Life savings stolen by DEA in civil forfeiture case

[Fanatical Meat]

I kind of remember a guy in my area (late 80s or early 90s) forfeiting a boat because drug testing swabs tested positive for cocaine. The deal was something like forfeit the boat or we'll dig around until we get a drug conviction. I can't remember what prompted the test.

 

[Pipeline 1010]

Lots of people are interested in such a solution. If you think of one please let us know.

Maybe we could create a group of people who work for the government who's sworn mission is to protect and serve us. We could give them badges and sharp-looking blue uniforms and whenever a thug tries to take our money away from us, they could jump in and protect us. Surely THOSE people would protect us, no?

 

[who?]

People need to learn to get an account at Bank of America and keep the money there.

 

[Genx87]

People need to learn to get an account at Bank of America and keep the money there.

Or what? The state will steal it from them?

 

[KMFJD]

Who makes the rules? Who enforces them? We are no longer a representative Democracy and we have not been for some time. The appearance of us being one is in place, but in practice we are not. Write your Senator or Congressperson over an issue in which you know he or she is not in agreement with you and see what kind of reply you get. It will have nothing whatsoever to do with the issue or issues you raised. It will be a form letter. Your opinion has no value to them.

This is what happens when you keep voting for the Obomneys.

who expanded these powers?

 

[SMOGZINN]

We are super close to gay marriage.
We have seen medical weed start to become legal.

Both of those things have far less support then ending this.

Neither of those hurt the pocketbooks of politicians. The problem with this issue is that fixing it directly reduces the revenue of the police force, which would mean that politicians would have to find money elsewhere in their budget to keep buying our local police military hardware, that would require them to make choices that would upset some corporation. When faced with a issue that most citizens support but a few corporations do, politicians nearly always choose to keep the corporation's happy.

The next problem with this issue is that it is so popular with both sides that there is little need to do anything about it. It wins no political battles when both sides can confidently say they support it, so instead they spend their time on topics that they can win support on. You don't debate topics you already agree on.

Surely THOSE people would protect us, no?

Sure, but we will need to find some way to pay those blue coated, badged men. Perhaps we can just let them keep the money they take from those thugs. That should work right?

 

[inachu]

This story makes my stomach turn. And there have been enough cases like this that civil forfeiture needs to be totally outlawed. I mean, can you believe that a DEA agent randomly looking at passengers on a train can single out someone, decide that they look "suspicious," and from that point on there doesn't even have to be "probable cause" for a search? Even if you don't give consent for the DEA to search your property, the DEA can nevertheless hold your property for a later search. And if they find money or valuable possessions, they can take them. Period. Here's the entire, outrageous story:


Just look at the first bolded paragraph. "Consensual encounter???" There's nothing consensual about it. Whether you consent or refuse, your possessions are going to be searched, and ANYTHING of significant value that's found WILL be seized. Another outrageous violation of individual liberties justified by the totally misguided "war on drugs."

Again, it's time for the Attorney general to absolutely ban civil forfeitures.

Fuck the DEA.

Eric Holder just banned this from happening. Point out the DOJ new article about this. Many people have suffered from this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2015/03/31/holder-announces-new-limits-on-civil-asset-forfeitures/

Even a man who just closed his business for the day to deposit his days earnings into the bank was stopped by police and $33,000 was stolen by police.

 

[Sonikku]

In hindsight maybe walking around with 16 grand in cold hard cash was a bad idea.

 

[realibrad]

Neither of those hurt the pocketbooks of politicians. The problem with this issue is that fixing it directly reduces the revenue of the police force, which would mean that politicians would have to find money elsewhere in their budget to keep buying our local police military hardware, that would require them to make choices that would upset some corporation. When faced with a issue that most citizens support but a few corporations do, politicians nearly always choose to keep the corporation's happy.

The next problem with this issue is that it is so popular with both sides that there is little need to do anything about it. It wins no political battles when both sides can confidently say they support it, so instead they spend their time on topics that they can win support on. You don't debate topics you already agree on.

Except politicians are not a small group. They are more than willing to side with a group if it gives them power. Politicians love an easy win, if they think everyone is on their side. Wide public support will erode the current position. If the position of the public becomes so popular, then politicians will be willing to take advantage for their own gain.

 

[master_shake_]

In hindsight maybe walking around with 16 grand in cold hard cash was a bad idea.

and if she didn't wear a short skirt she wouldn't get raped, right?

 

[inachu]

People need to learn to get an account at Bank of America and keep the money there.

Are you kidding?!?!?!

BOA is the #1 violator and the #1 go to place where people launder their money.

 

[inachu]

In January, Holder barred local and state police from using federal law to seize cash and other property without warrants or criminal charges, unless federal authorities were directly involved in the case.

Those changes followed a Washington Post investigation last year that found that police nationwide have seized $2.5 billion in cash from almost 62,000 people since 2001 — without warrants or indictments. The money was forfeited through Justice’s Equitable Sharing Program. Thousands of people had to fight long legal battles to get some or all of their money back.

 

[shortylickens]

DEA has less accountability than city police. And possibly less than the FBI, which is very low accountability.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Drugs were the terrorists of 2000.

It's what they previously used to pass shit that allows crap like this to slip by and rape our rights.

That said, you're a dumbass for carrying cash. You are....
1. More likely to be robbed
2. More likely to have it seized
3. More likely to lose it yourself
4. Earn 0% Interest
5. Losing money everyday due to inflation

The bullshit excuse in the article of "Rivers said he carried his savings in cash because he has had problems in the past with taking out large sums of money from out-of-state banks." is just that. Bullshit. There are tons of NATIONAL banks that are located in every damn city (Chase/JP Morgan, BoA, Citi, Wells Fargo). No excuse to carry it around.

That doesn't excuse the case here though. But at the same time, we haven't heard any of the story from the other-side. A one sided story isn't exactly useful.

 

[cabri]

Drugs were the terrorists of 2000.

It's what they previously used to pass shit that allows crap like this to slip by and rape our rights.

That said, you're a dumbass for carrying cash. You are....
1. More likely to be robbed
2. More likely to have it seized
3. More likely to lose it yourself
4. Earn 0% Interest
5. Losing money everyday due to inflation

The bullshit excuse in the article of "Rivers said he carried his savings in cash because he has had problems in the past with taking out large sums of money from out-of-state banks." is just that. Bullshit. There are tons of NATIONAL banks that are located in every damn city (Chase/JP Morgan, BoA, Citi, Wells Fargo). No excuse to carry it around.

That doesn't excuse the case here though. But at the same time, we haven't heard any of the story from the other-side. A one sided story isn't exactly useful.

Of those that you have listed, all four have multiple branches in most CA cities.

Only Wells Fargo does not have a presence in Michigan. The person was just plain lazy or was unable to setup/find a bank.

 

[Svnla]

There are tons of NATIONAL banks that are located in every damn city (Chase/JP Morgan, BoA, Citi, Wells Fargo). No excuse to carry it around.

The 4 National big banks in your post, only 1 of them (Chase) has branches here and recently (within the last 5 years or so after they took over a regional bank). And no, I do not like in BFE, mid size city with a few hundred thousands folks.

Oh, almost forgot, we do have Capital 1 and they did arrive here within the last few years, about the same time as Chase.

I do agree that carry that much cash was not smart and the civil forfeit rule is full of bullcrap.

Waite said. “It’s that the money is presumed to be guilty.”

 

[NoStateofMind]

No person shall be... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

Our leaders do not believe the Bill of Rights exists, therefore it does not. At this point are we really a better country than Russia or China?

this right here.

yet you should know by now that this land is a form of oligarchy and some laws just don't apply to the ruling class and their lackeys.

 

[who?]

Many states have forfeiture laws that can be used instead of the federal law.

 

[shira]

Lessons to be learned:
1) Never speak with police/governmental officials if you don't absolutely have to.
2) Never consent or waive your rights to search or attorney
3) If approaching a checkpoint or similar, avoid these areas.

But what's so scary about these cases is that if a DEA agent merely looks at you and thinks you "fit the profile", the agent can hold your bags until a court order is received to search it. If you refuse to speak to the agent, that just confirms the agent's profiling of you. And at that point, anything of significant value you have in your bags WILL be taken from you.

 

[shira]

You big government liberals can't have it both ways. Of course this is absurd on all levels but something tells me you probably think it's OK the Obama administration confiscating assets from legal businesses, gun shops, in order to put them out of business....since they can't get anti gun legislation passed.

Your point is absurd. Civil forfeiture has nothing to do with "big government." It has everything to do with the "war on drugs," which (if you remember) is much more of a right-wing agenda item. If you doubt this, then ask yourself to which political party do those who suffer most from the war on drugs primarily belong.

 

[davmat787]

How do these DEA agents and other LEO's who confiscate money on civil forfeiture grounds look themselves in the mirror when they do so on absolutely bullshit grounds? Do they even try lying to themselves that they are doing good work or even care? I just don't understand how someone could do this, it's as if they think they are above the law and we plebes are merely there to fund their existence.

 

[Pipeline 1010]

How do these DEA agents and other LEO's who confiscate money on civil forfeiture grounds look themselves in the mirror when they do so on absolutely bullshit grounds? Do they even try lying to themselves that they are doing good work or even care?

Trying to imagine them as anything other than evil fuckheads is a challenging mental exercise, isn't it? Maybe it's time to stop trying.

I just don't understand how someone could do this, it's as if they think they are above the law and we plebes are merely there to fund their existence.

What do you mean as if? They literally are above the law. There doesn't exist a single instance of one of these dickbags EVER being convicted for doing this. Not a single case of one of these douches personally losing a single dollar in a civil lawsuit.

 

[Venix]

Your point is absurd. Civil forfeiture has nothing to do with "big government." It has everything to do with the "war on drugs," which (if you remember) is much more of a right-wing agenda item. If you doubt this, then ask yourself to which political party do those who suffer most from the war on drugs primarily belong.

The law largely responsible for many asset forfeiture abuses--the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984--was introduced by a Democrat and passed the House with the support of 79% of Democrats, but only 64% of Republicans. Practically all of the terrible anti-drug laws from the 80's and 90's were overwhelmingly popular with Democrats, and were often written by Democrat anti-drug zealots like Joe Biden.

 

[nickqt]

The law largely responsible for many asset forfeiture abuses--the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984--was introduced by a Democrat and passed the House with the support of 79% of Democrats, but only 64% of Republicans. Practically all of the terrible anti-drug laws from the 80's and 90's were overwhelmingly popular with Democrats, and were often written by Democrat anti-drug zealots like Joe Biden.

Libruuls libruul libruuls, libruuls, libruuls.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYWS7udm0yg

 

[boomerang]

I just don't understand how someone could do this, it's as if they think they are above the law and we plebes are merely there to fund their existence.

No, our government exists to serve the people of our nation. Right?