From: lee@wang.com (Lee Story)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.drugs,misc.legal
Subject: Re: 60 Minutes piece on the Forfeiture Law
Date: 17 Apr 92 18:10:24 GMT
	<1992Apr7.174346.4247@henson.cc.wwu.edu>
	<1992Apr7.193851.9037@zip.eecs.umich.edu> <811@dogear.spk.wa.us>
Distribution: na
Organization: Wang Laboratories, Inc.


(Bob Kirkpatrick) writes:

   Aside from saying "higher taxes bud" or some of the other sarcasm from
   people, what ARE the legal ramifications of this? Can the city elect
   not to pay judgements against it? Is it possible to get an order of
   garnisheement or seize city property in the same way that an individual
   or a business can have their debt prosecuted? 

   What about the way that cities and counties "self insure" themselves,
   expecting to pay out of funds that don't exist? Can they be further
   litigated against for for negligence, malfeasance, or dereliction?

There appears to be another puzzling lack of principle here: Insofar
as a city, as represented by its government, _is_ the totality of its
represented populace, it would seem hard to justify a claim that the
_city_ was responsible for the bogus warrant, illegal seizure of
property, etc., described in the preceding post.  Surely the policemen
were responsible if they knew that the warrant was not legitimate.
Surely the police chief was responsible if he directed that the action
be taken.  Surely the mayor was responsible if he approved the sale of
private property and the use of the proceeds for public ends (and even
more so if part of it went into his pocket, or as payment for his
limo, ...)  Apparently there are various laws at local, state and
federal levels which offer at least _some_ protection to officeholders
from civil liabilities incurred in the course of their work.  WHY?
(If I break a law in the course of my work, I don't expect the Board
of Wang Laboratories to take the rap for me!)  Are there any which
would protect them from criminal charges (other than the famous one
preventing congresscritters from being arrested when on the way to the
Capitol)?  Suing or charging the officeholders rather than the city
would seem a sensible way to avoid placing an unfair financial burden
on the taxpayers.

Why was the Spokane suit against the city, rather than against the
officeholders?  Were criminal charges lodged?  If not, why not?

Also---why was it impossible to return the original property to
the Gypsies, and give them a modest compensation for damages (in
addition to prosecuting the policemen and officeholders)?  Don't
you just send detectives out to track the property down (usually pretty
easy if the items are individually expensive, or if real property
transfer was involved), and say to the new owners:  "Sorry, but you
inadvertently received stolen property; it isn't yours, and we (the
city or state) are returning it to its real owner; you may of course
sue the people who sold it to you for compensation."

As far as self-insurance goes, I don't see that the city is engaging
in a corrupt practice.  Where insurance or bonding is legally
required, corporate bodies (in a general sense, presumably including
government ones, but I'm not at all sure) are typically allowed by the
states to self-insure only if they post sufficient bond or demonstrate
that they have sufficient assets.  In this case the city was the
consumer, and can be expected to look for the cheapest deal (least assets
tied up, lowest premiums, etc).  If the State of Washington allowed
them to self-insure without assets to cover probable claims, it would
appear to be the State which was remiss.  If the award exceeded
what anyone considered a probable claim, there may be other problems,
which I discussed in the preceding paragraphs.

Might a real lawyer (is Hilary out there?) comment on these issues?
Anyone?  (I'd appreciate email Cc: lee@wang.com, since I'm out of here
on a kayaking trip, and the news will have expired from our spool by
the time I get back.)
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Lee Story (lee@wang.com) Wang Laboratories, Inc.
              (Merrimack Valley Paddlers)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism,alt.activism