Pubdate: Sun, 01 Nov 2015
Source: Pottstown Mercury (PA)
Copyright: 2015 The Mercury, a Journal Register Property
Contact:  http://www.pottstownmercury.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2287
Authors: Reggie Shuford and Matthew J. Brouillette
Note: Reggie Shuford is executive director of the American Civil 
Liberties Union of Pennsylvania and Matthew J. Brouillette is 
president and CEO of the Commonwealth Foundation, Pennsylvania's 
free-market think tank. *Names changed to protect their privacy.

PA. FORFEITURE LAWS NEED REFORM

Carol Johnson* of North Philadelphia, 87, carefully saved $2,000 from 
her pension checks, storing the money in an upstairs bedroom. But in 
a matter of minutes, it was gone - taken by law enforcement after 
Carol's husband Kevin* was found with two marijuana joints in their home.

Carol was never charged with a crime, but it didn't matter. Under 
Pennsylvania's civil asset forfeiture laws, cash, cars and even homes 
can be forfeited without a hearing on the evidence, without due 
process, without justice.

Every year, Pennsylvanians are stripped of about $14 million in 
property and cash simply on allegations that the property was 
involved in a crime. Last year, eight counties forfeited more than 
$500,000 of property each: Philadelphia, Montgomery, Lancaster, 
Lebanon, Allegheny, York, Berks and Delaware.

Civil asset forfeiture turns justice on its head, forcing property 
owners to prove their innocence instead of requiring the government 
to prove their guilt. It's a system in desperate need of reform.

Modern civil asset forfeiture originated as a tool in the "war on 
drugs," allowing law enforcement personnel to take and keep drug 
money to discourage dealing. But it is now used aggressively across 
Pennsylvania to take property prior to a conviction and sometimes 
even without a criminal charge. And all forfeiture revenues go 
directly to the very law enforcement agencies that make decisions 
about what to seize and when to pursue forfeiture.

 From 2011 to 2013, Philadelphia filed approximately 6,000 forfeiture 
cases per year, leading to the forfeiture of about 100 homes, 150 
cars, and nearly $4 million in cash. Nearly one-third of these cases 
were people like Carol who were never convicted of a related crime.

Even after Kevin was acquitted of all charges, the city moved ahead 
with the forfeiture of Carol's pension money. Hiring an attorney to 
recover the money would have cost more than the amount taken, so the 
Johnsons gave up.

In Philadelphia, more than 90 percent of forfeiture revenues come 
from cash. More than half of these cash forfeitures involved less 
than $200. Because individuals in civil forfeiture cases have no 
right to an attorney - as they would in criminal cases - taking a 
case to court to recover seized property means spending money 
out-of-pocket to hire an attorney. Most petty cash forfeiture victims 
choose to avoid a court fight - and expensive legal fees - to reclaim 
the money taken from them.

Particularly disturbing, too, is that civil asset forfeiture often 
disproportionately targets people of color. In Montgomery County, 
African-Americans represent 9 percent of the population, and 37 
percent of people arrested for drug crimes, but they are an estimated 
53 percent of property owners facing forfeiture.

Property rights have long been recognized as essential to liberty. 
Both our national and state constitutions prohibit the taking of 
property without due process of law. And our justice system is 
supposed to presume innocence until guilt is proven.

Pennsylvanians should not be stripped of their property without first 
being convicted of a crime. Likewise, law enforcement agencies should 
not have a financial incentive to pursue forfeiture targeting 
innocent citizens. A new poll shows 79 percent of Pennsylvania voters 
agree and support civil asset forfeiture reform.

Senate Bill 869, introduced by Sen. Mike Folmer, R-Lebanon, and Sen. 
Anthony Williams, D-Philadelphia, and House Bill 508, sponsored by 
Rep. Jim Cox, R-Berks, would require a conviction before an 
individual's property can be forfeited. These bills would also direct 
forfeiture revenue to a general fund of the state, county, or 
municipality that seized the property, instead of directly to law enforcement.

People like Carol should not be punished for a crime they didn't 
commit, and law enforcement shouldn't profit off of people like her. 
It's time to protect the rights of the innocent and restore the 
community trust in law enforcement that has been eroded by the 
aggressive use of civil asset forfeiture.

*Names changed to protect their privacy.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom