Oldsailor65 Loc: Iowa

FBI Seized Family's Assets Without a Single Charge, All Because Amazon Claims the Dad Wasn't Giving 'Honest Services'

The life-changing experience of one Seattle, Washington, family is shining light on a practice being abused by federal officials.

According to Reason, Carl Nelson was working as a real estate transaction manager for Amazon. He lived with his wife, Amy Sterner Nelson, and their four daughters in a home in West Seattle.

Yet the family’s life was turned upside down when the FBI suddenly seized nearly $1 million from them over an unproven allegation.

In April 2020, federal agents arrived at the Nelson’s house to inform them Amazon had accused Carl Nelson of not providing “honest services,” Reason reported.

Specifically, Amazon alleged Nelson provided extra benefits or deals for certain companies that in turn provided him illegal kickbacks. Nelson has continually denied the allegations.

“That never happened and is exactly why I’ve fought as long and hard as I have,” Nelson said, according to Reason. “It’s that simple.”

Sadly for the Nelson family, the FBI did not need a conviction when they arrived at the family’s residence in 2020. They were allowed to seize approximately $892,000 in funds from the family.

“We went from living a life where we were both working full-time to provide for our four daughters to really figuring out how we were going to make it month to month,” Amy Nelson said. “It’s completely changed my belief in fairness.”

According to Reason, the FBI seized funds that did not even come from Carl Nelson, the alleged criminal. Instead, they took money from “nearly every corner of the Nelson’s world,” including savings from Amy Nelson that she accrued during her time as an attorney.

Do you feel that civil asset forfeiture unethical?
Yes: 99% (488 Votes)
No: 1% (7 Votes)
The FBI agreed last week to a settlement that would return $525,000 to the Nelson family, while the family would have to forfeit $109,000, Reason reported. The rest of the money has gone towards court fees.

Even so, this will hardly help life go back to normal, Amy said. The family has already been forced to sell their house and car, liquidate retirement savings and move into Amy’s sister’s basement. They were forced to remove their four daughters from the Seattle school they attended.

According to Bloomberg, Amy was forced to close the Riveter, a co-working start up that she founded focused on helping women. In addition, Amy said Carl is still embroiled in a massive lawsuit, and the $525,000 will likely go to attorney’s fees.

“It’s hard,” Amy said, according to Reason. “Not much has changed for us.”

Amy set up a GoFundMe to help the family try and survive such difficult times. As of Monday, it had raised about $70,000.

Almost two years after the FBI seizure, Amazon has still not levied a single criminal charge against Carl, Reason reported. However, a civil case Amazon brought against Carl and another former employee has seen plenty of drama in its own right.

According to The Wall Street Journal, U.S. District Court Judge Liam O’Grady removed himself from the case in January 2022 after it was revealed that his wife held $22,000 in Amazon stock during the case. O’Grady had ruled in Amazon’s favor since the case began about 20 months prior.

O’Grady said he was reluctant to leave the case because his wife sold the stock in December, and he had previously denied knowledge of his wife’s holdings.

“However, perception of the fair administration of justice — both by the public and by the parties in the case — is of the highest importance to the Court,” he wrote, according to the Journal.

The Nelson are far from the only ones who have become victims of a practice known as “civil asset forfeiture,” Reason reported.

Americans across the country have had funds or possessions seized by federal officials without being charged with a crime in recent years, and Institute for Justice attorney Dan Alban said the practice has plenty of precedent.

“Civil forfeiture is quite common,” Alban said according to Reason. “The fact that the government can do this can obviously ruin lives, and it can ruin lives without anyone being convicted of a crime, without anyone even being charged with a crime.”

Alban said civil forfeiture is a very profitable venture for many government agencies.

“The vast majority of seizures and forfeitures … are driven by the profit incentive,” he said. “In most states and at the federal level, police and prosecutors get to keep up to 100 percent of the proceeds. So they just have a very strong incentive to go out and seize whatever they can and try to forfeit it, so that they can supplement their budget.”

Unethical as that may be, the effect the practice has on families is arguably even more concerning, Amy told Reason.

“If you can’t afford to defend yourself, let alone feed yourself, it becomes complicated.”

https://www.westernjournal.com/fbi-seized-familys-assets-without-single-charge-amazon-claims-dad-wasnt-giving-honest-services/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=newsletter-C50&utm_campaign=dailyam&utm_content=conservative-50&ats_es=8fb799e06563a601f50b5fdaf395b859

Tiptop789 Loc: State of Denial

I believe civil forfeiture is over used. Not only the FBI, but local LE can size cash you have on you claiming it's drug money an be you have to sue to get it back. In most cases the amount taken is thousands of dollars, not the weekly grocery tab.

Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio

Another invasion of personal rights.
Just shrug and move along , as long as it wasn’t you , who cares.
I can’t wait till the Nazis get here to really show you how it’s done.

Smedley_buzkill

In case you haven't looked, the Nazis are already here. You will note that this travesty occurred in the Liberal Hobbit Fart Sniffing Enclave of Seattle; the same place that brought you months of "mostly peaceful demonstrations that caused deaths, injuries and billions of dollars in property damage. Maybe the family should start a riot and just loot something to get their money back. They would never be prosecuted for that in Seattle. They could just say they identify as black, transgender aardvarks.

Smedley_buzkill

It should NEVER be used unless someone is proven guilty in court.

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

Right now, Chicago is in the process of instituting a Civil Forfeiture law. Still a lot of opposition. It is all about going after street gangs and their drug money etc, as a way of breaking them. Of course it won't work. And in the meantime, many families will have their money seized because someone in the family is supposed to be in a gang. Even before it is proven and if that individual did anything wrong. Our Mayor should be a good candidate for a trip along the wall and a Ready, Aim, and hopefully never hear the next word. Did you know that a bullet travels faster then the speed of sound?

Oldsailor65 Loc: Iowa

But I have more respect for aardvarks!!

Wonttakeitanymore

They are here! It’s the demonrats

JuristBooks Loc: North Carolina

BigJim

We have to take the profit motive out of law enforcement.
All federal fines, fees and forfeitures should go to the treasury, nothing for the agency.
All fines, fees and forfeitures by lower authorities should go into statewide pools. Monthly the money would be allocated according to each authority's law enforcement budget.
The enforcement will then be to enforce the law, not enrich the agency.

American Vet

Agree

However, the whole issue of 'civil forfeiture' needs to be carefully reviewed. Way too much abuse.

captainwalt Loc: Bay Area

As an attorney who has battled civil forfeiture laws for decades I know how injustice normally prevails in those kinds of cases! 😡.
Good luck in trying to get justice in a civil forfeiture proceeding. 😬

American Vet

I am truly amazed that these civil forfeiture laws passed Constitutional muster.

JuristBooks Loc: North Carolina

They don’t. Rule number 1 is that NO legislative body may circumvent, nullify, or modify any Constitutional provision by means of a statute, regulation, or anything other than an Amendment.

Two. “Nor shall private property be taken without just compensation.” Duh, that’s the last clause of the 5th Amendment.
Then, let’s not forget the 4th Amendment.
Every FBI person having a hand in this should be indicted, tried, convicted and executed.

American Vet

What I meant was that I am surprised the SCOTUS has approved civil forfeiture.

"While the 1993 Supreme Court case Austin v. United States ruled that a forfeiture could be considered as an excessive fine,[17] the court upheld the principle of civil forfeiture generally.[9]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States

As far as your other comments: