Quote:
Originally Posted by garhkal
IMO trump SHould have...
In situations like that, no.. Freeze the funds from the ill gotten gains so they CAN'T use them in their defense.. BUT don't confiscate it..
|
that's exactly what happens. assets are frozen. a different process really than these seizures. freezing assets happens after charges are pressed, my problem all along with these seizures is that they usually happen without charges. if the State can make a case, fine, hold the assets until the proceedings run their course. but if no charges are filed or no conviction, the assets should be returned and without costly legal wrangling.
here's an example of asset confiscation where charges are pressed prior to confiscation. as i've stated before, i lived in Louisville, Ky and the city had a large amp presence, comparable to Dallas but smaller in scale of course. and for anyone who knows the Dallas amp scene that's a compliment. there were always about 20-25 amp's open and 2-3 non asian mp's. you can guess which got the lion's share of the market and why lol. anyway, after the City finally won their decade long battle to restrict the strip club scene (a classic example of be careful what you ask for ahahaa), they went after the amp's.
Louisville vice made a case for prostitution and raided most of the amp's with charges and search warrants of course. they seized everything, cash, bank accounts, cars, even liens on houses of the owners. a lot of the girls were arrested also. well along the way, the Louisville DA's office turned one of the girls. turned her into a undercover informant. with the promise to drop charges obviously. her role was to report to the DA's office on confidential meetings with the owners and their attorneys, which is of course is privileged conversations.
well this eventually came out. two assistant DA's had to recuse themselves and barely avoided disbarment hearings. they also quietly left the DA's office not long after. the federal judge at the time, Judge Thomas Wine, publicly stated this was one of the most egregious examples of prosecutorial misconduct he'd ever seen in 20 years on the bench. OUCH!
what was the result? a deal was cut. given the misconduct and the fact that their businesses were closed and their cash held, the amp lawyers cut a deal where the owner's assets in full would be returned to them in agreement that they shutdown their businesses and leave Louisville. So they packed up and left. Now in Louisville there are maybe 3 L1 only mp's open. that's it now. no amp scene exists today.
so what happened to the strip clubs? well it had nothing to do with asset forfeiture so it's a bit off topic but not like that's a rare thing in this forum yeah? lol. but it's an interesting story as well and a lesson in "Be careful what you ask for, moral morons!" bahaaa
for years, the old way that i grew up on was that strip clubs could offer nude dancing and serve beer or booze if they had a license for both. either way you could go into any strip club and have a drink and watch nude dancing. Well the city didn't care none too much for that and went on a decade long war to end that. several of their ordinances were struck down as unconstitutional all the way up to the Kentucky Supreme Court. by the way, the strip clubs owners, in this case without asset forfeiture as they were operating legally at the time, banded together to hire top lawyers to fight it. and fight they did.
eventually the city got an ordinance that passed constitutional muster. it outlawed nude dancing where booze was served. in an ironic fuckup, the law, after it was put into effect, was put on hold. why? because the Kentucky Center for the Performing Arts in Louisville held a performance of the musical "hair", which we all should know features nudity. and they served wine to their well healed patrons of the arts. OOPS! bahhaa.
well the strip clubs pounced on that and for while it went back to the old ways. it was eventually reinstated as the courts ruled that the Center didn't really mean to violate the law. right!! so they got some slap on the wrist and the new law went back into effect.
so where does the "Be careful what you ask for, you may get it!!" part come in? well the new law split strip clubs into two categories. those that allowed booze but only topless dancing, and those that allowed nudity but couldn't serve booze. i think everyone here can see what is coming yeah? the topless clubs, as always, were 21 and over. the totally nude non-alcohol clubs could admit 18 year olds. so guess what happened? nearly all the clubs immediately surrendered their liquor licenses and started admitting 18 year olds. bahhaaa
well the moral morons went ape shit when they realized they'd just allowed Johnny 18 year old to drink soda and watch nude chicks dance. oh the outrage! but that's what the law said and that's what they wanted and that's what they got.
the strip club war ended before i left for Texas. the amp war happened after so it never affected my getting my amp on there. for anyone over 21 at the time, it didn't matter anyway, we'd just go have a few drinks at a regular bar conveniently located nearby (interesting how that happens, yeah? and many were opened and owned by the strip clubs. bahhaa) then walk
next door to the strip club. lol. in fact one of the bars was named exactly that .. "the Next Door Club" ahhaaaaaa. someone had a sense of humor and wanted to rub it into the already burning eyes of the moral morons eh??
so that's the way it is today in Louisville. no
full service amps at all, non-existent. (but there are several just outside the county line in Shelby county bahahha) and two types of strip clubs .. what we laughingly call "Little Johnny Clubs and Titties Clubs" bahhaaa
it's also interesting to note that Louisville, being a major convention town, saw a drop off in business after the strip club changes. over time i'd sure that biz came back to town but they still hear about it today as a loss in convention biz in town. not so much publicly but it's there.
so be careful what you ask for eh?
