A $500,000 Traffic Stop

in justice •  6 years ago  (edited)

Civil asset forfeiture has been used to take millions of dollars away from people who have never been convicted of any crime.

Despite there being many instances were authorities have overstepped their boundaries in taking funds from people, who've later sought to appeal the injustice that took place, the act is still widely prevalent today and continues to come at a tremendous cost.

Those who have been targeted under civil asset forfeiture have had their reputation ruined, it has cost them jobs, relationships, and more.

This policy has eroded private property rights for individuals in places like United States and Canada, the state has profited and made millions at the expense of deteriorating Constitutional protections that should've prevented such widespread injustices from taking place.

Recently, police in Georgia made a profitable traffic stop where they managed to seize over $500,000 from one vehicle who they claim was seen to be “driving erratically”.

Once that car was pulled over it's reported that no drugs had been found but they did find lots of cash and that cash has since been confiscated, with authorities claiming that they'll be looking forward to spending it on the department if its determined that it was obtained illegally; the investigation allegedly remains open at this time.

There are many victims who have had their cash taken from them, who have been viewed as and treated as a criminal simply because they had ”too much cash” on them, which is an amount that is entirely subjective.

Previous reports have alleged that the DEA has even resorted to using domestic travel records to profile millions of travelers, and seize millions of dollars at various airports around the country.

Increasingly, those who have challenged being targeted under this arguably unconstitutional policy, have been later been justified in having their property returned. More and more states have now sought to introduced their own “checks and balances” that might attempt to curb the corruption but the abuse is still too widespread.

The U.S. Constitution demands that people be free from unreasonable confiscations of their private property, you'd think this would include not having your property stolen if you haven't committed a crime. People are supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty, but when they are targeted under civil asset forfeiture the pressure is then on them to prove that their property is innocent.

This is a bogus practice, little more than a cash grab for government, that has helped illegitimately bring in millions of dollars for various departments and agencies and it's a practice that, for the best interest of liberty, should be brought to a close permanently.

Pic1 B Hasson via T Tribune
Pic2
Pic3

What Has Civil Asset Forfeiture Been Funding?

Courts Side With Another Victim Of Civil Asset Forfeiture

Class Action Status Sought Over Civil Asset Forfeiture Abuse

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I didn't know about this... I think my country has no such laws in place, if anything my government and police have way too hard of a time trying to remove, arrest, convict anyone.

Still... why did the guy have 500.000$ with him! Next time he should just buy Bitcoin instead, at least no one would be able to take it away because he would be the only one with the pass. This is why I love crypto, freedom from the slavery of government issued laws and money.

maybe he just thought he was "free"?😂

And what happens to you in other countries if the police catch you with $500,000 in untraceable cash?

it isn't illegal to carry cash on you... just so you know

but there are almost no legal reasons to have $500,000 in undocumented cash on you, I can't think of any. It might be reasonable given the preponderance of evidence on the scene to suspect that the money was stolen or drug money, if someone stole $500,000 in proceeds from your church poker night wouldn't you want the police to seize it from the thief if they stopped him?

yup, lucky it was the cops who took his money instead of crooks! lucky it wasn't crooked cops who just kept it, if they had the money legally then they will easily prevail in court.

funny thing is.. it is regularly found in court that they didn't have the authority to steal the millions that they've been confiscating 😀

The fact that happens is proof that the system works, that's my point, I have read a lot of stories about this but haven't found one yet where someone who was really innocent didn't get their money or property back. Sure it's a hassle and an injustice but in the grand scheme of things it seems to rank pretty low on the scale of injustice when compared to people who have been falsely accused of crimes or even people who were the victims of the police going to the wrong address. I find it hard to lose much sleep over people having to make a claim to get their property back when they had their property seized after they couldn't furnish any proof that it was their property. In most places if you were riding around with $500,000 in untraceable cash the police would just take it and throw your body in a cenote. It's pretty great if they log it into evidence and all you have to do is go to the police station or court to get it back.

Normally they need to have a mandate or good reason!

Posted using Partiko Android

Define "good reason" when they decide what is reasonable.

they need to have a preponderance of the evidence suggest that the property is related to criminal activity

unfortunately for civil asset forfeiture they don't, it's often simply their own greed

Oh you gotta talk with me. Any way I can have you on my show Friday's 4pm pacific time?

Yeah this is policing for profit. Hey thanks I'll just keep or take this from a citizen.

Life savings retiree...
People driving to buy a car with cash in hand legally earned.
How about the wonderful bail scams...

So many ways to make lots of funds as a cop.

Learning more about the world of Vegas... Wow! Talk about dirty cops.

Posted using Partiko Android

whenever I read about those cases where the people are actually not selling drugs they seem to always get their property back sooner or later.

Now the issue is that you have to pay a lawyer to defend yourself against this issue and most times it is more financially viable to just let things go.

However all of this goes to auction if it isn't just cash and the department then makes even more money.

But either way you cut the pie civil asset forfeiture is it dangerous and slippery slope for law enforcement to take advantage of.

Posted using Partiko Android

What they leave out is that 99%+ of the time it is legit drug or crime money. Political advocates mislead people by suggesting that the disparity between the rate of property seizures and criminal convictions means that all those people were innocent victims but mostly they give up their ill-gotten property to avoid incriminating themselves because they are criminals. That disparity is a testament to how great our criminal laws are and what strong protections they give the accused. Other countries don't have this problem because you are assumed guilty until you prove yourself innocent in criminal cases too.

I think it could use some reform but every time someone brings it up it seems like the people always get their money back and those are the cases that are supposed to get you outraged but they always have a happy ending. I worry more about cases where cops go to the wrong house and shoot the dog or residents, you can't bring them back like money and that happens all the time.

Actually most of the cases that I've read about are about people who have done absolutely nothing wrong and who have had property as well as money taken from them. Next step is then they have to pay massive amounts of money to get their stuff back and most times fight made-up charges.

What you don't hear about is everybody who is scared willingly it just gives money to these officers which they understand and know that it is ill-gotten gains that was not worked for so why is it that law enforcement are being allowed to keep it.

That should be given over to a public account and that money should be used properly instead of frivolously spent by law enforcement.

And if you don't believe me how much this is in Las Vegas it has been proven multiple times over that law enforcement takes advantage of civil asset forfeiture and as well as ridiculous spending of civil asset forfeiture financing...

Posted using Partiko Android

I would bet that every anecdote you have read about falls into that category, that's why they picked out those anecdotes, that's why they use anecdotes instead of statistics. See what I am saying about that?

I have read them all and not one where they had to "to pay massive amounts of money to get their stuff back " and in all of them they do in fact get their stuff back when they are not actually selling drugs.
In many of the cases the person doesn't even have to go to court, just provide some documentation to the police. In other cases you can go to court without a lawyer if you have the documentation that your property is legit, but of course all of that is premised on the "victims" being actually innocent which overwhelmingly in these cases they are not.
If you have $500,000 how do they know if it is legit or you stole it or it is drug money? It is suspicious just because there isn't any legal reason for that, that's a reasonable suspicion unless it's Monty Burns getting ready to board his hot air balloon to drop silver dollars on people. And of course Mr. Smithers would have a withdrawal slip or some other document.

Indeed the people pushing this issue never talk about how most people just forfeit the property because they don't want to incriminate themselves in their criminal case because that fact ruins their whole misleading supposition based on the disparity between the rate of convictions and the rate of seizures and that would ruin the whole specious argument.

no, 99% of the time it isn't drug money smh

What he said. Needs way more oversight.

Posted using Partiko Android

needs to be ABOLISHED. Nothing wrong with good old fashioned police work.. you know evidence and convictions before confiscations 👍👍👍 civil asset forfeiture is nothing short of complete tyranny

Damn. And truth. I have to say it needs to be investigated further and abolished. Then charges for misuse and investigate the financial deals and further charges.

Gonna be some pensions revoked.

Posted using Partiko Android

I notice these articles seldom have any statistics other than the rates of conviction vs rate of seizures, which is misleading, they are always anecdotes but I have yet to find even an anecdote without a happy ending

maybe more than 99% of the time those things that are seized are actually involved in crimes, that's why they never have any statistics in these articles, only anecdotes from 1%ers.

and treated as a criminal simply because they had ”too much cash” on them, which is an amount that is entirely subjective but most people can agree that $500,000 in unexplained cash meets that threshold if anything does. Civil asset forfeiture sure does suck because if you want to get your drug money back in that case you have to go to court and admit it is your drug money before your criminal case and if you testify saying that it is your drug money then they will use that against you in your criminal case. If it's not drug money and you haven't actually committed a crime then getting your money back is pretty easy but such cases are rare.

I am not a fan of violating peoples natural rights, or Constitutional rights, first and then finding out later that there was no authority to. It wastes time, money, and erodes what freedom there is left for Americans. They've taken different large amounts from various victims, all had diff legit reasons for having their cash (property) on them. And just because someone feels it might be "too much" shouldn't justify the tyranny of stealing from or criminalizing that person. Also, if related to drug activity that money was still made voluntarily with willing parties who exchanged their money for goods, drug dealing for example is a victimless crime and even in such a circumstance I don't feel it legitimate or moral to steal from someone who hasn't committed a crime, there isn't any victim. ✌

drug dealing for example is a victimless crime except for the thousands of people killed in the trade and the tens of thousands killed by their illicit product. I think all drugs should be legal mostly because when they are then it won't be armed teenagers on the corners shooting each other selling unlabled, dangerous, impure products produced by transnational gangs that cannot be safely used. Walgreens and CVS sell opiates across the street from each other but their employees never have shoot outs. Like the article mentioned the case is not really against a person it is against property. What articles like this never mention is that most of the time people don't even try to get their property back because it was ill gotten and they don't want to have to incriminate themselves by trying to claim it. If your property is seized wrongfully it's really easy to get it back. It's a drag and inconvenient but so is everything else in life.