What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
Not All Free Anti-Virus Software Is Created Equal view!
free.avg.com - 2.4 million people a week get AVG Anti-Virus Free, for the best protection against web threats.
268 Comments
- BelXul, on 10/10/2007, -0/+169Damn, for the record, the standard is supposed to be "burden of proof is on the state", not "he should prove the money wasn't from drugs."
- biggychong, on 10/10/2007, -3/+120It's nice to see that at least there are some people, like the ACLU, who still believe in our Constitution
- trghpy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+102Proof the government doesn't trust anyone it can't trace through money trails.
- redrock34, on 10/10/2007, -3/+82Of course the government doesn't trust anyone with over $10,000. That's why the bank has to report any transaction to the government that's over $10,000. You need to be out spending that money for the economy not saving it up for yourself you fool!
- DangerCollie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+62The war on drugs has turned into a war on the American people. I'd rather see a few people get away with it than see this type of intrusion go on unchecked.
- jefree, on 10/10/2007, -0/+60WTF? Is this the country I live in? The police can just take my things and ask me to prove I didn't acquire it illegally just because it something seems odd to them? Maybe it is drug money but the burden of proof is on the people and the government not the individual. Our drug enforcement and laws are out of control and an excuse to harass the populace.
- neoform, on 10/10/2007, -0/+57At least there are organizations like the ACLU that are there to help citizens out and protect our liberties..
- scubasteve377, on 10/10/2007, -0/+54***** THE DEA
- livevil, on 10/10/2007, -1/+49Guilty until proven innocent?
- airwalkery2k, on 10/10/2007, -0/+45"Of course you shouldn't be carrying around that kind of money. What does he expect would happen? That's unusual and suspicious, and therefore he should be investigated."
I hate that line of reasoning, which would no doubt be used to defend the actions against this guy. Yes, it's unusual to carry large amounts of cash and perhaps very foolish, but doesn't that force people to use banking by gunpoint? You're not free to use your money how you please. - goofporter, on 10/10/2007, -0/+44Carnies (carnival workers) are accustomed to this problem. Carnies are often broke but a good weekend at a state fair can easily put $20,000 cash in your pocket. Then it's pack up in the middle of the night and on to the next town. I've heard more than one tale of confiscated money. Often for less than $10,000. Carnies learn to hide their money well.
- neoform, on 10/10/2007, -2/+45Guilty until proven innocent?! What kind of crazy nonsense is that?
- ElectricMunk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+42Ever hear the line "ignorance of the law is no excuse"?
That ***** line is repeated ad nauseum by small minded fascists and power hungry types who, when presented with logic and common sense arguments, are forced to fall back on petty, bullying and humiliating tactics.
You show me one human being on the planet who knows all of the laws in our country....time's up. Our tax law is 80,000 pages long. Guess what, no matter how intelligent a cop might be, (s)he won't be able to adequately articulate the law you are "currently in violation of". Thus they are forced to make judgement calls which often amount to, "I am thickheaded, I have a badge and a gun, I don't like you for arbitrary-reason-XYZ, therefore you are going to jail". It is the old Roman authoritarianism. The centurion is a brutish thug representing the state who must be obeyed unquestioningly and immediately upon pain of loss of liberty.
If your civil laws can't be read and understood by someone with basic reading comprehension skills then they are unjust by nature. The opposite, our current system, allows for the wealthy to hire private counsel to navigate the morass of legalese looking for a "legal" loophole to ***** the masses while they sit back, impotent in the face of such brutal disparity. - cactus476, on 10/10/2007, -2/+43What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
- MrUnderbridge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+31I knew that ***** ring toss ***** was a racket.
- Shroommaster, on 10/10/2007, -1/+31That ended when the war on drugs came about.
- wiremonkeymommy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+31I sure wish those Presidents on that currency weren't dead, they'd be kicking some serious ass right now.
- beernutz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+28One thing that people never seem to realize about truckers, is that they have to pay for repairs FAST. Say a trucker owns his rig, and is making a good paying run, but breaks down in a small town. He is losing money by not rolling down the road. Several truckers i know keep this kind of cash on them as a "worse case insurance policy". Basically it allows them to pay for any large expense (replace the engine, drive train, or other expensive items) and be on their way as quickly as possible. There is NO reason to accuse them of being drug traffickers just because of the money they carry.
- Nougat, on 10/10/2007, -1/+28Many municipalities have ordinances on the books which allow police to impound your vehicle if you are arrested for solicitation of prostitution - and you have have it back when you pay an exorbitant fine. Not convicted - only arrested. Even if your case is thrown out, you're still out the impound fee.
Ever try and fight a traffic ticket, when you know damn well you're in the right (not when you're trying to pull a fast one)? You'll need to pay a lawyer, and take at least a day off work - it's cheaper to pay the ticket. Ever try and explain that when you punched the parking space number in the meter machine at the train station, you hit the wrong number, but you have a receipt for that day? You'll need to bring that receipt to the hearing, and there's no promises. No, you can't handle it by mail; you'll need to take a day off work to get out of a $20 fine.
All the state has to do is lay charges on you - substantiated or not - and make it cheaper for you to plead guilty and pay your fine (to them) than it would be to defend yourself. And it happens all the time. It's the United States of Extortion. - thrallie, on 10/10/2007, -1/+27So what happens if I go to the car lot with 20 thousand for a new car? The people in this thread saying "WELL THERES A PRECEDENT", that means ***** to me. People buy houses with cash, upwards of 300K. Just because he had a measly 10K with him doesn't mean he traffics drugs.
- Dumbledorito, on 10/10/2007, -0/+24First the DEA had it taken out to the countryside and shot. Then the Patriot Act came along and set the corpse on fire.
- aliengoods, on 10/10/2007, -0/+23My older brother had that happen. He was caught with $5K and they found no drugs on him (they were at his place because someone else who got busted dropped his name). Even though he sold his car 2 days prior for $4800 in cash, and had the paperwork as well as the buyer of the car to prove it, it was confiscated as drug money. The money and the snitch were all that was needed to get a conviction.
'Land of the Free' my ass. - s1mph0ny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+23"This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private"
- TenebrousX, on 10/10/2007, -0/+22Is the DEA going to go arrest Woz now?
- TexasScott, on 10/10/2007, -1/+22So much for innocent until proven guilty. Soon we'll bring back corruption of blood.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+21guilty until proven innocent? and ofcourse he cant use that money in his defense...
- Leomarth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19Most of our lawmakers never read the laws they pass. That's real criminal ignorance of the law. They don't know what it's specifics are, but you had damn well follow the letter of it.
- addakorn, on 10/10/2007, -1/+18Umm if you read the whole page you will see that precedent is for him. The case cited ends with the person getting the money back.
- DRINKxREDxBULL, on 10/10/2007, -18/+34The government robs all of us at gunpoint every time we go to work. Don't believe me? Refuse to allow taxes to be "voluntarily" withheld from your paycheck and find out what happens.
- gernblansted, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16If that's true, why don't they charge him with that crime instead of taking the money and running? This is standard operating procedure in the War on Drugs. It doesn't have to be $10,000 dollars, either. Many people have lost their livelihoods because police say money in a roll is evidence of illegal drug profits, or they test the money for cocaine residue and if it tests positive they take it - and deposit it in their account in their bank without 'cleaning' it, thus making it available via cash machines for the next victim.
For the record, the vast majority of US money has cocaine residue on it. How convenient. It's nothing more than organized crime - from within our own government. And yes, the police split up the profits with the DEA and keep some for their gyms, bonuses, whatever they can think of. This activity IS well documented, and it is very illegal. Of course, the victim's are chosen carefully - out of state citizens, their money gone, they have to prove themselves (their money) innocent (how do you do that?). Right.... - socokoolaid, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16DEA - Causing, exaggerating, and encouraging the 'drug epidemic' since 1970 to maintain funding and and a source of cars, cash, houses and properties to impound, seize, and or auction.
- gernblansted, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15There are thousands and thousands of people who's money, homes and other property have been accused of a crime and confiscated. Most have nothing to do with drugs and have broken no law - otherwise THEY would have been charged instead of their property being accused of a crime. Many have had their lives destroyed while the DEA and local authorities split up the profits. I'd bet these victims don't find it so hilarious.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15The war on drugs always was a war on the American people.
- chicoer2001, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16Knowing the government they'll probably lose the money.
- ripple123, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17ACLU for president.....
- aclements, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16Skip the blog: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/5081398.html
- Leomarth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15The 'war on drugs' is a very profitable item for the DEA and state/local law enforcements. I find it funny that they charge the item with a crime to confiscate it. "The Federal Government of the United States of America vs. $10,000 cash".
And to confiscate it, they don't even have to prove guilt. Only charge you. And then if you're found innocent, you may still never get your money back, or you may end up spending more than it's worth in legal fees. It's a immoral racket to pocket money and get headlines. - HolierThanYe, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17Why are people digging this guy down?It's true. If you want to keep the money that YOU earned, the government will send men with guns to take you to court so they can TAKE your money.
- onewingedangel9, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17"apparently the case is going to be called 'United States vs. $23,700'"
If that is true, it is HILARIOUS! - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14Please... post a link to this "law".
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14As someone who always supports law enforcement, I have to go against the DEA on this one.
Just the principal of the thing. The DEA says the man has to PROVE the money didn't come from drug deals.
Sorry, that IS NOT THE WAY IT WORKS in American. The BURDEN of proof is upon the STATE, or government
in this case, to PROVE the money DID come from drug sales. In our society, you are PRESUMED innocent.
If the DEA thinks the money came from an illegal activity, they should prove it. Until they do, it's HIS money,
not the governments. - WilliamDavis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15They were asking so they could fill out a report and send it to your masters.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14Land of the Free?
I weep for this country. - newsfrommars, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Knowing the government, they will spend MORE than that defending their right to jack you. then they will settle for an undisclosed sum, and keep right on doing this.
- johndi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13You can cover it up with civility and high sounding ideas all you want, but it is still theft. The constitution guarantees due process for both civil and criminal suits. The 7th amendment makes it clear that civil disputes where the value exceeds $20 require a jury.
- 5xSTUN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Jeez, the way people are reacting to this story, you'd think that this kind of assets forfeiture was a recent thing... people, it's been happening for years. If the police decide to pretend that they hear a scream coming from inside your house, they can smash the door in, kill everyone inside the house and take whatever they want, money, TVs, computers, whatever, with absolute impunity. Read the late Peter McWilliams' book "Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do" online for free (google it, it's there).
- AxeSwinger, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Prove it. Cite legal precedent or statute. People regularly transport that amount of cash.
- BelXul, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Too bad I'll never have a shot at Congress. I'd like to submit legislation that calls for an expiration date on all non Constitutional-Amendment laws. When that time expires, it must be voted on again. If not or if it doesn't pass, it's null and void. I think 20-25 years should be more than adequate for the life of a law.
- jftitan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12I was actually questioned by my bank when I spent a whole year depositing money into my savings account. Only to withdraw the $23k from savings to go buy a new/used car.
The bank teller actually asked me for why I was pulling the money out. I explained I was going to buy a new car. a minute goes by and I finally got my money in cash. Before handing me the money she makes a comment about how the whole year I made nothing but deposits, which was out of the ordinary for me because the prior year I would always withdraw money from savings twice a month.
The bank questioned me as to why I had 23k saved. ***** a. - Plinkotic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12What's scary is most people keep important records, but with what these nitpicking ***** are willing to itemize(and rarely correctly), you'd have to get receipts for every vending machine you've ever used!
/scurrying off to round up his gumball expense sheets -
Show 51 - 100 of 268 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is