Hell's Angels in Arizona rumble

The Hell's Angels are in a battle to keep their Cave Creek clubhouse (Clubhouse? Seriously? Shouldn't biker gangs have cooler names for their hang-out? Something like dens, lairs, or pits. Even crack addicts have crackhouses. They wouldn't be caught dead in a "clubhouse." Clubhouses make think of Spanky and the gang, not a biker gang.) Anyway, here's the background.

The house was raided two years ago as law enforcement agents raided Hell's Angels clubs statewide as part of a federal sting known as Operation Black Biscuit.

But prosecutors' case collapsed this year, with most of the defendants going free or pleading guilty to minor charges. No one from the Cave Creek charter was convicted.

The end right? Nope.

Meanwhile, state attorneys had filed seizure papers alleging that the clubhouse was acquired with criminal racketeering funds...Eberhardt contested the state's claim that he had used criminal racketeering funds. He won.

Now that's the end right? Nope.

He only owned half the property. The other half was owned by the heirs of Seybert, who was gunned down outside a Phoenix tavern by an unknown assailant in March 2003. Because Hoover's heirs did not fight the confiscation, the state became half-owner of the property.

So a raid against the Hell's Angels produced no real arrests, and the racketeering claim was also shot down, but the State, never having won a court case in the matter, still owns half this clubhouse. The kicker,

State lawyers would not comment on why they are trying to acquire the house or where the money to buy it would come from.

Gotta love the system.

Look, I'm not saying that the Hell's Angels are a bunch of nice guys getting picked on by the man. In fact, most of what I've read says I'm not inviting these guys over for Thanksgiving (however, I've got some ink so I'm down). But, Arizona's in the wrong here. Forfeiture laws are getting too vague, and too onerous. The weird thing is I can't figure out Arizona's strategy here. If they pay more than the $160,000 and win, then half the proceeds will go to a man they think built the clubhouse with illegal money. Why pay him off? Doesn't that move, in effect, launder the money for Mr. Eberhardt ? Shouldn't Mr. Eberhardt view that has a major victory?

On the flip side, if he wins the bid, Mr. Eberhardt will pay a one time tax of about $80,000. Nice victory tax. First he pays the legal fees paid to prove his innocence, does it again, then he has to buy back his clubhouse from the very State that he just proved wrong. Moreover, this move robs his partner's estate of the chance to seek free market value for their ownership of the clubhouse.

Everyone looses. Arizona's tax payers, Mr. Eberhardt , and Mr. Seybert's estate. Nice move by Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard.

PS. This post is mostly insurance in case I ever go to jail. I will print it and show it to Maggot or whoever and try to stay alive another day. "Me and you against the man!" Like the members of that other clubhouse say, "Be prepared."