Cops Using Devices To Seize Funds On Prepaid Cards

MacLeod said:
Oh for fuck sake. Another [H]yped up anti-cop story. Cops are not going to be pulling you over, taking your wallet and stealing the money off your Best Buy gift card. This is for when cops stop somebody and they've got 50 pre paid cards wrapped in a rubber band hidden under the seat and have no excuse or receipt for it. Even without these scanners cops can still confiscate a batch of cards like that with enough probable cause. A large amount of cash by itself is NOT justification for seizing it.

And stop acting like we're taking this money then hitting the strip clubs with it. It's counted, recorded, reviewed by my boss, his boss and then his boss then locked up in evidence. There it sits until it goes in front of a judge and he decides the disposition of it. If you've got 15,000 cash stuffed in the console of your 84 Nissan Sentara and can't give me a reason for it I can seize it. But then I have to go before a judge and I am the one that has to prove that I had probable cause to seize the money. If I'm wrong you get the money back and I can possibly be open to a lawsuit if I'm guilty of outright misconduct like racial profiling or something like that.

Stop acting like there is no judicial review of these cases. They ALL go before a judge and will in the case of these scanners. They will still have to go in front of a judge and prove to him they had legal justification for seizing your 50 pre-paid cards. If they can't you're getting your money back and you might wind up with some extra cash from a settlement.
Click to expand...

I'd argue the last couples line in your statement is not accurate. Once the money has been seized, it's guilty until proven innocent. The burden is on the citizen to prove it is not criminal money.
 
TwiceOver said:
Pretty sure neither person is required to answer your questions.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right. You can tell me to fuck off and you don't have to say a word but if I can still prove I have probable cause without your statement I'm good.

And let's stop acting like this is I see a 20 dollar bill in your cup holder and drag you out at gunpoint. We're talking about very large amounts of cash that are found that virtually nobody is going to have a legit reason for having. And this cash is going to be found after a vehicle search which I'll need probable cause to conduct anyway so there's gonna be a reason I am looking anyway like large odor of pot, little baggies on the floor, scales in the back seat, needle marks on your arms and stuff like that. We're not dragging grandma out and rifling thru her grocery money.
 
dave99 said:
I'd argue the last couples line in your statement is not accurate. Once the money has been seized, it's guilty until proven innocent. The burden is on the citizen to prove it is not criminal money.
Click to expand...

Nope. I go in front of a judge and he asks why I took the money and I say "well he just looked shifty". I'm getting a new asshole ripped and you're getting your money back. Now if I show probable cause like your story changed 3 times, you said you were coming from main street but were headed in the wrong direction and I found baggies and scales in your car along with some residue of meth. Then I'll have PC and then you'll have to show why you had the cash. But the initial burden of proof for seizing the money is 100% on me.
 
NeghVar said:
Pass a state law criminalizing civil forfeiture without due process and make it retroactive.
Click to expand...

You get due process. The money is seized, not taken forever from you. It's seized until judicial review.

(sorry for the double posting. I'm posting from my phone and trying to reply to a bunch of people so this is a whole lot easier.)
 
MacLeod said:
You're absolutely right. You can tell me to fuck off and you don't have to say a word but if I can still prove I have probable cause without your statement I'm good.

And let's stop acting like this is I see a 20 dollar bill in your cup holder and drag you out at gunpoint. We're talking about very large amounts of cash that are found that virtually nobody is going to have a legit reason for having. And this cash is going to be found after a vehicle search which I'll need probable cause to conduct anyway so there's gonna be a reason I am looking anyway like large odor of pot, little baggies on the floor, scales in the back seat, needle marks on your arms and stuff like that. We're not dragging grandma out and rifling thru her grocery money.
Click to expand...

Do you let people know that right before you question them about how they obtained any amount of money?

MacLeod said:
Nope. I go in front of a judge and he asks why I took the money and I say "well he just looked shifty". I'm getting a new asshole ripped and you're getting your money back. Now if I show probable cause like your story changed 3 times, you said you were coming from main street but were headed in the wrong direction and I found baggies and scales in your car along with some residue of meth. Then I'll have PC and then you'll have to show why you had the cash. But the initial burden of proof for seizing the money is 100% on me.
Click to expand...

In this case, does the defendant (the money) have to bring a lawyer to return to its owner? Also, do you hand deliver that money back to them when you get boned in court? Or has that never happened so you don't know?
 
MacLeod said:
Ummm...no shit. However you pull some guy over in a 1971 Pinto, missing most of his teeth, holes in his shoes, the odor of weed all over him and shake all over the car and he's got $8,000 in 20's stuffed in an envelope in the glove box on him. You ask him where he got that and you get "um, er, I'm, um". Would a reasonable person think that guy was selling drugs? Yep. Would I be reasonable in seizing that cash until we can get in front of a judge to determine if this is in face drug money? I think so.

Now I stop some dude in the same car but he doesn't smell like a Cheech and Chong movie and has most of his teeth and when I ask him about the cash says he just sold a fishing boat to John Smith up on 123 Main Street and he's coming from that direction. In that case I have ZERO legal justification to seize that cash.
Click to expand...
You went from someone driving around in an old car with lots of cash to someone driving around with lots of cash,missing teest, reeks of weed and had shake on him. Got anymore wild scenarios? You just keep making up these crazy scenarios adding on to them. Just because the person drive a 1980's POS and has a lot of cash on them doesnt mean they are a drug dealer. That is called profiling because you are just using past experinces with other people and putting everyone in that catergory. I have been profiled before in my college years when i looked like a stoner, long hair,beard, bags under my eyes from staying up late playing games. Yet i wasnt one and drove a nice car. I got pulled over and the cops excuse was that he was just making sure i didnt have anything on me, he suspected that i did because i was shaking ( i get bad anxiety at times) and asked me to get out of the car so he could search it. I knew i didnt have anything on me so i just let him waste his time getting on his knees just hoping he could find something.
 
MacLeod said:
Nope. I go in front of a judge and he asks why I took the money and I say "well he just looked shifty". I'm getting a new asshole ripped and you're getting your money back. Now if I show probable cause like your story changed 3 times, you said you were coming from main street but were headed in the wrong direction and I found baggies and scales in your car along with some residue of meth. Then I'll have PC and then you'll have to show why you had the cash. But the initial burden of proof for seizing the money is 100% on me.
Click to expand...

MacLeod - I don't know where you live, but there are many places in this country where how it works is very different. The abuse in the system is rampant.

It takes very little reading about civil asset forfeiture to get pissed the fuck off. I'd start with Policing for Profit from the IJ, here: Policing for Profit - Institute for Justice
 
nvgrim said:
You went from someone driving around in an old car with lots of cash to someone driving around with lots of cash,missing teest, reeks of weed and had shake on him. Got anymore wild scenarios? You just keep making up these crazy scenarios adding on to them. Just because the person drive a 1980's POS and has a lot of cash on them doesnt mean they are a drug dealer. That is called profiling because you are just using past experinces with other people and putting everyone in that catergory. I have been profiled before in my college years when i looked like a stoner, long hair,beard, bags under my eyes from staying up late playing games. Yet i wasnt one and drove a nice car. I got pulled over and the cops excuse was that he was just making sure i didnt have anything on me, he suspected that i did because i was shaking ( i get bad anxiety at times) and asked me to get out of the car so he could search it. I knew i didnt have anything on me so i just let him waste his time getting on his knees just hoping he could find something.
Click to expand...

Right because that's part of the probable cause. If you look like a homeless guy but have $10,000 in cash, that is going to be effective suspicious. If you don't think so then you're simply not being intellectually honest. Appearance matters.

TwiceOver said:
Do you let people know that right before you question them about how they obtained any amount of money?
Click to expand...

Nope and we're not required to do so either. But almost every time people are gonna talk especially when they've got a valid reason for the cash. Look, we're not talking about randomly stopping people and asking them how much cash they've got on them. We're talking about (usually) a traffic stop that was initiated because of probable cause, a vehicle search that was conducted due to probable cause and then a very large sum of cash that pretty much nobody is going to have. These are extremely extremely rare cases. And in the 3 years Ive been a LEO I've NEVER seen money seized by itself. There is always drugs with it because, again, money by itself isn't justification for taking it. Not saying cops have never taken it without other indicators but I'd be willing to bet it didn't stand up in court either.

In this case, does the defendant (the money) have to bring a lawyer to return to its owner? Also, do you hand deliver that money back to them when you get boned in court? Or has that never happened so you don't know?
Click to expand...

Doesn't have to bring a lawyer. And you're right it almost never happens because cops are almost never seizing someone's cash without a whole lot of good reasons that we're confident we can properly articulate in court. Especially with me. I'm still fairly new (3 years) plus I'm in my 40's with a family and house so I'm very careful in the cases I make because I don't want to lose everything in a civil rights suit because I was stupid. I do my best to make sure my ducks are lined up before going to bat. Plus I sat in court once when I was in FTO and watched a lawyer absolutely humiliate and embarrass an animal control officer over a dog bite case because he had a sloppy report and procedures. I swore that wouldn't happen to me.

Again, you having $10,000 on you is not by itself reason to seize it. You having 10 grand, little baggies and scales on you and no reasonable excuse, is. I need more than just cash to make my case.

This money is evidence, pure and simple. If I seize money, I don't get any of it. It sits up in the evidence locker until trial.
 
Retronym said:
There's not a goddamn thing they can do.

They can raid my house, my office, my safe deposit box. Put a gun to my head..

They can't do a goddamn thing.

I win.
Click to expand...
Um, what happens when someone hacks the bitcoin system and they all become worthless?
 
Decibel said:
MacLeod - I don't know where you live, but there are many places in this country where how it works is very different. The abuse in the system is rampant.

It takes very little reading about civil asset forfeiture to get pissed the fuck off. I'd start with Policing for Profit from the IJ, here: Policing for Profit - Institute for Justice
Click to expand...

I don't doubt it. I know there are abuses and I'm sure there are even whole agencies that are corrupt. However the answer is not to take all the tools and authority away from the good cops, the answer is to hammer down on the corrupt ones. If I'm talking your shit without provable cause that is illegal and a violation of your civil rights. You have plenty of choices to make that right, especially in this day and age.

I assure you we are not running around out there unchecked.
 
MacLeod said:
Right because that's part of the probable cause. If you look like a homeless guy but have $10,000 in cash, that is going to be effective suspicious. If you don't think so then you're simply not being intellectually honest. Appearance matters.
Click to expand...
So you admit to profiling? Now i know how black people feel, just because they dress a certiain way they get treated differntly from police. Yet the cunts in suits on wallstreet get away with ruining tons of lives because they are too important to jail.
 
MacLeod said:
I don't doubt it. I know there are abuses and I'm sure there are even whole agencies that are corrupt. However the answer is not to take all the tools and authority away from the good cops, the answer is to hammer down on the corrupt ones. If I'm talking your shit without provable cause that is illegal and a violation of your civil rights. You have plenty of choices to make that right, especially in this day and age.

I assure you we are not running around out there unchecked.
Click to expand...

This is a big part of why all officers interactions with suspects needs to be on camera and with audio. Otherwise an officer can easily create a story to establish probable cause.
 
DocSavage said:
Um, what happens when someone hacks the bitcoin system and they all become worthless?
Click to expand...
lol
There is not enough metal on earth to make the hard drives to spin up the computers to do it.
But supposing it did happen, it would only work for ten minutes worth of transactions, at which point they would be kicked off the network. And they would have spent astronomical amounts of money to do it. No nation on earth - no possible combination of nations - has the money to do it.

Bitcoin has been under constant attack from governments and crooks every day of its existence.
Every day it doesn't die it quite literally grows stronger.

There is an open 9 billion dollar reward (market cap) for hacking it.

No one has collected.

Math will always win. Always.
 
Retronym said:
lol
There is not enough metal on earth to make the hard drives to spin up the computers to do it.
But supposing it did happen, it would only work for ten minutes worth of transactions, at which point they would be kicked off the network. And they would have spent astronomical amounts of money to do it. No nation on earth - no possible combination of nations - has the money to do it.

Bitcoin has been under constant attack from governments and crooks every day of its existence.
Every day it doesn't die it quite literally grows stronger.

There is an open 9 billion dollar reward (market cap) for hacking it.

No one has collected.

Math will always win. Always.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Though Apple thought their phone was uncrackable as well. :D To be fair, anyone smart enough to control the Bitcoin network is also smart enough to move their money below the radar and not kill the golden goose.
 
nvgrim said:
So you admit to profiling? Now i know how black people feel, just because they dress a certiain way they get treated differntly from police. Yet the cunts in suits on wallstreet get away with ruining tons of lives because they are too important to jail.
Click to expand...

For crying out loud. Hate to burst your bubble but yeah, generally crooks look exactly like you think they look. A dude with rotted out teeth, 120 pounds soaking wet, sores all over his arms and ratty clothes is a lot more likely to be a meth head than a guy in a 3 piece suit driving a BMW. Cops spend 12+ hours a day with turds so we tend to know how they dress, what their appearance is like and so on.

That is nothing, not even in the same ballpark as stopping and frisk a guy just because he's black.
 
MacLeod said:
For crying out loud. Hate to burst your bubble but yeah, generally crooks look exactly like you think they look. A dude with rotted out teeth, 120 pounds soaking wet, sores all over his arms and ratty clothes is a lot more likely to be a meth head than a guy in a 3 piece suit driving a BMW. Cops spend 12+ hours a day with turds so we tend to know how they dress, what their appearance is like and so on.

That is nothing, not even in the same ballpark as stopping and frisk a guy just because he's black.
Click to expand...

Bullshit, the hardcore crims dress well and do drive BMWs. You know, the guys you cops take bribes from to look the other way. These crims you are talking about are just small fry.
 
eh, guilty until you prove yourself innocent, usually after spending tremendous amounts of money and hopefully it is a local cop that robbed you and not some guy in another state.

there should not be any incentive in robbing people, if there is federal assistance then all the money should go to federal. I think that would go a long way in solving these problems.
 
MacLeod said:
I don't doubt it. I know there are abuses and I'm sure there are even whole agencies that are corrupt. However the answer is not to take all the tools and authority away from the good cops, the answer is to hammer down on the corrupt ones. If I'm talking your shit without provable cause that is illegal and a violation of your civil rights. You have plenty of choices to make that right, especially in this day and age.

I assure you we are not running around out there unchecked.
Click to expand...

I disagree, this tool is not a good one. It is not one even "Good Cops" should have.

Taking someone's stuff on mere suspicion then making them go to court to get it back is wrong. (edit: if you can prove it, arrest them and do a criminal forfeiture, if you can't prove it you don't have the right to take their stuff)

Or, how about giving Citizens the right to seize the assets of corrupt police departments, (like Sheriff Joe Arpio's in AZ who's department can't account for $54 million of taxpayer money) and then making the departments go before a judge to get them back?

I mean they will get there stuff back if they didn't do anything wrong, so no worries if the department is without their stuff for a few YEARS (how long it is taking in several high profile cases where the victim is known to be innocent)

What makes you "more equal" than non cops? (literary reference)
 
I will bring up: Blackstone's formulation Blackstone's formulation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As a Cop, you should believe that: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"

If you don't believe that, I don't think you have any business being a cop, because you would be a bully and oppressor of innocents rather than one who "protects and serves"

I have several good friends who are cops, and they put "protect and serve" first, not "punish the bad guys" The 2nd may be a small part of the 1st, but it isn't the main goal of being a cop, "punish the bad guys" is the main goal of a bad cop who just really wants to be a bully deep down.
 
As sad as it may sound the United States has laws that allow civil forfiture without due process. There is no real process the police has to take in order to impound, sieze, or sell your assets. They just need to establish that they had probable cause and your word means jack squat. As it was pointed out Last Week Tonight did a pretty solid show on this....unfortunately this is one of those, slipped under the noses of all laws, that no one really knew about, and only got used once in a blue moon, sometimes reasonably so, most of the time without cause.

This isn't a black vs white issue, this isn't a dirty cop issue, this is a power issue. The people have no power, the Establishment however does. Freedom is a dying concept, and we asked for it to be. We wanted safety from the bad guys, at any cost; This is the result.

We also have to start understanding that to serve and protect means the interest of peace, this doesn't mean fair representation this means the established order, if you are against you are a target. Just don't be a target, find legal means of protecting yourself, deflate situations where ever possible, and carry a personal recorder if you are truly afraid that the police is corrupt.
 
MacLeod said:
I don't doubt it. I know there are abuses and I'm sure there are even whole agencies that are corrupt. However the answer is not to take all the tools and authority away from the good cops, the answer is to hammer down on the corrupt ones. If I'm talking your shit without provable cause that is illegal and a violation of your civil rights. You have plenty of choices to make that right, especially in this day and age.

I assure you we are not running around out there unchecked.
Click to expand...

No one is talking about taking tools away from cops, we're talking about eliminating a brutal form of grift. There is a reason so many people and politicians are pissed off.

The fact is, as it stands today, in over half the country, a LEO could pull me over, ask me if I have any money, and if I'm the honest type and tell him, he could seize the money, and I'd have to hire a lawyer and go to court to prove that it's legally mine. Without ever being arrested or charged for a crime. If I don't prove it's mine it goes into the department budget. Hell, in some places, that "court" is actually a meeting with someone from the DA. The same DA whose department gets a cut.

The way the laws are written, civil rights are taken out of it. It's not my civil rights that matter, it's the $8,350 in US currency I had in my car, and $8,350 doesn't have any rights.

Civil asset forfeiture does nothing to deter crime, it doesn't help you make your case. What it's doing is giving people yet another reason to distrust interacting with law enforcement, and here in the 21st century US we really don't need another.

My dad was a public safety officer for the City of Sunnyvale. (Think police, with fire and emt gear in the trunk of his cruiser.) Got his gold watch after 30 years. I proudly display his pistol team and competition patches on my living room wall. (I've been thinking about getting a bigger shadow box to add his .38 and duty belt.) I'm not anti cop, I'm anti bad cop.

If it weren't for civil asset forfeiture, Deputy Lee Dove wouldn't be infamous and a national pariah. (Although, part of me thinks he is a shit stain and would have fucked up his law enforcement career anyway.) Civil asset forfeiture has made a lot of potentially good cops dirty. Even if they're working entirely withing the legal framework as established, they're dirty.

They're just bad laws, and in practice an unfair tax.
 
MacLeod said:
You get due process. The money is seized, not taken forever from you. It's seized until judicial review.
Click to expand...

No most states it's close to impossible to open a case against the STATE in order to return your funds and assets... Again John Oliver covered this.

Civil forfeiture in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"
Contested seizures[edit]
After police and authorities have possession of cash or other seized property, there are two ways in which the seized assets become permanently theirs: first, if a prosecutor can prove that seized assets were connected to criminal activity in a courtroom, or second, if nobody tries to claim the seized assets.[30] What happens in many instances is that the assets revert to police ownership by default. If a victim challenges the seizure, prosecutors sometimes offer to return half of the seized funds as part of a deal in exchange for not suing.[14] Sometimes police, challenged by lawyers or by victims, volunteer to return all of the money provided that the victim promises not to sue police or prosecutors; according to the Washington Post, many victims sign simply to get some or all of their money back.[25] Victims often have "long legal struggles to get their money back".[25] One estimate was that only one percent of federally taken property is ever returned to their former owners.[31]"

and if you don't belive this is a rampant problem. You can see clearly that since introduction these went from 93 million per year, to over 2.50 Billion.

Also if you don't belive there is corruption in play please take off the rose colored glasses on this just read the wiki:

Georgia
There are few restrictions on how police use seized assets.[6] Georgia investigators found more than $700,000 in "questionable expenses" by Camden County's sheriff between 2004 and 2008, including a $90,000 Dodge car and a $79,000 boat.[11]


Pennsylvania
In Philadelphia, it is often the homes of African-Americans and Hispanics who are targeted by civil forfeiture abuses; what happens in many instances is that a child or grandchild who doesn't own the home is nabbed on a drug-related offense, and police use this as a pretext to seize the entire home.[6] In Philadelphia, authorities made thousands of "small-dollar seizures"; in 2010, the city filed 8,000 forfeiture cases which amounted to $550 for the average take.[9] From 2002 to 2012, Philadelphia seized $64 million by means of its forfeiture program, a total which was more than that seized byBrooklyn and Los Angeles combined.[9]

Washington, D.C.
Victims seeking to get their seized property back in Washington, D.C. may be charged up to $2500 for the right to challenge a police seizure in court, and it can take months or years for a decision to finally happen.[6]
 
tikiman2012 said:
What does a union have to do with it?


Also this:
"When the card is scanned by the officer to check the account balance, the system disguises the balance request as a typical vendor request". Isn't this felony wire fraud?
Click to expand...

Why do people always think that laws apply to the po-po?

No, I don't think a query of the balance would qualify as wire fraud. I think they would have to de-fraud you of some funds to count as a crime.
 
The story just aired on the local station's evening news. The OHP officer never mentioned the drug trade. His primary emphasis was on catching folks engaged in identity theft. Be interesting to see how many folks who have their cards drained are charged with identity theft or even possession of stolen property. My guess is not many.
 
MacLeod said:
Absolutely! 10% of everybody are assholes. Sure there is an opportunity for a corrupt cop to abuse this. But there are safeguards in place to stop it. There are opportunities for corrupt bank tellers to do the same thing.

Again, I sieze your stuff but it's not gone forever. It's simply my suspecting you're up to criminal activity with it, I can articulate my reasons for thinking so and so I'm gonna hold onto it until we can go to court and convince a judge and it's 100% my responsibility to prove it.
Click to expand...
Wow I bet that cash really puts up a strong defense in court. When it's your written report vs an inanimate object, it must be really hard to convince a judge that your department has every right to keep it. I'll add that what usually happens is the officer leaves out the statement by the owner in their report and the officer states that he suspected it of being drug money, it really is that easy.
 
Last edited:
MacLeod said:
Oh for fuck sake. Another [H]yped up anti-cop story. Cops are not going to be pulling you over, taking your wallet and stealing the money off your Best Buy gift card. This is for when cops stop somebody and they've got 50 pre paid cards wrapped in a rubber band hidden under the seat and have no excuse or receipt for it. Even without these scanners cops can still confiscate a batch of cards like that with enough probable cause. A large amount of cash by itself is NOT justification for seizing it.

And stop acting like we're taking this money then hitting the strip clubs with it. It's counted, recorded, reviewed by my boss, his boss and then his boss then locked up in evidence. There it sits until it goes in front of a judge and he decides the disposition of it. If you've got 15,000 cash stuffed in the console of your 84 Nissan Sentara and can't give me a reason for it I can seize it. But then I have to go before a judge and I am the one that has to prove that I had probable cause to seize the money. If I'm wrong you get the money back and I can possibly be open to a lawsuit if I'm guilty of outright misconduct like racial profiling or something like that.

Stop acting like there is no judicial review of these cases. They ALL go before a judge and will in the case of these scanners. They will still have to go in front of a judge and prove to him they had legal justification for seizing your 50 pre-paid cards. If they can't you're getting your money back and you might wind up with some extra cash from a settlement.
Click to expand...


Obviously you've missed some of the horror stories reported about CAF. Police taking cash from people pulled over on their way to buy a used car, moving cross country with a few thousands dollars on hand for the trip, etc etc. Oh and lets not forget police departments using the money for office parties and margarita machines. This shit is the exception usually and not the rule but don't pretend that CAF doesn't hurt innocent people and that the oversight is perfect. Policies and devices like this will only make it worse.
 
Decibel said:
Civil asset forfeiture does nothing to deter crime, it doesn't help you make your case. What it's doing is giving people yet another reason to distrust interacting with law enforcement, and here in the 21st century US we really don't need another.
Click to expand...

Thanks Decibel: For the Pro Cop (myself usually included) this should be the real stickler.

It isn't a useful tool in deterring or preventing crime, and it does make the non cops more anti cop. Simply: it's bad for everyone involved.
 
MacLeod said:
Now I stop some dude in the same car but he doesn't smell like a Cheech and Chong movie and has most of his teeth and when I ask him about the cash says he just sold a fishing boat to John Smith up on 123 Main Street and he's coming from that direction. In that case I have ZERO legal justification to seize that cash.
Click to expand...

If he tells you to fuck off I'm guessing you would make up some justification to seize the cash.
 
swimming pool said:
If he tells you to fuck off I'm guessing you would make up some justification to seize the cash.
Click to expand...

Right. Cause that's what cops do.

OK, well I've said my piece. I'm off now to shakedown some innocent motorists on their way home from church. Daddy needs a new pair of shoes!
 
MacLeod said:
Ummm...no shit. However you pull some guy over in a 1971 Pinto, missing most of his teeth, holes in his shoes, the odor of weed all over him and shake all over the car and he's got $8,000 in 20's stuffed in an envelope in the glove box on him. You ask him where he got that and you get "um, er, I'm, um". Would a reasonable person think that guy was selling drugs? Yep. Would I be reasonable in seizing that cash until we can get in front of a judge to determine if this is in face drug money? I think so.

Now I stop some dude in the same car but he doesn't smell like a Cheech and Chong movie and has most of his teeth and when I ask him about the cash says he just sold a fishing boat to John Smith up on 123 Main Street and he's coming from that direction. In that case I have ZERO legal justification to seize that cash.
Click to expand...


You're correct about not having justification, but the laws are written where the officer doesn't have to provide justification other than "suspicion". With civil forfeiture, the burden of proof is on the accused. the Officers never have to provide ANY evidence they had a reason for the seizure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top