Gov. Hickenlooper signs controversial civil asset forfeiture bill, calls it "important first step"

[TexasTowelie]

Gov. Hickenlooper signs controversial civil asset forfeiture bill, calls it “important first step” in addressing problems with practice

Gov. John Hickenlooper on Friday signed into law a controversial bill that changes how state law enforcement seize money and property suspected of being linked to crimes, despite pressure from Colorado sheriffs and police chiefs who say the measure will hurt investigations.

“Government should never keep assets seized from innocent people,” Hickenlooper said in a written statement. “House Bill 1313 is an important first step to address problems inherent in the civil forfeiture laws.”

The Democrat’s decision came within about an hour of his deadline to sign or veto bills passed during the legislative session and amid down-to-the-wire speculation about whether he would reject the measure. In making the legislation law, he created a task force to further analyze and develop policies involving civil asset forfeiture, and directed legislators to seek ways to fund police departments and sheriffs offices that could lose money because of the new statute.

“Complex reform does not happen overnight,” Hickenlooper wrote in a letter explaining his decision. “… Striking the right balance inevitably takes time. Today, we begin a process of reforming civil asset forfeiture.”

Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/2017/06/09/hickenlooper-signs-civil-asset-forfeiture-bill/

[7962]

1. No conviction, no seizure. It really is THAt simple.

My pet peeve has long been taking cash/property because you THINK it was involved in a crime. Prove it.. Then take it.

[IronLionZion]

2. Yeah, or at least return it within a short window of time

Innocent people have lost their life savings over this just because it was in cash. And cash makes people look like criminals, not like people who don't trust banks.

[Jim__]

3. The right of the people to be secure ... against unreasonable searches and seizures ...

The 4th amendment to the Constitution:

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.

To me, civil asset forfeiture has always been a violation of that amendment.

[mountain grammy]

4. Thanks for posting here.

I saw it before I went to bed last night and posted in LBN.. planned to cross post here this morning.. Thanks for posting, TT. I was frustrated that Hick delayed on this and called his office daily to remind him of the dire "unintended consequences" for people who are never convicted of anything. I was ecstatic it made it through the legislature.

[TexasTowelie]

6. You're welcome.

I should have double-checked in LBN to see if this was posted, but I guess there is no harm in cross-posting it here also.

[mountain grammy]

8. Absolutely!

and it's good to see Hickenlooper showing a tiny bit of spine here.

[Dustlawyer]

5. Most states cave to LE because of their strong Lobbys.

They are a considerable voting block that the assholes here in TX give them everything they ask for. The asset forfeit laws enable LE to act like a criminal gang. The cops are motivated because they get to spend the money on whatever they want. We are slowly devolving into a third world country.

[RVN VET71]

7. Appalling -- and horrifyingly so -- that this is even an issue

The fact this assumed right of the State to steal private property has gone on so long, and that a Governor is considered somehow courageous for opposing it is sickening.

[msongs]

9. the police union will not like being cut off from its gravy train nt

[gtar100]

10. Exactly. Why would the police be against this?

Why the police aren't steeped in constitutional law from day one I can only guess that it's because too many cops become cops for the wrong reasons. It should be up to their leadership to weed those kind of people out. But they don't.

[7962]

11. Because they want that damn money they seize.

They figure most probably IS crime related and no one will try to claim it
Burns me up