Couple has $107k stolen by cops.

[Dot Com]

Civil Asset Forfeiture was a big thing around 6 months ago among the screeching libertarians. Only someone who wants to evade discovery carries their own private treasury around in a suitcase.

Who does this? No one I've EVER ran into.

 

[Meathead]

What was his lie?

What facts did he leave out?

He posted the link to the entire article.

Show us the 'lie'

"Cops stole the money". FFS, it's in the title!

 

[Syriusly]

Alleged drug dealers, where the government has no hard evidence. You keep leaving that part out.

No, I said when they have enough circumstantial evidence. If you don't like the law lobby your senator.

They don't have enough circumstantial evidence for a criminal case, or they would have filed charges.

And the "if you don't like it, do X" argument is just a deflection, not a reason why these laws are a good idea.

They would need the drugs for the conviction so that's why they have this law, with enough circumstantial evidence they can seize the cash. I didn't deflect, just pointed out the facts. The fact that the cops, federal prosecutors and federal judge believe they are within the law and you have present zero evidence to the contrary I'm siding with it's legal.

Trying to turn it into a good/bad idea argument is the deflection.

So the people abusing their authority believe the abuse is A-OK. That's fucking hilarious.

If you think someone is a criminal you prosecute them as a criminal. You don't end run basic protections afforded all citizens just to make the government's job easier.

You haven't demonstrated where they are abusing their authority. If it's legal they have the authority. You are trying to confuse it with whether you like the law or not. That's a different matter and why I said go do some lobbying.

I think the logic is unconstitutional- but currently it is considered 'legal'

However, I think that seizing property of a person who has not been charged or convicted of a crime- is particularly un-American- and particularly immoral.

As I said before- would you be okay if police pulled you over and seized your car- and never charged you with a crime?

Since it would be legal.

 

[Syriusly]

Civil Asset Forfeiture was a big thing around 6 months ago among the screeching libertarians. Only someone who wants to evade discovery carries their own private treasury around in a suitcase.

Who does this? No one I've EVER ran into.

IN this case it was 107,000 dollars. It could be 10,000 dollars- and I know people- gamblers mostly- who carry that much cash on them when they head to Vegas.

And then there are jewelers who very typically carry thousands- sometimes millions of dollars worth of gems on their person transporting them- all subject to seizure- all trusting that no law enforcement officer will ever make a mistake, ever be over-zealous......

Would you be okay with it if they seized your car?

 

[Syriusly]

What was his lie?

What facts did he leave out?

He posted the link to the entire article.

Show us the 'lie'

"Cops stole the money". FFS, it's in the title!

I consider that more hyperbole rather than a lie.

Again- what facts did he leave out?

 

[Dot Com]

Civil Asset Forfeiture was a big thing around 6 months ago among the screeching libertarians. Only someone who wants to evade discovery carries their own private treasury around in a suitcase.

Who does this? No one I've EVER ran into.

IN this case it was 107,000 dollars. It could be 10,000 dollars- and I know people- gamblers mostly- who carry that much cash on them when they head to Vegas.

And then there are jewelers who very typically carry thousands- sometimes millions of dollars worth of gems on their person transporting them- all subject to seizure- all trusting that no law enforcement officer will ever make a mistake, ever be over-zealous......

Would you be okay with it if they seized your car?

unsourced anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. Find a direct source indicating the vast amount of people who drive around w/ $10,000+ in their cars.

This is a non-issue.

 

[Meathead]

I consider that more hyperbole rather than a lie.

Again- what facts did he leave out?

Hyperbole, eh? You must be a Hillary supporter.

 

[Syriusly]

I consider that more hyperbole rather than a lie.

Again- what facts did he leave out?

Hyperbole, eh? You must be a Hillary supporter.

No- just someone with a good vocabulary and reading comprehension.

So what is your opinion about whether it is good policy for police being able to seize property without every charging or convicting a person- and having that property go to the police department?

 

[JimBowie1958]

This couple get pulled over for speeding. The cops find over $107k in a suitcase and her purse. The cops seize the money. No drugs are found and no charges are ever made. But the couple loses the money?

WTH?? How do we allow this? This is pure theft.

Cops Seized Over $107,000 From Couple, Didn’t Charge Them With a Crime - Institute for Justice

This is known as 'Asset Forfeiture' or 'Civil Forfeiture' and it has been going on for decades.

Civil forfeiture in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Syriusly]

Civil Asset Forfeiture was a big thing around 6 months ago among the screeching libertarians. Only someone who wants to evade discovery carries their own private treasury around in a suitcase.

Who does this? No one I've EVER ran into.

IN this case it was 107,000 dollars. It could be 10,000 dollars- and I know people- gamblers mostly- who carry that much cash on them when they head to Vegas.

And then there are jewelers who very typically carry thousands- sometimes millions of dollars worth of gems on their person transporting them- all subject to seizure- all trusting that no law enforcement officer will ever make a mistake, ever be over-zealous......

Would you be okay with it if they seized your car?

unsourced anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. Find a direct source indicating the vast amount of people who drive around w/ $10,000+ in their cars.

This is a non-issue.

Not for the persons who have their property seized.

Again- would you be okay if police seized your car without ever charging you with a crime?

 

[JimBowie1958]

I have to agree with you. It does sound a little fishy.
While there's no law saying how much money one is allowed to carry with them, I can think of very few legitimate reasons why someone would be in possession of over $100K in cash.

While you may not be able to think of why they would do so, it is none of your business and they have not been convicted of a crime.

 

[martybegan]

Alleged drug dealers, where the government has no hard evidence. You keep leaving that part out.

No, I said when they have enough circumstantial evidence. If you don't like the law lobby your senator.

They don't have enough circumstantial evidence for a criminal case, or they would have filed charges.

And the "if you don't like it, do X" argument is just a deflection, not a reason why these laws are a good idea.

They would need the drugs for the conviction so that's why they have this law, with enough circumstantial evidence they can seize the cash. I didn't deflect, just pointed out the facts. The fact that the cops, federal prosecutors and federal judge believe they are within the law and you have present zero evidence to the contrary I'm siding with it's legal.

Trying to turn it into a good/bad idea argument is the deflection.

So the people abusing their authority believe the abuse is A-OK. That's fucking hilarious.

If you think someone is a criminal you prosecute them as a criminal. You don't end run basic protections afforded all citizens just to make the government's job easier.

You haven't demonstrated where they are abusing their authority. If it's legal they have the authority. You are trying to confuse it with whether you like the law or not. That's a different matter and why I said go do some lobbying.

Appeal to authority nothing more, you are equating "legal" with "right". And given the glacial pace of our judiciary things can be legal and illegal at the same time.

 

[Syriusly]

DEA Steals $16,000 In Cash From Young Black Man, Because He Must Be A Drug Dealer

After scraping together enough money to produce a music video in Hollywood, 22-year-old Joseph Rivers set out last month on a train trip from Michigan to Los Angeles, hoping it was the start of something big.

Before he made it to California, however, Rivers fell victim to a legal form of government highway robbery.

Rivers changed trains at the Amtrak station in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on April 15, with bags containing his clothes, other possessions and an envelope filled with the $16,000 in cash he had raised with the help of his family, the Albuquerque Journal reports. Agents with the Drug Enforcement Administration got on after him and began looking for people who might be trafficking drugs.


Rivers said the agents questioned passengers at random, asking for their destination and reason for travel. When one of the agents got to Rivers, who was the only black person in his car, according to witnesses, the agent took the interrogation further, asking to search his bags. Rivers complied. The agent found the cash -- still in a bank envelope -- and decided to seize it on suspicion that it may be tied to narcotics. River pleaded with the agents, explaining his situation and even putting his mother on the phone to verify the story.

No luck.

“These officers took everything that I had worked so hard to save and even money that was given to me by family that believed in me,” Rivers told the Journal. “I told (the DEA agents) I had no money and no means to survive in Los Angeles if they took my money. They informed me that it was my responsibility to figure out how I was going to do that.”

Rivers, who has since returned to Michigan, fell victim to civil asset forfeiture, a legal tool that has been criticized as a violation of due process and a contradiction of the idea that criminal defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Asset forfeiture allows police to seize property they suspect is related to criminal activity, without even charging its owner with a crime. The charges are filed against the property itself -- including cash, jewelry, cars and houses -- which can then be sold, with part of the proceeds flowing back to the department that made the seizure.

“We don’t have to prove that the person is guilty,” Sean Waite, the agent in charge at the DEA's Albuquerque's office, told the Journal. “It’s that the money is presumed to be guilty.

 

[Syriusly]

A series in The Washington Post published last year showed that since 2001, $2.5 billion had been seized in cash alone -- all from people who were never charged with a crime and without a warrant being issued.

Take the case of Matt Lee, 31, who in 2011 was pulled over by police in Nevada while on the last leg of a cross-country move from Michigan to California. In an ensuing K-9 search, police discovered $2,400 in cash, loaned to Lee by his father. Though officers had no proof of any connection to a crime -- Lee had never even been arrested before -- they seized the cash and left Lee with $151. Lee later hired a lawyer, and the county eventually agreed to return his money. By then, his legal fees had reached $1,269, leaving Lee with less than half of the money that had been taken from him.

 

[Dot Com]

Civil Asset Forfeiture was a big thing around 6 months ago among the screeching libertarians. Only someone who wants to evade discovery carries their own private treasury around in a suitcase.

Who does this? No one I've EVER ran into.

IN this case it was 107,000 dollars. It could be 10,000 dollars- and I know people- gamblers mostly- who carry that much cash on them when they head to Vegas.

And then there are jewelers who very typically carry thousands- sometimes millions of dollars worth of gems on their person transporting them- all subject to seizure- all trusting that no law enforcement officer will ever make a mistake, ever be over-zealous......

Would you be okay with it if they seized your car?

unsourced anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. Find a direct source indicating the vast amount of people who drive around w/ $10,000+ in their cars.

This is a non-issue.

Not for the persons who have their property seized.

Again- would you be okay if police seized your car without ever charging you with a crime?

are you implying that a car has no biz being on the roads of this great nation? Large amounts of cash have no biz being on the roads of this great nation unless being transported by an lisensed & insured/bonded courier.

Its a non-issue

Only to off-gridder wannabes is it an issue

 

[Meathead]

No- just someone with a good vocabulary and reading comprehension.

So what is your opinion about whether it is good policy for police being able to seize property without every charging or convicting a person- and having that property go to the police department?

Funny stuff, especially the good vocabulary and reading comprehension, I had no idea that "steal" and "seize" were synonyms.

 

[Syriusly]

By the way- I don't have a problem with asset seizure laws regarding property or money seized from convicted criminals, gotten from their illegal activities.

I do have a problem with the idea that nothing prevents any law enforcement officer from seizing property from any one of us, without having any obligation to charge us with a crime.

 

[Syriusly]

Civil Asset Forfeiture was a big thing around 6 months ago among the screeching libertarians. Only someone who wants to evade discovery carries their own private treasury around in a suitcase.

Who does this? No one I've EVER ran into.

IN this case it was 107,000 dollars. It could be 10,000 dollars- and I know people- gamblers mostly- who carry that much cash on them when they head to Vegas.

And then there are jewelers who very typically carry thousands- sometimes millions of dollars worth of gems on their person transporting them- all subject to seizure- all trusting that no law enforcement officer will ever make a mistake, ever be over-zealous......

Would you be okay with it if they seized your car?

unsourced anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. Find a direct source indicating the vast amount of people who drive around w/ $10,000+ in their cars.

This is a non-issue.

Not for the persons who have their property seized.

Again- would you be okay if police seized your car without ever charging you with a crime?

are you implying that a car has no biz being on the roads of this great nation? Large amounts of cash have no biz being on the roads of this great nation unless being transported by an lisensed & insured/bonded courier.

Its a non-issue

Only to off-gridder wannabes is it an issue

It is an issue to those whose property has been seized.

Again- would you be okay if police seized your car without ever charging you with a crime?

 

[my2¢]

I recall seeing a story on 60 Minutes about a somewhat similar situation. I haven't watched 60 Minutes in at least 15 years and story was about RICO laws passed way back to combat organized crime. Heart of story was the law treated the money itself as being guilty and money wasn't able to defend itself.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I consider that more hyperbole rather than a lie.

Again- what facts did he leave out?

Hyperbole, eh? You must be a Hillary supporter.

No- just someone with a good vocabulary and reading comprehension.

So what is your opinion about whether it is good policy for police being able to seize property without every charging or convicting a person- and having that property go to the police department?

He's trying to joke himself free from making sense