The California Supreme Court ruled in July that local government entities can no longer seize the vehicle of a person who has been arrested on suspicion of hiring a prostitute or buying drugs. The local ordinances that authorized such vehicle seizures were implemented in efforts to deter drug sales and prostitution, but they don’t seem to have done the trick — they simply provided an unusually harsh penalty for often victimless crimes.

These vehicle-forfeiture ordinances started popping up after Oakland put one in place in 1998. Since then, Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, San Diego, and several other cities started their own similar ordinances. In many cases, the forfeiture of the vehicle is a far worse penalty than the underlying offense — for example, individuals caught trying to buy a small amount of marijuana could have their vehicle seized even though the state penalty for the drug bust is a mere $100 ticket.

The Supreme Court decision, in O’Connell v. City of Stockton, pointed out that the punishments for drug and prostitution offenses “are matters of statewide concern that our Legislature has comprehensively addressed… leaving no room for further regulations at the local level.” We agree. The vehicle seizures seemed to be mostly a way for cities to make thousands of dollars at the expense of arrestees, who had to pay “impound fees” up to $2,000 a pop to get their vehicles back from the local police.

Fortunately, local law enforcement agencies appear to be willing to go along with the new ruling. John Lovell, counsel for the California Police Chiefs Association, acknowledged that “Forfeiture no longer appears to be an option.” We’re glad to hear it.

If you’ve had a vehicle forfeiture problem, contact Grech and Firetag to discuss your rights.

The popular television show “To Catch a Predator” has been on since 2004, with 11 episodes of reporter Chris Hansen and the vigilante group Perverted Justice snaring men with techniques that many have called ‘entrapment.’ Using Internet decoys (actually adults pretending to be minors), the show engages men in online chats that sometimes result in men going to a home that they’ve been led to believe is the residence of the minor they’ve been chatting with.

The show has caught nearly 300 men across the United States, in and around cities as disparate as New York City and Flagler Beach, Florida. Several sites in Southern California have also been targeted.

Arrests, Sex Offender Registry: For What?
Once a man has entered the home (which is also part of the plan) and has spoken with a decoy, Hansen reveals himself, explaining the trick. Although the first few episodes of “To Catch a Predator” simply left the situation at that point after publicly shaming the men, later episodes involved the local police, who arrested the men on charges such as child endangerment — although no such crime had yet been committed. The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department was one of the first law enforcement agencies to jump into the fray, participating closely with the show’s producers.

“Attempted sexual assault” is another charge being levied against men caught on this show—a conviction on which can carry a 5- to 10-year prison sentence. Lifelong membership in the national registry for sex offenders is often the upshot of the “To Catch a Predator” scheme.

How Much Is Too Much?
This television show is an ethical minefield. NBC pays Perverted Justice thousands of dollars to fund its operations, making it seem like a kind of “checkbook journalism.” Even Chris Hansen acknowledges the gray area: In an April 2007 interview with the Associated Press, he noted, “We debate all of this internally — how much is too much, what is our role, how do we balance compelling television with journalism.”

Sure, a TV program with such a high level of sensational material is bound “to catch an audience,” but the rights of every individual must be respected. Entrapment and arrest for crimes that have not been committed is a highly questionable activity, no matter what the intention of the show’s producers — who cannot help but be affected by concern over the Nielsen ratings.