Re: Any rights for victims of US government non-criminal actions?

Re: Any rights for victims of US government non-criminal actions?

ndiamond@despammed.com	3/6/2005 10:20:50 PM
Thomas Anantharaman wrote: ndiamond@despammed.com wrote: The US constitution originally promised a Jury trial in all Federal civil proceedings over $20, Aside: I once read that common law no longer exists in the US, and (pedantically) don't see the word "civil" in that part of the US constitution, so I didn't ask about juries. but since they forgot about inflation Another aside: They didn't forget about inflation, they forgot about a loophole where a government could make a legal tender of something other than gold or silver coin because that government isn't a State. But I didn't ask about that either _ the Supreme Court had to "reinterpret" this right to avoid overburdening the Federal Courts : they chose to simply eliminate the right to jury trial in Federal civil cases. But did they eliminate the entire right to trial? Is it no longer necessary for the US government to even inform the victim of the nature of the charges and the date and place of a trial, allow the victim to be present and hear the evidence and make a defence, etc.? Also, if there was a trial, how can the victim find out where the court was and read the details of the ruling against them? Can the victim even find out if there was a trial or not?



"Stuart A. Bronstein"	3/9/2005 10:24:13 PM
ndiamond@despammed.com wrote: But did they eliminate the entire right to trial? No. Is it no longer necessary for the US government to even inform the victim of the nature of the charges and the date and place of a trial, allow the victim to be present and hear the evidence and make a defence, etc.? No. Also, if there was a trial, how can the victim find out where the court was and read the details of the ruling against them? Can the victim even find out if there was a trial or not? I don't do criminal law, so I'm not familiar with all the procedures. I do believe that often, if court action is taken it is by the "victim." As a result, he would certainly know about the time and outcome of any trial. Stu



Thomas Anantharaman	3/9/2005 10:24:58 PM
ndiamond@despammed.com wrote: But did they eliminate the entire right to trial? Is it no longer necessary for the US government to even inform the victim of the nature of the charges and the date and place of a trial, allow the victim to be present and hear the evidence and make a defence, etc.? No the victim still has the right to a trial but the problem is that since it is not a criminal case, there is no right to a speedy trial. Until there is a trial the government is merely the custodian of the property. The other problem is that even if the government ultimately loses the case (say 10 years later) the judge typically only requires the return of the property, even if (eg) the truck has rusted out completely over 10 years and lost all value. This problem is part of a wider problem in that the government is generally exempt from having to reimburse innocent citizens for damages resulting from valid law enforcement proceedings. The assumption is that all citizens ought to be willing to put up with some time and minor property loss when there is sufficient evidence to issue a warrant against the citizen (either as part of a criminal case or a civil forfeiture). Unfortunately, once a warrant is issued, the government is free to do as much damage as it deems necessary, with no recourse even if the accused turns out to be innocent, or even if the warrant is excercised against the wrong person or property. Instead of trying to solve just the civil forfeiture problem, it would be better for Congress to compensate all citizens for any property damage as part of law enforcement proceedings and include interest and storage losses as part of the damages when justice is delayed for years. Guilty citizens can always be fined a suitable amount to recover tha average cost of law enforcement (including damages), but even in the case of guilty citizens I don't want the government to have an incentive to needlessly trash a home just because they are too lazy to do a more careful search and/or want to terrorize the accused.

Report this post for offensive content