9 ms·

Another Ortiz case

krutulis 14y ago
"U.S. Attorney Ortiz said through a spokeswoman last week that the government wanted to send a message by going after the motel .... up the street Walmart and Home Depot have all experienced a similar rate of drug crimes .... attorney Salzman says there’s one good reason Ortiz didn’t go after them .... the U.S. Attorney’s office, looking to make an example, picked on the smallest kid on the block.” Where have we heard this story before? It seems as if the Judiciary Committee might have more than just the Aaron Swartz case to consider.
rosser 14y ago
If even an tenth of the attention that's been paid to Aaron and his case over the last week could be shined on the heinous violation of Due Process that is Civil Forfeiture, I'd consider that, alone, a victory.
- rayiner 14y ago
  Seriously. As this case shows, it's an injustice that almost entirely hits the lower classes. It's not a conspiracy. There is even a certain logic to it: if drug dealers keep using a particular place as a meet up spot, you have to wonder if the owner isn't turning a blind eye to keep the business. But: this is a cheap motel. Of course it's going to be a hotbed for shady things. If you're up to something shady, where do you go, the Ritz? But the forfeiture laws are completely insensitive to these facts. All they do is to work the taking of property from the poor just because by virtue of being poor (or serving the poor) crime happens in their midst.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    The owner of this hotel was almost certainly turning a blind eye to keep the business. The owners of the hotel aren't poor (the tenants obviously are, though). Unlike many CAF cases, this one received a full hearing in front of a judge with evidence presented from both sides.
    - rayiner 14y ago
      Very interesting post up top--I didn't know that. You're right--even though I think civil forfeiture is wrong, I can see how this would not be a sympathetic case in front of a judge.
thomasvendetta 14y ago
Carmen Ortiz sounds like nothing more than a state-sponsored terrorist.
- hachiya 14y ago
  Prosecutors in general are professional conspiracy theorists.
- frozenport 14y ago
  Watching too much Foxy News, aren't we now?
thinkcomp 14y ago
The actual docket is here: http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=1823970 http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=1823970 You can help shine a light on what the DOJ and USAO are up to (and continue what Aaron Swartz started by downloading PACER) using this tool: http://www.plainsite.org/asymptote/ http://www.plainsite.org/asymptote/ If you follow the directions, it doesn't cost anything.
tptacek 14y ago
Repeating a comment from another thread: Any time you read a story like "government attempts to liquidate real property to fund police department", your first thought should be "that's not the whole story", because (for the most part) that's not how the federal government operates. So, some issues with this story: * This case is Sonya Rao, not Carmen Ortiz (though once again Ortiz oversees all the cases in her office). * The hotel is, let's not sugarcoat it, a blighted flophouse. Don't take my word for it; here's TripAdvisor ("ROOMS BY THE HOUR: Hookers, drug addicts, drug dealers, need I say more") complete with picture: http://tinyurl.com/ta-caswell http://tinyurl.com/ta-caswell and here's Yelp ("Please don't bring your kids here.") http://tinyurl.com/y-caswell http://tinyurl.com/y-caswell * The owners of the hotel were warned repeatedly by local law enforcement and an intervention of local hotel owners; specific measures were suggested to minimize the problems at this place and weren't taken; the hotel had no security, and its drug countermeasures consisted of a list of persons not to rent to again. * The hotel owners made no policy changes after a methamphetamine lab was discovered in one of their rooms. * The hotel owners made no changes after the dead body of a heroin overdose victim was found in one of their rooms. * Drug deals weren't simply occurring at the hotel; the Tewskbury PD repeatedly discovered drug dealers operating full-time out of rooms in the hotel. * The owners of the hotel repeatedly admitted under oath that they had continuing knowledge of drug crimes occurring on their premises, and had no policies to investigate the use of their rooms. There are places like this all over America and they're all neighborhood blights that need to be shut down (hey, by the way, still think there couldn't possibly be a difference between an apartment and a room up for temporary let on Airbnb?). If all we're saying is that civil asset forfeiture is the wrong means to shut them down, I'm with you. But this case does not make my blood boil the way it does for some. Beyond that, I'm not sure HN is a great place to debate it.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- jrockway 14y ago
  Beyond that, I'm not sure HN is a great place to debate it. Then why did you write a long comment rather than just flagging the article and moving on?
- 14y ago
praptak 14y ago
This quote made me stop: “As he describes his job, he looks through the newspapers and looks at the Internet, looking for news stories of properties that might be forfeitable and brings them to the attention of the U.S. attorney,” Caswell’s attorney, Larry Salzman, said. According to the agent’s sworn testimony, he then goes to the Registry of Deeds to determine the value of the targeted property. The DEA rejects anything with less than $50,000 equity." Ouch. I knew about the US forfeiture laws but this still managed to surprise me. The agents seem to have left any connection with justice and are pretty open about their real goal: grabbing money.
- nonamegiven 14y ago
  So he's a real estate agent then?
  - praptak 14y ago
    Ba-dum tsss. But seriously, suppose that this agency needs a new office. What stops them from finding some nice buildings, link them to owners and investigate them just in case? They would be doing their jobs, with the potential bonus of a free office. A true real estate agency. Yeah, false slippery slope and all but is it really a false one?
btilly 14y ago
It is wonderful that these stories are coming up. But is there a wiki somewhere that is tracking these so that when people go and look at Ortiz in more detail, we've got a quick way of educating them?
- thinkcomp 14y ago
  I think PlainSite is probably the closest thing. It lets you tag cases (if you sign up) and search by attorney or legal entity. http://www.plainsite.org http://www.plainsite.org
unreal37 14y ago
This story is outrageous. Outrageous. 14 crimes have occurred there in 15 years... And the government just wants to seize $1.5 million worth of property and keep the proceeds. That is itself a crime. It's not the hotel owners job to do the job of the police. I don't want to check into a hotel and have them check my police record, ask if I am planning to have visitors, scan my luggage in a metal detector to see if I am carrying anything suspicious or illegal. Not their job. If they see a crime occurring or something suspicious, call it in. Fine. But to hold private business owners responsible for the conduct of their customers? Ridiculous.
- tptacek 14y ago
  I think you are probably misinformed about the history of this property. The directly cited criminal cases in the evidence for the property spans a 7 page bulleted wall of text. Multiple people died there. They found meth labs there. On multiple separate engagements, retail drug operations were found running out of rooms in the property. And that's just the drug crimes. The government can't just "seize" the property. They're suing the property in civil court. For what appears to be very good reason. The whole thing is receiving a full hearing in front of an impartial judge.
  - petegrif 14y ago
    Sounds to me to be exactly the kind of property a town needs. Get all that bad shit in one place so the police don't have to work finding the perps. Just station some agents in the hotel and go fishing.
    - m0nastic 14y ago
      Governments tried something similar with various housing project initiatives throughout the later part of the twentieth century. It was an unmitigated disaster, and public policy has now shifted 180 degrees (with the biggest change in policy coming from the passing of the Public Housing Reform Act in 1998). Even DC, where I live, has been working to undo fifty years of bad housing policy, with the shuttering and redevelopment of projects. While serving on a homicide grand jury, ~20 of the 100 or so homicides we heard occurred at Sursom Corda, one of the last projects in the city, which was finally closed down.
sgfc 14y ago
I have been following this case for quite some time. I think it is worth noting that the defence lawyers[1] are a pro bono libertarian law firm, initially funded by the Koch brothers, that strategically litigates media friendly cases. It has been said that "In pursuit of its goal of a radical laissez-faire capitalism, the Institute has initiated a number of lawsuits aimed at ending government regulation of business. While the lawsuits generally involve small businesses, often in communities of color, the goal is to set a legal precedent for the deregulation of big business in general."[2] As a bit of silly trivia, in the movie "Invention of Lying" Ricky Gervais' character had a quicky fling set there where it was named "A Cheap Motel for Intercourse with a Near Stranger". [1] http://www.ij.org/massachusetts-civil-forfeiture http://www.ij.org/massachusetts-civil-forfeiture [2] http://my.execpc.com/~ajrc/ifj.html http://my.execpc.com/~ajrc/ifj.html [3] http://www.futuregamez.net/movies/inventionoflying/inventionoflying2.jpg http://www.futuregamez.net/movies/inventionoflying/invention...
- jmcguckin 14y ago
  If someone wants to demonize an organization they don't like, it's popular to accuse them of having ties to the Koch brothers. Well, here's some other (obviously evil) organizations funded by the Kochs: - ACLU - MIT - NYC Ballet - American Museum of Natural History - PBS - Lincoln Center
  - erichocean 14y ago
    Dude, you're hurting the narrative. Not cool.
trotsky 14y ago
I usually don't go in for commenting about the drug war because it's dumb and i'm over preaching to the converted. But I couldn't resist sidestepping the obvious revenue issue here and note that on any number of occasions I've stayed at perfectly straight hotels presumably run by upstanding members of the community that almost without a doubt had more than 15 felony drug offenses occurring just on that day! If your standards can include 9 years of traffic and a baker's dozen of issues it seems like a vast majority of lodging would be in danger of a zealous prosecutor. Now I'm sure this guy has in some way separated himself out in the states attorney's mind as compared to the usual econolodge, but that's faint comfort. Working for a time with federal investigators it became clear that pretty much 100% of the population is guilty of something if you're looking, usually something that can be finessed into a no joke federal rap. It's very unusual that it ever becomes an issue - but you get the right combination of attention, timing and bad luck or malice and then suddenly your world turns upside down. It seems like this happens really often when you're a target or related to an investigation, they put together what they think is a solid case only to find out whoops they got it wrong you're obviously not their guy. At that point god help you if you're stealing cable or borrowing your brother's wifi or were growing a tiny pot plant in the basement. I wonder what even the theoretical justification for something like this would be. If we seize the hotel then those junkies will stop shooting heroin because they cant get a chill hotel room in town?
niels_olson 14y ago
This seems like the physical equivalent of mega.co.nz, a "dangerous property". The owner may be upstanding, but the people we expect to protect us (the gov't) see it as a nest of thieves, regardless of who owns it. But if that were illegal, it seems to me Vegas would have been plowed under a long time ago.
arbuge 14y ago
Seems to me the whole gang in the Boston DA office need to go, starting from Ortiz and working swiftly all the way down. Thomas Jefferson - "A government afraid of its citizens is a democracy. Citizens afraid of government is tyranny."
chris_wot 14y ago
It occurs to me that Ortiz is having a spotlight done upon her office. She finally went too far, now people are questioning her actions. Transparency's a bitch.
alan_cx 14y ago
Are government buildings at risk when elected officials commit crime in them?
aneth4 14y ago
Civil forfeiture laws are the scariest government threat to American freedoms and rights. Unfortunately they have been upheld by the Supreme Court. And oddly, the freedom touting Republicans have traditionally supported these laws as they are "tough in crime."

"U.S. Attorney Ortiz said through a spokeswoman last week that the government wanted to send a message by going after the motel .... up the street Walmart and Home Depot have all experienced a similar rate of drug crimes .... attorney Salzman says there’s one good reason Ortiz didn’t go after them .... the U.S. Attorney’s office, looking to make an example, picked on the smallest kid on the block.” Where have we heard this story before? It seems as if the Judiciary Committee might have more than just the Aaron Swartz case to consider.

rosser 14y ago

If even an tenth of the attention that's been paid to Aaron and his case over the last week could be shined on the heinous violation of Due Process that is Civil Forfeiture, I'd consider that, alone, a victory.

rayiner 14y ago
Seriously. As this case shows, it's an injustice that almost entirely hits the lower classes. It's not a conspiracy. There is even a certain logic to it: if drug dealers keep using a particular place as a meet up spot, you have to wonder if the owner isn't turning a blind eye to keep the business. But: this is a cheap motel. Of course it's going to be a hotbed for shady things. If you're up to something shady, where do you go, the Ritz? But the forfeiture laws are completely insensitive to these facts. All they do is to work the taking of property from the poor just because by virtue of being poor (or serving the poor) crime happens in their midst.
- tptacek 14y ago
  The owner of this hotel was almost certainly turning a blind eye to keep the business. The owners of the hotel aren't poor (the tenants obviously are, though). Unlike many CAF cases, this one received a full hearing in front of a judge with evidence presented from both sides.
  - rayiner 14y ago
    Very interesting post up top--I didn't know that. You're right--even though I think civil forfeiture is wrong, I can see how this would not be a sympathetic case in front of a judge.

thomasvendetta 14y ago

Carmen Ortiz sounds like nothing more than a state-sponsored terrorist.

hachiya 14y ago
Prosecutors in general are professional conspiracy theorists.
frozenport 14y ago
Watching too much Foxy News, aren't we now?

thinkcomp 14y ago

The actual docket is here: http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=1823970 http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=1823970 You can help shine a light on what the DOJ and USAO are up to (and continue what Aaron Swartz started by downloading PACER) using this tool: http://www.plainsite.org/asymptote/ http://www.plainsite.org/asymptote/ If you follow the directions, it doesn't cost anything.

tptacek 14y ago

Repeating a comment from another thread: Any time you read a story like "government attempts to liquidate real property to fund police department", your first thought should be "that's not the whole story", because (for the most part) that's not how the federal government operates. So, some issues with this story: * This case is Sonya Rao, not Carmen Ortiz (though once again Ortiz oversees all the cases in her office). * The hotel is, let's not sugarcoat it, a blighted flophouse. Don't take my word for it; here's TripAdvisor ("ROOMS BY THE HOUR: Hookers, drug addicts, drug dealers, need I say more") complete with picture: http://tinyurl.com/ta-caswell http://tinyurl.com/ta-caswell and here's Yelp ("Please don't bring your kids here.") http://tinyurl.com/y-caswell http://tinyurl.com/y-caswell * The owners of the hotel were warned repeatedly by local law enforcement and an intervention of local hotel owners; specific measures were suggested to minimize the problems at this place and weren't taken; the hotel had no security, and its drug countermeasures consisted of a list of persons not to rent to again. * The hotel owners made no policy changes after a methamphetamine lab was discovered in one of their rooms. * The hotel owners made no changes after the dead body of a heroin overdose victim was found in one of their rooms. * Drug deals weren't simply occurring at the hotel; the Tewskbury PD repeatedly discovered drug dealers operating full-time out of rooms in the hotel. * The owners of the hotel repeatedly admitted under oath that they had continuing knowledge of drug crimes occurring on their premises, and had no policies to investigate the use of their rooms. There are places like this all over America and they're all neighborhood blights that need to be shut down (hey, by the way, still think there couldn't possibly be a difference between an apartment and a room up for temporary let on Airbnb?). If all we're saying is that civil asset forfeiture is the wrong means to shut them down, I'm with you. But this case does not make my blood boil the way it does for some. Beyond that, I'm not sure HN is a great place to debate it.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
jrockway 14y ago
Beyond that, I'm not sure HN is a great place to debate it. Then why did you write a long comment rather than just flagging the article and moving on?
14y ago

praptak 14y ago

This quote made me stop: “As he describes his job, he looks through the newspapers and looks at the Internet, looking for news stories of properties that might be forfeitable and brings them to the attention of the U.S. attorney,” Caswell’s attorney, Larry Salzman, said. According to the agent’s sworn testimony, he then goes to the Registry of Deeds to determine the value of the targeted property. The DEA rejects anything with less than $50,000 equity." Ouch. I knew about the US forfeiture laws but this still managed to surprise me. The agents seem to have left any connection with justice and are pretty open about their real goal: grabbing money.

nonamegiven 14y ago
So he's a real estate agent then?
- praptak 14y ago
  Ba-dum tsss. But seriously, suppose that this agency needs a new office. What stops them from finding some nice buildings, link them to owners and investigate them just in case? They would be doing their jobs, with the potential bonus of a free office. A true real estate agency. Yeah, false slippery slope and all but is it really a false one?

btilly 14y ago

It is wonderful that these stories are coming up. But is there a wiki somewhere that is tracking these so that when people go and look at Ortiz in more detail, we've got a quick way of educating them?

thinkcomp 14y ago
I think PlainSite is probably the closest thing. It lets you tag cases (if you sign up) and search by attorney or legal entity. http://www.plainsite.org http://www.plainsite.org

unreal37 14y ago

This story is outrageous. Outrageous. 14 crimes have occurred there in 15 years... And the government just wants to seize $1.5 million worth of property and keep the proceeds. That is itself a crime. It's not the hotel owners job to do the job of the police. I don't want to check into a hotel and have them check my police record, ask if I am planning to have visitors, scan my luggage in a metal detector to see if I am carrying anything suspicious or illegal. Not their job. If they see a crime occurring or something suspicious, call it in. Fine. But to hold private business owners responsible for the conduct of their customers? Ridiculous.

tptacek 14y ago
I think you are probably misinformed about the history of this property. The directly cited criminal cases in the evidence for the property spans a 7 page bulleted wall of text. Multiple people died there. They found meth labs there. On multiple separate engagements, retail drug operations were found running out of rooms in the property. And that's just the drug crimes. The government can't just "seize" the property. They're suing the property in civil court. For what appears to be very good reason. The whole thing is receiving a full hearing in front of an impartial judge.
- petegrif 14y ago
  Sounds to me to be exactly the kind of property a town needs. Get all that bad shit in one place so the police don't have to work finding the perps. Just station some agents in the hotel and go fishing.
  - m0nastic 14y ago
    Governments tried something similar with various housing project initiatives throughout the later part of the twentieth century. It was an unmitigated disaster, and public policy has now shifted 180 degrees (with the biggest change in policy coming from the passing of the Public Housing Reform Act in 1998). Even DC, where I live, has been working to undo fifty years of bad housing policy, with the shuttering and redevelopment of projects. While serving on a homicide grand jury, ~20 of the 100 or so homicides we heard occurred at Sursom Corda, one of the last projects in the city, which was finally closed down.

sgfc 14y ago

I have been following this case for quite some time. I think it is worth noting that the defence lawyers[1] are a pro bono libertarian law firm, initially funded by the Koch brothers, that strategically litigates media friendly cases. It has been said that "In pursuit of its goal of a radical laissez-faire capitalism, the Institute has initiated a number of lawsuits aimed at ending government regulation of business. While the lawsuits generally involve small businesses, often in communities of color, the goal is to set a legal precedent for the deregulation of big business in general."[2] As a bit of silly trivia, in the movie "Invention of Lying" Ricky Gervais' character had a quicky fling set there where it was named "A Cheap Motel for Intercourse with a Near Stranger". [1] http://www.ij.org/massachusetts-civil-forfeiture http://www.ij.org/massachusetts-civil-forfeiture [2] http://my.execpc.com/~ajrc/ifj.html http://my.execpc.com/~ajrc/ifj.html [3] http://www.futuregamez.net/movies/inventionoflying/inventionoflying2.jpg http://www.futuregamez.net/movies/inventionoflying/invention...

jmcguckin 14y ago
If someone wants to demonize an organization they don't like, it's popular to accuse them of having ties to the Koch brothers. Well, here's some other (obviously evil) organizations funded by the Kochs: - ACLU - MIT - NYC Ballet - American Museum of Natural History - PBS - Lincoln Center
- erichocean 14y ago
  Dude, you're hurting the narrative. Not cool.

trotsky 14y ago

I usually don't go in for commenting about the drug war because it's dumb and i'm over preaching to the converted. But I couldn't resist sidestepping the obvious revenue issue here and note that on any number of occasions I've stayed at perfectly straight hotels presumably run by upstanding members of the community that almost without a doubt had more than 15 felony drug offenses occurring just on that day! If your standards can include 9 years of traffic and a baker's dozen of issues it seems like a vast majority of lodging would be in danger of a zealous prosecutor. Now I'm sure this guy has in some way separated himself out in the states attorney's mind as compared to the usual econolodge, but that's faint comfort. Working for a time with federal investigators it became clear that pretty much 100% of the population is guilty of something if you're looking, usually something that can be finessed into a no joke federal rap. It's very unusual that it ever becomes an issue - but you get the right combination of attention, timing and bad luck or malice and then suddenly your world turns upside down. It seems like this happens really often when you're a target or related to an investigation, they put together what they think is a solid case only to find out whoops they got it wrong you're obviously not their guy. At that point god help you if you're stealing cable or borrowing your brother's wifi or were growing a tiny pot plant in the basement. I wonder what even the theoretical justification for something like this would be. If we seize the hotel then those junkies will stop shooting heroin because they cant get a chill hotel room in town?

niels_olson 14y ago

This seems like the physical equivalent of mega.co.nz, a "dangerous property". The owner may be upstanding, but the people we expect to protect us (the gov't) see it as a nest of thieves, regardless of who owns it. But if that were illegal, it seems to me Vegas would have been plowed under a long time ago.

arbuge 14y ago

Seems to me the whole gang in the Boston DA office need to go, starting from Ortiz and working swiftly all the way down. Thomas Jefferson - "A government afraid of its citizens is a democracy. Citizens afraid of government is tyranny."

chris_wot 14y ago

It occurs to me that Ortiz is having a spotlight done upon her office. She finally went too far, now people are questioning her actions. Transparency's a bitch.

alan_cx 14y ago

Are government buildings at risk when elected officials commit crime in them?

aneth4 14y ago

Civil forfeiture laws are the scariest government threat to American freedoms and rights. Unfortunately they have been upheld by the Supreme Court. And oddly, the freedom touting Republicans have traditionally supported these laws as they are "tough in crime."