is a conspiracy.
Your faith is touching.
Would you like to buy some magic beans?
Would you like to buy some magic beans?
taken from west virginia U.S. attorney's website:
====
The Asset Forfeiture Section is responsible for obtaining the forfeiture of assets, whether real property or personal property, which have been used in criminal activity and/or were purchased with the proceeds of criminal activity. To obtain the forfeiture of assets, the Section works with investigative agencies and Assistant U.S. Attorneys to identify assets, restrain the assets pending completion of the forfeiture, and conduct any legal proceedings necessary to complete the forfeiture.
====
let me go over a particular section so it is absolutely clear:
"property...used in criminal activity and/or were purchased with the proceeds of criminal activity. "
So it may be the property being charged with a crime, but that property has been either used by someone for a crime, or has been obtained illegally. So no robbing of innocent old ladies, unless she was not, in fact, innocent.
More clear is this, taken from The Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture, on the Department of the Treasury website (http://www.eoaf.treas.gov/ forfeiture.asp)
==========
There are two types of forfeiture available to the Government: civil forfeiture and criminal forfeiture. A civil forfeiture is intended to confiscate property used or acquired in violation of the law; a criminal forfeiture is imposed on a wrongdoer as part of his/her punishment following a conviction. The procedures involved in these two types of forfeiture are very different; however, the results are the same, which is the transfer of rights, title, and interest of the property to the United States. Whichever procedure is employed, a party asserting an interest in the property may petition to recover that interest.
===========
2 types of forfeiture.
1)confiscation of property used or acquired IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW
2)as part of a punishment FOLLOWING A CONVICTION
So, I can only conclude that either the old woman's money was part of an illegal money laundering operation, or it was not in fact hers, and belonged to someone else, who ha recently been convicted for criminal activities.
====
The Asset Forfeiture Section is responsible for obtaining the forfeiture of assets, whether real property or personal property, which have been used in criminal activity and/or were purchased with the proceeds of criminal activity. To obtain the forfeiture of assets, the Section works with investigative agencies and Assistant U.S. Attorneys to identify assets, restrain the assets pending completion of the forfeiture, and conduct any legal proceedings necessary to complete the forfeiture.
====
let me go over a particular section so it is absolutely clear:
"property...used in criminal activity and/or were purchased with the proceeds of criminal activity. "
So it may be the property being charged with a crime, but that property has been either used by someone for a crime, or has been obtained illegally. So no robbing of innocent old ladies, unless she was not, in fact, innocent.
More clear is this, taken from The Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture, on the Department of the Treasury website (http://www.eoaf.treas.gov/ forfeiture.asp)
==========
There are two types of forfeiture available to the Government: civil forfeiture and criminal forfeiture. A civil forfeiture is intended to confiscate property used or acquired in violation of the law; a criminal forfeiture is imposed on a wrongdoer as part of his/her punishment following a conviction. The procedures involved in these two types of forfeiture are very different; however, the results are the same, which is the transfer of rights, title, and interest of the property to the United States. Whichever procedure is employed, a party asserting an interest in the property may petition to recover that interest.
===========
2 types of forfeiture.
1)confiscation of property used or acquired IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW
2)as part of a punishment FOLLOWING A CONVICTION
So, I can only conclude that either the old woman's money was part of an illegal money laundering operation, or it was not in fact hers, and belonged to someone else, who ha recently been convicted for criminal activities.
Page: