Blogger leaked order to raid Hells Angels

[BuffNaked]

How is it not relevant? It's the issue that the post was made on.

HA is not the legal owner of the property. I believe it is the Red and White Corp.

Why can't you answer the question?

 

[fuji]

I read the 11th post in this thread. I guess we will have to wait till the court case is decided to find out.

In the meantime, maybe you can answer this question:

Do you think it is right for the government to seize property or assets of an indvidual before being convicted of a crime?

( )Yes
( )No

Please tick one.

I think there needs to be due process but it need not be criminal process. No-one else needs to have a criminal conviction before seizing assets under civil law, so why would the govt. need to have a conviction? If you take my property I can sue to get it back even if you don't get convicted of theft for taking it. Proceeds of crime are similarly due back to society as a CIVIL rather than as a CRIMINAL matter.

Also note that you may well convince me that the proceeds of crime law should be changed, and HA will STILL be a criminal organization and a threat to democracy.

 

[Esco!]

Hey Fuji, ever consumed any illicit drugs????? (like Coke, marijuana, ecstasy, hash...etc????)

 

[fuji]

Hey Fuji, ever consumed any illicit drugs????? (like Coke, marijuana, ecstasy, hash...etc????)

Not since I turned 18, but what does that have to do with the price of chickens in rome?

 

[Esco!]

Not since I turned 18

So you were at one point a criminal then, just like the HA

 

[fuji]

So you were at one point a criminal then, just like the HA

If you want to equate drug use with drug dealing, extortion, and murder, sure, "just like".

 

[Esco!]

If you want to equate drug use with drug dealing, extortion, and murder, sure, "just like".

My point is if you've ever done drugs (and you say you have), you are probably contributing towards organized crime in some way.
Yes you can grow your own weed but you cant do that with the other drugs, it has to come from somewhere.

 

[Serpent]

You guys are not seeing the big brother state that we're slowly going into.

To answer your question directly, as long as the corporation/business is demonstrated to be a public threat and the law enforcement agencies obtain agreement from an independent government body in an appropriate manner (a judge signed off on this warrant, correct?), then yes, the government should be able to seize the property.

You asked me a question and I answered. So my turn to ask:

If this were a business front of the Tamil Tigers or say a certain Lebanese organization and the exact same process were followed, would you consider that a "Big Brother" action?

I would agree with your big brother state hypothesis if the cops had acted in a criminal manner (Maher Arar anyone?). But if this violated constitutional rights of anyone (even the Hells Angels), I would have expected a legal challenge. Has that happened yet?

 

[fuji]

My point is if you've ever done drugs (and you say you have), you are probably contributing towards organized crime in some way.
Yes you can grow your own weed but you cant do that with the other drugs, it has to come from somewhere.

Never used other drugs, not that dumb, and never used any drugs since I turned 18 because I grew up. Equating all of this as some sort of justification for threatening someone with physical violence because they won't pay you $75,000 is mind blowing.

 

[BuffNaked]

My point is if you've ever done drugs (and you say you have), you are probably contributing towards organized crime in some way.
Yes you can grow your own weed but you cant do that with the other drugs, it has to come from somewhere.

That's a whole different can of worms. Here's what the label says. If you have no where to turn to for a product or service, you will turn to the black market. The government has created the enviorment for OC to thrive by this prohibition on drugs. Look back to the last time they banned booze to see what happened. When they lifted the prohibition they took the legs from right under OC.

I can't buy my X or Weed or Coke or whatever at a pharmacy so I turn to the blackmarket to get my fix. I'd much rather use my visa to pay for this than meet some guy in a parking lot worried that I might get busted or robbed. But not enough not to do it.

Stay tuned. I got another politically charged post coming up.

 

[fuji]

You know Fuji, I'm constantly laughing at this one. Take the HA out of the equation and put yourself in his shoes. Someone ripped you off for $75,000 wouldn't you be banging on his door threatening him and demanding your money back?

Do you think the law would be spending hundreds of thousands of dollars prosecuting you and bringing in all these so called experts and lo and behold, finding a bomb planted on the Justice overseeing the case's car? Come on.....

You obviously missed the point.

These thugs threatened to "beat the hell" out of a guy unless he paid them $75,000. That's exortion. Period. Full stop.

If I thought someone ripped me off I might well bang on their door and demand money. I might even threaten to sue them. What I would not do is threaten physical violence.

I have no doubt that the people who are connected to the HA in some business dealing, like this Mr. M, are also bottom of the barrel. Thieves congregate together and steal from one another. No doubt. It's still murder when a thief shoots a thief. It's still extortion when a thief threatens another thief with physical harm unless he pays money.

What we have here is a bunch of HA's engaged in selling pirate satellite signals, not being smart enough to build their own equipment, and then feeling that one of their suppliers ripped them off when they realize he sold them something they could have downloaded from the net for free. So they go threaten to beat the guy up unless he pays up. You think this is making them look better, that the dispute arose out of this dishonest trade?

If you think their association with losers like this "Mr. M." makes them somehow more desireable... if you think the implication that they also threatened the judge makes them model citizens... wow. You need to get your head straight.

 

[Esco!]

Fuji, even if all HA, Italian mob, Vietnamese mob...etc were locked up tomorrow, do you really think organized crime wouldl go away?????

Of course it wouldnt

 

[BuffNaked]

HA will STILL be a criminal organization and a threat to democracy.

HA is not a threat to democracy. They have no political clout and no means of revolution. This is a cheap ploy to try an garner support for your side.

The real threat to democracy is you! Don't worry, I'm not singling you out fugi. I'm inditing just about every one in this thread as a threat against democracy. With the notable exception of Shiek.

You are all caught up with this ambiguous enemy which we can't even agree on if it exists or not, that we lost sight of what is really important. The checks and balance for the government are there to protect us citizens regardless of political and social affiliation. Those of you who would give up just a little bit of freedom and liberty to be just a little bit safer from the evils of the world deserve none (To paraphrase Tomas Jefferson).

You have this evil HA gang prowling the streets and shooting up the place and you need tools to get rid of them. This reminds me of a person I once knew. His name was Emmanuel Goldstein. No one knows if he really was, but he was the enemy. Do what you must to get rid of him. Do you see what I'm getting at?

You guys bought that HA is some faceless evil tyrant out to ruin your day. And the police love you for it. Now they got more tools to work with. Read this girls story on asset seizure. It's pretty fucking scary. In fact this whole web site shows all the problems with seizure in the states. Don't be dismissive. Just because that site deals with the states doesn't mean it can't happen here. If you allow for this to happen and applaud it then you are the threat to democracy.

We don't need people going on if Hells Angels or a criminal organization or not. We need people to stop and think of what happens when there are no more Hells Angels. Who's the next target. Maybe it's the Muslims. I live in peel and I'll shit a brick when ever I run into one of Peels finest. I shit a brick because I look brown and they are all white.

Maybe pulling the race card is not a good idea. So here's an example I'm sure most here can relate to. What if they decided that if you're caught with an SP they can take your car away. Right on the spot. If you want it back, tough. It's government property now. What if that wasn't enough. What if they decided to freeze your accounts too. I do not envy the married ones. That's for sure.

So what I'm getting at here is that the greatest threat to our democracy right now are the apathetic and dismissive citizens who choose not to take a stand on this issue. That attitude of "it will never happen to me" or "if you are doing nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about" is the killer of democracy. And you are letting it happen because you think the real threat is a bunch of bikers who may or may not have ties to organized crime.

 

[Esco!]

What if they decided that if you're caught with an SP they can take your car away. Right on the spot.

Thats already happening in the States (and Calgary I think).

 

[Serpent]

HA is not a threat to democracy. They have no political clout and no means of revolution. This is a cheap ploy to try an garner support for your side.

The real threat to democracy is you! Don't worry, I'm not singling you out fugi. I'm inditing just about every one in this thread as a threat against democracy. With the notable exception of Shiek.

Whoa, whoa, whoa....

The story being painted in your post is of state excess and dark times to come. This isn't unauthorized wiretapping or extra-judicial rendition or secret prison camps. Infact, your entire post is a complete slippery slope fallacy. Whose liberty and freedom has suffered here?

Let me remind everyone: A judge signed the warrant authorizing the raid. This was leaked and will be used as a legal technicality to have the evidence dismissed:

http://www.thestar.com/article/200536

So, let's recap and get back to reality and withdraw the hypotheticals of state interference gone wild:

Did a judge sign the warrant for the seizure? Yes.
Did the Hells Angels get their day in court? Yes.
If they are acquited and they decide to sue the City of Toronto, will they have their day in court? Yes.

Regarding vehicle seizures: is that a local ordinance? Meaning, did some voters vote for that proposal?

Btw, the race example wasn't a good idea. If you approach life as a potential race victim, chances are you'll get treated as one. That's from a fellow brown person (me).

 

[Serpent]

The cops seized two clubhouses, one in oshawa last year and one this year. The one that was seized last year was on suspicion that the HA were selling alcohol without a license. It's being appealed as far as I know. The seizure of the Toronto clubhouse, I'm aware that the club is getting itself organized to launch a lawsuit to get it back since they were informed of the seizure or given a chance to prove that they obtained the property by legal means. It's been owned by the club one way or the other since 1978 however its obvious that the justice was not told that.

That's appeal against the criminal charges, not a law suit to claim civil rights violation, is it? The reason i ask for this distinction is since the spectre of loss of liberties and freedoms has been raised and it's important to understand what the retaliatory lawsuit is about.

 

[fuji]

You are all caught up with this ambiguous enemy which we can't even agree on if it exists or not

You lost me right there. We can all agree that organized crime exists. The people of Ontario have officiallya greed that the Hell's Angels were, fairly recently, an organized crime group.

Those of you who would give up just a little bit of freedom and liberty to be just a little bit safer from the evils of the world deserve none (To paraphrase Tomas Jefferson).

What does that have to do with the price of chickens in Rome? Whether HA is a threat to democracy has NOTHING WHATEVER to do with whether or not the proceeds of crime law is any good.

The proceeds of crime law may well be crap, and HA is still a threat to democracy.

You have this evil HA gang prowling the streets and shooting up the place and you need tools to get rid of them.

Stop constructing straw-men.

No-one here is suggesting that the police need additional powers to deal with HA.

You guys bought that HA is some faceless evil tyrant out to ruin your day.

Nope. All I bought was that the HA are an organized crime group (judicial fact) that appears to have infiltrated the police (see post #1 on this thread).

We don't need people going on if Hells Angels or a criminal organization or not. We need people to stop and think of what happens when there are no more Hells Angels. Who's the next target. Maybe it's the Muslims.

Empty rhetoric and propaganda. Getting rid of an organized crime group does not mean we are going to start getting rid of a religion.

What if they decided that if you're caught with an SP they can take your car away.

There's no such law on the books, so try again. You pay to be with an SP. The law seizes goods that are PROCEEDS of crime. Seizing the proceeds of crime makes good logical sense. If something is acquired by crime you give it back to its rightful owner. If you cant give it back to the rightful owner because you can't identify them then give it back to society at large. Makes more sense than letting the criminal keep it.

Anyway, nice try and making up laws that we DON'T HAVE and then pretending you have a case. There's a word for that: Rhetoric.

Let's stick to the facts, OK?

So what I'm getting at here is that the greatest threat to our democracy right now are the apathetic and dismissive citizens who choose not to take a stand on this issue.

I'm a big advocate for checks on the power of the police and government, so go bark up another tree.

The HA's got caught extorting money and declared a criminal organization. There's now some evidence that they have infiltrated the police. That makes them a threat to our justice system, and any threat to our justice system is ultimately a threat to our democracy.

That is true WHETHER OR NOT there are other threats to our democracy. There are no doubt LOTS of other threats to our democracy, but that does not lessen in any way the fact that the HA's, and other criminal organizations, are one of the threats.

 

[fuji]

Has anybody got a defense of the HA's that is not a complete non-sequiter?

Every time someone here points out that the HA's are thugs engaged in organized crime, etc., the HA's apologists change the topic and pretend that pointing to other things wrong in our society is somehow a defense of the HA's.

Pathetic.

 

[Esco!]

Womanizing slimeballs are a threat to women everywhere

 

[ImanHa]

Fugi

The government's obvious ploy to bankrupt us by forcing us to defend ourselves against unjust actions as a matter of tactic, is a foreshadowing of what may become the normal form of procedural persecution many are destined to face in the future.
I'm sure you will approve and support that.

The fact that there are other groups that are not without sin does not excuse anyone's behaviour, but it does illustrate that guilty by association is wrong for any group.

And Fugi, the Hells Angels were not declared a criminal organizatiom.

District Court Judge Fuerst's decision was not an 'in rem' decision and cannot be refered to or relied upon by any court in Canada except in referring to the two men convicted in the case.

The Supreme Court of British Columbia took that position and recently the Manitoba Supreme Court of Appeals did also. Both Cases are listed below. You may know better than them, but both those courts are higher than Fuerst's Court.

THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
Ciarniello v. HMTQ, 2006 BCSC 1671

p. 67) The answer to that argument is that Justice Fuerst's finding that the H.A.M.C. is a criminal organization is not an in rem judgment. It is simply a finding of fact that is not binding on anyone except the parties to the case that she was hearing, that is, Mr. Lindsay and Mr. Bonner. If Mr. Ciarniello or any other member of the H.A.M.C. were charged with an offence under the impugned legislation in relation to the H.A.M.C., the Crown would have to prove by admissible evidence in their trial that the H.A.M.C. is a criminal organization. The Crown could not simply rely on Justice Fuerst's ruling.

In Manitoba, the sentencing judge imposed a unique condition that Kirton "is not to associate or communicate either directly or indirectly with any person known to him to be a member or associate of a gang including the Hells Angels."
The ban was for the duration of his probation.
However, Kirton appealed the decision, claiming it was a breach of his "constitutional right to freedom of association" under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
And the province's highest court agreed in a unanimous decision.
“It is hard to escape the conclusion that the sentencing judge was led astray by her preoccupation with the accused’s involvement with the Hells Angels,” said Scott.

Of particular interest was the high court’s finding that Beard’s description of the Hells Angels as a criminal organization was not supported by any facts.

Although there are many Canadian cases that have made such a finding, Scott said judges must have supporting evidence backing their decision each and every time.

“A court cannot take judicial notice of the fact the Hells Angels is a criminal organization, tempting as that may be,” said Scott.

“It was not open for the sentencing judge to consider membership in a criminal organization as an aggravating factor.”

The Ontario decision relied on a law that requires three persons to conspire. Clearly there were two. If the police weren't running the Appeals calendar, that decision too would possibly be reversed.

If your going to dismiss court findings in favour of what media has given you as facts, as you said you know none of us personally, then save all your 'respect for the rule of law' phylosophical B.S. for those that buy it, and get yourself a rope and join the mob.

You will have become what you beheld.