One of the most unadvertised law enforcement practices in New Hampshire, and across the nation, is civil asset forfeiture. This is when the people enforcing the law charge your property with a crime without ever actually charging you with one. You are a person of interest but your property is placed into protective custody where it enters the fiscal equivalent of witness protection. It gets a new name and a new life as the property of the agency or agencies who seized it.
You are never charged with a crime but your property is serving life, and good luck “breaking it out.”
And no, it’s not illegal. And yes, you need a good lawyer and deep pockets for any hope at restitution. Property seized under civil forfeiture has no rights, and in most cases neither do you. Just being under suspicion is grounds for being deprived of that which, if you believe the New Hampshire Constitution, leads to happiness. The police are happy, because most of their the victims of civil forfeiture are deprived of sums much less than the cost of a bad lawyer. So the police have little to fear and every possible incentive to keep the practice in play.
To do that, they will try to blind you with the smoke screen of criminal asset forfeiture.
Criminal asset forfeiture is the sort you see on crime drams. The police seize cash or property as some ne’er-do-well and their henchman are hustled off camera in handcuffs by uniformed officers. It’s a drug war thing. And that’s fine an dandy, assuming the perp is charged, tried and actually convicted.
But the real world is nothing like Hollywood. Most property seizures are civil forfeitures and do not involve yachts or piles of ill-gotten cash and jewelry. They occur when officers engage ordinary citizens. Cars or cash are taken never to be returned, even when the property’s original owner is not charged at all or found innocent. Does it happen often? That depends, is once often enough? Is once often enough if it’s you?
It happens more often than it should, which is the point, and why New Hampshire is ripe for asset forfeiture reform.
But the the police and attorney general like the practice. It enriches them and their various departments and agencies. They like it so much, in fact, that they will oppose reform at any and every opportunity, no matter how sensible, so they are none too happy about this.
Mike Sylvia, who chairs the sub-committee looking at asset forfeiture reform, sent me a message this morning.
The sub-comm for HB 636 Asset Forfeiture approved an amendment which will be heard in full judiciary committee on Tuesday 10/27 1:00. Law enforcement and the AG are less than happy. The bill requires a conviction before forfeiture, protects innocent owners, and deposits forfeited money in the state general fund. The sub-comm vote was unanimous.
As noted, the full hearing is on Tuesday October 27th, at 1pm. (I’ll add the LOB number when I have it.)
This is important legislation with an opportunity to get to the governors desk, in a year when she’d like very much to avoid negative press.
HB636 ends civil forfeiture. It requires a felony conviction before assets are forfeited. It includes protections for families with shared property, where one member of a family is arrested yet others were unaware of criminal activity. Yes, law enforcement can seize homes, cars, and bank accounts in use (and needed) by other family members, leaving them out in the street. HB636 protects their rights to shared property when they are innocent.
No one is opposing criminal asset forfeiture as long as there is a felony conviction and the property is related to the crime. They are opposing civil asset forfeiture, the incentive to police for profit, and the injustice this brings upon the people of New Hampshire.
This isn’t just a good bill, it is a great bill. If you can get to the hearing go. We know the NH AG’s and the police will be there, trying to kill it. Stand up for property rights. End civil asset forfeiture.
