How Asset Forfeiture Provisions of Patriot Act join-with illegal-NSA-Domestic Spying on Americans

Greater success against provisions of the Patriot Act and illegal-NSA-Domestic Spying on Americans could be achieved by publicly addressing "Patriot Act-broad-Civil Asset Forfeiture Provisions" that now threaten innocent U.S. Citizens and business assets, and Intellectual Property.

Few organizations that claim to oppose the Patriot Act have focused on Patriot Act provisions that permit government/police Civil Forfeiture of Assets belonging to U.S. Citizens, including heirs and businesses using only a Preponderance of Evidence and/or by so-called secret testimony: Under the Patriot Act the same informants who provide secret testimony may be paid a percentage of a citizen's or business's assets confiscated and/or resulting fines the government collects. There appears to be no Statute of Limitations for Police/Government Civil Asset Forfeiture since 2000 when Rep. Henry Hyde's got passed HR 1658 the "Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000." Hydes bill included over 200 felonies and violations that can subject property to civil asset forfeiture. The statute limitations under Hyde's bill for government civil asset forfeiture was changed to 5-years from the time police allege they discovered that an asset became subject to forfeiture.

Consequently NSA by itself or other Federal/state agencies using the Patriot Act may be able to share/use information gleaned from illegal-surveillance of telephone, fax and emails in the future to go back indefinitely to seize assets of businesses and U.S. Citizens using the low standard a "preponderance of evidence." Patriot Act provisions refer to civil asset forfeiture laws guiding Patriot Act forfeitures according to Title 18 of the United States Code. However this statement appears trashed when you consider the Patriot's "Substitution of Assets for Forfeiture provision." Under that provision it is difficult to determine if the government is using any standard of evidence whatsoever to forfeit offshore funds that may be connected to a crime, including funds that may have been innocently connected to the same offshore entity:

The U.S. Government or a joint sharing foreign agency need not prove the source of the funds being confiscated: this would apply for the "substitution of assets being forfeited" in the U.S. For example, one person that is alleged among many others to have or had an interest in a tainted offshore bank account could have their shopping center confiscated in Las Vegas, NV and the evidence for the forfeiture can be kept secret by the U.S. Government in the name of National Security.

The Republican controlled Congress 3/2006 voted to extend Patriot Act provisions that allows the U.S. Justice Department to hit individuals and businesses with "Administrative Subpoenas" without probable cause (fishing expeditions). This can act as a prelude to Government Civil Asset Forfeiture proceedings using only a "preponderance of evidence" to threaten, confiscate assets and/or assess huge fines against individuals and businesses. Rep. Hyde’s passed Hr. 1658 Civil Asset Forfeiture Act of 2000 included more that 200 alleged crimes and violations that can make property subject to civil asset forfeiture. U.S. Citizens and corporations would have little chance of protecting themselves from civil asset forfeitures and fines when served with Administrative Subpoenas.

Please find summarized below "asset forfeiture information" from the Patriot Act and Rep. Henry Hyde's passed "Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000, HR 1658." Rep. Hyde's "Forfeiture Act" gave the Patriot Act more power to seize and forfeit property using a low standard of evidence; including employing secret informants, secret witnesses, hidden evidence to forfeit property and to impose huge fines: Note: that secret and non-secret witnesses can share in the same assets they cause to be confiscated by police from Americans.

New Federal Civil Forfeiture Laws
"CREATING ARMY OF INFORMANTS"

U.S. Government can now Forfeit Property "Involved" In Most Felonies and Seize Inheritances:

HR 1658, "The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000" expanded government Civil forfeiture laws to include approximately 200 felonies and violations making more property subject to Government forfeiture; even after the statute of limitations has passed for criminal prosecution. Only a "mere preponderance of evidence" is needed for federal agencies and police to confiscate property, not "clear and convincing evidence."

Inheritances and Innocent Heirs:
Heirs need not be "involved" in a felony that makes their inheritance subject to government forfeiture. They need only have reason to know that someone e.g., a relative, employee or other person previously committed a felony or violation that involved their inherited real property or other assets.

Innocent Property Owners Lost under HR 1658: Nationally, property owners and real estate associations could not stop the U.S. Senate from GUTTING HR 1658’s original "Innocent Owner Protection Provision" that would have made government PROVE by "Clear and Convincing Evidence" that an owner’s property was subject to government forfeiture."

The standard of proof now needed for government to seize property is ONLY a "Preponderance of Evidence." Rep. Henry Hyde’s HR 1658 "The Civil Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000" affectivity DID AWAY with the statute of limitations for government to civilly seize and forfeit assets. Police now have "Five Years" to seize property from "whenever" police alleged they learned that an "asset was involved in crime" that would make it subject to asset forfeiture: police in effect, may have forever to seize citizen and corporate assets using a the low standard of evidence—" a Preponderance of Evidence."

For example, police agencies can under the USA Patriot Act, retain for years telephone, fax and email communications: Twenty years in the future any police agency may claim to have "discovered something" in an electronic communication to cause the seizure of a business, a citizen’s assets or inheritance. Under the USA Patriot Act, police need not inform the owner why they are confiscating his or her property. Or disclose the witnesses who may be getting part of the confiscated assets.

NEW ARMY OF GOVERNMENT/POLICE INFORMANTS
Congress’s expansion of property forfeiture laws under HR 1658 created an "army of informants."
Informants to get paid "25% to 50% of assets forfeited, may allege or falsely tell police that an innocent person, inheritance or business was "involved" in a felony in hopes that a government agency will seize their assets. This practice lends itself to corruption because it is too easy for informants to kick part or all of their "forfeiture commission" back to "police" involved the seizure of an owner’s property. Under HR 1658, state or federal government’s discovery of a 20-year-old crime may make property forfeitable: An alleged misrepresentation by a deceased on a FDIC Insured Loan Application can make an inherited home or its subsequent sales proceeds forfeitable by the federal government. Did Innocent Property Owners Lose? "The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000" Passed: And as before, still only a "mere Preponderance of Evidence" is required for government/police to civilly forfeit, confiscate an innocent owner’s property—NOT "Clear & Convincing Evidence."

In order to be an innocent owner, the owner must prove that he or she "Did All That Could be Reasonably Expected Under the Circumstances To Terminate Such Use of their Property". Note: There is no federal government definition for property owners to follow that state what constitutes "DID All" or "Could be Reasonably Expected Under The Circumstances to Terminate Such Use of their Property." This is important because it is the police who determine what the alleged "circumstances" were that will cause government to seize an owner’s property.
End of Item