Interesting Development as Nebraska Now Joins Other States to Prevent Civil Forfeiture without Conviction

dangerous humans

Earlier this year…Nebraska joined other states in creating laws that prevent civil forfeiture without conviction of certain crimes but does not include conviction of animal cruelty…Would have to be prescribed by the law itself or the civil forfeiture of animals will come to an end.

Bloggers personal note-Already in Texas, the animals are to be returned without conviction of animal cruelty however, the Judicial system in Texas apparently does not and nor is it required that law enforcement or judges follow the law and instead do as they please-Just ask Marion County sheriff or previous County/District Attorney Bill Gleason how they are getting away with the abuse of the citizens that live there-Feel free to toss my name in the mix-HA!

Without conviction and without a court with proper subject matter jurisdiction they took and kept my animals…However the ACTUAL law for animal cruelty in Texas requires conviction!!! There was none-no criminal case exists…They tried to fool us ad fool the court however a Justice of the Peace Court is not allowed to hear class A misdemeanors in Texas…Midway, the case changed without any notification of the defendants…Note-There is a saying, a criminal case is criminal ad a civil case is civil and never the two shall meet-Two different sets of rules *NOTE-Argument regarding the JP Court and the taking of property-Civil Procedure:

The case went on appeal to the County Court as a civil matter however the County Court in Marion County is forbidden from hearing civil cases-Judge Phil Parker knew this although he is not trained in matters of law…Marion County Judge was required to sign a document regarding TX Government Code 26.258 when taking the assignment:

“The County Court of Marion County has the general jurisdiction of a probate court, general criminal jurisdiction, and juvenile jurisdiction as provided by Section 26.042(b) but has no other civil jurisdiction” Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 480, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985. Amended by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 187, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003

The value of the animals and other property taken even though was not listed on the warrant exceeded $307,000.00-Civil Liberty abuse massive from law enforcement from day one from entering my farm property without a warrant to the jurisdiction and judgment of 2 courts that heard the case.

[NOTE: Phil Parker is an accountant and likely was looking for the extra money he would receive as County Judge-likely was already doing the accounting for the county as the County Judge is largely an administrative job in Marion County-nothing more beyond what is specified-I venture to say this was the biggest case ever heard in that court to this day. Likely he receives a retirement income from his time on the bench-He did not work within the parameters of the laws and rules that govern his court]

…and the very reason he was not allowed to hear the case-the judgement was carried out which was an illegal procedure.

I will not allow them to hide from this truth and never has any two defendants suffered from so much civil liberty abuse-Yes, I rant on this blog from time to time in hopes that someone will notice and start asking those questions as the suffering and duress continues from civil forfeiture without conviction of any crime as prescribed by Texas law.




“are you aware that animal seizures and rescues are being conducted by a very sophisticated network of organized crime who have developed a very sophisticated scheme by which they are criminalizing longstanding animal owners; divesting them of ownership of entire herds of livestock and commercially valuable animals. ~all of this done at taxpayer expense?!?”

Nebraska Just Abolished Civil Forfeiture, Now Requires A Criminal Conviction To Take Property

Institute for Justice-Nick Sibilla, contributor

Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts signed a bill on Tuesday that eliminates civil forfeiture, which allows law enforcement to seize and keep property without filing charges or securing criminal convictions. The bill, LB 1106, passed the unicameral legislature last week by a vote of 38 to 8.

Civil forfeiture has ensnared a wide swath of victims in Nebraska. A Peruvian pastor once had $14,000 seized during a traffic stop. Only after the local chapter of the ACLU intervened was he able to recover his cash. Last year, a federal appellate court upheld forfeiting more than $63,000 in  savings from a decorated Air Force veteran, even though he was never charged with a crime.

The newly signed law provides sweeping reforms. First and foremost, Nebraska now requires a criminal conviction to forfeit property. The accused must be convicted of an offense involving illegal drugs, child pornography or illegal gambling to lose their cash, vehicles, firearms or real estate. Nebraska joins just nine other states that require a criminal conviction as a prerequisite for most or all forfeiture cases. Following North Carolina and New Mexico, Nebraska is now the third state largely without civil forfeiture. In addition to the criminal conviction requirement, LB 1106 also enacts new reporting requirements for seizures and forfeitures.

Financial Incentives in Civil Forfeiture Laws

pfp figure 6States collect 0% of financial incentives from civil forfeiture are those in white.

Other percentages are shown state by state

Grading State & Federal Civil Forfeiture Laws

Institute for Justice-Nick Sibilla, contributor

Just in time for the Fourth of July, states are declaring their independence from civil forfeiture.

Enabled by civil forfeiture laws, police can seize and keep property without the government ever filing criminal charges. Innocent Americans actually must prove their own innocence in court if they ever hope to regain their property. Local, state and federal law enforcement agencies routinely seize property and pad their budgets with forfeiture revenue. Outlets as diverse as The New Yorker and Last Week Tonight with John Oliver have detailed this travesty of justice.

But thankfully, civil forfeiture’s days may soon be numbered. Starting July 1, two major reforms from Montana and New Mexico will go into effect.

Earlier this year, Montana Gov. Steve Bullock signed a law that requires the government to first obtain a criminal conviction before taking and keeping someone’s property through civil forfeiture.  This legislation also shifts the burden of proof onto the government—where it belongs—when spouses, neighbors and other innocent owners try to get back property used by a suspect without their knowledge. Montana’s civil forfeiture reforms are vital to restore due process and protect the property rights of the innocent.

New Mexico went even further and abolished civil forfeiture outright. As in Montana, law enforcement can only forfeit property after a criminal conviction. Crucially, this new law requires that all forfeiture money be deposited in the general fund, preventing it from becoming a police slush fund. Without a single vote cast against it, Gov. Susana Martinez (and a former prosecutor) signed this landmark reform on April 10.

Impetus for reform came after the Institute for Justice and The New York Times uncovered unsettling comments made last fall. Speaking at a forfeiture conference, Pete Connelly, then the city attorney for Las Cruces, New Mexico, called civil forfeiture “a gold mine,” and told attendees, “We could be czars. We could own the city.”


I guarantee you that the homegrown Fanatical Animal Rights Terrorists that have gotten away with stealing animals (property) from their legal and rightful owners will not like the change in these states and states that will join in adopting anti-forfeiture laws -Laws that require conviction of a crime for forfeiture must meet the requirements as prescribed by law.

Note-Court cases and police reports are public information pay a visit to your courthouse and see for yourself what’s going on…just ask for animal cruelty cases and for civil forfeiture cases.

Disclaimer connected to this blog…Things said are of my opinion and the opinions of others…Stay tuned -B

Animal Rights1

Justin 302407_234365913266554_1122968575_n

Justin-forced to live out his days without me-Ripped from loving and caring arms

~ by topcatsroar on November 29, 2016.

4 Responses to “Interesting Development as Nebraska Now Joins Other States to Prevent Civil Forfeiture without Conviction”

  1. There never was any good in having a “law enforcement” system and the asset forfeiture thing has proven that what little good they might have been has never existed. They have caused damage that will never be calculated or recompensed, against their own supporters. Ironically, and somehow justly, they caused massive damage to a lot of people who believe in them.

    People have worked out before just how controlled a so-called justice system would have to be in order to be at all tolerable and maybe usable in some miniscule way. This has never been implemented. All we got was the lie, the pretense that it was done that way, and that has been the only use for creating an ideal of a justice system.

    When believers and users of the justice system get it in the face or in the ass, that’s just poetic justice.

    Asset forfeiture would never have been an option if our so-called justice system had been trying, at all, to be just.

    • If any integrity existed in law enforcement, “civil” asset forfeiture would never have been considered an option.

      • Thank you for commenting Thomas-You have been here all along thru the years of undue suffering. I think it a crime in itself that no one notices and those who were forced to fought us over the actual civil liberty abuse-case dismissed on a technical mistake made by pro-se litigant after 2-1/2 years instead of how outraged they should have become over what occurred and have done nothing. Governor Greg Abbott was the Attorney General at the time and was notified. Maybe time to sue the state of Texas in Appellate Court for allowing this to occur. Greg Abbott’s office fought to have the case dismissed instead of correcting the problem. Why create rules of the courts and then allow them to abuse those laws no matter who or what gets hurt in the process??? -B

  2. […]… […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: