Quote of an e-mail Richard Celata Sent out.
So, they had to use the “civil forfeiture” to steal my guns, then drop the case, and then, claim they are evidence for a criminal investigation.
Why did they not just skip the civil forfeiture, and go straight to the criminal?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judgment in civil case
Richard Celata (Plaintiff)
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (Defendants)
Decision by Court. This action came before the Court for bench trial, hearing, or determination on the record. A decision has been rendered.
It is ordered and adjudged:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED without prejudice.
2. Defendant’s Motion for Summery Judgment is GRANTED subject to the following Conditions:
A: The property Plaintiff seeks to have returned will remain in the custody of the government pending conclusion of the ongoing related criminal investigation or prosecution.
B: While in government custody the property is to be protected against loss, tampering, destruction, or damage.
C: If a criminal prosecution in which this property will be necessary as evidence is not forthcoming the government is to return the property to Plaintiff or notify the Plaintiff as to why the property is not to be returned.
D: If a criminal prosecution is to be undertaken the government is to notify the Plaintiff as to whether some or all of the items will be subject to a claim of forfeiture.
Patrick E. Duffy, Clerk
Sam E. Haddon USDJ