FAIR Act to Reform Asset Seizure Laws

[Pertinacious Tom]

Kochy Coal-Fired Conclusion and Recommendations

This is a good summary of the nutjob point of view.

Policing for Profit


Civil forfeiture is a vast national phenomenon and a fundamental threat to property rights and due process. And while it can be lucrative for law enforcement, there is little evidence to suggest forfeiture effectively meets policy goals of fighting crime or supporting victims and community programs. There is, however, substantial evidence of abuse. Civil forfeiture laws stack the deck against property owners, compromising due process and inevitably sweeping up many innocents. And with transparency lacking, forfeiture activity typically happens outside public view, enabling questionable tactics and spending.

Recent years have seen greater attention and action from lawmakers, but most reforms have been partial measures, leaving civil forfeiture’s core deficiencies largely intact. Instead, state and federal lawmakers should pursue more fundamental change.

First, states and the federal government should end civil forfeiture. Its two-track system that separates a person’s criminal culpability from their loss of property is inherently abusive. If government is going to forfeit a person’s property, it should do so only as part of criminal proceedings with the full panoply of due process protections afforded the accused—in other words, through the one-track process of criminal forfeiture. Lawmakers should be wary of half-measures, such as so-called conviction requirements, that maintain the two-track system and fail to help most property owners caught up in forfeiture proceedings.

Second, states and the federal government should eliminate the perverse financial incentive by directing proceeds to neutral funds, beyond the control of law enforcement. Enabling agencies to self-fund through forfeiture undermines constitutional and democratic controls and accountability mechanisms, including the separation of powers, while incentivizing the pursuit of property at the expense of justice.

Third, state and federal lawmakers should provide robust protections for innocent third-party owners, making it quick and easy for owners to secure the return of wrongfully seized property—and putting the burden on the government to show owners’ personal culpability in order to forfeit.

Fourth, the federal government should abolish equitable sharing, and until it does, states should prohibit their law enforcement agencies from participating in the program. Evidence indicates equitable sharing is not effective as a crime-fighting tool and is prone to abuse—and encourages law enforcement to circumvent state forfeiture law.
Finally, states and the federal government should insist on full transparency and accountability for all forfeiture activity.

New Mexico adopted this reform program in 2015 and, contrary to opponents’ predictions, has seen no increase in crime. New Mexico’s experience demonstrates that strong protections for property rights and due process are achievable without compromising public safety. The only way to protect against unjust seizures and forfeitures and to ensure law enforcement pursues justice, not property, is to end civil forfeiture and the financial incentive that fuels it.

I think the New Mexico reforms demonstrate that libertarian nutjob ideas are not unrealistic, not counter-factual, and do actually work when enacted.

But I guess a Biden/Sessions fan will be along shortly because this site has no shortage of people who loudly say THAT libertarians are wrong. And virtually never say WHY libertarians are wrong.

 

[jocal505]

Pertinacious Tom Today at 3:42 AM​

Kochy Coal-Fired Conclusion and Recommendations

(dark money vs. possibilities for the people)

But I guess a Biden/Sessions fan will be along shortly because this site has no shortage of people who loudly say THAT libertarians are wrong. And virtually never say WHY libertarians are wrong.

I can say, succinctly, why Libertarians are wrong: because the Kochs don't know when to stop. The Koch express definitely can't be trusted, and I say that based on the known results: dark money has dynamically infected the Supreme Court., and the Kochs set it up.



Hi Dogballs. You are the best the Kochs can do, on Political Anarchy. And you are what, a dishonest, two-bit, Libertarian blogger, posting cheap tricks, tobacco propaganda, nonsense... and prolific race-baiting.

THE MELANIN FILES (Search>Melanin>Tom Dogballs Ray)​

2012 one melanin​

2013 zero​

2014 one​

2015 three​

2016 two​

2017 zero​

2018 four​

2019 two​

2020 one​

2021 two​

2022 one​

2023 one (Race Baiter Alert #5 for 2023)​

​

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Lawmakers should be wary of half-measures, such as so-called conviction requirements, that maintain the two-track system and fail to help most property owners caught up in forfeiture proceedings.

I disagree with this part. It can be a choice between a half measure and none at all and something is better than nothing. Additionally, conviction requirements seem to really trigger drug war looters, so they have to be at least somewhat useful.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Unnamed sources are accurate occasionally

Your point?

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Grabbing loot for your agency is good fun, but if you are your own oversight, why not, you know, bring it on home?

The Institute for Justice (IJ), a Kochy nutjob law firm that protects property rights nationwide, called on New York lawmakers to eliminate civil forfeiture following reports that an Albany County sheriff’s employee was arrested for using funds to pay gambling debts. John Cox, head of the sheriff’s business office, is accused of siphoning more than $68,000 from the department’s federal forfeiture funds account.


“The misuse of forfeiture funds is shockingly common because civil forfeiture is inherently abusive and non-transparent,” said IJ Senior Nutjob Lee McGrath. “In just the past few years, we’ve seen a Pennsylvania deputy steal $200,000 from a safe, a Michigan prosecutor embezzle $600,000 in funds, and widespread problems with forfeiture reports in states like Kansas and Oklahoma.
...

But if we stop doing this we might lose the drug war!!!

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Tom is getting closer to simply being a spam account

Oh crap. You mean that if I prove for a third time that I read your sources more carefully than you I'm going to be banned or something?

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Philadelphia Settlement Moving Forward



The first consent decree, if implemented, will prevent the City from engaging in their previous practice of outlasting owners in endless proceedings and thereby keeping the loot.
...

The Philadelphia looting program has come to a happy end for nutjobs everywhere.

Class Action Lawsuit that Stopped Philadelphia’s Forfeiture Machine Ends with Victims Compensated and Unclaimed Funds Donated to Charities

Nearly a decade after a Philadelphia family launched a lawsuit to save their home from the city’s abusive forfeiture program, the case ends with reforms in place to protect property owners, compensation paid out to victims of the city’s forfeiture machine, and a distribution of unclaimed settlement funds to local charities. In the beginning of 2021, the Institute for Justice (IJ) secured final approval of two consent decrees to end a class action lawsuit on behalf of people who had homes, cash and cars wrongfully seized. While one decree established reforms to prevent abuse in the future, the other created a $3 million fund to compensate forfeiture victims.


Nearly 2,400 individuals received awards that averaged $1,476. The Institute for Justice then selected Philadelphia charities that are working in the city’s most affected communities to receive approximately $282,000 in unclaimed funds.


“For years, Philadelphia seized and forfeited millions of dollars from individuals through a cruel and unjust legal process. It took a major federal class action lawsuit to bring the mistreatment to an end,” said IJ Senior Nutjob Rob Frommer. “The funds which could not be given back to individuals will be going to help those communities in Philadelphia most harmed by these practices.”

...

I can think of a charity that could help out those most harmed by looting. 4 Stars from Charity Navigator too!

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Grabbing loot for your agency is good fun, but if you are your own oversight, why not, you know, bring it on home?



But if we stop doing this we might lose the drug war!!!

More on Albany looter John Cox and his department

...
"The head of the Albany County Sheriff's Office business office was charged with grand larceny and five counts of forgery after he allegedly siphoned more than $68,000 from the department's federal forfeiture funds account and forged Sheriff Craig Apple's name to cover it up," Albany's Times-Union reported last week. "Apple said he believes Cox was using the money to pay off gambling debts."

...

Notably, Cox's personal redirection of forfeited assets was discovered in the course of a U.S. Justice Department audit of money acquired through civil asset forfeiture by the Albany County Sheriff's Department and the Albany County District Attorney. That is, the feds suspected that the departments as a whole were misusing seized property and cash and accidentally discovered the business office manager's personal pilfering in the process.

The Justice Department got involved only after county Comptroller Susan Rizzo issued an earlier audit finding the office of District Attorney David Soares was "not compliant with regulations that govern the expenditure of" both state and federal forfeiture funds. Soares's office was found to have withheld roughly $365,000 in seized assets it was supposed to turn over to New York's Office of Addiction Services and Supports.

A few months later, another audit by Rizzo found a similar "failure to comply with legal requirements in the processing of forfeited funds by the office of Sheriff Craig Apple. In addition, she said, "several expenses processed with forfeited funds were impermissible" under the law.

One guy paying off his gambling debts was just the cherry on top.
...

The most common answer would be to fire or buy off Comptroller Susan Rizzo, who apparently isn't a team player and doesn't get the purpose of drug war looting.

We're lucky to have people like her in government.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

FBI Misled Judge in Obtaining Warrant To Seize Hundreds of Safe Deposit Boxes

The warrant explicitly forbade looting, so "supplemental instructions" were needed.


Lots of things can make cash seem like criminal proceeds, especially if your agency then gets some of the cash. Lots of cash smells like drugs, so the dogs make sense in the context of looting, if not in the context of inventorying.

The FBI looting at US Private Vaults was stopped by Kochy nutjobs back in 2021, but only for those victims who were part of the class action suit.

For those not part of the class action? It's going like this:

The FBI Hasn’t Said What This Couple Did Wrong, But Is Taking Their Savings Anyway

Linda Martin thought she found a safe place to store cash she and her husband Reggie Wilder were setting aside to purchase a home. But now her home savings are in the hands of the FBI and she may never see them again. Today, she teamed up with the Institute for Justice (IJ) to launch a federal class action lawsuit to get her savings back and to end the FBI’s practice of sending unconstitutional forfeiture notices that do not explain why the government is trying to take someone’s property away forever.


“The government shouldn’t get to take your property if it can’t tell you what you did wrong,” said IJ Attorney Bob Belden. “Using civil forfeiture, the government decides for itself whether to take and try to keep property, even when it doesn’t suspect the owners of any crime. Then, the FBI sends copy-and-paste forfeiture notices that fail to tell owners anything about why it is trying to take their property. That’s not only wrong; it’s unconstitutional.”

...

In March 2021, the FBI raided US Private Vaults with a warrant that explicitly directed agents not to conduct a criminal search or seizure of individual customers’ boxes. They were just supposed to identify owners so they could claim their property. But the FBI instead acted on its months-old plan to search and try to forfeit the contents of any box worth more than $5,000.


That’s all the agency really knew about the customers: that they had property worth forfeiting. It didn’t have any idea if owners had broken any law. But with dollar signs in its eyes, the FBI pressed on, sending out notices to hundreds of customers from whom it wanted to forfeit over $100 million cash, gold, and other valuables. Although those notices indirectly refer to hundreds of federal crimes, they don’t tell anyone what the government thinks they specifically did wrong.


That’s what happened to Linda. When she got the notice saying the FBI intended to take her $40,200, she was left utterly bewildered. Lacking any idea about why the government took her money, Linda unwittingly filed a petition that gave the FBI free rein to decide if it will return any of her money. Nearly two years later, Linda has not been charged with a crime and there is no indication that her savings will be returned.

“The FBI took my savings nearly two years ago but has never told me why,” said Linda. “It’s been a confusing and frustrating process from the day my money was taken. No one should have to go through this.”


The FBI’s forfeiture notices violate the Fifth Amendment, which requires the government to provide specific factual and legal reasons for forfeiture. An earlier IJ lawsuit on behalf of several US Private Vaults customers successfully stopped the FBI’s forfeiture proceedings against those renters, with the judge declaring that the FBI’s notices were “anemic.” Unfortunately, that ruling against the government only applied to the named plaintiffs in that suit, leaving people like Linda still fighting for their property.


The new lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeks to halt administrative forfeiture proceedings for everyone who has received one of the FBI’s deficient notices.



...

It would be nice if credible legal representation could be found, but unfortunately only Kochy nutjobs seem to want to stop the Reagan/Biden drug war looting programs.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Detroit Gives In To Nutjobs



Glad Mr. Reeves got his car back. I don't think noted heroin dealer Tyson Timbs has gotten his back yet, though, and I'm glad to see the Koch-$pon$ored nutjobs are not giving up the assault on American law enforcement.

I thought this had a relatively happy ending back in 2020 when Mr. Reeves got his car back from Detroit looters. It didn't.

Wayne County Seized His Car Without Evidence. When He Spoke Out, They Filed Criminal Charges to Silence Him. Now He is Fighting Back.

In February 2020, Detroit resident Robert Reeves partnered with the Institute for Justice (IJ) to file a class action lawsuit aimed at putting an end to Wayne County’s practice of seizing Detroiters’ cars without charging them with a crime. At the time, he had no way of knowing just how low Wayne County would go to silence his voice and attempt to put an end to his lawsuit.


Within days of filing suit, Wayne County prosecutors slapped Robert with two bogus felony charges. With IJ’s help, Robert hired an attorney and fought back. Months later a judge dismissed the case, citing a lack of evidence. But that didn’t stop the county, which refiled the identical charges against Robert. Once again, he mounted a defense and won.


Now he’s fighting back. Today he’s filed a new federal civil rights lawsuit against Wayne County to put an end to its campaign of harassment and intimidation.


“The government cannot use bogus criminal charges to attempt to silence its critics,” said IJ Nutjob Kirby Thomas West. “At the core of the First Amendment is the idea that Americans are free to criticize their government without fear of intimidation or retaliation. And yet, that’s precisely what Wayne County prosecutors have done in their no-holds-barred attempt to derail Robert’s lawsuit. In more than thirty years of work, the Institute for Justice has not seen such a brazenly unconstitutional litigation tactic. We’re confident that with this second lawsuit, the courts will not only end the retaliation, but also hold those responsible to account.”
...

His car should never have been taken and he shouldn't have twice faced bogus felony charges and it would be nice if Mr. Reeves could find credible legal representation, but reputable lawyers don't wish to challenge the Reagan/Biden looting programs so it's up to Kochy nutjobs yet again.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

The FAIR Act is Back

And has about the same prospects as it did in 2014 when I started this thread. Americans continue to elect drug war looters and continue to be fine with the looting. Libertarian nutjobs continue to object. I expect this cycle to continue for at least another decade before the obvious problems with drug war looting can overcome the powerful force of habit that keeps Americans voting for more of this shit.

Today, Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) reintroduced an enhanced version of the Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration (FAIR) Act, which would enact a sweeping overhaul of federal civil forfeiture laws. The bill would remove the profit incentive that drives so many federal forfeitures, end the federal “equitable sharing” program that is used to circumvent state law protections for property rights, and eliminate the unfair administrative forfeiture process.


“The new FAIR Act takes an even stronger stand against abusive forfeitures than in the past by ending administrative forfeitures,” said IJ Senior Nutjob Dan Alban, who heads IJ’s National Initiative to End Forfeiture Abuse. “Protecting Americans’ property rights isn’t a partisan issue and we’re glad to see lawmakers from across the aisle working together to pass true reforms.”
...

I suspect that Mr. Alban knows there is no way Congress would pass, and really no way Biden would sign, a bill undoing his drug warrior legacy, but he has to sound cheerful for the press release.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Problems with Petitions for Remission or Mitigation

Short version: when a government looter is taking your property without alleging any crime, he might put a piece of paper in front of you and say something like, "you should sign this to start the process of asking us for your property back."

And that's actually TRUE. Also true: if you sign, you're extremely unlikely to ever recover your property. You need to find a Kochy nutjob or some other lawyer who actually opposes this shit. That nutjob will fight in court, where you at least have some chance, instead of asking the agency that keeps the money whether they really want to keep that money. Their answer is going to be that they want to keep your money. Surprise.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Coming up on ten years since drug war looters took noted heroin kingpin Tyson Timbs' car back in 2013.

He won a unanimous victory in the US Supreme Court in 2019 and the third time before the Indiana Supreme Court was the charm when he finally got his car back in 2021, 8 years after it was taken.

Even with a unanimous SCOTUS and the complete absence of anyone willing to say why Kochy nutjobs were wrong to take his case to SCOTUS, that's how long it took. Grinding slowly...

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Florida is drumming up business for Kochy nutjobs.

Families lose homes after Florida cities turbocharge code enforcement foreclosures

...
The foreclosures have brought in millions for the cities, but have taken away homes that have been in families for generations, particularly in heavily Black and lower income neighborhoods. And the lawyer who has aggressively pursued the practice is trying to make cities in South Florida next.

“It’s my life,” Shroyer said of her Fort Pierce home. “If they take this property, they are ripping my life away.”

Last May, the city filed a lawsuit to foreclose on the house over unpaid property fines going back all the way to 2004. The city said the amount due from the fines, some of which increase by $100 a day, is more than $240,000.

That came as news to Shroyer, who had no idea the house had unpaid fines. She said her father, Gene, had always done his own maintenance on the house.

...

In late 2021, the city signed a contract with an outside attorney named Matt Weidner to file lawsuits against the owners of these properties.

Weidner is trying to get several South Florida cities, including Davie and Boca Raton, to join in, calling homes subject to foreclosure because of aggressive enforcement of code violations a potential goldmine of untapped revenue.

...

The Herald spent more than six months analyzing roughly 775 lawsuits that Weidner filed on behalf of nine cities and counties over the past eight years. The Herald reviewed thousands of pages of legal documents, filed more than two dozen record requests and spoke with numerous property owners who have been the target of these lawsuits as well as lawyers who have defended against them.

While the lawsuits have undoubtedly targeted some properties that deserved to be foreclosed upon, the Herald’s investigation shows that Weidner’s work on behalf of these cities has also had collateral damage.

According to court documents and interviews, numerous property owners complained that they hadn’t been properly notified of the lawsuits and hadn’t been given adequate time to mount their defense.

More than 70% of the property owners named in these suits didn’t have an attorney defending them, according to the Herald’s analysis of court records. Several told the Herald they couldn’t afford one.

The lawsuits have been filed predominantly in heavily Black neighborhoods, which property owners see as part of a mission to gentrify and redevelop their neighborhoods by pushing them out.

Legal experts said that the nature of Weidner’s financial arrangement raises serious concerns that profit motive could dictate which cases — and how many — the cities pursue.

...

Gee, ya think?

Strikes me as similar to negro removal by eminent domain buybacks. The people being targeted don't know the rules, can't afford a lawyer, and probably don't know that Kochy nutjobs work for free.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

...
Clark sees the foreclosure push by cities like Clearwater and St. Petersburg as part of a broader effort to redevelop historically Black neighborhoods and push out Black residents.

“That was the attitude, gentrification across America,” he said. “I was not the only person in this town that this happened to.”

The city of Clearwater bristled at suggestions of racial bias in its code enforcement lawsuits.
...

The pattern of foreclosures is completely random and has nothing to do with where black people are concentrated close to extremely expensive property.

But recently added to my list of things that I know, but should not:

If you're approaching the Skyway bridge and low on fuel, DO NOT stop where all those dots appear if you appear to have something to steal. There's fuel a little further down where it says Greater Pinellas Park.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Arizona Appeals Court Lets Charlotte Trucking Company Owner Fight for $39,500 Seized From Him at Phoenix Airport



Considering that publicity surrounding this case led to some reforms in Arizona that were distinctly unfavorable to looters, I doubt any appeal will happen in the next 30 days, so Jerry Johnson should eventually get his money back.

Jerry Johnson finally got his money back

Following a two-and-a-half-year legal battle, the $39,500 seized from small business owner Jerry Johnson at the Phoenix, Arizona, airport was finally returned to him this weekend. Jerry was never charged with a crime, but the state attempted to take his savings through civil forfeiture. After a trial court judge ruled Jerry did not even have standing to contest the forfeiture of his money, the Institute for Justice (IJ), a Kochy nutjob law firm, intervened and successfully appealed Jerry’s case.

“Jerry’s case potently illustrates the injustice of civil forfeiture even when someone ultimately gets their property back,” said IJ Senior Nutjob Dan Alban. “It took 31 months for Jerry to finally get his savings back even though he was never even charged with a crime. In the middle of the COVID pandemic, Jerry had to find a way to keep operating his small trucking business after its working capital was seized while also scraping together money to hire an attorney (before IJ took his case). We’re glad that the money has been returned, but Jerry still needs to be made whole.”

...

The state returned Jerry’s money with less than 0.8% in accrued interest after moving to dismiss the case, but it refuses to pay his attorneys’ fees and interest at Arizona’s statutory rate for judgments. This would leave Jerry uncompensated for the years his money was locked away and for what he paid out-of-pocket to an attorney before IJ took on his case. The case will continue as IJ has filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings and opposes the state’s motion.

So that's nice and I hope he gets back the attorneys' fees too.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Kochy Nutjobs Making Looting Less Profitable

The case against Jerry Johnson's property was dismissed with prejudice.

Today, the Arizona Superior Court for Maricopa County ruled that the forfeiture case against Jerry Johnson’s life savings will be dismissed with prejudice, meaning it cannot be filed again. The court also ruled that Jerry, the owner of a small trucking business who had $39,500 seized by law enforcement at the Phoenix Airport in August 2020, is not only entitled to get his money back, but he is also owed 9% interest for the loss of use of his property and is eligible to be compensated for his attorneys’ fees.

The decision marks the end of a legal saga that left Jerry Johnson without his money for more than 2.5 years during the COVID-19 pandemic. After a trial court originally ruled that Jerry could not even contest the forfeiture of his money, the Institute for Justice (IJ) intervened in May 2022 and successfully appealed Jerry’s case, securing a published opinion holding that property owners do not have to prove their own innocence just to contest a forfeiture.

“I’m so happy to finally have this case dismissed, to get my money back, and to receive interest for the years that the government refused to return my money without proving I did anything wrong. And I am also eager to get back the money I paid out of pocket for my first attorney.” said Jerry. “I can now invest this money in my business so I can continue to grow it to provide for myself and my family.”
...

Obviously, things could have gone better and faster if he had credible legal representation instead, but he does look pretty happy with the outcome. His "the looting is over" smile is pretty similar to Tyson Timbs'!

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

OK, who has the better "the looting is over" smile?

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Culley v Marshall is headed to SCOTUS

Kochy nutjobs plan to help

The U.S. Supreme Court today announced that it will consider Culley v. Attorney General of Alabama, a case concerning whether someone whose property is seized will receive an immediate probable-cause hearing, or must wait months or years before they have an opportunity to contest the seizure. Prompt post-seizure hearings are particularly important for innocent third-party property owners in civil forfeiture cases, who do not currently have any opportunity to show that they did not know their property—often a car—was being used for an illegal purpose.


“The government should not be able to take your car without providing you with a prompt opportunity to challenge the seizure,” said Dan Alban, Senior Nutjob at the Institute for Justice (IJ), the Kochy law firm that has been leading efforts nationwide to end civil forfeiture. “In criminal cases, after the government arrests you, it must hold a probable cause hearing shortly after the arrest so that a judge can make a preliminary determination about whether the arrest was legitimate. The government should provide the same kind of prompt hearing after it takes your property.”


The two cases consolidated in Culley involved car owners whose cars were seized in Alabama, but who were not themselves at the scene of the seizure and were never charged with a crime. Both cases are on appeal from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that the civil forfeiture proceeding itself provides sufficient due process to protect innocent owners, even if it might take years for them to get their property back.
...

Other Kochy nutjobs are already helping.

So that's nice. Maybe in addition to the "the looting is finally over" smiles we'll get to see what a "the looting is over much sooner than I expected" smile looks like.

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

Georgia Looters Don't Even Begin To Obey Their Lax Rules

Kochy nutjobs, unable to see the wisdom of the Reagan/Biden drug war looting programs, object again.

Yesterday, the Institute for Justice (IJ) submitted an amicus brief in the Georgia Supreme Court, urging the court to grant review and reverse a Court of Appeals decision that drastically undermines the already limited protections available to victims of civil forfeiture in the Peach State.


In November 2021, the Decatur County Sheriff’s Office seized business records, a former residence, multiple vehicles, bank accounts, business properties, and personal files from the owner of a small scrap metal and waste-hauling business. The forfeiture complaint against property owned by Stacey Smith and her husband, Garrett, included ambiguous citations to numerous statutes that it alleged were the basis for the forfeiture. However, the state failed to meet even the modest standards that are required before police can keep someone’s property through civil forfeiture under Georgia law.


“Georgia’s protections for victims of civil forfeiture are already anemic, so the absolute bare minimum we should expect is for law enforcement to meet those bare-bones standards before forfeiting people’s property,” said IJ Senior Nutjob Dan Alban.
...