Life savings stolen by DEA in civil forfeiture case

[Darwin333]

I wouldn't carry $16,000 either but I have bought and sold motorcycles before with cash, maybe $4-6,000, and I certainly wouldn't want that taken from me by some shake-down artist posing as a cop.

I own a company that does, among other things, roofing work in an area often hit by hurricanes. Now when a hurricane comes through its quite literally "go time" for us and I am forced to withdraw tens of thousands of dollars. Why, because my guys still need to be paid (then more than ever) and it can take weeks for power to be restored. Debit cards don't work when there is no juice so I have to pay upwards of 150 men and women in cash. I even have a special safe installed just for that purpose but because of how absurdly busy we are at the time I pay them on the jobsite.

My only point is that there are legitimate reasons to carry that much cash even though I don't believe I should need such a reason to do something that is perfectly legal with my own, or my businesses, property. I should not be at risk of being robbed at gunpoint by the very government organizations that are supposed to protect me from being robbed.

Some departments even use extortion to get you to sign over your money with threats such as if you don't sign this waiver we will arrest you for "insert absurdly trumped up charges". This tactic is especially popular to use against minorities and travelers from out of town. Do I really want to go in front of some podunk jury in some podunk town in Texas over $5,000 or is it easier just to sign it over? Keep in mind that decision must be made on the side of the road without access to counsel.

To blame people who got robbed by the government for carrying too much cash is absurd and as another story illustrated you don't even have to carry it, they'll take it right out of your damn bank account. Not to mention that while they prefer cash that is not the only assets they can and do steal from you. Some departments really like fancy cars or even houses, often targeting people for criminal investigation based off of how much stuff they have to steal.

 

[Darwin333]

ugh those blaming libs, obama, bush.. etch are insane.

Civil Forfeiture started as a good idea. to take drug lords money and use it for good. The issue is it has gotten to the point they now take from anyone they can to fund the small military they now have.

they steal because they think everyone is a criminal. they steal to buy more equipment so they can do more raids.

cops were put on a pedastal. We gave them far more power then they need. We gave them more and more military equipment to "protect" them. Now we have police departments that could go toe to toe with some small armies.

IMHO they steal because they can. Some are actually required to steal as their jobs quite literally depends on it. No more and no less.

Imagine if the only penalty for robbing a bank was that you might have to give some or all of the money back. How many more people do you think would be willing to rob banks? The answer is whole lot. When something is profitable some people will do it, that is just a law of human nature.

 

[Darwin333]

Rarely have I scene something in P&N that we can all agree on.

Apart from the civil forfeiture issue though, he should have just put it in a bank. He could have opened a savings account at any of the big national banks and avoided this issue. Not sure what issues he's had taking out his own money before. Nothing good ever comes from carrying around that amount of cash.

I personally refuse to do business with the big national banks after the raping they recently did to us, as is my right. Sure he could have found other ways to wire it from his credit union or whatever but frankly all of that is irrelevant. The man committed no crime, imho, the government is the criminal in this case.

 

[Darwin333]

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.

What prompted the test is that they wanted the boat. That's one of the most horrendous issues concerning civil forfeiture, you can and will be targeted not because they believe you guilty of a crime but because you own property that they want to take from you.

 

[nageov3t]

the fact that it usually goes right back to the police departments themselves is what really galls me... police shouldn't have an incentive to steal.

I'd love to see what forfeiture rates would look like if the money went towards drug rehab programs instead of a new police cruiser.

 

[waggy]

What prompted the test is that they wanted the boat. That's one of the most horrendous issues concerning civil forfeiture, you can and will be targeted not because they believe you guilty of a crime but because you own property that they want to take from you.

that is one of the big problems. they get the stuff they sieze to either sell or keep.

so they have a reason to continue to take stuff from people. they know they won't lose the court case and if they do? big deal they aren't held liable.

 

[Bubbleawsome]

“We don’t have to prove that the person is guilty,” Waite said. “It’s that the money is presumed to be guilty.”

Oh man.
Just..
what

 

[Pipeline 1010]

Can the resident cop apologists find and post even ONE article about a cop actually stopping another cop from doing this shit? Where are the good guys?

 

[1prophet]

You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything, he's no longer in your power - he's free again.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

It will only change when "free men" arise who have nothing left to lose.

 

[werepossum]

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.

True, but this more directly affects the government's power & money. On those, the two parties march in lockstep.

Rarely have I scene something in P&N that we can all agree on.

Apart from the civil forfeiture issue though, he should have just put it in a bank. He could have opened a savings account at any of the big national banks and avoided this issue. Not sure what issues he's had taking out his own money before. Nothing good ever comes from carrying around that amount of cash.

True, but whoever robs him it should not be the freakin' government.

 

[werepossum]

Yeah let's blame the law and not the individual acts themselves. To further confuse the issue lets make it a republican/democrat problem and all we have to do is vote our way out.

No I'm sick of people like you who seem to think if one more law was made or repealed that that will make men act accordingly. The law is not the arbiter of right and wrong as you seem to believe it to be. Slavery was legal but the legality doesn't negate the egregious act. In like manner this law is wrong and it doesn't take a politicians pen to figure that out.

Yet you have to admit that this would be massively more difficult if not for a law making it legal. It's all well and good to decry the individual acts, but as long as the law is on the books it's going to continue.