Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
in [Europe]
|
From: Hatunen on 11 Aug 2006 20:24 On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 15:06:07 -0700, dgs <dgs1300(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >Martin wrote: > >> On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 23:07:06 -0700, dgs <dgs1300(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>>[...] Yep, that's how it is in the weird and mixi'ed up world of a >>>stuffy little apartment in Paris... >> >> ... tell us about his Last Tango. > >The horror! The horror! If you're at his place, don't use the butter. ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
From: Carole Allen on 11 Aug 2006 23:07 >>>Define "abroad". >> >>other countries > On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 10:01:23 -0700, Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net> wrote: >So Mexico and Canada and the Caribbean islands are "abroad", even >for Americans. > And France is abroad for Germans?
From: Hatunen on 11 Aug 2006 23:41 On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 03:07:49 GMT, carolea7(a)comcast.net (Carole Allen) wrote: > > > >>>>Define "abroad". >>> >>>other countries >> >On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 10:01:23 -0700, Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net> wrote: >>So Mexico and Canada and the Caribbean islands are "abroad", even >>for Americans. >> >And France is abroad for Germans? Apparently. ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
From: Carole Allen on 11 Aug 2006 23:26 >On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 10:49:41 +0200, Mxsmanic <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> >wrote: > >>Carole Allen writes: >> >>> Are you talking about personal property, real property? >> >>Both. If the government suspects that property belongs to someone >>thought to be dealing drugs, for example, it will assume that the >>property represents the spoils of drug-dealing and will seize it >>without any due process. > On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 11:28:54 +0200, Dave Frightens Me <deepfreudmoors(a)eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote: That is not a civil matter, it's criminal. >-- >--- Actually, in the US it is a civil forfeiture. But he has it backwards. If someone is arrested and charged with drug dealing, say he has a pot farm in his garage, 100 plants or so, the plants will be taken as evidence. After a conviction (either by trial or plea) AND sentencing, the state may commence civil forfeiture proceedings against the house, which are an entirely separate legal action (different case number, different government entities involved), and which are subject to the laws of the applicable jurisdiction. They don't just arrest you and take your house upon "suspicion." This also applies to cars, boats, etc. But the forfeiture happens after sentencing, not while charges are only pending. Now, if you have a prior conviction which carried as an additional condition of your sentencing that you not possess firearms (ever again, for the rest of your life) , and you are arrested for speeding or shoplifting, or whatever, or and you have a gun in your possession, they WILL take the gun, and you won't get it back, and you will probably be charged with something like UPFA (Unlawful Possession of a Firearm). Or your friend or roommate has a gun and he gets busted and you are in the car with him and it, you are still in violation of the firearm prohibition. They don't confiscate your property if you are charged with child molestation in your livingroom. Civil forfeiture pretty much follows drugs - pot farms, meth labs, using a house to run a significant size drug selling ring, etc. Or a boat to run drugs. And it doesn't happen in every single case. define government: US (federal) state UK France Germany Saudi Arabia etc., etc. government is a pretty vague concept
From: Carole Allen on 11 Aug 2006 23:36
>Tchiowa writes: > >> That's because property can't commit a crime. But the civil forfeiture >> is a result of the criminal conduct. And it all has to be approved by a >> judge. > On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:24:25 +0200, Mxsmanic <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Criminal conduct is decided by a jury, not a judge. And civil >forfeiture occurs before anything is proved by anyone. Therefore, no >due process. > >-- No numbnuts. If by "criminal conduct" you mean guilt or innnocence, many of these cases are decided a a judge. Yes, in the US a defendant is entitled to a jury trial if he so chooses. OR he can waive that right and plead (usually he will do so if offered a lesser charge), OR he can waive his right to jury and opt for a bench trial in which the judge is the sole fact-finder. Many defendants do in fact choose a bench trial. Every criminal trial is NOT a jury trial. It is up to the defendant to forego one if he so wishes. And civil forfeiture occurs AFTER conviction and sentencing. The state (through the county prosecutor) files and prosecutes the criminal case, and a criminal defense attorney represents the defendant. The local property taxing district (if it is real property), such as a city attorney (NOT the county attorney) files a SEPARATE civil lawsuit, diferent case number, different category of case, different parties in fact, in which the "party" named is the "property;" this is a civil lawsuit seeking to have the property forfeited - i.e., turned over to that government entity. The property owner is entitled to a full and fair adjudicative hearing before a judge on this issue. No forfeiture order is signed without the opportunity for such a hearing. The property owner may choose to waive this hearing and stipulate to the forfeiture. I KNOW how this works beause I have sat through these in open court. The property owner gets due process up the ying-yang. |