Category Archives: By The Book

How Police have confiscated billions from law abiding Americans


By Doug Book, editor

Thirty years ago, the Department of Justice created a civil asset forfeiture program known as “Equitable Sharing.” Though originally created for the purpose of separating drug dealers from their ill-gotten assets and cash, since 2001 Equitable Sharing has been employed by the nation’s police to score $2.5 Billion in cash and assets from citizens “who were not charged with a crime and without a warrant being issued.” It is a high-dollar confiscation scam through which 298 police departments and 210 task forces have seized as much as 20 % of their operating budgets “…despite a federal ban [on the use of such money] to pay salaries or otherwise support budgets.”

A 2014 Washington Post article revealed that Equitable Sharing resulted in “…61,998 cash seizures made on highways and elsewhere since 9/11 without search warrants or indictments.” And this plunder was indeed shared equitably with $1.7 billion going to state and local authorities as “…the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and other federal agencies received $800 million. Half of the seizures were below $8,800.” The rather meager number of less than $8,800 hardly represents automobiles, airplanes or vacation homes confiscated from international drug rings.

How far removed are the nation’s police from the “Protect and Serve” mission we hear so much about? In 2012, John Anderson of San Clemente, California was pulled over by part-time deputy David Frye in Seward County Nebraska for “failing to signal promptly when changing lanes.” The stop for an issued warning ticket took just 13 minutes.

But according to court papers filed by Frye, he claimed to find “…several indicators of possible suspicious activity: an air freshener, a radar detector and inconsistencies in the driver’s description of his travels.” The Deputy asked Anderson if he was in possession of cocaine, heroin or large amounts of money and then sought permission to search Anderson’s BMW. When Anderson declined permission for the search, Frye “…radioed for a drug-sniffing dog, and [Anderson] had to wait another 36 minutes for the dog to arrive.” “I’m just going to, basically, have you wait here,” Frye told him. Upon arrival, the dog was said to have indicated the presence of drugs and although none were found, Frye confiscated $25,180 found in Anderson’s car.

And here’s the kicker. Frye handcuffed Anderson and told him he was under arrest. “Drug currency is illegal in Nebraska,” said Frye as he offered the undoubtedly shaken Anderson the following deal: “You’re going to be given an opportunity to disclaim the currencyto sign a form that says, ‘That is not my money. I don’t know anything about it. I don’t want to know anything about it. I don’t want to come back to court.’ ” Anderson was not read his Miranda rights until over an hour had passed in the “arrest” procedure. An hour later, after signing away his $25,000, Anderson was permitted to go. Fearing arrest, the possible destruction of career and reputation and how one might be treated over 1000 miles from home by a LEO obviously more interested in cash than justice, I wonder how many of us would follow Anderson’s example? Anderson has since gone to court to retrieve his money, saying he signed the waiver because he felt intimidated by Frye.

Deputy Frye committed a number of unconstitutional actions during his “arrest” of John Anderson. And though he will probably retrieve his money, Anderson will undoubtedly be required to sign away his right to sue, that being SOP for others who have decided to take a stand after having been intimidated by police into parting with money or property.

Could an innocent John Anderson have avoided the nerve-wracking hours of threat and intimidation suffered at the hands of a Deputy whose behavior was far more suggestive of John Dillinger than a member of law enforcement? The answer is yes. This week, Coach is Right will review the ways in which motorists may protect their rights from an officer trained to intimidate and confiscate rather than protect and serve.


Learn the truth about Democrats. Get your free PDF of Coach’s book “Crooks, Learn the truth about Democrats. Get your free PDF of Coach’s book “Crooks Thugs& Bigots: the lost, hidden and changed history of the Democrat Party.” Just ask at




Police steal $100’s of Millions from innocent Americans in “Stop and Seize” scams

By Doug Book,  editor

After 9/11, the federal government “…called on police to become the eyes and ears of homeland security on America’s highways.” But if the new, more aggressive agenda of seeking out suspicious individuals was embraced by officers as part of their interdiction training by the federal government, their policing behavior turned out to be worlds removed from the mundane yet somehow historically reassuring promise to “protect and serve” the American public. For law enforcement officers throughout the nation were eagerly learning and practicing the fine art of “policing for profit,” that is, the barely legal method of confiscating money and assets from generally guileless American citizens taught since childhood that police may be trusted.

Thirty years ago, the Department of Justice created a civil asset forfeiture program known as “Equitable Sharing.” Though originally used for the purpose of separating drug dealers from their assets and cash, since 2001, Equitable Sharing has been employed by the nation’s police to score $2.5 Billion in cash and assets from citizens “who were not charged with a crime and without a warrant being issued.” It is a high-dollar confiscation scam which is painfully easy to operate and, to ensure the successful practice of which, law enforcement has been dealt every trump. How can billions be confiscated from law abiding drivers?

Simply pull over a car for any violation, real or imagined. While issuing a warning or a ticket, “study [the driver or passengers] for signs of nervousness, including…clenched jaws or perspiration.” Police are then taught to look for “supposed indicators of criminal activity, which can include such things as trash on the floor of a vehicle, abundant energy drinks or air fresheners hanging from rear view mirrors.” Unbelievable.

It will be after the reading of these meaningless tea leaves that the officer will ask permission to search the vehicle. A legal refusal by the driver may cause drug sniffing dogs to be summoned, a thoroughly illegal use of the driver’s time as has already been determined by the Supreme Court. But how many Americans will be aware of such legal decisions guaranteeing their rights?

And now comes the fun part. Drivers across the nation have been found in possession of thousands of dollars in cash. It’s their own money, lawfully acquired, but police immediately conclude that it represents the ill-gotten gains of a drug sale. The money is confiscated on the spot and the driver must now prove that the cash was acquired in a legal manner should he ever wish to enjoy its return.

Unfortunately, given the cost of hiring attorneys to fight Big Brother, over 60% of law abiding people who are the VICTIMS of a crime committed by the police, will never retrieve their money. And for those who choose to fight, it is usually mandatory that they sign away their right to sue!

During the rest of the week, Coach is Right will relate the stories of honest citizens who have been robbed by the people they look to for protection while providing some of the knowledge necessary to avoid becoming a victim.



Why does the left keep aiming at our guns?

By Doug Book, editor

In 1996, Washington Post reporter and FOX News’ faux-conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer wrote “…the [Clinton Administration’s] assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security.  Nonetheless, it is a good idea . . . .  Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation.”

Of course, Krauthammer soon learned that the American people cannot be “desensitized” to the left’s arrogant enterprises of would-be gun theft.  On the contrary, recent in-your-face efforts by gun control zealots to force gun owners into 2nd Amendment defeatism have inevitably resulted in defiance, not submission.  The unparalleled explosion in gun sales upon the installation of Barack Hussein in the White House, the absolute refusal to appease the left after New Town and the unexpected appearance of armed freedom fighters at the Bundy ranch; all have served to give provide the nation’s Krauthammers with a real education.

And today the left is faced with what may be its greatest fear—a serious, firearm owning public which has drawn a line in the sand that a gun grabbing government is not permitted to cross.

But why did the government choose this fight? Why did a battle over 2nd Amendment guarantees take on the seeming appearance of life and death to the American left? Was the Democrat Party somehow convinced disarming the American people would be an easy win? Did Chuck Schumer and Diane Feinstein really believe a coupling of the left’s laughable “nobody wants to take your gun” mantra with a professed “common sense” approach to gun control had actually fooled the nation’s gun owners?

Anyone who believes liberal claims of heartbreak over 19,000 annual firearm suicides or even the yearly average of about 250 youngsters accidently killed by mishandled guns must first ask how the left can abhor these numbers yet celebrate some 1 million annual abortions.

In 2010, the FBI reported 8,874 firearm homicides in the United States. In 2011, the number was 8,583. Of these homicides, as many as half—and depending upon location, sometimes far more—are committed by gang members. As of 2011 there were some 1.4 million active gang members in the United States comprising 33,000 different gangs. The FBI determined gangs to be responsible for “…an average of 48 percent of violent crime in most jurisdictions and up to 90 percent in several others.” This means the American left has spent decades doing everything in its power to trample the Constitution and disarm the American public, all for the prevention of some 4,300 deaths.

Does anyone really believe that Democrats and other dedicated gun grabbers can get all broken up over 4,300 shootings?

Sources:       Krauthammer. Disarm the Citizenry. But Not Yet.  WaPo, April 5, 1996.



News of Chicago’s St Sabina stiffing workers for $200,000 finds its way down the memory hole


By Doug Book, editor

On September 2nd, Chicago’s WGN carried a news story entitled “Chicago Summer Job Employees say they have not been paid.” Several hundred people who signed up for the city’s summer jobs program “One Summer Chicago” did not receive the paycheck they were expecting on August 29th.

But don’t bother looking for this story on the web today unless you are familiar with “webcache,” for the entire piece has been erased and chucked down the familiar memory hole. Why? It could have something to do with who owes these summer jobs workers the money! That would be the St Sabina Catholic Church, made infamous outside the Windy City by its priest, the dedicated Marxist, Obama-supporter, America hater and well known fighter for his own brand of “racial justice,” the Reverend Michael Pfleger.

In 2008, Pfleger decided he and his anti-gun minions should simply do away with John Riggio, the owner of Chuck’s Gun Shop in Riverdale.   “We’re going to snuff out John Riggio,” said Pfleger to a gathering of like-minded gun grabbers at a rally outside of Chuck’s. As a typically inclusive liberal, Pfleger added “we’re going to snuff out legislators that are voting against our gun laws.”  When questioned about his choice of terms, the good reverend claimed, “I was talking about exposing the gun shop owners and legislators who support them.” After all, everybody knows that “snuff out” really means expose. This provides just an idea of the general depravity of St. Sabina’s priest.

According to the current “Page Can’t Be Found” story, WGN investigated the complaints of the unpaid One Summer Chicago workers to find they had been part of a mentorship program through St Sabina. They told WGN they “were not given an explanation as to why” they hadn’t been paid. The only information they received had come from a supervisor who wrote in a text message that he also didn’t know why no one had been paid.  “I don’t know when we’ll be paid,” he continued. “As soon as I get more information, I’ll let you know.”

Upon continuing to dig, WGN discovered from a city department spokesman that “St Sabina is responsible for paying workers up front and then submitting paperwork to their city for reimbursement.” A call to St Sabina and WGN was informed that the non-payment “came down to cash flow issues.”

“Because there were three pay periods in the month of August, we didn’t have the liquidity in our accounts.” This was according to Lisa Ramsey, Director of St Sabina’s Employment Resource Center. According to the WGN story, Ramsey said the Church is waiting on “about $200,000 in city funds in order to issue paychecks to these workers.”

The folks who worked through St Sabina for the One Summer Chicago program had better hope these are NOT funds the Church expects as reimbursement for paychecks not yet provided!!! St Sabina has to pay FIRST and THEN get reimbursed. That’s just sorta how it works.

As for the Reverend Reverend, he has been out among the flock, offering $5,000 to anyone who can provide information as to the identity of an individual who killed a 9 year old boy in Chicago. This is certainly commendable, but shouldn’t Reverend Pfleger take care of the business of St Sabina before offering rewards around town?

 Sources:   (PAGE NOT FOUND)


Mindset of Michael Brown “[meant] everything” in confrontation with Officer Wilson

By Doug Book, editor

Last week, former St. Louis Police Chief Ed Delmore addressed an Open Letter to Captain Ron Johnson, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon’s choice to “direct all law enforcement operations” in Ferguson after the shooting death of Michael Brown. Chief Delmore revealed that he is not a fan of what another officer described as Capt. Johnson’s “hug a looter” attempts to bring criminals under control by directing St. Louis County Police to “remain uninvolved” on the night “the rioting and looting began again.”

The essence of Delmore’s criticism, however,  is directed at Capt. Johnson’s claim that “there was no reason to release” the video of Brown manhandling the comparatively pint-sized owner of the convenience store from which he and a friend had stolen cigars. According to Johnson, “the reported theft and the killing [were] entirely different events.”

But it’s in his response to this “entirely different events” claim that Delmore may have revealed the reason Officer Darren Wilson had to pull the trigger on Brown a short time later.

“The fact that Brown knew he had just committed a robbery before he was stopped by Officer Wilson speaks to Brown’s mindset,” wrote Delmore.  “And Captain, the mindset of a person being stopped by a police officer means everything, and you know it.

If Captain Johnson wanted to “get schooled” he came to the right window. For Chief Delmore made it clear that the release of a video is unimportant when compared with the mindset of a criminal who has foolishly confronted a cop just moments after the crime. Johnson was concerned with optics, Delmore with what a frightened and potentially desperate thug might attempt with an unprepared police officer.

Read Chief Delmore’s Open Letter below. It offers far more insight into the shooting of Michael Brown than any self-proclaimed, criminal law/police procedure “expert” in our national media.


“An Open Letter to Captain Ronald S. Johnson”

From a former St. Louis Metro Area police chief

I have to call you out.

I don’t care what the media says. I expect them to get it wrong and they often do. But I expect you as a veteran law enforcement commander—talking about law enforcement—to get it right.

Unfortunately, you blew it. After days of rioting and looting, last Thursday you were given command of all law enforcement operations in Ferguson by Governor Jay Nixon. St. Louis County PD was out, you were in. You played to the cameras, walked with the protestors and promised a kinder, gentler response. You were a media darling. And Thursday night things were better, much better.

But Friday, under significant pressure to do so, the Ferguson Police released the name of the officer involved in the shooting of Michael Brown. At the same time the Ferguson Police Chief released a video showing Brown committing a strong-arm robbery just 10 minutes before he was confronted by Officer Darren Wilson.

Many don’t like the timing of the release of the video. I don’t like that timing either. It should have been released sooner. It should have been released the moment FPD realized that Brown was the suspect.

Captain Johnson, your words during the day on Friday helped to fuel the anger that was still churning just below the surface. St. Louis County Police were told to remain uninvolved and that night the rioting and looting began again. For much too long it went on mostly unchecked. Retired St. Louis County Police Chief Tim Fitch tweeted that your “hug-a-looter” policy had failed.

Boy did it.

And your words contributed to what happened Friday night and on into the wee hours of Saturday. According to the St. Louis Post Dispatch, you said the following regarding the release of the video: “There was no need to release it,” Johnson said calling the reported theft and the killing entirely different events.

Well Captain, this veteran police officer feels the need to respond. What you said is, in common police vernacular—bullshit. The fact that Brown knew he had just committed a robbery before he was stopped by Officer Wilson speaks to Brown’s mindset. And Captain, the mindset of a person being stopped by a police officer means everything, and you know it.

Let’s consider a few examples:
On February 15, 1978 Pensacola Police Officer David Lee conducted a vehicle check. He didn’t know what the sole occupant of the vehicle had recently done, but the occupant did. Who was he? Serial killer Ted Bundy. Bundy attempted to disarm Lee. Lee was able to retain his firearm and eventually took Bundy into custody.

On April 19, 1995 Oklahoma State Trooper Charlie Hangar stopped a vehicle for minor traffic violations. He didn’t know that 90 minutes earlier the traffic violator, Timothy McVeigh, killed 168 people with a truck bomb at the Murrah Federal Building. But McVeigh sure knew it, didn’t he? Fortunately, given his training and experience Hangar was able to take McVeigh into custody for carrying a concealed firearm. It was days later before it was determined that McVeigh was responsible for the bombing.

On May 31, 2003 then-rookie North Carolina police officer, Jeff Postell, arrested a man digging in a trash bin on a grocery store parking lot—an infraction that would rise to about the level of jaywalking. Postell didn’t know that he had just captured Eric Rudolph, the man whom years earlier had killed and injured numerous people with bombs and was on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted list.

So now, let’s consider Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson’s stop of Michael Brown. Apparently Wilson didn’t know that Brown had just committed a strong-arm robbery. But Brown did! And that Captain, is huge.

Allegedly, Brown pushed Wilson and attempted to take Wilson’s gun. We’re also being told that Officer Wilson has facial injuries suffered during the attempt by Brown to disarm him. Let’s assume for a moment those alleged acts by Brown actually occurred. Would Brown have responded violently to an officer confronting him about jaywalking? Maybe, but probably not.

Is it more likely that he would attack an officer believing that he was about to be taken into custody for a felony strong-arm robbery? Absolutely.

Officer Wilson survived the encounter with Brown as did Lee, Hangar, and Postell. Michael Brown didn’t survive and it’s too soon to say if Officer Wilson’s use of deadly force was justified and legal. You and I both know that not all officers survive such confrontations. Officers die in incidents like this Captain Johnson, including a couple that I remember from your own organization:

On April 15, 1985 Missouri Trooper Jimmie Linegar was shot and killed by a white supremacist he and his partner stopped at a checkpoint; neither Trooper Linegar nor his partner were aware that the man they had stopped had just been indicted by a federal grand jury for involvement in a neo-Nazi group accused of murder. The suspect immediately exited the vehicle and opened fire on him with an automatic weapon.

Just a month before, Missouri Trooper James M. Froemsdorf was shot and killed—with his own gun—after making a traffic stop. When the Trooper made that stop he didn’t know that the driver was wanted on four warrants out of Texas—But again the suspect knew it.

So Captain Johnson, I guess the mindset and recently committed crimes of the suspects that murdered those Missouri Troopers didn’t mean anything. The stops by the Troopers, as you have said, are entirely different events right?

St. Louis Police Chief Ed Delmore, retired