Cash confiscation...4th Amendment violation

J

John/az2

New member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Lyon County Sheriff's Department seizes more than $18,400 on I-35

By CHRIS GRENZ
The Capital-Journal

EMPORIA -- The Lyon County Sheriff's Department seized more than $18,400 after a routine traffic stop early Friday of a sedan along Interstate 35 led to the discovery of a hidden compartment that contained the cash.

No arrests were made.

An officer stopped a four-door Ford Tempo that was traveling south on I-35 at 2:49 a.m., a sheriff's department dispatcher said. The traffic violation that prompted the stop wasn't named.

The officer then requested a Coffey County Sheriff's Department canine unit to assist with the traffic stop. The dog sniffed out a hidden compartment underneath the trunk on the right rear side of the car, the dispatcher said. The compartment had a fresh undercoating.

Once opened, the officers discovered $18,438.11, the dispatcher said.

The two men in the car were from El Paso, Texas, and St. Louis. They weren't arrested, and their names weren't released.

The officer who made the stop filed an affidavit for the forfeiture of the money and in connection with criminal charges of a hidden compartment. An affidavit is an official document forwarded to the county attorney, who determines if criminal charges will be filed and an arrest warrant issued, said Rick Buck, assistant Lyon County attorney.

"I haven't seen any documents in this case, so I'm not sure what's going to happen," Buck said Friday. "We have to sort out what kinds of things we'll be pursuing, if anything."

Buck said he would have to see the officer's report to know if criminal charges were involved, but he wasn't aware of a hidden compartment being illegal.

"My officer seems to think it is," he said. "It might be a new statute. I'm not sure if it is (a crime). That's something I'm looking into."

As for the money, the forfeiture is a civil proceeding. If officers seize the money in connection with a suspected crime -- even if they don't get a conviction -- they can keep the cash, Buck said. If the men want to reclaim their money, it would be through a civil court proceeding, he said.

Lyon County Sheriff Clifford Hacker didn't know the specifics of this case because a report hadn't yet been filed. But, he said, if Lyon County were to keep the money, it would be divided between the sheriff's department and the county attorney's office.[/quote]

Since when was it illegal to have a hidden compartment in your car?

------------------
John/az

"The middle of the road between the extremes of good and evil, is evil. When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!

http://www.countdown9199.com




[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited August 23, 1999).]
 
The next to the last paragraph was the most telling, IMHO. In effect, the government can confiscate your cash, not charge you with a crime, and keep the money, which you then have to spend more money to get back through a civil trial. :(

Does anyone know how often the citizens win, in a case like that?
 
Lessee here...

The cops do the deed "early Friday" (2:49 a.m)...its Monday and DA Buck has his thumb up his @ss cuz no report has been filed, and the cops may know current law better than he? What a doofus...what a pathetic joke of a DA.

They don't arrest the men, but take the money, and release the men.
"As for the money, the forfeiture is a civil proceeding. If
officers seize the money in connection with a suspected
crime -- even if they don't get a conviction -- they can
keep the cash,"...WTF does that mean? Its a civil proceeding? The suspected crime....oh my God...a hidden compartment!!!!!!

So it means that if a cop suspects anything is a crime then he can take your cash....you waste your money in court trying to get it back. "Hey you..Mister! Drop your pants....yep wearing women's underware, thats agin the law, or should be...gimme all your cash!"

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
Grenadier...
It can take years...the cops/city always appeal....seriously. They appeal even when SWAT takes out the wrong people

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
In all candor, if this situation is as it has been described, WE better get off our a$$e$ and make a real big noise. It appears that this matter-of-fact report signals the forfeiture of a lot of our rights to a facist, elitist police state with no regard for ANY law, let alone the Constitution.And the press apparently praises it as law enforcement.

------------------
Better days to be,

Ed
 
Now you know why they want your guns! They can't continue to do things like this for long without getting rid of them.



------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!
 
PLEASE SEE RICHARDS POSTSCRIPT
He says quite a bit!
I've voted since I was able. I enlisted when dodging was cool. I've noticed that my taxes and insurance premiums are higher every year.
I've noticed that ..............
Hank
 
This sort of thing has become much more common since police departments have been allowed to keep "contraband", whether cash, or something that can be used or turned into cash. When a car is involved in a violation, a hot BMW is more likely to be confiscated than a rusty '74 Ford. Why? Because the cops get to drive the "contraband" and which would you rather pilot around town to impress the gals?

Jim
 
The government has found away around the fourth amendment by going after cash and property in civil court. These laws (very ill advised) were passed to seize the big drug lord's (mansions, high dollar cars, etc. etc.). I don't know if any of the appeals of this has made it to the Supreme Court or not. This has become big business in law enforcement and has grown all out of proportion and past the intent of the writers of the law (doesn't anyone in government READ the Constitution before they do stuff like this?). Most of the cars seized belong to small time dealers. The big fish now usually have their property mortgaged, can't seize something with a lein on it without paying off the lein holder.

The DEA even acts as a collection agency for small police departments, filing the court paperwork for a percentage of the seized money.

Unlike in criminal court, where the state has to prove you guilty, in civil court you have to prove the money was legally obtained.

The government has since expanded these laws to include all sorts of crimes. In some instances it's a way for a government agency to seize property it wants without paying for it.

In nearly 25 years in the Army and 14 as a part time LEO (since I've been in one genral area as a trainer for the National Guard) this has been the greatest abuse of power that I have ever seen. The saddest part of all is that on my small department (23 sworn officers) that has a major interstate going through it's jurisdiction, I'm the only one who sees anything wrong with this. Everyone else is just terribly happy when cash is seized, and the sad thing about it is that for the most part what is seized up and down the interstates is drug money, but no one else that I've met in Law Enforcement sees this as a bad thing for all of us.

I never thought I'd say it, but it's about time to declare victory in the war on drugs and quit, while we still have a Bill of Rights.

Perhaps the way to win is to legalize drugs and stigmatize their use the way we have drunk driving.

I hope no one thinks I'm for drugs, I'd have no trouble with the death penalty as there is in Singapore. But at what point is enough enough? How much freedom are we willing to trade, to make sure no one smokes dope?
Jeff
 
Jeff,
"How much freedom are we willing to trade, to make sure no one smokes dope?"

Trading freedom is what most of the Drug "War" has become. It is a handy tool to justify tyranny.
 
In 1977 the Feds required banks to report transactions of $10,000 or more...in 1995 this was dropped down to $5000 transactions. Between 1977-1996 banks filed 74 million reports to the Feds of these type transactions....there have been 540 convictions of money laundering/drug money based on these 74 million reports....

Do the math.....0.00073%. Real effective policy huh?. I wonder how many of these transactions were IRS audited? Lot of money they could get their mitts on, no?

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
The State is simply an armed robber. And unfortunately the criminal justice system, from the leo to the judge to the jail, is the weapon that it uses in the robbery of its citizens. Hence, the criminal justice system is no better than other armed robbers that are not officially affiliated with the State.
 
Yes, one of these cases recently went to the Supreme Court-in a manner of speaking. Off the top of my head (subject to memory lapse, bias, and ignorance) the appellants had let an attached room to a man who was accused of a murder committed after he had moved from their house. The police obtained a search warrant for the rented room and executed it when the owners were not home. Not satisfied with searching the rented room they proceeded to search the entire house. They found $3000 in a closet in the master bedroom which they promptly seized. Why? Because they could apparently. Then they would not give the money back or even tell the owners how to go about retrieving the money.

The Supreme Court ruling basically stated the police were not required to tell you how to regain possession of seized property.

Sweet racket, isn't it. The Mafia is green with envy. To serve and protect, boys, to serve and protect.

Many of the police tactics that seem to be beloved of LEOs everywhere appear to be designed to make citizens who should be allies into suspicious adversaries. Perhaps the LEOs on the street should begin looking at the overall strategic results of many of their new tactics.
 
What occurs to me about all these civil rights violations of late is that they are getting so numerous that ACLU is unable to keep up with even the outrageous ones due to a lack of resources. However, at the same time, ACLU stubbornly refuses to embrace the second, which is shooting themselves in the foot, because it would open the floodgates of cash from true libertarians such as us.
 
Pretty soon it will be they can take your money if you have more than they have in there pockets.

Oh - and they dont have to tell you how much that is...

I hope the "officers" kissed them first.

------------------
"America is a melting pot, the people at the bottom get burned while all the scum floats to the top."


RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
The Critic formerly known as Kodiac
 
George said:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Pretty soon it will be they can take your money if you have more than they have in there pockets.[/quote]

You're absolutely right, but only if your cash is in your pocket. Pockets are obviously hidden compartments in your pants and a crime. :)

bkm

------------------
Anyone worth shooting, is worth shooting twice...
 
Jeff White, thank you for your service. And for your courageous honesty in taking a hard look at the results of our 'drug war'.

This has been going on for many years now. When a friend first told me about how these seizures work, I didn't believe him. But, I called my Senators and Congressman and asked about this. At least one of them sent the law to me. I was floored. I had told my friend that this kind of thing 'couldn't' happen in the U.S. Naivete on my part. Again. That old habit of remembering the America I learned about in grade school.

I had heard about an organization working to reform these laws - see http://www.fear.org/ . Looks like lots of good info. Check it out. Note especially, unfortunately, the FOP's (Fraternal Order of Police) support for expanding the seizure laws, instead of reforming them. I suppose their good reputation is much less important to them than that Camaro they've been itching to grab ...

And, for those LEO's and politicians out there (lurkers or members) who feel actions such as asset seizures are still what we need, please consider this. Average, honest citizens are more than uncomfortable with any government that can seize private property without a criminal conviction or other reasonable due process. You may see this as an efficient tool in the 'war on drugs'. We see it as a cynical theft of private property under color of authority. And, it simply adds to our disgust with your perversion of our American heritage. These seizures also greatly damage our respect for LEO's, and that is certainly a shame. If you want to continue with your idiotic 'war on drugs', then go the extra mile - actually get a conviction before you punish anyone.



[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited August 28, 1999).]
 
WHOA! WHOA! WHOA!

Your telling me that there is some kind of law against having a secret compartment in your car. This is totally nuts. How big of a step is it to having a wall safe at your home made illegal, or burying an emergency firearm in your backyard a terroist act. Where do the brain dead people who pass these laws come from. Opps, sorry, my mistake. I see now that this is a California law. I understand now.

Sorry

TEX
 
TEX,

It's not just a California law ... there are Federal laws that give the police the authority to sieze your property should they suspect it was used in a drug related crime or was purchased with "drug money", or is "drug money"

Then the agencies involved get to split up the funds siezed or derived from siezed items amongst themselves.

Nice, huh?

Once aquitted, just try and get your assets back. They dare you.

[This message has been edited by TR (edited August 29, 1999).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top