digg

Proof the government doesn't trust anyone it can't trace through money trails.

Damn, 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."

Of 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!

The 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.

It's nice to see that at least there are some people, like the ACLU, who still believe in our Constitution

At least there are organizations like the ACLU that are there to help citizens out and protect our liberties..

Is the DEA going to go arrest Woz now?

What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

***** THE DEA

"apparently the case is going to be called 'United States vs. $23,700'"

If that is true, it is HILARIOUS!

Precedent is against him. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_v._%24124%2C700 . Possession of large amounts of money can be used as evidence that a drug transaction occurred. I think theres another precedent involving 86 thousand some-odd dollars, but i can't find a link.

WTF? 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.

ACLU for president.....

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

The 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.

guilty until proven innocent? and ofcourse he cant use that money in his defense...

Carnies (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.

"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.

Knowing the government they'll probably lose the money.

So 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.

I am curious what Ron Paul has to say about this case, can someone point me to a response. This is anything but a setup (read my past votes), it is a honest request about how the Constitution relates to this type of government intervention. As they always said with the Germans do not worry .....

I like Penn and Teller's interview with Weiner. That was a wonderful example of a stereotype: straight-laced, drug's'r'bad, m'kay? ***** and the silly bastard couldn't even back up his claims. Hicks asked why the hell America has a Drug Czar, and why he's not someone who's had a real issue and gotten over it? Not some ***** accountant who's goosestepping the same ***** since Reefer Madness. Gateway drug? I'll show you a ***** gateway drug!

I sure wish those Presidents on that currency weren't dead, they'd be kicking some serious ass right now.

Ever 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.

I've heard the government steals everything whenever they get the chance because of huge debt.
All this trucker needs to bring up in court is, "Innocent until proven guilty." It's the same principle as god: You can't prove it exists, so logically, he wouldn't, right? Except with the DEA, they're like, "Logic? Wat dat?"

The '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.

And I thought it was innocent until proven guilty...

ha...ha... it's the latest application of the term "Innocent until proven guilty" We won't charge you, but we'll take your money...

It's about freaking time this has come to light!

Apparently you can't make an excess of $10,000 these days, unless you hand that money over to banks... -_-
Didn't anyone get the memo? lol

What *****... just having money, is not proof of drug money... -_- The DEA are just thieves now... huh... Somehow, I can't help but think this is just "legal" theft on the behave of the DEA... But the banks are in on it as well... Why else would large amounts of cash be deemed drug money in ALL cases.

That is some scary stuff! My brother is a cross country trucker and I am leaving with him tonight when he gets his load assignment. That guy is going to end up with a fancy new truck.

The argument to prove the money didn't come from drugs is just like Bush demanding Saddam to prove he didn't have WMDs when he didn't have any. It's impossible and you will lose. Welcome to the new world order. If the banks are holding onto your money they you are a criminal.

Haha, Anastasio Prieto, Prieto means like, I don't know how to explain it, but like dark skinned, not as in black or anything but like, I guess it's like when brown people (Hispanics) go out in the sun and it's what they look like when they get 'burnt' or w/e, a bit darker. Hahahaha, Prieto.

Poor bastard, he's lost it now. Never see it again.

As 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.

This is why the ACLU gets a check from me every year. I hate their stance on immigration and fighting for the rights of illegal immigrants, but I love the way they go to bat for the freedom of American citizens no matter what the politics of the case are.


I just wish they could have stopped all that eminent domain abuse.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279

what if he was just selling stolen LCD TVs or chinese poison toothpaste, then the DEA will have to give his money back.

This is sick. And what is even more scary is that, if it were to go to the Supreme Court, they would probably side with the DEA - citing "the Federal Government's right to control interstate commerce" as a defense (similar to the way medical marijuana was defeated.)

What really bothers me is how the Supreme Court keeps upholding questionable laws passed by Congress. IMHO, every law passed by Congress should clearly and cleanly pass the Constitution. If it doesn't, then any such law should be stricken down. If it really is so important, then draft a freaking amendment and let the states ratify it. Much harder to sneak by shady legislation that way.

Jeez, 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).

Has anyone actually fallen for the "it's for the children" ruse regarding the War on Drugs? You'd think by now people would understand that anytime the government says "We're waging a 'War on (whatever)" they are actually saying "We're waging a war on liberty, because individual liberty ***** us off and gets in our way. Now give us your things and your unquestioning loyalty or we'll sick Janet "The BBQ" Reno on your ass."

***** da police

Well, why does our Government have the right to arrest people for drug trafficking, if they are the source for most of the illegal drugs?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/choice2004/interviews/winer.html
http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/WATcolby.htm
http://www.namebase.org/books13.html

And of course the activity with Afghanistan poppy fields and our involvement in laundering that money through Dubai. When I say us, I mean forces operating for Bush and Cheney.

Then make it illegal to sell something that cost over ten thousand dollars .Why because by their ruling it's a drug deal.***** them!that ***** just isn't right.This ADMIN is tired,let's fire the whole stupid bunch.

Oh, and if you think putting money in your vault means it's safe. Please read the Patriot Act.
If the government finds gold in your private vault at a bank, they can confiscate it presuming it is used for nefarious purposes. They don't have to tell you it has been confiscated, nor is the bank allowed to inform you (nor when they check on you moving more than $10,000 in a week). If you do not lodge a complaint with Homeland Security in that 3 month time -- then you forfeit the right to get the gold back.

No, I'm not making that up.

Since the State wants to be tyrants, I say it's time to set a precedence of guardian ad litem over said $23,700.00. Make the State actually give witness to the court as what this money has done and give the money the power of writ of Habeus Corpus.

He's just a lonely trucker who has to carry cash-money around so that he can pay for love-services. You know what's even sadder, the DEA is going to jack some other unsuspecting law-abider to pay for court costs and settlements.

Well, it's a good thing he wasn't hauling needles.

They've been pulling this ***** for years with "the war on drugs", it's called property forfeiture. He's lucky it wasn't his own car otherwise they would've confiscated that aswell. Everything they bring in, they get to keep and add to their budget.

The war against the people, funded by the people.