Toys for Police or Aid for Victims--who or what is DOJ's asset forfeiture for?

PG County police has a newish mobile command center.   It looks glossy, sophisticated, and high-tech, which is to say, cool.*

The techie-fizz wears off, however, when you realize the county got the new command center through the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Equitable Sharing Program, which allows state and municipal police to share in a portion of so called "ill-gotten assets" (i.e. those seized under suspicion that a federal crime has been committed).  Here's the formal definition of the program on DOJ's webpage.

It sounds good doesn't it?  Hitting the bad guys by going after their money.  'What could be wrong with that?' you ask?  A lot, as it turns out.

An investigative series on the program by the Washington Post highlights two issues in particular.  The first is that seizure of property can occur based on suspicion (i.e. without concrete evidence). Ordinary citizens can have cash, vehicles, and other property seized on suspicion that it was obtained through illegal means. 

The second problem is that even if police fail to produce enough evidence for an indictment, they can still keep your property.  In fact, the only way to get your stuff back is to negotiate, or hire a lawyer and go to court. The Washington Post found that 81% of the cases it tracked through a FOIA request did not result in an indictment.  Your pockets for the picking--local law enforcement edition. 

The third problem--do victims of crime benefit from Equitable Sharing?--brings us back to that bus.  When DOJ is pressed to justify the program given these obvious problems, it usually resorts to tropes about helping victims.  Here's how a DOJ spokesperson described the program to a Washington Post Reporter:  "It [Equitable Sharing] removes the tools of crime from criminal organizations, deprives wrongdoers of the proceeds of their crimes, recovers property that may be used to compensate victims, and deters crime."

So, how do victims make out in the Equitable Sharing Bonanza?  Not well, it turns out.  State and local forces would rather buy stuff than help already existing victims.  According to the Washington Post, since 2008 the state and local police from across the country have received 2.5 billion from the Equitable Sharing Program.  And, a breakdown of the categories for national spending demonstrate victims are at the bottom of the list.  One billion dollars of that spending was categorized as 'other,' as in 'none of your damned business how we spent the money.'  The second largest spending category--communications and computers--sucked up 436 million of total funds.   Likewise, 261 million went to "building and improvements," 215 million on salaries, and 177 on weapons.  Victims, "community-based programs" in DOJ parlance, got a paltry 20 million.

So, the next time you see the PG County Mobile Command Unit tooling around town, ask the police chief why he didn't spend that money on helping gunshot victims, or victims of domestic violence, or victims of elder abuse?  The list goes on and on.

By the way, the question about victims shouldn't stop you from asking all the other questions the WAPO reporting begs you to ask, including whether we really do have a presumption of innocence anymore?    

* The picture of the mobile command center is from PG County's website.