It's illegal to have large amounts of cash?

[atomd]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/5081398.html

ACLU sues DEA on behalf of truck whose money was seized
 ALBUQUERQUE, N.M.  A trucker has sued the Drug Enforcement Administration, seeking to get back nearly $24,000 seized by DEA agents earlier this month at a weigh station on U.S. 54 in New Mexico north of El Paso, Texas.

Anastasio Prieto of El Paso gave a state police officer at the weigh station permission to search the truck to see if it contained "needles or cash in excess of $10,000," according to the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the federal lawsuit Thursday.

Prieto told the officer he didn't have any needles but did have $23,700.

Officers took the money and turned it over to the DEA. DEA agents photographed and fingerprinted Prieto over his objections, then released him without charging him with anything.

Border Patrol agents searched his truck with drug-sniffing dogs, but found no evidence of illegal substances, the ACLU said.

The lawsuit alleges the defendants violated Prieto's right to be free of unlawful search and seizure by taking his money without probable cause and by fingerprinting and photographing him.

"Mere possession of approximately $23,700 does not establish probable cause for a search or seizure," the lawsuit said.

It said Prieto pulled into the weigh station about 10:30 a.m. Aug. 8 and was let go about 4 p.m.

DEA agents told Prieto he would receive a notice of federal proceedings to permanently forfeit the money within 30 days and that to get it back, he'd have to prove it was his and did not come from illegal drug sales.

They told him the process probably would take a year, the ACLU said.

The ACLU's New Mexico executive director, Peter Simonson, said Prieto needs his money now to pay bills and maintain his truck. The lawsuit said Prieto does not like banks and customarily carries his savings as cash.

"The government took Mr. Prieto's money as surely as if he had been robbed on a street corner at night," Simonson said. "In fact, being robbed might have been better. At least then the police would have treated him as the victim of a crime instead of as a perpetrator."

The DEA did not immediately respond Friday to a request for comment from The Associated Press.

Peter Olson, a spokesman for the Department of Public Safety, which oversees state police, said he could not comment on pending litigation.

The lawsuit names DEA Administrator Karen P. Tandy, DEA task force officer Gary T. Apodaca, DEA agent Joseph Montoya and three state police officers identified only as John or Jane Doe

[charby]

Welcome to the real war that we lost before we even started it... The War on Drugs.

[Paddy]

Remember, this is happening under the Bush administration.

[Wizzo]

Remember, this is happening under the Bush administration.

It's about money.  Wouldn't matter if Clinton was President.

Never, never consent to a search of your person or property.

[Balog]

Wanna bet?
Delaware. 1990. Man, without prior record, carrying $100K cash, stopped and sniffed. Money confiscated in a case styled, US Government v. One Hundred Thousand Dollars in US Currency. (They charge the property because it makes it more difficult for the owner to prove "standing" in court.)

The burden of proof was not on the government but the bearer. The money was "guilty until proven innocent". The bearer claimed he was headed to Western North Carolina in search of land deals. In Court he produced his money backer, complete with cash withdrawal history from legal bank accounts; a man who could document his income and who had an un-impeachable background. That backer was yours truly. The money was mine. It no longer is. In the end, the Judged decided that we had not sufficiently proven my ownership of my money.

True story.
Rich

[Standing Wolf]

DEA agents told Prieto he would receive a notice of federal proceedings to permanently forfeit the money within 30 days and that to get it back, he'd have to prove it was his and did not come from illegal drug sales.

Guilty until proven innocent. Stalin surely would have understood. I don't.

[Perd Hapley]

Remember, this is happening under the Bush administration. 

Giggle-snort.  Knee-jerk away.   

[Art Eatman]

The Louisiana legislature got the governor to sign on to a law that divvies up this "arrested money":  First off, one-half to the State of Louisiana.  Then, the remainder is split 50-50 between the arresting law enforcement entity and the judge who has jurisdiction.  After all that, the issue can be brought to court by the person from whom the money had been taken.

For some reason the judge with jurisdiction never finds that the money legitimately belongs to the person from whom it was taken...

Art

[jeepmor]

More fuel for the fire.  Our government is out of control and it's getting worse.

Stalin would be proud.

[Pew pew pew]

This is one of those things that... ummmm... makes me angry.

[Balog]

Damn Art, do you have any documentation on that profit sharing thing? Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but are you saying the judge gets a % of everything seized into his pocket? Really? Isn't that the definition of kickback?

[LadySmith]

ACLU sues DEA on behalf of truck whose money was seized

That truck is going to have one heck of a time getting its money back.
But seriously, this is yet more govt. sanctioned & sponsored theft.

[280plus]

Yea, once they get their hands on your money it's AWFUL hard to make them give it back. It's nothing new though and not just a result of "Bush's administration. They took mine when uh, Reagan was in office and rand me around uo to and including the day my account went from frozen to seized with me doing eveything they said in the meantime to get it back. Not to mention every time I talked to an IRS guy it was a different one and they all had colors for last names. Mr Brown, Mr Gray, Mr White, Mr Green. Yup, no lie, I thought I was in the "Pelham 123" movie... 

[matis]

Yep, they call it civil asset forfeiture (there is also criminal asset forfeiture).  Government hates cash because it's so hard to trace.  On the other hand they love to grab the cash for themselves.


This was the subject of discussion on a talk show around 15 years ago.  The guests were 2 public relations type cops, defending the practice.

I called up to lampoon their explanations.


Boy did they get mad when I said over the radio that this practice on the part of police gave new meaning to the phrase, "highway robbery".  They could only mumble nonsense in answer to that, but I could smell their rage over the phone.


In this case I'm with the ACLU all the way.


matis

[Firethorn]

In this case I'm with the ACLU all the way.

Agreed.

For a while they tried using 'trace amounts of drugs' detected on money as an excuse/proof to say that it was drug money and confiscate it.  That worked until they did a test and found that the vast majority of cash had those levels of detectible drugs.

The levels they were testing for were so trace that a single 'dusted' bill would contaminate bank's money counting machines, which proceeded to contaminate every bill that passed through it.

Personally, something like this would probably make me hole up in the woods somewhere.  You might of gotten 10G out of me today, but by golly, that's going to end up costing you money, because you're no longer getting taxes from me, because I'm not working.  Oh yeah, and when I get sick I'm heading to the emergency room with no insurance or money...

[Manedwolf]

I have to wonder...

What would happen if someone was traveling around with that amount of money in Euros, Yen or Pounds Sterling, rather than US dollars? How about gold coins or Credit Suisse gold ingots?

Is that still "illegal"?

And when did it become illegal to carry your money? Is the use of a bank account now legislated?

[Ned Hamford]

Wanna bet?
Delaware. 1990. Man, without prior record, carrying $100K cash, stopped and sniffed. Money confiscated in a case styled, US Government v. One Hundred Thousand Dollars in US Currency. (They charge the property because it makes it more difficult for the owner to prove "standing" in court.)

The burden of proof was not on the government but the bearer. The money was "guilty until proven innocent". The bearer claimed he was headed to Western North Carolina in search of land deals. In Court he produced his money backer, complete with cash withdrawal history from legal bank accounts; a man who could document his income and who had an un-impeachable background. That backer was yours truly. The money was mine. It no longer is. In the end, the Judged decided that we had not sufficiently proven my ownership of my money.

True story.
Rich

This makes me rather interested as to the actual proceedings.  One always has to remember, its process not reality.  If evidence wasn't properly admited and arguements not made, the actual facts don't matter.  Does make me think of how even if one gets their money back, they are out the probably considerable lawyer fees, and if they don't hire a lawyer, or at least a good lawyer...

[Paddy]

Does make me think of how even if one gets their money back, they are out the probably considerable lawyer fees, and if they don't hire a lawyer, or at least a good lawyer...

I'd just tell the lawyer to take his fees out of my confiscated money he failed to get back.  But of course, he would have already extorted his fees from me in advance.  Then it becomes my problem to recover those fees from him.

[Nick1911]

And when did it become illegal to carry your money? Is the use of a bank account now legislated?

I wonder this as well.  Any lawyers want to chime in?  (El T?)

[Paddy]

Although it's probably not technically 'illegal' to possess a 'large amount of cash', it means you:

1) Have done something illegal
2) Are about to do something illegal

Your're up to no good, that's for sure. 

[Tallpine]

One problem that I'm likely to not ever have to worry about ...   

[Manedwolf]

I did get a bit of wide-eyed sort of suspicion from the clerk at a supermarket Western Union, though.

I'd sold a still-boxed early laptop I'd found to someone in Russia for a good sum...they either wanted it for a museum or as a correspondent, I don't know, it was one of those ones with a short, wide LCD display that can run a month on AA batteries, and it was still sealed in its packaging from nearly 30 years ago.

Anyway, I'd gone from work to pick up the money they wired. It was cold, I had been at a meeting, so I was wearing a nice grey turtleneck, slim black leather dress coat and dress gloves. Someone at work has called that my "German assassin" look.  I went up to the counter, and when the terminal showed the point of origin as Moscow, the clerk looked up at me with a bit of a wide-eyed look. I just smiled politely, which seemed to unnerve them even more.

I was amused.

[Perd Hapley]

I was wearing a nice grey turtleneck, slim black leather dress coat and dress gloves. Someone at work has called that my "German assassin" look

I'd call it your metrosexual goth look.   

[jnojr]

Has anyone who's had their cash "seized" ever gotten it back?

I don't see how anyone could prove that their cash was not the proceeds of criminal activity.

[Manedwolf]

I was wearing a nice grey turtleneck, slim black leather dress coat and dress gloves. Someone at work has called that my "German assassin" look

I'd call it your metrosexual goth look.   

Bah. It also included a stainless Millenium Pro .45 carried small-of-back. Metrosexual goths are generally leftists who are terrified of guns and don't carry.