DEA data mining of travel and millions in civil forfeiture

[Exterous]

WASHINGTON — Federal drug agents regularly mine Americans’ travel information to profile people who might be ferrying money for narcotics traffickers — though they almost never use what they learn to make arrests or build criminal cases.

Instead, that targeting has helped the Drug Enforcement Administration seize a small fortune in cash.

It is a lucrative endeavor, and one that remains largely unknown outside the drug agency. DEA units assigned to patrol 15 of the nation’s busiest airports seized more than $209 million in cash from at least 5,200 people over the past decade after concluding the money was linked to drug trafficking, according to Justice Department records. Most of the money was passed on to local police departments that lend officers to assist the drug agency.

The DEA came under fire for harvesting travel records two years ago, when Amtrak’s inspector general revealed that agents had paid a secretary $854,460 over nearly two decades in exchange for passenger information. A later investigation by the Justice Department’s inspector general found that the secretary initially looked up reservations only at agents’ request, but quickly “began making queries on his own initiative, looking for indicators that a person might be planning to transport illegal drugs or money on a train,” according to a report obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

Glad to see there are no monetary incentives to take peoples money without actual proof of a crime...

A DEA group assigned to Los Angeles’ airports made more than 1,600 cash seizures over the past decade, totaling more than $52 million, according to records the Justice Department uses to track asset seizures. Only one of the Los Angeles seizure records included an indication that it was related to a criminal indictment.

Such charges appear rare. Of the 87 cases USA TODAY identified in which the DEA seized cash after flagging a suspicious itinerary, only two resulted in the alleged courier being charged with a crime.

But don't worry they also make it incredibly difficult to get your money back even if you are never charged with a crime and the reason was legitimate:

Tillerson told the agents that her boyfriend had withdrawn the money from his U.S. Postal Service retirement account so that she could buy a truck, according to court records. Agents were suspicious; Tillerson was an ex-convict, who had spent time in prison for driving a load of marijuana into the United States from Mexico. She seemed to have little money of her own. And a police dog smelled drugs on the cash.

Agents seized the money, and let Tillerson go. Her lawyer, Cyril Hall, said she was never arrested, or even questioned about whether she could give agents information about traffickers.

A year and a half later — after she produced paperwork showing that much of the money had indeed come from her boyfriend’s retirement fund — the Justice Department agreed to return the money, minus $4,000. A spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s office in Detroit, Gina Balaya, said prosecutors concluded that “a small percentage of the funds should be forfeited.”

Also good to see we continue to punish ex-cons after they served their time.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/08/10/dea-travel-record-airport-seizures/88474282/

Civil forfeiture continues to be an obscene stain on our country that no politician seems to give a rats ass about. Can't charge you with a crime? Fine - we'll just take your shit instead

 

[Ancalagon44]

Isn't it obvious why the DEA is so reluctant to remove marijuana from Schedule 1? Their source of money would dry up. Not only would their government funding decrease, but they would probably make less from civil forfeiture.

The War on Drugs is really just a cash cow.

 

[PokerGuy]

Nobody who believes in freedom can possibly support laws that make it OK to simply take stuff from people without any due process or easy recourse.

If the government can show that you got something through illegal means or as the result of illegal activity, then fine. But simply taking stuff away based on suspicion (or no reason at all) and then putting the onus on you to prove the items or money are "legit" goes contrary to the core values of the country IMO.

 

[zinfamous]

Nobody who believes in freedom can possibly support laws that make it OK to simply take stuff from people without any due process or easy recourse.

If the government can show that you got something through illegal means or as the result of illegal activity, then fine. But simply taking stuff away based on suspicion (or no reason at all) and then putting the onus on you to prove the items or money are "legit" goes contrary to the core values of the country IMO.

This is so profoundly obvious that we shouldn't even be having this discussion, sadly.

 

[Bart*Simpson]

All of the above are great posts!

 

[Vic]

The DEA has been stealing family farms ever since Reagan signed the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984.