Below is an article that was found. It focuses on the racketeering / extortion going on in Ferguson Corporation however this activity is Nationwide!
Every COUNTY, CITY, TOWN, TOWNSHIP, BOROUGH corporations engage in this process. It is the only way they are able to generate revenue in order for all the employees of the COUNTY, CITY, TOWN, TOWNSHIP, BOROUGH corporations to receive a weekly paycheck and obtain a surplus of revenue that is paid to their executive body.
Note – there is NO product or service provided.
This is Racketeering.
RACKETEERING. An organized conspiracy to commit the crimes of extortion or coercion, attempts to commit extortion or coercion. From the standpoint of extortion, it is the obtaining of money or property from another, with his consent, induced by the wrongful use of force or fear. The fear which constitutes the legally necessary element in extortion is induced by oral or written threats to do an unlawful injury to the property of the threatened person by means of explosives, fire, or otherwise; and to kill, kidnap, or injure him or a relative of his or some member of his family. From the standpoint of coercion, it usually takes the form of compelling by use of similar threats to person or property a person to do or abstain from doing an act which such other person has the legal right to do or abstain from doing, such as joining a so-called protective association to protect his right to conduct a business or trade. United States v. McGlone, D.C. Pa., 19 F.Supp. 285, 287.
It is also extortion.
EXTORT. To compel or coerce, as a confession or information by any means serving to overcome one’s power of resistance, or making the confession or admission involuntary. Sutton v. Commonwealth, 207 Ky. 597, 269 S.W. 754, 757.
• To gain by wrongful methods, to obtain In am unlawful manner, to compel payments by means of threats of injury to person, property, or reputation. McKenzie v. State, 113 Neb. 576, 204 N.W. 60, 61; State v. Richards, 97 Wash. 587, 167 P. 47, 48.
• To take from unlawfully; to exact something wrongfully by threats or putting in fear. State v. Adams, Del., 106 A. 287, 288, 7 Boyce, 335. See Extortion.
• To wrest from, to exact, to take under a claim of protection. Commonwealth v. Neubauer, 142 Pa.Super. 528, 16 A.2d 450, 452. The natural meaning of the word “extort” is to obtain money or other valuable thing either by compulsion, by actual force, or by the force of motives applied to the will, and often more overpowering and irresistible than physical force. Com. v. O’Brien, 12 Cush., Mass., 90.
• EXTORTIO EST CRIMEN QUANDO QUIS COLORE OFFICH EXTORQUET QUOD NON EST DEBITUM, VEL SUPRA DEBITUIVI, VEL ANTE TEMPUS QUOD EST DEBITUM. 10 Coke, 102. Extortion is a crime when, by color of office, any person extorts that which is not due, or more than is due, or before the time when it is due.
EXTORTION. Unlawful obtaining of money from another. People v. Parkinson, 181 Misc. 603, 41 N.Y.S.2d 331, 334.
• It has also been defined as corrupt demanding or receiving by a person in office of a fee for services which should be performed gratuitously; or, where compensation is permissible, of a larger fee than the law justifies, or a fee not due, 2 Bish.Crim.Law, § 390;
• exaction of .money by reason of oppressive conditions or circumstances, People v. Weller, 237 N.Y. 316, 143 N.E. 205, 208, 38 A.L.R. 613;
• obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of force or fear, or under color of official right. And see State v. Logan, 104 La. 760, 29 So. 336; In re Rempfer, 51 S.D. 393, 216 N.W. 355, 359, 55 A.L.R. 1346; Lee v. State, 16 Ariz. 291, 145 P. 244, 246, Ann.Cas.1917B, 131.
• Obtaining of property of another by threats to injure him and to destroy his property, State v. Phillips, 62 Idaho 656, 115 P.2d 418, 420.
• Taking or obtaining of anything from another by means of illegal compulsion or oppressive exaction, Daniels v. U. S., C.C.A.Cal., 17 F.2d 339, 342;
• whether by an officer or otherwise, United States v. Dunkley, D.C.Cal., 235 F. 1000, 1001.
• Unlawful taking by any officer, by color of his office, of any money or thing of value that is not due to him, or more than is due, or before it is due, 4 Bla.Comm. 141; Com. v. Saulsbury, 152 Pa. 554, 25 A. 610; 1 Russ.Cr.* 144; 2 Bish.Cr.L. 390; U. S. v. Deaver, D.C.N.C., 14 F. 595; Bush v. State, 19 Ariz. 195, 168 P. 508, 509.
• Wrongful exaction of money or other valuable thing, either by compulsion, actual force, or by force of motives applied at will, Commonwealth v. Donoghue, 250 Ky. 343, 63 S.W.2d 3, 89 A.L.R. 819.
• A taking under color of office is of essence of offense. La Tour v. Stone, 139 Fla. 681, 190 So. 704, 709, 710.
• At common law, any oppression by color or pretense of right, and particularly and technically the exaction or unlawful taking by an officer of money or thing of value, by color of his office, either when none at all is due, or not so much is due, or when it is not yet due. Preston v. Bacon, 4 Conn. 480. See People v. Barondess, 16 N.Y.S. 436, 61 Hun, 571; Murray v. State, 125 Tex.Cr.R. 252, 67 S.W.2d 274, 275; State v. Anderson, 66 N.D. 522, 267 N.W. 121, 123; Whart.Cr.L. 833.
• Term applies to persons who exact money either for the performance of a duty, the prevention of injury, or the exercise of influence, and covers the obtaining of money or other property by operating on fear or credulity, or by promise to conceal the crimes of others. Commonwealth v. Mann, 111 Pa.Super. 371, 170 A. 381, 382.
• Term in comprehensive or general sense signifies any oppression under color of right, and in strict or technical sense signifies unlawful taking by any officer, under color of office, of any money or thing of value not due him, more than is due, or before it is due. State v. Barts, 132 N.J.L. 74, 38 A.2d 838, 843, 844, 848; State v. Vallee, 136 Me. 432, 12 A.2d 421.
• To constitute “extortion,” money or other thing of value must have been willfully and corruptly received. La Tour v. Stone, 139 Fla. 681, 190 So. 709, 710.
• To constitute “extortion,” the wrongful use of fear must be the operating cause producing consent. People v. Biggs, 178 Cal. 79, 172 P. 152, 153.
• The distinction between “bribery” and “extortion” seems to be this: the former offense consists in the offering a present, or receiving one, if offered; the latter, in demanding
a fee or present, by color of office. Jacob.
The sad reality of this is that many of the People, majority Europeans and a few Asiatics, work and receive a weekly pay check from these COUNTY, CITY, TOWN, TOWNSHIP, BOROUGH corporations.
So it would seems that the People, all People are in a bit of a conundrum.
How Many Ways Can the City of Ferguson Slap You With Court Fees? We Counted
Ferguson city officials pledge to cut back on revenue-boosting court fees and fines—and there are plenty to choose from.
—By Julia Lurie and Katie Rose Quandt
| Fri Sep. 12, 2014 6:30 AM EDT
Over 100 people showed up on Tuesday night at the first Ferguson City Council meeting since Michael Brown’s killing, and unreasonable court fees were a major complaint. Ferguson officials proposed scaling back the myriad ways small-time offenders can end up paying big bucks—or worse. Community activists are optimistic about the proposed changes, but as it turns out, imposing punitive court fines on poor residents is a major source of income for a number of St. Louis County municipalities.
How bad is the current system? Say you’re a low-income Ferguson resident who’s been hit with a municipal fine for rolling through a stop sign, driving without insurance, or neglecting to subscribe to the city’s trash collection service. A look at the municipal codes in Ferguson and nearby towns reveals how these fines and fees can quickly stack up.
To start, you might show up on time for your court date, only to find that your hearing is already over. How is that possible?
According to a Ferguson court employee who spoke with St. Louis-based legal aid watchdog ArchCity Defenders, the bench routinely starts hearing cases 30 minutes before the appointed time and even locks the doors as early as five minutes after the official hour, hitting defendants who arrive just slightly late with an additional charge of $120-130.
Demand for Income [Fine] for each “failure to appear”: $125 Federal Reserve Notes
Or you may arrive to find yourself faced with an impossible choice: Skip your court date or leave your children unattended in the parking lot. Non-defendants, such as children, are permitted by law to accompany defendants in the courtroom, but a survey by the presiding judge of the St. Louis County Circuit Court found that 37 percent of local courts don’t allow it.
Coming to court has its own pitfalls, but not the ones many people fear. It’s a common misconception among Ferguson residents—especially those without attorneys—that if you show up without money to pay your fine, you’ll go to jail. In fact, you can’t be put behind bars for inability to pay a fine, but you can be sent to jail for failure to appear in court (and accrue a $125 fee). If you miss your court date, the court will likely issue a warrant for your arrest, which comes with a fee of its own:
Demand for Income [Fee] for a warrant: $50 Federal Reserve Notes and 56 cents/mile driven by the corporation security guard of the corporation [cops who serve you]
At this point, you owe your initial fine, plus fines for failure to appear in court and the arrest warrant. Thomas Harvey, executive director of ArchCity Defenders, explains that if you’re arrested, your bail will likely equal the sum of these fines. Ferguson Municipal Court is only in session three days a month, so if you can’t meet bail, you might sit in jail for days until the next court session—which, you guessed it, will cost you.
Arrest for failure to appear in [court]? You might sit in jail for days, and pay $30 to $60 Federal Reserve Notes a night until the next [court] session.
Once you finally appear in court and receive your verdict, your IOU is likely to go up again.
The average demand for income [fine] in a Ferguson Corporation racket [case] resulting in a [guilty verdict] in 2013:
$275 Federal Reserve Notes
Can’t pay all at once? No problem! Opt for a payment plan, and come to court once a month with an installment. But if you miss a date, expect another $125 “failure to appear” fine, plus another warrant for your arrest.
Penalty for a late payment:
$125 Federal Reserve Notes Failure to Appear and $50 Federal Reserve Notes Arrest Warrant.
Court fines for minor infractions tend to snowball. For example, drivers accumulate points for speeding, rolling through stop signs, or driving without insurance. You can pay to wipe your record, which is pricey. If you can’t afford to, and rack up enough points, your license will be suspended and your insurance costs will probably jump. Need to get to work? If you’re caught driving with a suspended license, your court fines increase, you gain more points, and your suspension is lengthened. That’s how rolling through a stop sign could end up costing you your job, messing up your degree plans, and more.
In a county like St. Louis, which consists of 81 different municipal court systems, it’s easy to end up with fines and outstanding warrants in multiple towns. Harvey has seen his clients bounce from jail to jail, and says there’s even a local name for this: the “muni-shuffle.”
“Every handful of months, there’s some awful thing that happens as a result of someone being arrested on multiple warrants,” says Harvey. Last year, a 24-year-old man in Jennings, another city in St. Louis County, hung himself after he couldn’t get out of jail for outstanding traffic warrants. “They can’t get out, and they know they’re not going to get out,” says Harvey. In Ferguson, he explains, residents are caught in cycles of debt that stem from three main infractions: driving without insurance, driving with a suspended license, and driving without registration.
15 times in 10 years – The number of times one Ferguson [defendant] described being kidnapped [incarcerated] on the same suspended license charge.
So what happens to all that cash? In Ferguson, as in thousands of municipalities across the country, it goes toward paying city officials, funding city services, and otherwise keeping the wheels of local government turning. In fact, fines and court fees are the city’s second-largest revenue source. Last year, Ferguson issued 3 warrants for every household—25,000 warrants in a city of 21,000 people.
Ferguson Corporation [municipal court] demand for income [fees and fines] collected in 2013: $2.6 million Federal Reserve Notes
“Ferguson isn’t an outlier,” says Alexes Harris, sociology professor at University of Washington and author of the upcoming book Pound of Flesh: Monetary Sanctions as Permanent Punishment for Poor People. Similar measures play out in jurisdictions across the country. “All you have to do is show up in court and watch what happens.”
The good news is that this week, under pressure from local activists, the Ferguson City Council announced plans to eliminate some of the most punitive fees, including the $125 failure to appear fee and the $50 fee to cancel a warrant. Of course, nothing is set to change elsewhere in St. Louis County. But eliminating some of the most egregious fees in one town, says Harvey, is “huge progress.”
Front page image: Jeff Roberson/AP
Taken from the following website: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/ferguson-might-have-break-its-habit-hitting-poor-people-big-fines