18 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHMk1 996 Police Car
Leading reported evidence
Use illegal goods or not
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Leading evidence: 'Use illegal goods or not' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Use illegal goods or not' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
18 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T222516Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I've seen the car around here, and saw it at the body shop where it was being dolled up.
Personally it makes me mad, it's the police flaunting that yes, they can seize your property on the
suspicion
of criminal activity. All they have to do is convince a judge that the property was involved in a crime, and it's theirs--no trial or anything. The person who "committed" the crime may get off scott free for lack of any evidence at all, but the property will still be seized.
Just to repeat that: Person accused of crime is not convicted, property involved at the time is still seized by police. Let alone that seizure of the property could, combined with sentencing, easily blow by the maximum sentence allowed by law for that crime.
It's the single most disgusting money grab I've ever heard of.
Oh god, reminds me of that time some guy was flying across country with 10grand in his pocket. Sure it's stupid to do, but guess what, he was caught with it, law enforcement "decided" he was going to buy drugs with it, and kept it. That's it; end of story. And you bet you don't get your day in court for that, the crimes are bought up against your property, not you, so if you want it back you have to start up your own civil suit, and often that will cost significantly more than the property that was seized.
So just remember that if you see this car.
Well said Dave.
Could not agree more. This is an epidemic in the South. Every small town police department that is remotely near a heavily traveled interstate plays the personal property lottery and not always on the level.
Yup, I've heard of that and am amazed that noone has managed to successfully challenge it yet.
Didn't the guy that lost the $10K eventually get it back?
i'm surprised that is allowed to happen, you guys in the south are usually pretty small-government oriented...how the hell did that bill get allowed to pass without pitchforks and mobs forming.
Did he cross country borders, because anything over 10k unclaimed going over the border is illegal in itself. Whether it's being used for illegal goods or not.
Probably because it hasn't happened to them personally, yet.
I kinda dig that Porsche, but....
I don't know what the analogy is, but cops driving around small towns in seized sports cars is like some kind of intimidation.
I see the PD there also has 5 K-9 units!
The whole Orange County Sheriff here only has 7 K-9s -- they must be busy chasing people down in Hoover, crikey!
(Note to self, if I ever go to Barber Motorsports Park, stay clear of Hoover!)
Actually, no, you just nailed what was wrong with that car... it has an aero wing, but no front bumper or side skirts - the car is dangerous at high speed.
i had recently read that northwest texas small towns are famous for property grabs. i think that's where that guy got his $10k stolen. it was his life savings.
