Couple has $107k stolen by cops.

[Iceweasel]

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

It went to court. That's considered due process of the law.

Due process turned upside down. I can see holding the money/property for a short period of time pending a trial; however, if there is not enough evidence for a conviction, then the people have a right to their property. The DA should have to prove that the people are drug dealers to take their property. It shouldn't be that the people have to prove that are not drug dealers to get their property back.

Anyway, you have your position and you are going to stick with it. So do I.

The feds had to go to court to take permanent possession of the drug money. I'm all for throwing them in jail as well. We don't have a lot of information to go on, the OP was very one sided and misleading.

 

[JoeMoma]

If the police believe the people are drug dealers, let's just have the police lock them up until they can prove they are not drug dealers.

No need for the dramatic over reaction. Just don't drive around with 100k of cash you can't account for in a pot bag with scales in your car. If you're a drug dealer and lose the illegal money, cry me a river....

If they are drug dealers, then prove it. Then we will be in agreement. Sometimes the police are wrong. There are many examples of innocent people being abused already listed in this thread.

 

[Iceweasel]

If they are drug dealers, then prove it. Then we will be in agreement. Sometimes the police are wrong. There are many examples of innocent people being abused already listed in this thread.

Looks pretty convincing to me, who rides around with that kind of cash? Drug dealers. It wasn't just the police though, how many times do we need to go over that?

 

[WinterBorn]

If the police believe the people are drug dealers, let's just have the police lock them up until they can prove they are not drug dealers.

No need for the dramatic over reaction. Just don't drive around with 100k of cash you can't account for in a pot bag with scales in your car. If you're a drug dealer and lose the illegal money, cry me a river....

Maybe you don't. And I don't. But confiscating $107k because most people don't do that is simply wrong.

This is as wrong as the use of Eminent Domain to get property for private businesses. And that is legal too.

 

[Iceweasel]

If the police believe the people are drug dealers, let's just have the police lock them up until they can prove they are not drug dealers.

No need for the dramatic over reaction. Just don't drive around with 100k of cash you can't account for in a pot bag with scales in your car. If you're a drug dealer and lose the illegal money, cry me a river....

Maybe you don't. And I don't. But confiscating $107k because most people don't do that is simply wrong.

This is as wrong as the use of Imminent Domain to get property for private businesses. And that is legal too.

That's not why they took the money.
That's not why they took the money.
That's not why they took the money.
That's not why they took the money.

 

[Meathead]

If the police believe the people are drug dealers, let's just have the police lock them up until they can prove they are not drug dealers.

No need for the dramatic over reaction. Just don't drive around with 100k of cash you can't account for in a pot bag with scales in your car. If you're a drug dealer and lose the illegal money, cry me a river....

Maybe you don't. And I don't. But confiscating $107k because most people don't do that is simply wrong.

This is as wrong as the use of Imminent Domain to get property for private businesses. And that is legal too.

"imminent Domain" is a very unusual concept. I guess it happens really quick.

 

[WinterBorn]

If the police believe the people are drug dealers, let's just have the police lock them up until they can prove they are not drug dealers.

No need for the dramatic over reaction. Just don't drive around with 100k of cash you can't account for in a pot bag with scales in your car. If you're a drug dealer and lose the illegal money, cry me a river....

Maybe you don't. And I don't. But confiscating $107k because most people don't do that is simply wrong.

This is as wrong as the use of Imminent Domain to get property for private businesses. And that is legal too.

That's not why they took the money.
That's not why they took the money.
That's not why they took the money.
That's not why they took the money.

That is as much a reason as the claim that they are drug dealers. They have NO PROOF that they are drug dealers. All you have is that they have scales and "nobody carries that kind of money except drug dealers". If there is not enough evidence to convict, they should get the money back.

 

[WinterBorn]

If the police believe the people are drug dealers, let's just have the police lock them up until they can prove they are not drug dealers.

No need for the dramatic over reaction. Just don't drive around with 100k of cash you can't account for in a pot bag with scales in your car. If you're a drug dealer and lose the illegal money, cry me a river....

Maybe you don't. And I don't. But confiscating $107k because most people don't do that is simply wrong.

This is as wrong as the use of Imminent Domain to get property for private businesses. And that is legal too.

"imminent Domain" is a very unusual concept. I guess it happens really quick.

Auto-correct. I should have caught that.

 

[Iceweasel]

If the police believe the people are drug dealers, let's just have the police lock them up until they can prove they are not drug dealers.

No need for the dramatic over reaction. Just don't drive around with 100k of cash you can't account for in a pot bag with scales in your car. If you're a drug dealer and lose the illegal money, cry me a river....

Maybe you don't. And I don't. But confiscating $107k because most people don't do that is simply wrong.

This is as wrong as the use of Imminent Domain to get property for private businesses. And that is legal too.

That's not why they took the money.
That's not why they took the money.
That's not why they took the money.
That's not why they took the money.

That is as much a reason as the claim that they are drug dealers. They have NO PROOF that they are drug dealers. All you have is that they have scales and "nobody carries that kind of money except drug dealers". If there is not enough evidence to convict, they should get the money back.

You're wrong, since they still have the money. I said we don't have all the facts. You damn sure weren't going to provide them.

 

[Kosh]

Who cares if a bunch of rich white folks have their money seized..

 

[JoeMoma]

If they are drug dealers, then prove it. Then we will be in agreement. Sometimes the police are wrong. There are many examples of innocent people being abused already listed in this thread.

Looks pretty convincing to me, who rides around with that kind of cash? Drug dealers. It wasn't just the police though, how many times do we need to go over that?

Looks pretty convincing to you......is that the standard by which someone should be punished for a crime?

 

[EverCurious]

hmmm I should talk to my folks about carrying their receipts with them; they globe trot and regularly carry around large sums along for conversion (they say the rates are better in the designation than through companies with US markups.)

 

[candycorn]

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

We now have video evidence of cold-blooded murder by the cops in multiple instances. Why would it surprise anyone that there is theft committed as that group as well.

Change the word "cops" to "blacks" in your title, and you'd have endless comments from the peanut gallery and comments about they being primates etc...

 

[candycorn]

There has to be more to the story.

I have looked and found nothing. They brought a dog out and it keyed on the luggage. But it has been shown many times that cash often has traces of drugs on it.

But if you can find more, I'd love to see it.

I'm not interesting in investigating the case, it sounds like bullshit to me. Who drives around with their savings and disability payments in cash in a bag? My guess is they were looking to buy drugs to supplement their income and the feds know it.

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.

Why someone would be carrying 500 rounds of ammunition seems less fishy?

 

[Iceweasel]

There has to be more to the story.

I have looked and found nothing. They brought a dog out and it keyed on the luggage. But it has been shown many times that cash often has traces of drugs on it.

But if you can find more, I'd love to see it.

I'm not interesting in investigating the case, it sounds like bullshit to me. Who drives around with their savings and disability payments in cash in a bag? My guess is they were looking to buy drugs to supplement their income and the feds know it.

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.

Why someone would be carrying 500 rounds of ammunition seems less fishy?

You've never gone to the range. You can shoot 200 rounds without realizing it.

 

[Iceweasel]

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

We now have video evidence of cold-blooded murder by the cops in multiple instances. Why would it surprise anyone that there is theft committed as that group as well.

Change the word "cops" to "blacks" in your title, and you'd have endless comments from the peanut gallery and comments about they being primates etc...

"That group".
LOL

 

[Iceweasel]

If they are drug dealers, then prove it. Then we will be in agreement. Sometimes the police are wrong. There are many examples of innocent people being abused already listed in this thread.

Looks pretty convincing to me, who rides around with that kind of cash? Drug dealers. It wasn't just the police though, how many times do we need to go over that?

Looks pretty convincing to you......is that the standard by which someone should be punished for a crime?

Yes, that's exactly what I said. I alone should decide these matters by doing a quick online search.

Dipstick.

 

[candycorn]

There has to be more to the story.

I have looked and found nothing. They brought a dog out and it keyed on the luggage. But it has been shown many times that cash often has traces of drugs on it.

But if you can find more, I'd love to see it.

I'm not interesting in investigating the case, it sounds like bullshit to me. Who drives around with their savings and disability payments in cash in a bag? My guess is they were looking to buy drugs to supplement their income and the feds know it.

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.

Why someone would be carrying 500 rounds of ammunition seems less fishy?

You've never gone to the range. You can shoot 200 rounds without realizing it.

I'm sure most terrorists think the same way. Now imagine if we limited the magazine/clip sizes to 5 rounds a piece. That would be 40 re-loads x about 3 seconds a re-load and gives people about 2 minutes to get away.

Oh but these are facts...we can't use those with gun nuts. My bad.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

There has to be more to the story.

No, there doesn't, actually. This is kind of thing happens far more frequently than you realize under civil asset forfeiture laws, courtesy of the "War on Drugs."

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I'm not interesting in investigating the case, it sounds like bullshit to me. Who drives around with their savings and disability payments in cash in a bag? My guess is they were looking to buy drugs to supplement their income and the feds know it.

We don't confiscate people's property based on your "guess" now do we? No, we actually have an innocent until proven guilty justice system.

Aren't you one of those conservatives who claims to be all about "small" government and freedom?