Couple has $107k stolen by cops.

[martybegan]

No, I am willing to see anything accurate. What I am not willing to do is have the gov't seize assets based on a crime that has not happened.

I dislike financing cars. I prefer to save the money and pay cash. By doing that I increase what I can buy, since I am not paying interest. I also get much better deals when I pay cash.

Should they be able to seize my cash if they find me with $15k or $20k?

Is that similar to what happened? No. If you are "going to buy a car" with hidden compartments in your car, scales, pot smell in a bag of over 100k in cash and can't explain demonstrate where it came from and the car dealer doesn't have anything worth over 10k on his lot, then you may have a problem.

But our system is based on the concept of innocent until proven guilty. Here the situation is guilty until your prove innocence.

Civil asset forfeiture should only happen AFTER a criminal conviction, not in lieu of it.

If they discover a terrorist planning to blow people up and have the circumstantial evidence they don't need to sit back and wait for it.

They still have to charge him/her with something.

 

[bucs90]

There has to be more to the story.

There is more. And although I strongly support cops...I don't like this.

It's a federal law where if you possess over a certain amount of cash it can be held until verified that it's not drug money. Which is bullshit in my opinion. I'm all for stopping drug dealers. But...the Constitution shouldnt, and IMO doesn't, allow for this.

 

[Claudette]

The couple can always get a lawyer. I'm sure that a court would get them their money back.

Any idea why they haven't done so???

It's been in court. Their story didn't add up.

I have to agree.

If it were cut and dried they they would get their money back. No problem.

More to this than meets the eye.

 

[Muhammed]

There has to be more to the story.

There should be more to the story.

Cops get shot dead, people get their money back and live happily ever after.

 

[Iceweasel]

No, I am willing to see anything accurate. What I am not willing to do is have the gov't seize assets based on a crime that has not happened.

I dislike financing cars. I prefer to save the money and pay cash. By doing that I increase what I can buy, since I am not paying interest. I also get much better deals when I pay cash.

Should they be able to seize my cash if they find me with $15k or $20k?

Is that similar to what happened? No. If you are "going to buy a car" with hidden compartments in your car, scales, pot smell in a bag of over 100k in cash and can't explain demonstrate where it came from and the car dealer doesn't have anything worth over 10k on his lot, then you may have a problem.

But our system is based on the concept of innocent until proven guilty. Here the situation is guilty until your prove innocence.

Civil asset forfeiture should only happen AFTER a criminal conviction, not in lieu of it.

If they discover a terrorist planning to blow people up and have the circumstantial evidence they don't need to sit back and wait for it.

They still have to charge him/her with something.

There has to be more to the story.

There should be more to the story.

Cops get shot dead, people get their money back and live happily ever after.

And get your kids hooked on dope and selling themselves for more. Don't forget that part.

 

[Iceweasel]

There has to be more to the story.

There is more. And although I strongly support cops...I don't like this.

It's a federal law where if you possess over a certain amount of cash it can be held until verified that it's not drug money. Which is bullshit in my opinion. I'm all for stopping drug dealers. But...the Constitution shouldnt, and IMO doesn't, allow for this.

According to the story I posted they did hold it and the feds went to court and apparently did make the case it was drug money, that's how it got transferred to the government. I'm not a federal prosecutor or federal judge and assume they know the law better than me. I, for one, am not worried either way. I use checks or credit cards for purchases over $10.

 

[Meathead]

There has to be more to the story.

There is more. And although I strongly support cops...I don't like this.

It's a federal law where if you possess over a certain amount of cash it can be held until verified that it's not drug money. Which is bullshit in my opinion. I'm all for stopping drug dealers. But...the Constitution shouldnt, and IMO doesn't, allow for this.

Are you trying to put money laundering out of business? Is it OK to have that kind of money cash but illegal to deposit or legally invest it without proof of receipt?

 

[Weatherman2020]

There has to be more to the story.

There is more. And although I strongly support cops...I don't like this.

It's a federal law where if you possess over a certain amount of cash it can be held until verified that it's not drug money. Which is bullshit in my opinion. I'm all for stopping drug dealers. But...the Constitution shouldnt, and IMO doesn't, allow for this.

According to the story I posted they did hold it and the feds went to court and apparently did make the case it was drug money, that's how it got transferred to the government. I'm not a federal prosecutor or federal judge and assume they know the law better than me. I, for one, am not worried either way. I use checks or credit cards for purchases over $10.

They can confiscate all of your bank accounts without an arrest. It will take you years of court battles and lawyer fees to get it back. Try living in the meantime.

 

[Iceweasel]

There has to be more to the story.

There is more. And although I strongly support cops...I don't like this.

It's a federal law where if you possess over a certain amount of cash it can be held until verified that it's not drug money. Which is bullshit in my opinion. I'm all for stopping drug dealers. But...the Constitution shouldnt, and IMO doesn't, allow for this.

According to the story I posted they did hold it and the feds went to court and apparently did make the case it was drug money, that's how it got transferred to the government. I'm not a federal prosecutor or federal judge and assume they know the law better than me. I, for one, am not worried either way. I use checks or credit cards for purchases over $10.

They can confiscate all of your bank accounts without an arrest. It will take you years of court battles and lawyer fees to get it back. Try living in the meantime.

I don't care if drug dealers live or not. I'm not wringing my hands over them. Anyone with half a brain knows what was going on, people don't carry 100+k in cash unless they are making an illegal deal. With the other evidence it made it clear and the court ruled for the prosecution. That's what happened, it wasn't dirty cops stealing their hard earned money simply because they had some cash on them.

 

[martybegan]

There has to be more to the story.

There is more. And although I strongly support cops...I don't like this.

It's a federal law where if you possess over a certain amount of cash it can be held until verified that it's not drug money. Which is bullshit in my opinion. I'm all for stopping drug dealers. But...the Constitution shouldnt, and IMO doesn't, allow for this.

According to the story I posted they did hold it and the feds went to court and apparently did make the case it was drug money, that's how it got transferred to the government. I'm not a federal prosecutor or federal judge and assume they know the law better than me. I, for one, am not worried either way. I use checks or credit cards for purchases over $10.

They can confiscate all of your bank accounts without an arrest. It will take you years of court battles and lawyer fees to get it back. Try living in the meantime.

I don't care if drug dealers live or not. I'm not wringing my hands over them. Anyone with half a brain knows what was going on, people don't carry 100+k in cash unless they are making an illegal deal. With the other evidence it made it clear and the court ruled for the prosecution. That's what happened, it wasn't dirty cops stealing their hard earned money simply because they had some cash on them.

That is "destroy the village in order to save it" thinking. So basically the constitution doesn't apply when drugs are involved, got it.

 

[Weatherman2020]

There has to be more to the story.

There is more. And although I strongly support cops...I don't like this.

It's a federal law where if you possess over a certain amount of cash it can be held until verified that it's not drug money. Which is bullshit in my opinion. I'm all for stopping drug dealers. But...the Constitution shouldnt, and IMO doesn't, allow for this.

According to the story I posted they did hold it and the feds went to court and apparently did make the case it was drug money, that's how it got transferred to the government. I'm not a federal prosecutor or federal judge and assume they know the law better than me. I, for one, am not worried either way. I use checks or credit cards for purchases over $10.

They can confiscate all of your bank accounts without an arrest. It will take you years of court battles and lawyer fees to get it back. Try living in the meantime.

I don't care if drug dealers live or not. I'm not wringing my hands over them. Anyone with half a brain knows what was going on, people don't carry 100+k in cash unless they are making an illegal deal. With the other evidence it made it clear and the court ruled for the prosecution. That's what happened, it wasn't dirty cops stealing their hard earned money simply because they had some cash on them.

A friend may come over to your house, and unknown to you has a bag of weed. Now your home and bank accounts are government property.
Sure you can fight it and win. Years later and 6 figures to your lawyers.

 

[Iceweasel]

There has to be more to the story.

There is more. And although I strongly support cops...I don't like this.

It's a federal law where if you possess over a certain amount of cash it can be held until verified that it's not drug money. Which is bullshit in my opinion. I'm all for stopping drug dealers. But...the Constitution shouldnt, and IMO doesn't, allow for this.

According to the story I posted they did hold it and the feds went to court and apparently did make the case it was drug money, that's how it got transferred to the government. I'm not a federal prosecutor or federal judge and assume they know the law better than me. I, for one, am not worried either way. I use checks or credit cards for purchases over $10.

They can confiscate all of your bank accounts without an arrest. It will take you years of court battles and lawyer fees to get it back. Try living in the meantime.

I don't care if drug dealers live or not. I'm not wringing my hands over them. Anyone with half a brain knows what was going on, people don't carry 100+k in cash unless they are making an illegal deal. With the other evidence it made it clear and the court ruled for the prosecution. That's what happened, it wasn't dirty cops stealing their hard earned money simply because they had some cash on them.

That is "destroy the village in order to save it" thinking. So basically the constitution doesn't apply when drugs are involved, got it.

No, it means the justice system is allowed to put two plus two together when it's obvious to a blind fool what happened.

 

[martybegan]

There is more. And although I strongly support cops...I don't like this.

It's a federal law where if you possess over a certain amount of cash it can be held until verified that it's not drug money. Which is bullshit in my opinion. I'm all for stopping drug dealers. But...the Constitution shouldnt, and IMO doesn't, allow for this.

According to the story I posted they did hold it and the feds went to court and apparently did make the case it was drug money, that's how it got transferred to the government. I'm not a federal prosecutor or federal judge and assume they know the law better than me. I, for one, am not worried either way. I use checks or credit cards for purchases over $10.

They can confiscate all of your bank accounts without an arrest. It will take you years of court battles and lawyer fees to get it back. Try living in the meantime.

I don't care if drug dealers live or not. I'm not wringing my hands over them. Anyone with half a brain knows what was going on, people don't carry 100+k in cash unless they are making an illegal deal. With the other evidence it made it clear and the court ruled for the prosecution. That's what happened, it wasn't dirty cops stealing their hard earned money simply because they had some cash on them.

That is "destroy the village in order to save it" thinking. So basically the constitution doesn't apply when drugs are involved, got it.

No, it means the justice system is allowed to put two plus two together when it's obvious to a blind fool what happened.

it's an end run around criminal due process, nothing more or less. Again, if you want to seize their property due to criminal acts, get a criminal conviction first.

 

[Iceweasel]

According to the story I posted they did hold it and the feds went to court and apparently did make the case it was drug money, that's how it got transferred to the government. I'm not a federal prosecutor or federal judge and assume they know the law better than me. I, for one, am not worried either way. I use checks or credit cards for purchases over $10.

They can confiscate all of your bank accounts without an arrest. It will take you years of court battles and lawyer fees to get it back. Try living in the meantime.

I don't care if drug dealers live or not. I'm not wringing my hands over them. Anyone with half a brain knows what was going on, people don't carry 100+k in cash unless they are making an illegal deal. With the other evidence it made it clear and the court ruled for the prosecution. That's what happened, it wasn't dirty cops stealing their hard earned money simply because they had some cash on them.

That is "destroy the village in order to save it" thinking. So basically the constitution doesn't apply when drugs are involved, got it.

No, it means the justice system is allowed to put two plus two together when it's obvious to a blind fool what happened.

it's an end run around criminal due process, nothing more or less. Again, if you want to seize their property due to criminal acts, get a criminal conviction first.

Why are you pretending it isn't legal? It's legal. For a reason. Not to take your Franklin out of your wallet.

 

[ClosedCaption]

There has to be more to the story.

Civil Asset Forfeiture is a growing problem, particularly when the police departments doing it profit directly from whatever is seized.

Also, since they seize money knowing that they will be able to use it for their new toys and events.


A few bad apples tho guys. Its only 107k. There is currently more than a quadrillion dollars in circulation so $107K isnt even 1%.


Waka waka

 

[Weatherman2020]

The IRS can also confiscate all of your assets and property without due process. And we all know how political they are.

 

[martybegan]

They can confiscate all of your bank accounts without an arrest. It will take you years of court battles and lawyer fees to get it back. Try living in the meantime.

I don't care if drug dealers live or not. I'm not wringing my hands over them. Anyone with half a brain knows what was going on, people don't carry 100+k in cash unless they are making an illegal deal. With the other evidence it made it clear and the court ruled for the prosecution. That's what happened, it wasn't dirty cops stealing their hard earned money simply because they had some cash on them.

That is "destroy the village in order to save it" thinking. So basically the constitution doesn't apply when drugs are involved, got it.

No, it means the justice system is allowed to put two plus two together when it's obvious to a blind fool what happened.

it's an end run around criminal due process, nothing more or less. Again, if you want to seize their property due to criminal acts, get a criminal conviction first.

Why are you pretending it isn't legal? It's legal. For a reason. Not to take your Franklin out of your wallet.

It's legality is dubious at best, from a constitutional perspective, it just hasn't made its way through the courts yet.

 

[ClosedCaption]

They can confiscate all of your bank accounts without an arrest. It will take you years of court battles and lawyer fees to get it back. Try living in the meantime.

I don't care if drug dealers live or not. I'm not wringing my hands over them. Anyone with half a brain knows what was going on, people don't carry 100+k in cash unless they are making an illegal deal. With the other evidence it made it clear and the court ruled for the prosecution. That's what happened, it wasn't dirty cops stealing their hard earned money simply because they had some cash on them.

That is "destroy the village in order to save it" thinking. So basically the constitution doesn't apply when drugs are involved, got it.

No, it means the justice system is allowed to put two plus two together when it's obvious to a blind fool what happened.

it's an end run around criminal due process, nothing more or less. Again, if you want to seize their property due to criminal acts, get a criminal conviction first.

Why are you pretending it isn't legal? It's legal. For a reason. Not to take your Franklin out of your wallet.

Its legal because the people taking it says its legal. Thats like someone invading America, taking your daughter and saying "Its Legal because we say it is"

 

[martybegan]

There has to be more to the story.

Civil Asset Forfeiture is a growing problem, particularly when the police departments doing it profit directly from whatever is seized.

Also, since they seize money knowing that they will be able to use it for their new toys and events.


A few bad apples tho guys. Its only 107k. There is currently more than a quadrillion dollars in circulation so $107K isnt even 1%.


Waka waka

That's the worst part of it, it basically issues letters of Marque to Police Departments.

 

[Meathead]

Also, since they seize money knowing that they will be able to use it for their new toys and events.


A few bad apples tho guys. Its only 107k. There is currently more than a quadrillion dollars in circulation so $107K isnt even 1%.


Waka waka

A quadrillion?! Oh, that's right, you're black and don't do math.