Thursday, 15 May 2008
Home arrow Local News arrow Police forfeiture policy criticized
InVenice Poll
Do you feel like Local,State and Federal Agencys Care about You and your Family?
Main Menu
Home
My Tube
Local News
Clubs and Organizations
Election 2008
Grass Roots
911 investigations
The Police State
Florida News
Fun Facts :Things to Know
National News
World News
Music News
Forum
Weather
Soap Box
News Feeds
Swanny's Fun Room
Florida Facts: Things to Know
Web Links


Police forfeiture policy criticized E-mail
Written by By MICHAEL A. SCARCELLA and ANTHONY CORMIER   
Friday, 20 October 2006

A man says Bradenton police wrongly took $10,000, dropped the charge and now won't return his cash.

BRADENTON -- City police filed a bogus charge against a 20-year-old man, improperly took $10,000 from him and now refuse to return it despite the charge being dropped, lawyers for the man argue in a lawsuit filed against the department this week.

The lawsuit on behalf of Delane Johnson also questions the legality of the department's policy, which allows police to take a person's property without judicial oversight -- simply by having the person sign a consent form drafted by the department.

The forfeiture dispute dates to July, when police stopped Johnson outside an east Bradenton apartment. Police say when they questioned Johnson they saw a wad of money in his pants pocket.

Johnson told police he was going to use the $10,000 for a party. Police arrested him on a rarely used charge of failing to report a business transaction that exceeds $10,000.

But prosecutors said it's not a crime to carry that amount of cash, and dropped the case in August. By then police had already deposited Johnson's money into a department bank account.

"The whole arrest was bogus. It's awful," said attorney Varinia Van Ness, who represented Johnson.

After his arrest and while still in custody, Johnson signed a forfeiture form prepared by the Bradenton Police Department.

The "Contraband Forfeiture Agreement," which Bradenton police officials say they have used for years, states that a person signing it agrees to 11 items, including ownership of the property and a willingness to give it up.

By signing the form, the person also acknowledges that he does not have an attorney and agrees to waive the right to have a judge sign off on the confiscation.

Van Ness said Johnson has no memory of signing the paperwork. There are no witness signatures on the document, which a detective signed.

State law says a person is entitled to a hearing with a judge before authorities can take away property in a forfeiture case. The police document does not mention this.

Authorities must show in a sworn statement that property was either used to commit a crime or obtained through criminal activity. There is no such statement in this case.

Still, Bradenton police defend the policy, saying that nobody forced Johnson to sign the document.

Bradenton Police Chief Michael Radzilowski said some people would rather sign the papers -- skipping any chance to contest the forfeiture -- than spend the time and money necessary to fight for their property back.

"This is not the first time a person who has signed away their money who now wants it back," Radzilowski said. "A property owner can decide how they want to dispose of their property."

lIf a judge rules against the city in the Johnson case, Radzilowski said he won't lose any sleep cutting a $10,020 check.

"Does he really think a judge will give him back his drug money? God bless him if a judge goes along with that."

But several legal scholars and attorneys said the Bradenton method of confiscating property is dumbfounding -- and possibly illegal.

Why, they asked, when the state has a system in place to seize property through the courts, would a police agency ask people to give up their right to contest the seizure?

"It sounds like robbery to me," said Joseph Little, a law school professor at the University of Florida.

Tampa Bay defense attorney Denis DeVlaming said the practice of signed documents that give up the right to protest police seizures is sweeping.

DeVlaming has seen similar cases in Pinellas County, and believes the close-knit police community is looking for a quick fix instead of a lengthy court process to seize cash and vehicles.

"Why go through this long, drawn-out process when somebody signs a document and gives up all their rights? It's alarming," DeVlaming said. "And, to tell you the truth, I'm surprised it's not happening more often."

{mos_sb_discuss:8} Political Scandal

 

{mos_sb_discuss:13} Life in Paradise or not

link

 
< Prev   Next >
Design by Joomlactive
© 2008 invenice.net
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.