Civil Asset Forfeiture Law: Are New Jersey Police Putting Civil Seizures Ahead of Safety?

The head of the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office’s Forfeiture Unit says items seized under a law designed to allow law enforcement to pursue drug traffickers, terrorists and racketeers should tie in with law enforcement needs in a video obtained by the New York Times

Under the law, known as civil asset forfeiture, police across the country are allegedly putting the forfeiture of property ahead of public safety.

The law permits law enforcement agencies to seize property of criminal suspects without filing criminal charges, let alone securing a conviction.

In an undated video, Sean D. McMurtry, of the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office, allegedly makes a point to say forfeitures should be closely tied to law enforcement needs, according to a report the newspaper posted on Monday.

He put an emphasis on flat screen TVs over items such as cell phones and jewelry, according to the report. He said forfeitures make up a small percentage of local budgets, and the practice is a good deterrent against repeat offenders, according to the report.

Law enforcement agencies in New Jersey are permitted to keep 100 percent of forfeited property, leading to what the Institute of Justice describes in its report, “Policing for Profit: The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture,” as “creating an incentive to pursue forfeiture over other law enforcement efforts.”

In its report, published in 2010, the Institute gives New Jersey a “D” for its civil asset forfeiture law.

The report claims New Jersey gives “scant protection to property owners” as law enforcement needs to show a preponderance of evidence that the seized item is related to criminal activity.

In what the Institute describes as a policy of “guilty until proven innocent,” the property owner must then prove the property was not forfeitable.

New Jersey makes an average of $3,377,013 a year in seized properties, according to the report. It’s made a total of $30,393,114 since 2000.

In addition to the New Jersey video, the New York Times has obtained a video from a similar seminar in New Mexico, and reviewed an untaped seminar that took place in Georgia.

In New Jersey, the law was declared unconstitutional in 2002, when a Superior Court judge ruled in favor of a woman whose car was confiscated after her son was caught selling marijuana to an undercover officer while using her car in Cumberland County. The car was returned, but the New Jersey Appellate Court later overturned the decision, according to the Institute for Justice.

In a Youtube video from 2012 attached to this post, a prosecutor from Mercer County explains it is important to determine who uses the vehicle the most in such cases.

Despite the car being registered to a different person, in many cases, the defendant is the one who uses the car more often than not.

That person would be recognized as the primary owner, and it must be proven that they used it in the commission of the alleged crime.

The video was posted by Garden State CLE.

What are your thoughts on New Jersey’s Civil Asset Forfeiture Law? Let us know in the comments section below.

Not sure how to comment on Patch? Click here for step-by-step instructions.