The Cops Have Become The Thieving Thugs Through "Civil Asset Forfeiture" And Now -- Through "Booking Fees"
And they do all of this under the cover of law...
It's so often the poorest, least powerful people they fund their departments through, by seizing cash as supposed illicitly earned -- without proof it actually was. (In the Orwellian-named "civil asset forfeiture," citizens must prove their money innocent -- which often would mean hiring a lawyer who will cost them more than the money that was seized.)
Booking fees are a thing I hadn't heard of before. Adam Liptak writes for The New York Times that people are being charged a fee for getting arrested -- and most obscenely...whether they're deemed guilty or not:
WASHINGTON -- Corey Statham had $46 in his pockets when he was arrested in Ramsey County, Minn., and charged with disorderly conduct. He was released two days later, and the charges were dismissed.But the county kept $25 of Mr. Statham's money as a "booking fee." It returned the remaining $21 on a debit card subject to an array of fees. In the end, it cost Mr. Statham $7.25 to withdraw what was left of his money.
The Supreme Court will soon consider whether to hear Mr. Statham's challenge to Ramsey County's fund-raising efforts, which are part of a national trend to extract fees and fines from people who find themselves enmeshed in the criminal justice system.
Kentucky bills people held in its jails for the costs of incarcerating them, even if all charges are later dismissed. In Colorado, five towns raise more than 30 percent of their revenue from traffic tickets and fines. In Ferguson, Mo., "city officials have consistently set maximizing revenue as the priority for Ferguson's law enforcement activity," a Justice Department report found last year.
An unusual coalition of civil rights organizations, criminal defense lawyers and conservative and libertarian groups have challenged these sorts of policies, saying they confiscate private property without constitutional protections and lock poor people into a cycle of fines, debts and jail.
Ramsey County "does not return the $25 booking fee even if the arrest does not lead to a conviction." Instead, in echoes of what goes on in "civil asset forfeiture," "it requires people like Mr. Statham to submit evidence to prove they are entitled to get their money back."
In this, they are preying on the people who are the most vulnerable and the least able to do this. I love the word "legwork" below.
When the case was argued last year before the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in St. Paul, a lawyer for the county acknowledged that its process was in tension with the presumption of innocence."There is some legwork involved," the lawyer, Jason M. Hiveley said, but noted that it is possible for blameless people to get their $25 back. "They can do it as soon as they have the evidence that they haven't been found guilty."
The legwork proved too much for Mr. Statham. He never got his $25 back.
Some of you may know that I've been friends for a long time with a guy who's been homeless. He is in Illinois now, with a roof over his head, and I receive mail for him and send it to him. Though he is a very hard worker when he gets work and a talented artist, we all have our issues, and he just hasn't been able to maintain a bank account or do things that many of us find easy.
Personally, with ADHD, I find certain tasks that others find simple really overwhelming -- yet, I can spend a day researching science to get a single line correct and then throw the whole thing out the next day, because it makes some paragraph of the column too long -- and yes, ventral tegmental area, I mean you!
Back to Statham and how he was further screwed (and we have to ask what goodies the police department or municipality got for signing up with the particular cashcard company):
He did get a debit card for the remaining $21. But there was no practical way to extract his cash without paying some kind of fee. Among them: $1.50 a week for "maintenance" of the unwanted card, starting after 36 hours; $2.75 for using an A.T.M. to withdraw money; $3 for transferring the balance to a bank account; and $1.50 for checking the balance.In its appeals court brief, the county said the debit cards were provided "for the convenience of the inmates," who might find it hard to cash a check.
Bullshit.
A chain of papers started paying me through some cashcard thing. There's also a fee for transferring your money to your bank -- which the paper pays by adding that $1.50 to your check.
Fundraising through policing makes for arrests for the wrong reasons, if even to bring in $100 a day per cop. It needs to stop.
And it's just one more way our civil liberties are being yanked. On each front, it doesn't seem like a big deal -- trigger warnings on campus, a little civil asset forfeiture from poor people, the TSA violating your genitals and Fourth Amendment rights for "security." But put these all together, and you see a creep away from constitutional rights toward something ugly and dangerous.
via @RAVerBruggen
"Under cover of law"? Shouldn't that be "under color of law"?
K Jackson at December 26, 2016 6:51 AM
When in doubt, if you need to understand why a government does or doesn't do a given thing, contemplate the opportunities for graft and corruption.
With regard to the cash card company, one might be enlightened to look at the donors to the city council. I would not be surprised to see money from said cash card company, or its upper level management, or donations in kind.
I R A Darth Aggie at December 26, 2016 7:46 AM
Should Corey Statham have been charged a "booking fee?" No.
Should he have been given the remainder of his assets on a debit card that charged more fees? No.
Should he have just been given his $46 in cash as returnable property as he was released from holding? Definitely, yes.
However, at no point in this article does anyone claim that Statham was falsely arrested nor engaged in the disorderly conduct that got him arrested in the first place. It looks like the prosecutors didn't feel like the case was worth pursuing and agreed to dismiss the charges, but if they had, he likely would have been found guilty and had to fork out more money in fines or spend more time in jail.
Would have this been worth forfeiting $32.25 so he could walk away without this mark on his criminal record? Probably.
Should he have just chalked this up as a lesson learned the hard way and gone on with his life? In my opinion, yes.
Should he have pursued this injustice further, to the point that his name gets published in the papers and on-line so that prospective employers have an easier time finding out he had been arrested for disorder conduct before, which they wouldn't have with a simple criminal background check? Definitely not.
Fayd at December 26, 2016 9:01 AM
I would advocate simply killing all government officials who engae in such behavior, and their families just to drive home the point, were it not illegal to do so
lujlp at December 26, 2016 9:02 AM
My god, listen to you people.
Don't you know police officers face down snarky hookers, pot-crazed hippies, demonstrators carrying cardboard signs? You do understand that they have to interact with Negroes, don't you?
It's a dangerous job and letting the police screw the poor and confiscate money from innocent travelers is the least we can do for our wonderful heroes. And I call them heroes even though cops have been convicted for everything from robbing the dead to murder and drug trafficking. They're still better than us.
If you don't like it, stop being poor and for the love of God don't carry cash.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 26, 2016 9:42 AM
But put these all together, and you see a creep away from constitutional rights toward something ugly and dangerous.
"Something ugly and dangerous" was just elected President.
JD at December 26, 2016 11:05 AM
Can't you wait JD until he at least gets sworn in?
And it's mighty broad brush blaming police for a court system's actions.
Bob in Texas at December 26, 2016 11:29 AM
**"Something ugly and dangerous" was just elected President. "Something ugly and dangerous" was just elected President. **
That's entirely your fault for running an awful candidate and not campaigning properly in the swing states. Now the GOP owns all three branches of government and you've no one to blame but yourself. Shame on you. Shame!
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 26, 2016 11:49 AM
Why is the police department converting his cash to a debit card anyway? Why aren't they locking it up in plastic bag to be returned to him upon his release?
If he'd had no cash, would they have sold his watch and returned the difference to him on debit card?
If they want to charge him a fee, charge him a fee. Send him an invoice. Have the court system apply it to his case.
He was not charged a fee, he was mugged.
Conan the Grammarian at December 26, 2016 12:13 PM
This stuff is disgusting. This is government greed, pure and simple.
mpetrie98 at December 26, 2016 8:03 PM
Hey JD, go fuck yourself.
Fayd too.
The point is unaccountable cops assigning a lifetime of misery to anyone they please. Go fuck yourself. Call me if you need instructions.
Canvasback at December 26, 2016 9:20 PM
Should he have pursued this injustice further, to the point that his name gets published in the papers and on-line so that prospective employers have an easier time finding out he had been arrested for disorder conduct before, which they wouldn't have with a simple criminal background check? Definitely not.
Yep, because everyone is better off if you just accept the shakedown. Your comment, Fayd, is tantamount to him saying 'I was lucky 30 bucks was enough to buy the cops off'.
Ltw at December 29, 2016 3:30 AM
So.
Why do we object to cops doing this, then turn around and giggle when somebody breaks the law about marijuana?
It's because we're selfish beyond the point of hypocrisy.
Radwaste at December 29, 2016 4:28 PM
Leave a comment