Will the DEA shut down every major music festival?

This will affect EVERYONE! Whether You're a music festival patron or not this will begin affecting concert venues, baseball and football stadiums, anywhere there are large groups if people.

The seizure of the 352-acre Camp Zoe property in Southeast Missouri has so far garnered substantial attention both in America and internationally. That’s because this is no ordinary seizure; without (so far) being charged with a crime, the property owner, musician Jimmy Tebeau, is having his land taken from him in a process that strips him of his rights under both the US and Missouri constitutions.

The DEA has filed a claim for seizure and forfeiture of the property on the grounds that for years, concert-goers have engaged in consumption and transaction of illegal drugs. Under this theory, every major music festival in the country could be shut down by law enforcement whose motive is not to make Americans safer through the protection of their rights, but the profit that police can make by taking property from citizens.

From today’s St. Louis Riverfront Times:

Only later did Goebel learn that the raid was the culmination of a four-year-long investigation by the DEA and the Missouri State Highway Patrol into alleged drug use and sales by Camp Zoe concertgoers. No one — including Camp Zoe owner*Jimmy Tebeau — has been charged with a crime, but the eastern Missouri U.S. Attorney’s Office is attempting to confiscate the 352-acre property using a controversial process called*asset forfeiture.

It’s not just alarming to festival attendees like Goebel. The situation has other music festival organizers worried that they, too, might be held accountable for any illegal activity that happens to take place at their event.

“It has gotten our attention,” says*Brian Cohen, the organizer of St. Louis’ LouFest. “All festivals take on some degree of liability. That’s why we hire security, medical personnel, etc. But the potential penalties in this case seem to put it in a different category. LouFest and Schwagstock are two very different animals, so it’s hard to know what impact this could have on us. But we’re definitely watching it.”

Dave Roland, an attorney with the for the non-profit advocacy group*Freedom Center of Missouri, calls the Camp Zoe seizure “a shot across the bow” for individuals who host music festivals or popular events on private land.

“My home state is Tennessee,” Roland says. “What about Bonnaroo? The folks who own that property need to be very aware and very concerned. With any large gathering of young people, there’s probably going to be some illegal activity, and if that’s taking place, it appears that property could be subject to forfeiture.”

Yesterday’s RFT story on the Camp Zoe seizure implicates the motive for the seizure: keeping money flowing to law enforcement despite the existence of Missouri law directing forfeitures to education:

Eapen Thampy, a policy analyst for the Kansas City-based non-profit group*Americans For Forfeiture Reform, obtained*records of each Missouri county’s deposits into the state’s “School Building Revolving Fund” via a Sunshine request. Thampy then compared the records to state audits of the forfeiture activity. After crunching the numbers, he concludes that “90 percent of counties in Missouri are non-compliant” with the state law that requires forfeiture proceeds be used to fund public education.

“We’re talking $60 to $80 million that has been misappropriated,” he says. “‘State law enforcement has been able to dodge all requirements of the system and keep that money directly for their budgets.”

…

That last part is key. Missouri’s reforms only apply to forfeitures in the state system. But local law enforcement agencies know that they may still keep seizure profits for themselves if they use the federal system.

In federal cases, an agency such as the DEA takes a percentage of the money seized — usually 20 percent — and returns the remaining 80 percent to the local police, an exchange called “equitable sharing.” None of the money goes to the schools.

That $60-$80 million estimate is for the years 2008-2009, when the federal government reported disbursements of roughly $50 million to Missouri law enforcement agencies.* This $50 million in disbursements from the Dept. of Justice Equitable Sharing fund represent roughly $60 million in seizures, since the seizing DOJ agency (usually DEA or FBI) keeps 20%.

It is unclear how much of this is reported to the state auditor, but we do know that the Missouri state auditor in 2008-2009 reported roughly $12.7 million in seizures, $5.7 million of which received circuit court rubberstamp approval to proceed in federal court.

And in 2008-2009, deposits to the Missouri School Building Revolving Fund (the statutory vessel where seizure funds are supposed to be deposited) totaled $86,000.

What this means is that most, if not all, of Missouri counties are non-compliant with the statutory requirement that forfeiture money be deposited in a school fund. They are also non-compliant with the requirement that all forfeitures that state agencies participate in, even if the forfeiture ends up in federal hands, must be reported. As per the Revised Statutes of Missouri, 513.605:

(8) “Seizing agency”, the agency which is the primary employer of the officer or agent seizing the property, including*any agency in which one or more of the employees acting on behalf of the seizing agency is employed by the state of Missouri*or any political subdivision of this state;
(9) “Seizure”, the point at which any law enforcement officer or agent*discovers and exercises any control*over property that an officer or agent has reason to believe was used or intended for use in the course of, derived from, or realized through criminal activity. Seizure includes but is not limited to*preventing anyone found in possession of the property from leaving the scene of the investigation while in possession of the property;

And RsMO 513.607:
(2) Seizure may be effected by a law enforcement officer authorized to enforce the criminal laws of this state prior to the filing of the petition and without a writ of seizure if the seizure is incident to a lawful arrest, search, or inspection and the officer has probable cause to believe the property is subject to forfeiture and will be lost or destroyed if not seized.*Within four days of the date of seizure, such seizure shall be reported by said officer to the prosecuting attorney of the county in which the seizure is effected or the attorney general; and if in the opinion of the prosecuting attorney or attorney general forfeiture is warranted, the prosecuting attorney or attorney general shall, within ten days after receiving notice of seizure, file a petition for forfeiture. [...]
8. The prosecuting attorney or attorney general to whom the seizure is reported shall report annually by January thirty-first for the previous calendar year all seizures.

10.*Intentional or knowing failure to comply with any reporting requirement*contained in this section shall be*a class A misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to one thousand dollars.

And as I wrote in the Columbia Tribune this September, not only is this Missouri law, but these directives are enshrined in the Missouri Constitution and a couple Missouri Supreme Court decisions:
In 1990, the Odessa School District won a landmark victory in the Missouri Supreme Court with a verdict that held the Missouri Constitution directed money seized from criminals to Missouri’s schools. The victory was short-lived. Almost immediately, Jean Paul Bradshaw, the U.S. attorney for western Missouri, contacted Missouri’s law enforcement agencies with news that they could keep the money through a federal forfeiture provision managed by the Department of Justice.

The program, called Equitable Sharing, allows state and local law enforcement agencies to take property seized in the course of an investigation to the Department of Justice for liquidation rather than to state courts. Ultimately, the Department of Justice cuts the local law enforcement agency a check for up to 80 percent of the property’s value, dodging Missouri’s requirement that the money must go to education.

In 2001, Gov. Bob Holden signed a bill aimed at reforming this system. The bill contained a number of protections, including a mandate that all forfeitures to federal agencies receive Missouri circuit court approval and that all forfeitures be attached to a felony conviction.

Nine years after these reforms, a number of problems have re-emerged. First, the transfer of forfeitures to the federal government has continued unabated as circuit court judges often rubber-stamp law enforcement requests. Second, the requirement that circuit court approval be granted is unenforceable; often, property goes to federal law enforcement agents who can execute the forfeiture directly without judicial approval. The amount of money that ends up being misappropriated this way is substantial. In 2008 and 2009, state and federal law enforcement retained well more than $50 million in direct circumvention of Missouri law at the expense of Missouri schools.

What do the feds have to say about this?

“It’s another tool in the toolbox,” says Richard Callahan, the U.S. Attorney for Eastern Missouri. “Forfeiting is a key part of the attempt to achieve justice.”

Mr. Callahan, you are a thief, operating under color of law, working for a government agency that has made theft part of its modus operandi. I urge all Americans to hold our elected officials accountable for the behavior of people like Mr. Callahan; if we do not, we have forfeited our liberty, and we have nothing left.

by Eapon Thampy on Forfeitureform.com

 

Achieve justice? Nobody has been charged with a crime. The sad thing is, it seems like the slant of the story is not the injustice being done but that none of the proceeds are going to the education fund.

It seems like everyday we are getting closer to the point of no return.

 

What a silly thread title. It's been talked about. If you're not a corporation and running a festival, you're in danger. If you're a corporation, you're just fine.

With a name like schwagstock... They're fucking asking for it, honestly. Of course it's wrong, but discretion never hurt anyone...

I vote we seize walmart next.... It's fun as fuck to get stoned, stash your illegals and monies, and go to walmart to play in the toy department.... it's all about those bike riding lightsaber duels.... *edit* and walmart security people are so funny... they think they're all undercover, when I had neglect locks and generally dressed like the blacksmith I was working as this last summer, I'd go to walmart at least twice a week for supplies and fun, with 2-8 equally eccentric looking people, all in different ways. They would tail us around, and if you looked at them they'd quickly turn towards a cart obviously full of returns, or pick something off a shelf and pretend to look at it, always muttering into a cell phone... There where multipule times I just burst out laughing at them... they didn't seem to see what was funny "

So yeah, if we're seizing everything that people do on drugs... walmart seems like it would be a lucrative one, even if the schools only get a fraction of what they're supposted to, they'd be rolling in the dough.

 

You don't even need discretion, it's just holding a giant private music festival is like essentially holding your giant rave. You don't have any legal requirements for security, or checking of people going in, or permits, ect. Gathering of the Vibes that happens here every year in Bridgeport basically tells you what the experience is going to be in the name, and it's essentially an open air drug market for 40,000 hippies, but the police always stand back as long as no fights are going on.

The real problem is they can't let a precedent be set that anyone with a large yard who wants to form a festival called Scwagstock can.

 

Yep.... Makes great sense, instead of legalizing what they're doing so there's nothing to revolt against, making everyone happily win, it seems like a good idea to steal their land and make a public spectacle of it.... THAT'LL show em...

Tunisia? What's Tunisia?

 

Great post Moe! Thanks for the update!

I still think it sounds like they're just trying to push the band and landowners into a corner they can't get out of. Sounds a lot like blackmail to me. Jimmy and the crew blatantly posted on their handouts at Schwagstock and posted on the site "NO illegal drug use or distribution on the premises." To some degree they really have no control over what people are doing on the camp site. They search the vehicles coming in to the camp site and security roams the grounds keeping an eye on people and discriminates (not sure if that's the right word) against drug use.

So, in that respect I don't see why it's such a problem. Tax evasion is another subject tho... I hope everything works out in their favor, as it is their prime source of income along with local shows. It's their way of making a living, to support their family and kids. Jimmy and the crew aren't out on the campgrounds trying to push drugs or anything, they just go up on stage, do their thing and make people happy. Giving them music and a place to hang out and meet new people over the span of 3 days.

I think it's a great event and would love to see it go on to be a landmark of freedom, as are Bonnaroo, Wakarusa, and other venues. Kids will be kids regardless of how much you try to enforce the laws or how many times you tell them "You can't do that!" Power to the people!

 

Moe thanks for posting, I hadn't heard. Wow...I agree with Skip and Roor..this is not a good move with the political climate in disarray alread. DD

 

Next they'll be issuing a directive for EVERYONE in the US to report to the nearest police station because we're ALL under arrest!! Fucken ass-hats!! You know,"they" are going to take so much away from us that "they" are going to get a surprize one of these days. Where's the ACLU when they're needed?

 

im pretty sure the government would rather have all this illegal activity happening in one place, rather then all over.

its called controld chaos.

have all the crazy people gather in one spot. do there thing. then move to the next spot.

 

The Superbowl is heavily controlled by homeland security..

 

and they wonder why people don't trust the F-ing government!!!
grrrrrrrrrrrr

 

thats bad its got to happen here in the good ole usa its getting like the commies its getting to the point ua cant do any thing with out big brother interfearing its bs. they mys well build a big roll of bars around the whole country and call it jail in fact they will do that too for controll

 

People flamboyantly break the drug laws

Hip Forums conclusion - US is like Soviet Union.

 

In soviet states of america, drug laws break you!

 

It's true, I've been taken down by the law!oliceman:

*edit*
Why does the cop emoticon smile

 

Because pigs take joy in being the worthless shit that they are? In my case, at least.

Perjury, for the greater good, comrades!

 

and in that respect, it's not the public's fault the living private people don't know how to keep their activities in the private: naturally the public is going to clean up. They didn't invade - the activity was not private to begin-with.

& you don't have any 'rights' via their constitution.. see my other posts.

Failure of the camp zoe people to organize a private members-only venue with the proper procedure to put it in the true private is not to be blamed on the public actions; the camp zoe people put it in the public and so they lost any jurisdiction.

Everything is split titles, symmetrical like the body. Knowledge of only the public law-form places people as permanent slaves until they wake up.

again, see my other posts.


people are going to bellyache against my post because they don't want to do one thing: educate themselves.

 

What a bunch of fucking silly, and largely incorrect, statements.

No bellyaching, you give yourself too much credit, bellyaching is complaining, no one will complain because you don't understand something, but they WILL call you out for being stupid.

 

yo!! I remember once my friend had his first grateful dead concert it was 1990. So everything is fine til a helicopter circled around. This dude went on a really bad trip.. Thinking they was going to surround the stadium with troops arrest all these people.. and for a minute, I really starting thinking it too,. Then I LOLed..
I never gave it much though again til all the rainbow stuff started going down, but Ive always seen police as being needed . I dont think law enforcement need be carrying guns inside the events, and only need firearm units where money is handled..
Though this becomes an issue when festivals with alot of money from vendor to vendor. this is very inviting for robbery, thieves, money snatch and grab. I know it happens ..
i dont know what were talking bout now scrolling back over the last few comments..