[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Large Amount of Cash (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 12/20/2004 10:02:02 PM EDT
| What would you do if you found a large amount of cash on a person. Say a middle aged Wht male, clean cut, normal guy (I know there is no "normal"), but you get the point. For hypothetical purposes let's assume it's 20K-30K mainly 100's. You ask why he has it and are told that they just prefer to deal in cash or tells you that he doesn't have to justify why he has it. A few more issues to throw in. You stop him for a normal minor traffic situation. One varible local, out of town, out of state. |
|
There is no law against carrying that amount of money on your person, although you are just asking to get robbed. But to answer your question, if I encountered this, and he wasn't driving an armored car with Brinks labeled on the side, I would immediately think he was trafficing either narcotics or weapons. Depending on the circumstances, his explaination / reasons, and situation, I would be looking for reasons to take him to jail (ie. traffic offense, warrants, etc). Otherwise, the event would be well documented. |
|
I booked a guy one night who was carrying over $15000 cash. It was suspicious but he was a Hispanic farm worker with good ID and no prior record. Some of these people just don't trust banks. During booking I counted that money 3 times in front of him, on camera, and with another officer present. He got it all back when he was released. |
| There is a standing protocol for federal officers (DEA, Customs, INS inspectors) at airports to confiscate large amounts of cash found on one person. My sister-in-law worked a MJTF at DFW Airport through Ft. Worth. She said it was a pain in the hind end because of all the liability and paperwork; however, it was nearly a sure thing that it was drug money when the intended flight is heading south of the border and the cash is surrendered with little or no protest by the carrier. (Afterall, it ain't his/hers...it's goin' to Escobar back home). As far as what I'd do? Well, I'm not gonna make any assumptions without something to compliment reason to take action. If the person is fairly adamant about carrying that much cash with them, then as long as they're not milling about in the bad side of town, and everything else checks out, I'm likely to say, "Have a nice day!" |
|
Well, I'm the "on-call" guy! If you don't have dope, a compartment, or articulable facts that link it with a felony, then let them go. First, here is the problem: Many people legitimately carry large sums of cash on their person, primarily because the the CTR's that the US Treasury Dept. requires, when you shuffle cash around. I.E. like Wave mentioned: "They don't trust banks". Although I personally don't have sufficient cash on hand to ever warrant those worries, some people do, and it's legitimate money. Many of these people are immigrants from third world countries, where it's understood that the police will steal your stuff. If you tattle on them, you wake up dead (like our friendly neighbors to the south=Mexico). When american police officers conduct a seizure of large sums of cash from these people, many times without the required or weak "articulable reasonable suspicion that it is the proceeds derived from the commission of a felony" (read: weak or lame facts), these people perceive that as the typical governmental theft that they encountered in their home country. Because they have fear of governmental officials, they often times don't retain legal counsel to state their case during the forfeiture hearings. Don't get me wrong, I've done more than my fair share of currency seizures, but there has to be a clear and overtly obvious link between the money and a felony offense. I would rather let a currency smuggler walk, than to "accidently rob" someone of their life savings. Asset seizure laws are under intense scrutiny by civil rights groups, and many of our appealate courts. And rightly so. There have been many abuses by greedy governmental agencies, who have chosen to use this law to generate revenue. Just my humble $.02, your mileage may vary! |
|
If there is no crime, there is no crime. Susupicious... yes. I would FI and keep his info for future reference just in case. I was put in charge of a robbery scene where the perp had knocked over a large check cashing place on a Friday morning. I'll spare posting the "how to rob a check cashing place" on the internet, but suffice it to say, it was a GOOD JOB (at least before the getaway). If any LEOs want details, IM me. Dood escaped through the roof and got away, dropping a trail of cash from his ripped duffel bag. Cash was blowing everwhere. Roof, parking lot, inside, in a field behind the place. The loss was reported to be $78,000+. We (4 cops) personally collected and recovered $39,000 of it. The manager admitted later that he did not know exactly how much cash was in there and that the bad guy could have taken much more than we assumed. Picture loose, unaccounted for bundles of $100 bills and single bills everywhere. It was like a "safe explosion" scene from an old crime drama. It was kind of surreal. I saw the recovered cash and it wasn't as bukly as I thought 40K in cash would be. it is entirely possible to "bag" a 100K and run. AFAIK, the guy was never caught. We tracked him with the dogs as far as an Apt complex, but lost the track. NorCal |
A sharp defense guy used that to get his client's $$ back. He'd had his $$ seized in Fl under the "trafficking" charge after the K9 alerted on the bills. No alert in the vehicle, or on the guy. No compartments, just buckage. But they After the K( handler displayed his sog's abilities, and the circumstances surrounding the nab, the lawyer aked of the dog could provide a demonstration in the courtroom. The dog did, to everyone's satisfaction. His nose knows. Then he he had "officer Barky" sniff cash from the jury's wallets. He alerted on 8 / 12 members. Not Guilty. |
|
I am running traffic enforcement and stopped a local "citizen". Recognizing him from previous encounters in the projects as a convicted drug dealer/ murderer and all around thug known to carry weapons and drugs I ask him to step out of his vehicle. After moving to the shoulder of the road so I can see him and his partner I do the usual 20 questions. He and his partner are really nervous and so for my safety I do a Terry frisk because I know this perps history of shooting people and running drugs. Well low and behold I feel a very large and hard object in his left front pants pocket. I ask what it was and he says cash after confirming that is was it was. I then finished writing my speeding ticket. By this time my back up arrives, and I ask for permission to search the car and he verbally consented on camera. I get his partner out and frisk him too. (Nothing found) Then I start searching the car. Remember we're working on reasonable time limitation. I ask about the trunk after not finding even a seed in the passenger compartment. They say they don't have a key for and it doesn't open from inside. I call for a dog and am told it will be 25 mintues before one can arrive. Taking all this guys history into account I decided that we could wait. Dog shows up DOES not alert to anything at all including the $23,475 this guy had in his pocket. I had to let it all walk because there was not a legal reason to hold it. I alerted all the local agencies around to try and catch him on his way back but no one saw him. 
|
I have been told that much of our currency in circulation would test positive for drugs. Don't know and never tried to test the theory out, but it wouldn't much surprise me since so many people do "recreational drugs"! Smart attorney who earned his fee! |
|
No big deal really. He doesn't have to justify it. He could be going to buy a car or just sold a car or real estate for that matter. If I need cash like that and I don't have it in the safe, I'll call the bank and make sure it's there for me to pickup before I need it. -luke |
|
If you are in Louisiana, there is a strong chance you cash will be siezed, even with no wrongdoing, and you will then have to post a large bond and fight in court to prove its yours. They have some of the worst forfiture laws in the country. They will drag it out in court and offer to settle and give you a percentage of your money back if you don't want to keep fighting and paying lawyers. Then what does get siezed is divided among the department, the DA, and the state judicial fund.... so everyone involved has a vested interest in keeping your $$$! Google "Louisiana Forfiture" for details. Elsewhere I think you would be ok. |
|
Thanks guys - I asked because of being told that it was "illegal to carry over 10K in cash". It's something I do all the time sometimes alot more. It's not for any illegal purposes, I just found it simplified life. A couple of years ago I canceled all my CC's, closed my bank accounts, and went on the cash basis. I don't owe a dime to anyone and when I make a transaction I am done. I give 'em the cash and get what I bought. No balancing the checkbook, checking card statemnets arguing over incorrect charges, etc. The moment I buy something then it's done. I really can't tell you how relaxing life can be this way, until soemone brought up there being a problem for LEO when they encounter someone with too much cash . Now if they would just go to a national sales tax and dump the income tax then I would really have it simple. How can anyone seize cash just because it's cash. It's my property, I worked my ass off, physically, for it. I didn't win the lotto, get an inheritance, or screw some investor out of it . I have worked 60 hour weeks in construction since I was 17. I was doing nothing wrong. I just can't understand that just because it's "odd" and somebody with a little authority "thinks" I may have done someting wrong that they can take it and then make me pay some blood sucking lawyer a shit load to get MY property back. How can any LEO or anyone else justify this? That really is a question, not meant to bas in anyway. I am just trying to understand the logic. FWIW my dad was a state trooper for 28 years. Best damn man I ever knew. |
Look at this quote to get an idea of the mentality:
www.fear.org/941214.html |
| We deal with this every few years at my PD since we live by a huge farm that hires migrantes. They just don't use banks. Unless its obviously drug related we just count the money in front of them and return it after the stop or arrst. Of course odds are we wont see them again so we make them post out of the cash and issue a court date. If they beat the rap then they get back the fine amount they posted. Works for us, RnR |
|
Well guys I used to attend about 8 gunshows a year. And it was not uncommon for me to have cash in the 5 figure range on my person for the duration of the weekend. When you locate that rare item you have been searching for for 10 years, that is not the time to have to search for a check cashing joint or ATM. ATM's are useless because most have a very low limit per transaction. Would a K9 peg on that cash - likely if it was also trained for nitrates/firearms. |
Ahhhhhhhhh, the urban legend of the "tainted money supply." There wuz this lawyur wunce... Somebody please show me the scientific study of the nation's federal reserve banks (all of them across the country) which shows that all of our currency, where ever it is located geographically, is tainted with dope. Oh, yeah, THERE ISN'T ONE. 
|
Nobody would claim it all is... but if one has hundreds or thousands of bills odds are more than a few ahve passed through the drug trade and been exposed in the past. Any department that uses a dogs alert on cash as its only justification for siezure is out for the $$$ not to fight crime. |
That's not 100 per cent true. The science and case law on drug dog alerts has mostly repudiated the defence that all money is contaminated and will be alerted on by a drug dog. In fact, there is a significant body of case law on cash seizures and what events or observations constitute legitimate probable cause to seize bulk currency. Many times, a layman only sees that there was a lot of cash, and that a law enforcement officer seized it, with no understanding or knowledge of what other facts may have been known at the time. And, who is going to get on television and say, "Darn it. I had just made a big score, and I thought I could sneak the stuff through. They got me fair and square." I worked airport interdiction for three years, and we had a lot of cases where the person we seized cash from would tell us that they were carrying it for a doper, how much they had been paid, and how many other trips they had made. Next thing you know, some lawyer has filed a claim on the money saying it belonged to the couriers dear old departed grandmother who never trusted banks since the Great Depression. And, I have run into several people, including a carnival owner, a Mexican car dealer, and a Vietnamese jeweler, who were carrying very large sums of cash through the airport with business records, and a story that checked out, who did not have their money seized. There are a lot of good stories on drug money seizures. A really common occurence used to be to catch a courier with several hundred thousand dollars that the courier would deny ownership of, sometimes even denying that they knew it was in their luggage, and then refusing to take a receipt for the money. Usually, they would come in the next day, all beat up, and say, "I've changed my mind. I would like to have that receipt now."  |
Ahhh, the "urban legend" rings remarkably close to thevery real case: www.ndsn.org/dec94/dog.html The case was U.S. v. $30,060 in U.S. Currency, CA9, No. 92-55919, Nov. 8, 1994. Only in the wierd world of government can you ahve a court case vs an inanimate object, but anyway...... The evidence of forensic toxicologist Jay B. Williams was that up to 75 percent of U.S. currency is coated with traces of controlled substances. Williams has run tests on currency since 1982, examining $1, $2, $5, $10, $20, $50, and $100 bills from such places as banks, department stores, and restaurants in the western U.S. In Los Angeles and Las Vegas, he found that 75 percent of currency has traces of illegal drugs, while in Bozeman, Montana even 10 to 15 percent of currency is contaminated. In his affidavit to the court, Williams testified that other studies have found that because some illegal drugs are "sticky," these substances cling to bills and are transferred to other bills in cash registers and wallets. "If greater than seventy-five percent of all circulated currency in Los Angeles is contaminated with drug residue, it is extremely likely a narcotics detection dog will positively alert when presented with a large sum of currency from that area," the court said. And another source, from who looks like a person that the LE community may find a reliable expert... Thomas Jourdan, chief of materials and devices at the FBI laboratory in Washington, D.C., says 85 percent to 90 percent of the currency in the United States has measurable amounts of cocaine. "A new bill is kind of a wall-to-wall sticky surface in a microscopic sense," Jourdan said. "And over the course of that bill's life, it gets things to adhere to it as well as drugs of abuse." ................................. But seizures based only on drug dog alerts shouldn't occur, given the research on levels of drugs adhering to the general monetary supply, says Terry Hall, who has testified, primarily on behalf of the prosecution, in more than 500 drug cases and is laboratory director for Toxicology Testing Service Inc. in Miami. "Anytime you take a bunch of money and let a dog sniff it, he will find cocaine on it,'' Hall says. "It doesn't mean you're a drug smuggler. It just means you had a lot of money in one place.'' www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v99.n710.a07.html Just about 5 minutes and google..... |
|
Another interesting article, some highlights... Just last April, Broward County, Fla., sheriff's deputies nabbed almost $1,600 from one Rosendo Louis, who was suspected of trespassing on the lot of an unoccupied house. After searching Louis, drug-sniffing dogs red-flagged Louis' money -- mostly small bills -- for narcotics taint. The cops grabbed the cash -- to no avail. Just this month, according to the Miami Herald, Circuit Judge Robert Lance Andrews ordered the police to give back the cash. "It is conceivable," ruled Andrews, "that anyone in South Florida who was carrying U.S. currency would 'alert' a narcotics-sniffing dog." To help make his point, Andrews referenced a 1985 Miami Herald story that related the results of a test involving $20 bills taken from various community leaders and checked for traces of drugs. Residues were found on the bills belonging to, among others: * Jeb Bush * The Archbishop of Miami * And then-Dade County State Attorney Janet Reno "Overall," says Miami forensic toxicologist Dr. Jay Pupko, "the money in the general circulation has been contaminated by microgram levels of cocaine." Not only do drug users sometimes roll up bills like straws and use them to snort lines of cocaine, but, as Pupko believes, most of the money is tainted initially by drug dealers counting stacks of bills. The taint, however, spreads quickly, as Pupko adds that even bank tellers spread the residue when sorting and tallying cash. Cashiers and pushers shouldn't feel too bad about it, though. There's plenty of blame to go around -- including the Federal Reserve itself. Testing suspicions that drug-tainted money spreads quicker than either gospel or gossip in a Midwest church, Wagner reports that in 1985, DEA chemists examined money-processing machines at a U.S. District Federal Reserve Bank, "where vast amounts of currency is routinely sorted." The results? "In random samples of $50 and $100 bills, a third to a half of all the samples collected had cocaine," according to one DEA chemist, who added that "it appeared that hot money was contaminating the (machine) belts, which then contaminated fresh money." In a test that positively resolved a 1994 case for the defendant, Pupko and fellow toxicologist Dr. William Lee Hearn collected currency from all corners of the country, including Austin, Los Angeles, Miami, Milwaukee, New York, Pittsburgh and Seattle, even going abroad to grab U.S. bills circulating in London. All but four of the bills were tainted -- 131 out of 135. "Basically, the DEA is conceding that this is a problem," said Pupko, "that most of the money is contaminated." www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=19702 |
|
The Miami Herald and the defense attorneys are putting the argument in the terms they want, whether money is contaminated or not, without discussing whether drug dogs alert to all contaminated money. An study was done several years ago by U.S. Customs that found that drug detector dogs don't hit on the scent of cocaine HCL so much as they hit on the much more potent cutting agents in cocaine HCL such as ether and acetone, which both evaporate rather quickly. Which would help explain why dogs do not always hit on money. I have been in forfeiture proceedings where we had a lot of evidence that money was proceeds, or intended for use in purchasing narcotics, but we couldn't get a dog to hit on it. Then, you have defense attorneys getting up like sinners who have seen the light, saying stuff like, "everyone knows these dogs are very accurate and if there had been any cocaine on this money, that dog would have said so." What can you do but just shake your head and go on? |
only about 99% of the time almost all of money in circulation has been touched by some sort of narcotic. |
|
There is no definitive, credible, nationwide study. If there was, and the pervasive contamination of currency were decidedly proven, I'm certain there would be controlling U.S. Supreme Court case law on the matter. (I'm talking about case law like "Miranda v. Arizona or Tennessee v. Garner type stuff.) Quoting web-located newspaper articles hardly establishes credibility of any such study, especially when the methodology and/or sample size is not stated. But just for fun, I spent "five minutes" and found the following: (** notes my opinion.) www.hoboes.com - "1989 experiment by Miami toxicologist Dr. William Hearn, who gathered 135 dollar bills from Banks in 12 cities found 131 had traces of cocaine." ** That's quite a scientific study, Dr. Hearn. www.snopes.com/business/money/cocaine/asp - "currency contamination found was as small as a nanogram (one-billionth of a gram) to as much as a milligram (one-thousandth of a gram) Argonne National Lab study revealed the average contamination was 16 micrograms (16 one-millionths of a gram.) ** No methodology stated, but if it's true, I would trust the Argonne Lab. www.asct-nationalK9.com (American Society of Canine Trainers) - "Currency in circulation does not contain enough narcotic scent for a narcotic detector dog to alert to. Only currency tainted with the odor of controlled substances in a realistic level will trigger a postitive canine alert." (See above Argonne study.) ** Odors dissipate. Think of it this way, when you fry fish in your kitchen, your kitchen and part of your house will stink like fish for a while. 48hours later the odor is gone. Having said all that, I should also make it clear that outside of finding the money in the immediate presence of a felony amount of contraband, no seizure should take place unless an in-depth income/cash flow analysis of the subject holding the cash clearly shows the money as ill-begotten. (Edited to show 131 bills found to be contaminated, not 121 as I originally misquoted.) |
|
I predict that we are going to loose our ability to seize criminal assets in the very near future, based largely on the fact that it is being abused in some jurisdictions. Many agencies are using it as a revenue generating tool, and no matter how you slice it, that's wrong. This is a lot bigger issue than some people think. The thought of some honest person having their life savings stolen by the government really bothers me. Mind you, I'm not a left wing liberal cop. I've done a lot of asset seizures in conjunction with my cases, but ONLY when it's overwhelmingly obvious that the assets are tied in with the contraband or illegal activity. The thought of some poor slug having to give 1/3 of his money to the government, and another 1/3 to a defense attorney, when the currency was legit to begin with, really bothers me. I think as cops, we have to really hold ourselves, and each other accountable in relation to how we administer this law. Probably the biggest underlying issue, is that the asset forfeiture statutes are civil cases. The burden of proof is based on the preponderance of evidence, and not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That can be a pretty tough case for a guy, who for whatever reason, chooses not to store his money in a bank. |
Chemical residue test |
Hidden compartments in the vehicle, drug detection dog hitting on the vehicle, prior convictions for sales... |
And, quite often, the person being found with the money admitting it is drug money and they are being paid to move it, something you don't put in the reports all the time because you just don't want to see the courier getting murdered later. Because, most of the time no one even follows up on contesting these seizures, mainly because the person contesting it is required to come in and give a depostition. And, taking the fifth in a civil case may keep you from getting prosecuted, but it is going to sink your defense that the money is legal. Claims of abuse of forfeiture laws are like police hitting the wrong house, they don't have to happen very often to be big news when they do. And, it matters little how small a percentage bad seizures are for the same reason. Years ago, the DEA put out a long press release, detailing the true facts, and reasons for seizures in dozens of media reported cases of seizure abuse. Not one newspaper or television station printed it, mainly because it was old news, not being releasable until after the investigation and forfeiture proceedings had concluded, by which time the media had lost interest in the cases. The truth is almost all money seizures, like amost all home invastions, and almost all kidnappings, happen to drug dealers, not normal citizens. |
Just because the dog alerts doesn't mean that person had anything to do with drugs, the cash may have at one point or another, but it might not at that point in that persona possesion. It's said that something like 90% of the currency in circulation in this country has coke residue on it. Don't know how accurate that is but still. Past use of money doesn't mean that thas what it's currently being used for. I just don't see how that could be a legitimate reason to take the cash in absence of any other eveidance to show it was used to buy drugs. |
|
Some good points have been brought up, like a "secret" compartment. WOldn't it be reasonable that a person use to carry large amounts of cash would (or mabey perhaps is a better word) have a compartment hidden for the cash. That would be hard to find to a normal smash and grab thief. By the same token, how would you ever find the hidden compartment unless you were doing a very detailed search in the first place probably for just cause at that point. The second thing that has been brought out is wether or not money in general circulation is "tainted" with drugs. Noone points out wether dogs actually hit on the money or not, just that it contains residue. It seems that DEA and all drug dog handlers would really want to know what the % possibility is that a dog would hit on general currency. The lack of a scientific study by the DEA is a little suspicious to me. I know I am a pessimist but I suspect thet they have done studies and choose not to publish the results as they do not help their efforts., but that is pure speculation on my part. It's very logical though. |
Almost all large or "bulk" currency shipments by drug dealers are concealed in hidden compartments in vehicles. It is not that hard to find them if you are trained to do it. If you are not trained, it is darn near impossible. There are a lot of tell tales that are pretty hard to avoid if you are a drug dealer, carrying large amounts of cash in a hiddent compartment, and almost none of them have anything to do with a drug detection dog. Any LEO wanting to know more should look into attending a DEA, Operation Pipeline, training seminar. |
Roger that, Group 9. USDOT's DIAP (Drug Interdiction Assistance Program) for CMV's is pretty good, too. Big trucks = big dope. 
|
| This thread makes me think about the scandal in Volusia County, FL some years ago. Officers would let obvious drunk drivers go so they could fish for drug dealers on I95. Its a real shame because confiscation used correctly can be a huge assest for fighting drug trafficking, money laundering, etc.. by PD's. |
|
It is kind of creepy how many of you guys want to seize cash from people for no real reason other than they have cash. If you ever read cash, it says it is suitable for crime right on the front. "This note is legal tender for all debts public and private" It is also ok to buy cars, boats, old furniture or gamble with cash. Having cash, while helpful in commiting some crimes is not a crime in itself, is it? My dad lived by Cocoa Beach, Florida about ten years ago. The local sheriff took over a million dollars from some guy in a $150,000 car and kept it for months. The guy was filthy rich and said he could do whatever the hell he wanted with his money so he had a million at home and was moving it to his new house when he was stopped.(or some similar story on the TVnews) The sheriff was on TV grinning like an idiot and saying if he kept it for a year he would earn enough interest for a lot of new equipment and he did not want to give it back. His justification, he did not see why anyone should have that much cash so they took it. The guy had to get a court order to get it back, with interest. As much as I hate drug dealing shitbags and support whatever the hell you want to do to them. I dislike the idea of seizing assets from people because they have the potentional to be used in crime. Especially people with no criminal record. |
There is a pretty important caveat to your statement. It is okay to buy all of those things with cash as long as you comply with the appropriate currency transaction reporting requirements. No one is saying that it is not impossible for some eccentric to get inconvienced for trying to live a cash only lifestyle. But, the reason is due to the major problem drug dealers face, which is how to convert all of that cash into some kind of usable financial instrument. This difficulty is what causes them to hoard, and transport, large amounts of bulk currency. I'll also give you a little life lesson here. For reasons that even I can't understand, many already rich people are not satisfied with the amount of money they have. I have investigated more than one millionaire who started dealing drugs because he wanted to be a multi-millionaire. A lot of drug dealers like to think that once money is earned illegally, it should be considered "safe" and be waiting around for them after prison. Another drug dealer belief is that it is not fair to get their money first, and then get them. I have seen a lot of drug dealers brought down because of a chain of problems that started with them losing a large cash shipment. Asset seizures of drug dealers, including their bulk currency, is a very important part of drug investigations. And, despite the best efforts of the ACLU, drug attorneys, and off shore bankers, it is likely going to remain so. |
I have no problem with taking $$$ from a person convicted of a crime with a clear chain of evidence that shows where it came form. I have a huge problem with the idea of siezing any large amounts of cash simply because it is there and forcing a citizen to not only prove it is thiers, but also post a huge bond and hire a lawyer to do it. Exactly what happened to my friend, and many others from all I have seen, in Louisiana. I also feel that the agency doing the siezure should not get the $$$. That factor alone is what leads to the cases of abuse. If the goal is truely to fight crime, give the money to some other place, or charity. Unless your real goal is profit, that shouldn't be a problem. That one change alone would probably make the number of bogus cases drop 90%. Just like in states where the local municipality does not get the $$ from speeding tickets, traffic enforcement becomes solely a matter of traffic safety, not one of pulling in $$$ like it does in some communities. I see where it could be a tool, but I also see cases where it is abused.... so remove the potential for abuse. |
The guy has a lot of cash so he must be a crook. Some of my family members used to carry thousands around in their pockets for business deals. THIS IS NOT ILLEGAL!! Just another reason I am leaning toward legalizing drugs---and I am a cop. Too many innocent people are being arrested or hassled because of a few cops being greedy for $$$$$ to buy more equipment. GR |
WOW !!! Sounds like you MUST be on the phone to the FBI every other day, seeing how you are such a righteous officer and you have soooooo much PERSONAL AND DIRECT KNOWLEDGE of police wrongdoing. I smell a poser.  You people just don't get it. There are investigative techniques (and no, I'm not going to tell you how it's done so you posers can figure out how to walk with your dirty cash.) which are used to clearly show that bulk currency seized is possessed as a result of criminal activity. There is nothing wrong with seizing assets as long as it's done correctly. In fact, NOT using every tool in the tool box to fight organized crime (and it IS organized crime) means you're either too lazy, too scared, or just plain ignorant of how to correctly use the tool in the first place.
|
I give up. ...can't fight the urban legend machine. "There was once a copper who had Jimmy Hoffa's killer by his shirt collar, but then he saw what he thought to be a load of cash going by..."
|
Good try. Now you see what happens when people try and bullshit the police about something. The same thing happens when they try and bullshit us about where all their drug money came from. |
So what you're saying is that a cop MUST believe drugs should be illegal. He can't look at the total situation and decide for himself? GR |
I'll bet you didn't voice that opinion in your job interview. (poser)  OK, NOW I'm done with this thread... it's been fun. 
|