Wednesday, May 06, 2009

All your monies are belong to us

Over at Timmy's place, fresh from the PA wire, we see the police happily stealing money from innocent citizens—and, shamefully, for once it's legal.
No, no, nothing belongs to you. It all belongs to the State, you are only allowed to have what you can prove the State should allow you to keep:
A man lost £67,000 in cash found at his home after being unable to explain how he came by it.

Perhaps one of the legal types who reads The Kitchen could remind me of what is a good reason for having large amounts of cash these days? Can I assume that "I found it" is not good enough? Or, how about "I took it out of my savings account at Northern Rock"—would that do?
Police seized the cash under the Proceeds of Crime Act even though the unnamed man was never charged with a criminal offence.

Yes, having £67,000 in cash hanging about is a wee bit suspicious but, if you believe that to be the case, charge the guy with a crime, produce the evidence and if he is found guilty, then you can start proceedings to confiscate the cash.

That is how justice is supposed to work. It is not supposed to justify the whims of the fucking police: they are supposed to uphold the law, not fucking make it.
Officers were called to an address in Port Talbot, south Wales, after reports of an attempted burglary at the property.

Nice. Someone tries to burgle you so you call the police; next thing you know, it's the police doing the burglary. Still, never mind: the gentleman should be able to identify the culprits—provided that they were (unfashionably) wearing their numbers, of course.
While making inquiries at the address, which is in the town’s Sandfields area, they discovered the cash, South Wales Police said...

... and thought, "that little lot would pay for the force's Christmas Party and then some. We'll be 'aving that, thank yew very much."

What has this fucking country come to when the police are able to make up the laws on a whim and enforce them preferentially? Oh, wait... there's a phrase for it... Oh, yes: it's "police state".

Fucking hellski.


BenS said...

Didn't you get the memo? The state owns you and all your property, and leases it back to you on a temporary basis.

You'd think you peasants would never learn.

Anonymous said...

"Or, how about "I took it out of my savings account at Northern Rock"—would that do?"

Yes, it would have done but he couldn't come up with any evidence of where it came from could he? No HMRC records, no DWP records, nothing. He didn't obtain the money legally.

"What has this fucking country come to when the police are able to make up the laws on a whim and enforce them preferentially? Oh, wait... there's a phrase for it... Oh, yes: it's "police state"."

The Proceeds of Crime Act was passed by Parliament. The ruling was made by a Magistrates Court.

Pop your tin foil hat back on, there's a good boy.

Gareth said...

Anon said: He didn't obtain the money legally.

You don't know that and neither does the State. They have assumed it to be the case.

FlipC said...

Have a link to the original story.

Now enjoy the officer's quote of "The onus was on the respondent to provide a lawful origin of the cash found in his possession." Gosh isn't that assuming guilt unless innocence can be proved?

Sir Henry Morgan said...

He saved it over many years of hustling his bum down at Cardiff docks and doesn't want anyone to know that's what he used to do for a living.

Chalcedon said...

What the fuck happened to "innocent until proven guilty" in a court of law. I thought possession was nine points of the law? Yes, 67000 quid without being able to account for it is suspicious, but confiscation is simply stealing by another name. I expect it is another nazi law down to the bunch of tossers in government.

Anonymous said...

Er... yeah, but.
Honest people can always produce an honest reason for how they made their money. You know, work, gambling, whatever.
This guy was so unwilling to say how he came by his £67,000 that he would rather forfeit it.
If we lived in a world where pikeys didn't con old ladies out of their life savings, rob post offices and deal crack to kids I'd be fully onside with you.
Equally, if we lived in a world where said pikeys were easily convicted of their evident crimes, ditto.
But we don't so I'm not.

charlie said...

Fuck off anonymong 3:23pm. "If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear"is such BOLLOCKS. So you've never ever ever ever broken any laws? Are you quite sure? Liar.

charlie said...

and further, FUCK YOU. so fucking what if the bloke DID commit a crime? if he wasn't found guilty in a court then as far is the law should be concerned, he is INNOCENT and can keep his fucking money. wanker.

Rob said...

"The onus was on the respondent to provide a lawful origin of the cash found in his possession."

So, say some old fella takes £20,000 in cash out of the bank because he doesn't trust them (I mean, who does these days?). A crime is committed against his property, and the police wander up approx three days later to deal with it. While in the property they notice the cash. They ask him where he got it. Poor old John's memory isn't what it was, he can't remember. Cops say "cheers mate" and off with the cash, because obviously old John's a terrorist or a Mafia mastermind.

As for the "passed by Parliament" bollocks, the Reichstag passed lots of laws against Jews. A healthy modern democracy has checks and balances to protect the individual against a predatory State - just because Parliament votes for something it doesn't make it right.

Dread said...


Laws are passed by governments not by Coppers, they do as they are told as distasteful as it may be.Perhaps you have lived your life not doing what your employer wants you to do, unfortunately the rest of us can't afford that luxury.

Dex said...


Just read an article on a similar vein talking about Obama blasting the hedge funds because they are not willing to make a sacrifice and accept the governments offer on Chrysler bonds of 30cents on the dollar. Apparently they are selfish for holding out and trying to get the best return on their money for their investors.

but one hedge fund manager has blasted back with three pretty powerful points

# Let’s be clear, it is the job and obligation of all investment managers, including hedge fund managers, to get their clients the most return they can. They are allowed to be charitable with their own money, and many are spectacularly so, but if they give away their clients’ money to share in the “sacrifice”, they are stealing."
# "The President screaming that the hedge funds are looking for an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout is the big lie writ large. Find me a hedge fund that has been bailed out. Find me a hedge fund, even a failed one, that has asked for one. In fact, it was only because hedge funds have not taken government funds that they could stand up to this bullying. The TARP recipients had no choice but to go along."
# "The President's attempted diktat takes money from bondholders and gives it to a labor union that delivers money and votes for him. Why is he not calling on his party to "sacrifice" some campaign contributions, and votes, for the greater good? Shaking down lenders for the benefit of political donors is recycled corruption and abuse of power."

anyway thought it was interesting. here is the link (with video)

John A said...

"The Proceeds of Crime Act was passed by Parliament. The ruling was made by a Magistrates Court."

So? It used to be legal - as in the law - to execute homosexuals. Ditto seven-year-old children who stole anything - such as a loaf of bread - in excess of one pence value.

Here in the US we have something similar in RICO which was intended as a tool against drug traffickers and other organized crime groups. It has similarly devolved and rumblings are starting to be heard...

AMPOIC said...

Don't you just love our government's position on free speech?

wonkotsane said...

This made me so fucking angry yesterday, it took me an hour to write something publishable about it. Liebour have shit on our constitution for the last decade, there's no protection for anyone other than shitty fucking politicians any more.

FlipC said...

@Rob - If he'd taken it out of the bank a record of that would exist. It's more like he'd never trusted banks and thus kept all his savings in his house. Just like the Italian couple in the earthquake who kept all their savings in jars in the basement. The emergency services helped recover it all.

Here they'd be now helping the police with their inquiries as to where all that money came from.