It has been stored outside since 2013. www.nwitimes.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/court-orders-land-rover-returned-as-indiana-loses-again-in-civil-forfeiture-lawsuit/article_0e1bd19e-1a22-5ee5-a584-0314e0799f37.html
Here's the cure: The Made Whole Doctrine is an equitable defense to the subrogation or reimbursement rights of a subrogated insurance carrier or other party, requiring that before subrogation and/or reimbursement will be allowed the insured must be made whole for all of its damages. Insist that the money comes from the government entity(s) that caused this.
"If they're trying to rehabilitate me and help me help myself, why do want to make things harder by taking away the vehicle I need to meet with my parole officer...?" Newsflash--they don't care about you. They want money!
By the states logic if the drug dealer took the bus to buy his drugs, then the state could seize the bus ... Which makes as much sense as taking the land rover.
My dad and I were going to buy a 66 Chevelle. A Trooper that pulled us over wanted to know what was in the manilla envelope in the glovebox. Long story but the only thing that kept him from confiscating it was that my dad was retired chief of police in our home town. But he was letting them dig their own grave and didn't say anything about being a retired cop. It was only when the backup officers ran his name they realized it and let him keep his hard earned money. There was another incident about ten years ago where they dragged the 2 of us out of a car over a legal gun that was legally stored and locked in the trunk that he became outspoken about police corruption and misconduct. Ever since he's been outspoken about the police issues these days.
Sounds like the Land Rover was new or a year old, the state needs to replace it with a similar Land Rover of same age as when seized! (nearly new) - also, the State should be responsible for any attorneys fees, and ALSO for any transportation costs (Uber etc.) incurred by Mr. Tims over the last 7 years! - not to mention, PUNITIVE damages!!
The only reason they're fighting so hard to keep the Land Rover is because they don't want to have to shut off the spigot of civil asset forfeiture Revenue. Absolutely disgraceful and I wholeheartedly agree these tyrants need to be voted out.
@@sbrazenor2 Hah. I'll bet you anything that the vast majority of the seized property is now being driven, worn, or used by members of the police force or DA's office.
This is why the state is stalling. Maybe the reason for the inability to accept the ruling is. If the vehicle is handed back and a further investigation reveals corruption. Dragging this case out for so long must be an admission of guilt.?
Tim's lawyers need to ask the Supreme Cpurt for their ruling to include a clause for Indiana to stop appealing their decision or the state attorney will be disbarred and thrown in prison.
Sounds like the Land Rover was new or a year old, the state needs to replace it with a similar Land Rover of same age as when seized! (nearly new) - also, the State should be responsible for any attorneys fees, and ALSO for any transportation costs (Uber etc.) incurred by Mr. Tims over the last 7 years! - not to mention, PUNITIVE damages!!
These rogue prosecutors need to be prosecuted. Beyond the abuse suffered by the owner of the vehicle they are also costing the state millions. Steve's use of the word "gruesome" is correct.
He likely sue them for damages as a result of them holding the vehicle. Reason they are dragging it out. The cost of going to courts and attorney fees outweighs what the value of the vehicle even worth? Then he can use the argument by them withholding he vehicle in question. He lost opportunities and wages for legitimate employment as a result causing years of damages. They end up having to pay way over what the vehicle worth.
I don't think I will see it in my lifetime but I wouldn't be shocked to see an armed rebellion at some point in the next 100 years. It's just slowly getting worse instead of getting better at all.
@@dcast777 I predict it around the time the baby boomers realize their Social Security and savings are being paid in worthless U.S. dollars. The youngers will join in when they realize the government is trying to take even more of their money away.
What I gather from this is: your rights are only as strong as you can afford to have them defended. When you take everything from a person who is defending their rights, they'll have nothing left to lose. Remember that, our country was founded on it.
Cryptic Observer yup. It's time to eliminate our entire government from the lowliest parking ticket cop all the way to the president and start fresh as outlined in the original writing of the Constitution.
@@dcast777 That's the cycle of empire. Over the 2010's people forgot why fascism is bad. World War II and the Holocaust has passed from memory. In the 00's it was oligarchy from the 20's and 30's. When grandpa dies, his grandkids forget the lesson.
He probably told them, "they were going to lose and have to give him his car back." After saying that all those years, the prosecution has been riding on relentless ego ever since. They are getting paid either way, why not? Hope that prosecution get sanctioned and run out of state.
As someone who lives in Indiana, I can tell you that a lot of what this state does is ass backwards, especially when drugs are involved. For a state so “hard on drugs” it sure has a lot of drug abusers. This is why we need to kick all these judges off the bench in November. They shouldn’t be on the bench for life.
Start holding these idiot prosecutors PERSONALLY responsible for the attorney fees of the plaintiff when they abuse their authority this way. When they have this type personal accountability for their actions rather than waste tax payer money this behavior will quickly stop.
@Paul T While I mostly agree it is the JUDGE that even allows the case to be heard & continue to begin with. They could just deny the appeals of the state but they don't because they are part of it. I'm sure Mr Lehto will agree that in many instances (especially in smaller towns) you will see the judge out having lunch with the prosecutors; how that doesn't create a conflict of interest is beyond me.
Absolutely. It’s more than just the judges though. The more people they have in prison/county jail, the more money the state gets. Spending on the prison system is also 3x that of public education. Instead of helping people with chemical addiction, they lock them up and extort them, and add a couple more cells. Where’s the justice in that?
Steve, If I lived in Michigan and was arrested (fined) for something, I would want you to argue my case. Thanks for your insight on the different scenarios you bring to light. Carry on, sir! you are doing great!
That argument is every bit as stupid as any arguments the state has used to justify seizing the car. The vehicle is a tool that gets people to places, whether it's for honest activities or to do something illegal, so the vehicle facilitates the crime. Regular clothing, OTOH, doesn't facilitate the crime, though a mask, or dark or camouflage clothing might be seized legitimately.
Mike Cummings Maybe just Maybe the DA is running for higher office and this is his way of showing the world "I'm a law an order candidate". I thought those dinosaurs were extinct years ago ...apparently not.
If they (Indiana) still (unlikely) have it (which probably don't) may be why they're fighting so hard to block Timbs from "getting it back", if they sold it Timbs is going to be entitled to the cash value when it was sold plus most likely punitive damages for this whole ordeal.
Wow. Sounds like their appeal has already been addressed. There is no scenario where keeping the vehicle is not an excessive fine. They should be held in contempt for not complying and then appealing again on something that has basically already been asked and answered.
That would be every person speeding would lose their vehicle, because it part of the crime and or instrumental involved in the crime if you follow Indiana idea on crime and fines?
If a traffic violation isn't a criminal act or against the law? Then why would they pull you over to being with? Yes I understand its a civil process but the issue still remains that if you don't stop and adhere to the police to deal with the situation either way you would be in deep dog poop! So I think its very funny to say a traffic ticket isn't a crime when basically you can't refuse to follow the traffic laws or refuse to deal with the law enforcement if they pull you over?
@@darcam my understanding ,( and am not a lawyer so I could be wrong) a crime is either a misdemeanor or felony. Where a moving violation is just that, a violation. That's why when they run background checks it doesn't show driving record. I could be wrong. You might very well know more about it than I do. Although DUI is a crime. So I'm not sure, just the way I understand it. This was a good discussion, I will check in to it more for my own curiosity.👍
I'm from Indianapolis, In. The attorney general is Curtis Hill. He has already been asked to resign over sexual abuse allegations, but denies the claims and refuses to resign. Guess it's up to us citizens to get rid of him.
A perfect reason why we need to abolish the Government, form a common law grand jury and prosecute them; clearly the Judicial branch can't be trusted, nor can the other branches
The Supreme Court ruled on whether the state had to adhere to the 8th amendment, not whether the seizure was actually an excessive fine. Right now they are fighting over whether or not taking a $40,000 car for a $10,000 maximum fine is an excessive fine. The state is arguing that it's not a fine so the 8th amendment doesn't apply in the first place.
Because the SC only said that the 8th amendment applies to the state, so they can't impose an excessive fine. That leaves the state free to argue that seizure of the car wasn't an excessive fine. Timbs lawyer originally argued that the seizure violated the 8th amendment's prohibition against excessive fines, and (I would guess because they knew it was a certain loser) instead of arguing that it wasn't an excessive fine the state argued that the 8th amendment didn't apply to the states. The SC punted on excessive fines and sent the case back to Indiana to consider that question.
Once again thank you for sharing this story. Steve I would like to talk to you in the near future. I've had a case now going 36 years , I know the punishment fits right.. after hearing this story from you it helps give me the Hope's that some day the courts will do the right thing and correct there mistakes. I take care of a special needs person now for 40 plus years so I have borrowed to the hills cash for legal fees but laws keep changing so the courts just do what they want and not the right thing. I feel people in power just aren't doing the right thing and cover there tracks. I like the way you speak about issues. Maybe you could help me or give me some helpful advice. Thanks again
Since it is turning personal, can Tims go after the opposing attorneys' qualified immunity. It is not just government, you should know being an attorney, corporations do it all the time to the little people!
If they lose this case and are told "you don't get to do this anymore" they'll lose a revenue stream. Here's the problem: when have you ever seen a bureaucrat willingly give up a revenue stream? I doubt there's any more to it than that.
I am very confused. Didn’t the SCOTUS say that the Land Rover seizure was disproportionate to the crime. Yet even still the state ignores this decision? What in the end is his remedy?
The Supreme Court said "this is excessive" and then sent the case back down to the Indiana court for them to retry basically. The Indiana court has to take the Supreme Court's opinion into account the second time around. And they did.. they said "This is excessive" but the state is appealing that decision. It's a waste of tax dollars if nothing else. Just stupid at this point.
Sounds like the Land Rover was new or a year old, the state needs to replace it with a similar Land Rover of same age as when seized! (nearly new) - also, the State should be responsible for any attorneys fees, and ALSO for any transportation costs (Uber etc.) incurred by Mr. Tims over the last 7 years! - not to mention, PUNITIVE damages!!
For exercising his 'sworn duty to uphold the law' by re-prosecuting the same person over and over again? No. For sitting around and watching porn videos and using State funds to buy drugs? Yes,,,unless he's got political pull, then No.
The way we treat drugs users is disgusting. I love how 3 people on the planet will argue that alcohol prohibition was a good idea, (remember the govt poisoning it citizens alcohol, because dead people are better than "filthy alchys"? I do!) but for some reason people cant get past the fact that drug prohibition fails at its purpose, hurts the users, gives power to criminals, etc. is Thats not even getting into the fact that civil assest forfeiture is govt theft with no due process. Ive always said if they want to take shit, it should have to be proven in court first, with a jury, then they can take it, but this side of the road " oh nice ride, hey is that a grain of plant matter on the carpet? ohhh my car now!!" is criminal, unconstitutional, and just down right wrong.
The problem with fights like these is that the government officials don't see that they are wrong. They cannot see the violation of human rights. They cannot see the disservice to the entire community due to wasted litigation. When it isn't your money, it is easy to spend. They all pat themselves on the backs and convince each other they are right, while the world looking in goes, what?
Assuming the vehicle hasn’t been sold, it likely has received zero maintenance. So the fuel system will have problems, any rubber/plastic parts deteriorated, paint and interior damaged by UV. So when he gets it back it will cost more to make it operational than it will be worth.
Hello Steve, I'm subscribed CYBER DOC and he mentioned your channel, I just subscribed to you! I have respect to the people I subscribed too. From Ray Spring Hill, FL.
Only way to solve this, make lawmakers criminally liable when their decisions are clearly illegal. We hear a lot about members in the legal system are held to a higher standard.
Nice T shirt - Collins Radio Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Made the best radios - commercial AM / FM transmitters - Amateur Radio's that where the best. A KWM-2A transceiver costed $2800 in 1978. Take care 'Spin'
The real reason is so they can put as much resources as possible into convicting the accused. The lengths this state is willing to go just to prove a misdemeanor charge, using tax dollars, are absolutely ridiculous. I've been the foreman on a jury for a petty drug charge. The process was far from fair and the scale was definitely tipped toward the state the entire way. They even brought a supervisor from the lab that conducted the drug test at the local hospital, 100 miles away as a witness, as well as the nurse who administered the drug test, just to say he took the test and that those were the correct results. It was absolutely unnecessary. The evidence that "proved" the man was intoxicated at the time of arrest was a crappy cruiser dashcam video of the accused during a sobriety test that was obscured by rainfall, yet everyone except me agreed it was admissible. There was no real evidence to prove he was intoxicated when he was caught in possession of the drugs, yet he still ended up being charged with a DUI on top of the various possession charges. It was an absolute kangaroo court. A jury of peers doesn't help you much in a state where authority is blindly trusted en masse. Thousands and thousands of dollars thrown around over a joint.
...so designated fine, jail & loss of income isn't enough punishment, so we're taking you possessions as well, forced labor to the State rapidly approaching.
Peppermint Catsass it's already there. The 13th only abolished slavery for common folk. It still left that convenient clause that the state can justify slavery as punishment.
Southern Indiana resident here...let’s be real - it’s never about rehab - it’s about money! It’s always been about money and how the state/government can control us - WE THE PEOPLE. Always will be.
IN is hardly impartial in this process is it. This is where CAF falls short. It encourages policing for profit, encourages the courts to support tge system and is generally just distasteful.
"how does this end?" Seems like the only way it's going to end is if the courts dismiss the state's case with prejudice and approve emergency injunctive relief to have the vehicle returned under threat of contempt. If the courts are so bold that's the only way it's going to end.
Money, get back, your all right Jack, keep your hands off of my stack.! The LAW and Legal system. A needed service in civilized society. When it becomes a business, it becomes corrupt and void, for Justice is dependent on how much money a person has and the Character of those in the business!
This sounds like the government of Indiana doesn't want to give up on asset forfeitures that are grossly unfair. It also sounds like the DA has a large ego and doesn't like to lose. The rights of the citizens means nothing to them.
The only way things like this get fixed are if the state officials could be held criminally or civilly liable after they lose a certain number of appeals. If these prosecutors had to pay a $10,000 fine themselves for malicious prosecution - this would stop.
Not being a lawyer myself, what can get this to finally stop ? Can the respective Supreme Courts issue a binding ruling instead of sending it back to the lower courts ?
Sounds like the Land Rover was new or a year old, the state needs to replace it with a similar Land Rover of same age as when seized! (nearly new) - also, the State should be responsible for any attorneys fees, and ALSO for any transportation costs (Uber etc.) incurred by Mr. Tims over the last 7 years! - not to mention, PUNITIVE damages!!
We were similarly held hostage by a bankruptcy court. We run a welding and fabrication shop that was supplying the materials for the construction of a theme park, a very small one... When they went belly up they owed us nearly $15,000. We received a letter telling us they believed we had been paid with preference and told us they wanted the $8,000 for the previous 90 days payments. We were on a 30-day billing cycle that was never breached as we feared failure. We were told by our attorney that there are 3 clauses that if you are eligible for just 1 they cannot claim preference and we would not have to pay the park back for the steel we purchased for them. We clearly had 2 of the 3 and sent the letter, it accomplished nothing. We were then given papers saying we were being sued by the bankruptcy court. We were told by our attorney that this is commonplace, they figure we will settle rather than fight it as we cannot recoup attorney fees from the bankruptcy court. We settled and paid $1500 and we have never fully recovered the loss. It set us back hard as we had to cover $16,500 of purchased material that we didn't get back from the park. As a very small biz it has left enormous mistrust of our government and legal system in our minds if it is legal to sue for money when preference clearly didn't apply to us.
I used to work for my local police department. They would seize vehicles and then "store" them in a fenced in area that was part of a larger city yard where they stored the city trucks and other equipment. Those vehicles would just sit there, exposed to the elements, and rot away. So I can only imagine what shape this guy's land rover will be in after having been "stored" by the state for 6+ years. Not only should he get his property back but he should get back the depreciation plus the cost to bring to back to proper running condition. Any rubber will have rotted away by now I'm sure.
His vehicle has depreciated to the point of being practically worthless, especially if it has been sitting untouched in an impound yard for 7 years. Lord knows what kinds of problems it has developed. At the VERY minimum, he should be reimbursed the value of the vehicle at the time of seizure (not current value), and it sounds like he has all kinds of ground to sue for more. I agree Steve... These "politicians" need to be voted out.
The "Robot Lady" reminded me that .....A friend gave me a book about eliminating procrastinatin a few years ago but I didn't get around to reading it yet
I think the requirement is (or should be) to make the defendant whole. If the government says it only needs to give him the specific auto back after all this time, then a thief can say he is only required to pay back the actual dollars stolen ... Just as soon as the courts provide him with a list of the serial numbers.
If the state can't prove an asset was acquired through illegal means then they shouldn't be able to seize that asset. Any authority who feels otherwise should be dealt a fitting tyrant's end...with extreme prejudice.
Street dealers rarely make tons of money and are often in debt to their suppler. The only place where the dealer makes a ton of money is in the prisons or if they are also the maker/grower and that has its own down side. I am sure if he ever dose get the jeep back it will have 300,000 extra miles on it as the only reason it would not of been sold off by now is if it turned into someones daily driver or a undercover car. Would be fun if the vin is known to see if it has been registered by someone.
