> "Empyreal bears the burden to show by a preponderance of evidence that it has strictly complied with state medical marijuana laws," Holcomb writes.
That’s not how “innocent until proven guilty” works. It’s the government’s job to collect evidence to prove the law was broken. Source: I served as a federal juror in the last six months. During voire dire, one juror said something like “well, yes - the defendant has to prove his innocence.” This got us a lecture from the judge: we must assume they’re innocent, and the prosecution has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
This wasn't a criminal case or even a case asking for return of the funds. Innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply. It was a request for a temporary restraining order to prevent future action by the sheriff's office. The burden of proof for a TRO always falls on the party requesting the TRO.
Almost all of the SoCal police departments (LAPD, LASD, San Bernardino Sheriffs) are out of control, with massive, sprawling budgets (the city of Los Angeles gives more money to police than any other category and just added more money for the next year after their "defunding" in 2020) and a complete lack of oversight.
Villanueva, in charge of the LA County Sheriff's Department, has refused to participate in basic oversight or accountability from the LA County Board of Supervisors and routinely oversteps his legal boundaries in dealing with issues (his bizarre "sweeps" in Venice, as one example).
The police are an uncontrollable force in this country and will only grow more violent and brazen in their actions as public trust continues to erode.
I feel like a much needed accountability reset of police departments across the country got sidelined, after the BLM protests(George Floyd) that erupted turned into a call for abolishing them.
I don't want to abolish them, and would be willing to fund them even more with better trainings in exchange for better accountability. The subsequent actions would've even fulfilled some of the asks of the protestors. The ideological asks kinda ruined it.
As a counterpoint, last time I did a comparison it looked like LAPD had a drastically smaller budget (both per capita and per square mile) than any large other city. NYPD's budget is well over double per capita.
The police are only allowed to do what the law let's them.
no knock warrants are not the police's fault.
seizure of people's property is not the police's fault
militarization of police is not their fault
the police are literally using all the tools at their disposal that the law allows them to.
Your frustration should be targeted at the politicians who are influenced by lobbyists and have their seats secured by gerrymandering who give the police these powers.
the police are just easy targets for people's frustration
Sadly, I live in this Sheriff's jurisdiction. It's embarrassing. And yeah, puns about his last name using a short "i" are in order.
Civil asset forfeiture disturbs me. I mean it really, really disturbs me -- deep down in my gut. I have a hard time understanding how it is consistent with the values we (U.S. citizens) claim to hold. I'm not a student of the law, so I won't pretend to have any deep insights into its constitutionality. I just feel it's a malignant tumor on our justice system. I can only wonder how it appears to those in other developed nations, at least those whose laws do not allow such presumptive seizures. It doesn't seem all that far removed from the system of letters of marque that authorized so much piracy in the 16th century -- we can so we will. Honestly, I don't see how any fair-minded person can be anything but sickened by civil asset forfeiture.
Why not just seize all cash from all armored cars regardless of what kind of business it is? I don't see the distinction from seizing the cash from a LEGAL marijuana business versus seizing it from Walmart. What law is being broken by the marijuana business or the cash-movers?
This will happen as long as the ruling class is prevented from taking their cut of the pie due to it still being illegal at the federal level.
They’re mad and bothered that lower classes are able to establish marijuana business in select states, so they have their posse (police) do their bidding.
There are no completely legal marijuana businesses in the US. All of them are in violation of federal law. This is why the money was transferred to a federal agency for the actual asset forfeiture.
One of the core tenants of our government is checks and balances. Why is there no panel of citizens with enough power to keep the police in check? I feel like if average citizens had the opportunity to effect the careers of policemen and women, then they would behave much better.
[+] [-] jagged-chisel|4 years ago|reply
That’s not how “innocent until proven guilty” works. It’s the government’s job to collect evidence to prove the law was broken. Source: I served as a federal juror in the last six months. During voire dire, one juror said something like “well, yes - the defendant has to prove his innocence.” This got us a lecture from the judge: we must assume they’re innocent, and the prosecution has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
[+] [-] tssva|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] strangesongs|4 years ago|reply
Villanueva, in charge of the LA County Sheriff's Department, has refused to participate in basic oversight or accountability from the LA County Board of Supervisors and routinely oversteps his legal boundaries in dealing with issues (his bizarre "sweeps" in Venice, as one example).
The police are an uncontrollable force in this country and will only grow more violent and brazen in their actions as public trust continues to erode.
[+] [-] gime_tree_fiddy|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Rebelgecko|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vgeek|4 years ago|reply
This may be relevant if you haven't already seen it.
[+] [-] edmcnulty101|4 years ago|reply
no knock warrants are not the police's fault.
seizure of people's property is not the police's fault
militarization of police is not their fault
the police are literally using all the tools at their disposal that the law allows them to.
Your frustration should be targeted at the politicians who are influenced by lobbyists and have their seats secured by gerrymandering who give the police these powers.
the police are just easy targets for people's frustration
[+] [-] mlazos|4 years ago|reply
Real talk though those audio recordings of the police commenting that “that’s all they got” has no place in this country.
[+] [-] tanseydavid|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] glennvtx|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sleightofmind|4 years ago|reply
Civil asset forfeiture disturbs me. I mean it really, really disturbs me -- deep down in my gut. I have a hard time understanding how it is consistent with the values we (U.S. citizens) claim to hold. I'm not a student of the law, so I won't pretend to have any deep insights into its constitutionality. I just feel it's a malignant tumor on our justice system. I can only wonder how it appears to those in other developed nations, at least those whose laws do not allow such presumptive seizures. It doesn't seem all that far removed from the system of letters of marque that authorized so much piracy in the 16th century -- we can so we will. Honestly, I don't see how any fair-minded person can be anything but sickened by civil asset forfeiture.
[+] [-] mikece|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ecf|4 years ago|reply
They’re mad and bothered that lower classes are able to establish marijuana business in select states, so they have their posse (police) do their bidding.
[+] [-] tssva|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] frogperson|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 0x7E3|4 years ago|reply