Deputies seize $88,000 in cash in traffic stop

Lexington Dispatch ^ | 9/27/06 | SEAN JAREM

[elkfersupper]

Two men traveling south on Interstate 85 southwest of Lexington Tuesday told Davidson County sheriff's deputies that the $88,000 in cash they had hidden in their car was to buy a house in Atlanta.

Officers with the sheriff office's Interstate Criminal Enforcement unit didn't believe the story after a drug-sniffing dog found a strong odor of narcotics inside the car.

No drugs were found, and the two men weren't charged with a crime, but officers did keep the money, citing a federal drug assets seizure and forfeiture law.

Deputies first stopped the car for following too closely to another vehicle, said Davidson County Sheriff David Grice.

The two men told officers they had flown from Texas to New Jersey and were driving south to Atlanta to buy a house with the money, Grice said.

Federal investigators arrived and took the cash in order to make a case in federal court that the money would fall under federal forfeiture laws.

If a federal judge agrees with investigators, the Davidson County Sheriff's Office would receive 75 percent ($66,000) of the confiscated money.

"It takes about a year for the money to come back to the county," Grice said.

The money then would make its way into the sheriff's office general fund, where it could only be used for enhancement purposes, such as new equipment or additional training.

Grice said as a general rule the sheriff's office cannot count on forfeiture money, noting the money isn't a sure thing and can fluctuate from year to year.

But the Davidson County Sheriff's Office has had positive results in the past after bringing in $1.6 million in 2005 and $1.4 million in 2004.

This year Grice said officers have brought in about $400,000.

"It allows us to buy equipment without using taxpayers' money," Grice said.

Replacing older vehicles, installing newer radios in patrol cars and installing a new camera system in the jail were all paid for by drug forfeiture money, Grice said.

[elkfersupper]

"It allows us to buy equipment without using taxpayers' money,"

Fabulous.

[elkfersupper]

Ping.

[Lurker]

"It allows us to buy equipment without using taxpayers' stolen money,"

Fixed it.

L

[July 4th]

Why even bother with cash anymore? Some punk cop decides he want to confiscate your cash, there's nothing you can do about it. No drugs? No problem!

[NicknamedBob]

Why would you buy a house for cash? Why not write a check?

[ansel12]

I think it was Dateline that showed an old black man that was traveling, that lost a little over $800.00 because the law thought it was too much cash for a guy like him to have.

[DumpsterDiver]

-- drug-sniffing dog found a strong odor of narcotics inside the car
-- no drugs were found
-- the two men weren't charged with a crime
-- the officers kept the money

This country is beginning to resemble a banana republic.

[Quickgun]

I've recently read another ,similar post on here about this. Its disturbing that your money can be confiscated on a dogs opinion. Even if these guys are suspicious,taking thier money and not charging them with anything? Could it be a corrupt police department?

[muawiyah]

Virtually all drug sniffing dogs will "alert" on fried chicken.

Knowing that there are some things we know about the guys carrying the cash.

[elkfersupper]

This country is beginning to resemble a banana republic.

I agree with everything but "beginning to resemble".

[Valpal1]

drug-sniffing dog found a strong odor of narcotics inside the car

And the dog was able to testify as to the strength of this odor exactly how? Stupid journalists, evil law, injustice abounds.

[patton]

Well said.

[USF]

Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime

Eighth Circuit Appeals Court ruling says police may seize cash from motorists even in the absence of any evidence that a crime has been committed.

A federal appeals court ruled yesterday that if a motorist is carrying large sums of money, it is automatically subject to confiscation. In the case entitled, "United States of America v. $124,700 in U.S. Currency," the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit took that amount of cash away from Emiliano Gomez Gonzolez, a man with a "lack of significant criminal history" neither accused nor convicted of any crime.

On May 28, 2003, a Nebraska state trooper signaled Gonzolez to pull over his rented Ford Taurus on Interstate 80. The trooper intended to issue a speeding ticket, but noticed the Gonzolez's name was not on the rental contract. The trooper then proceeded to question Gonzolez -- who did not speak English well -- and search the car. The trooper found a cooler containing $124,700 in cash, which he confiscated. A trained drug sniffing dog barked at the rental car and the cash. For the police, this was all the evidence needed to establish a drug crime that allows the force to keep the seized money.

Associates of Gonzolez testified in court that they had pooled their life savings to purchase a refrigerated truck to start a produce business....

Source: US v. $124,700 (US Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, 8/19/2006)

[elkfersupper]

This may be one of the reasons people are starting to shoot law enforcement officers at "routine traffic stops".

All it would take is one experience like this, and even reasonable people would not be in the mood for another.

[USF]

And don't say "why don't they just use a bank?". This is about yet another loss of liberties.

As someone who has at times had to drive around with large sums of (legit) money, saying "I'm not too thrilled about this" would be an understatement.

[kenth]

I don't know. But, if someone wants to buy a house with cash, they should be allowed to do so.

[kenth]

Yep, it's a blanket presumption of guilt and being penalized without their right to a trial.

[jan in Colorado]

All it would take is one experience like this, and even reasonable people would not be in the mood for another.

I understand people being upset about this...but I sure hope you aren't saying this in ANY way justifies shooting a police officer. My partner is paralyzed from being shot after a "routine" traffic stop. Trust me, there is nothing routine about any traffic stop.

[processing please hold]

I recall reading a story a couple of years back where if you took money from anyone in the US, it would have traces of drugs on it...and that was a couple of years ago.

They stole those guys money pure and simple.

[elkfersupper]

but I sure hope you aren't saying this in ANY way justifies shooting a police officer.

No, I am not.

I'm just saying that I'm starting to understand why it happens.

Sorry about your partner, and wish him or her well.

We recently lost a deputy sheriff in this community to a thug stopped for a license plate light violation.

Maybe we should reconsider threatening people with fines and imprisonment for burnt-out lightbulbs and other such things.

[thomaswest]

Projected testimony in court:

Defense counsel: Could the dog testify?

Prosecutor: Dogs do not talk English, so no.

Defense: Hmm, but you said that the dog "felt strongly". How do you know?

Cops: We know the dog. We interpret for him.

Defense: Is there a standard translation for dog-speak to English?

Cops: We have 18 years of experience with dogs. They always say what we want them to say.

Defense: OK. How long does the average dog live? How many years are the peak between puppyhood, training, and retirement? How does a dog's reporting depend on when it was last fed?

Cops: These questions are irrelevant. My dog is always my friend and companion, he loves me, we love him....{ tears to flow}.

Defense: Let's go back to smells and pheronomes. Dogs smell a lot to see when other dogs are in heat. Are drug smells related to sex in dogs?

Cops: Our dogs are not gay. When a dog smells hashish, parchment paper, mint tootpaste, or odor of a cat, he will bark.

Defense: So you agree that traces of sex hormones or cats or other chemicals might affect the dog's speech?

Cops: Nonsense. Dogs always report what we want them to say. And it's neat, because you can't cross-examine them. So there.

[Dead Corpse]

Why isn't this theft?

[Skooz]

It is.

[jan in Colorado]

It was almost 20 years ago and his vest saved his life.

The traffic stop was also for a headlight or some such stupid thing (on Christmas Eve no less).

Are people threatened with imprisonment for burned out light bulbs? I've never heard of that one before.
I agree, it's low on the priority list, but sometimes those stops result in catching wanted felons. Did you know Ted Bundy was caught from a traffic stop? There are some things about this case that trouble me, and maybe it's because I'm an ex-cop that I give the police the benefit of the doubt, until all the facts are in.

IMO there is A LOT more to this than what is reported. Do you really believe the cops just 'accidentally' stopped this car and just happened to find the money? Have FReepers on this thread, who are so quick to villanize the cops and the police department, ever heard of a sting?

[freepatriot32]

Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here

[CSM]

"No drugs were found, and the two men weren't charged with a crime, but officers did keep the money,...."

I can't wait to see the FR support for such an abuse of individual liberty.

[CSM]

"but I sure hope you aren't saying this in ANY way justifies shooting a police officer."

Defending a life savings from being stolen under the force of government sponsered guns is not a legitimate use of defensive force?

[jan in Colorado]

No!

[CSM]

"Are people threatened with imprisonment for burned out light bulbs? I've never heard of that one before."

What happens if the fine is not paid?

[CSM]

Then what is worth defending?

[jan in Colorado]

I can't wait to see the FR support for such an abuse of individual liberty.

Don't worry, the majority of FReepers, at least on this thread, choose to side against the police.

If you don't like the law, change it.

Just keep in mind, things aren't always what they seem, and you can't believe most of what you read or hear in the news.

[jan in Colorado]

This Country!

Yes, freedom and liberty are also worth defending, but shooting a police officer is not the way to accomplish that.

I'm troubled by what this law says as well, but I don't think the whole story is being presented here.
I'm sure things have changed a lot since since I was a cop, but I do know there are valid reasons some of these things are done, and it's not as random as it appears in this story.

I have to go for now...have a great day, and just remember, there are a lot of GOOD cops too!

[CSM]

"This Country!"

What is this country if the citizens do not have the right to protect their property? Yes, money is nothing more than earned property.

"Yes, freedom and liberty are also worth defending, but shooting a police officer is not the way to accomplish that."

In cases such as this, the police officers are nothing more than theives. That anyone would defend this type of activity is sickening and a clear sign that the tenents of our founders have been abolished. The WOsD has wrought great damage on freedom and individual liberty.

"but I do know there are valid reasons some of these things are done,"

Name one valid reason that money is confiscated without the victim being charged with a crime.

"there are a lot of GOOD cops too!"

I agree. Now, how is your average citizen supposed to be able to tell the difference as they are being approached by a police officer? How can they tell if it is a good cop or just a government endorsed theif.

The fact that this department is bragging about their take over the last 3 years leads me to believe that they have created a lot of victims.

[mugs99]

This country is beginning to resemble a banana republic.
That's exactly what we've become.
.

[elkfersupper]

Are people threatened with imprisonment for burned out light bulbs?

Yes, they are.

Thanks to law enforcement being used as revenue enhancement, there are millions of people out there who have had adverse encounters with law enforcement personnel.

That amounts to "priors" on a traffic stop.

You would be surprised how many people on the margin have had their lives completely ruined by this.

Speaking for myself, I would defend a "Peace Officer" with my armament, my life, and my fortune.

I wouldn't walk across the street to urinate on a "law enforcement officer" if they were on fire.

[jan in Colorado]

Thanks for enlightening me.
I will make sure to encourage my son to pursue a different profession.

[Know your rights]

Name one valid reason that money is confiscated without the victim being charged with a crime.

There is no valid reason. It's theft legalized through anti-drug hysteria.

[dcwusmc]

Would it justify shooting an armed robber masquerading as a cop?

[jan in Colorado]

I guess you'd have to let a jury decide. If the jury consisted of FReepers from this thread, it would be 'justified.'

I must admit, I'm surprised to read that from a Marine.
Thank you for your service.

[dcwusmc]

"I must admit, I'm surprised to read that from a Marine."

Don't be. The oath I took numerous times over the span I served (1967-1993) told me I was protecting and defending the Constitution for the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. I took the time to find out what it was I was swearing to protect and defend and, guess what? The Constitution is a LIMIT on governmental authority at all levels, not just federal. One of those limits is that government cannot just willy-nilly take someone's property without either a search warrant or a judgement entered in open court. That being the case, ANY "LEO" who does what the cops in this case did are not acting under the ultimate authority of the Supreme Law of the Land, but are committing armed robbery UNDER COLOR OF LAW and are no better than any other armed robber, thus deserving of the same fate. Preferably at the hands of the intended victim.

FURTHER, when SOME cops do this sort of evil activity, they make it much harder for the GOOD cops, who are tarred with the same brush. It can also shorten their life spans when citizens finally get fed up and go off on them. (Google Vin Suprinowicz and the Ballad of Carl Drega for a good example.)

[robertpaulsen]

"Name one valid reason that money is confiscated without the victim being charged with a crime."

Because the prosecution believes he cannot get a conviction based on "beyond a reasonable doubt", but can based on "a preponderance of the evidence".

[CSM]

Do you think it is valid that criminal trial requirements are being lowered to civil trail standards?

[OregonRancher]

I usually don't express my opinions on these types of topics because I know a lot of men with badges....However,
on this I have to agree with you all the way....

[robertpaulsen]

"Do you think it is valid that criminal trial requirements are being lowered to civil trail standards?"

In that there is no loss of liberty for the individual, yes.

Bear in mind that the prosecution must still convince a jury by a preponderance of the evidence that the property was acquired by other than legal means.

[robertpaulsen]

"The two men told officers they had flown from Texas to New Jersey and were driving south to Atlanta to buy a house with the money, Grice said."

And after that, they were going to fly from Atlanta to Minneapolis then drive to Phoenix to buy another house.

Uh-huh.

[robertpaulsen]

That case is even funnier.

"Associates of Gonzolez testified in court that they had pooled their life savings to purchase a refrigerated truck to start a produce business...."

Yeah, right. When Mr. Drug Dealer Gonzolez arrived (on a one-way air ticket from LA to Chicago) to purchase the truck, his unnamed friend told him the truck had already been sold by the unknown owner.

So, after staying in Chicago for three days, he then decided to ... drive all the way back to LA in a car rented by yet another unnamed individual. In the back seat was cooler containing a garbage bag containing $124,700 wrapped in aluminum foil -- (140) $100 bills, (999) $50 bills, (2,932) $20 bills, (208) $10 bills and (6) $5 bills.

Yep. Buy a truck and make the seller count 1000 $50 bills and 3000 $20 bills.

[elkfersupper]

And after that, they were going to fly from Atlanta to Minneapolis then drive to Phoenix to buy another house.

Why do you care?

[tacticalogic]

Bear in mind that the prosecution must still convince a jury by a preponderance of the evidence that the property was acquired by other than legal means.

Or not, depending on the owner's ability to get a competent lawyer (maybe hard to do with no money), and get to trial. A smart prosecutor, a cooperative judge, and a defendant in poor health could easily die waiting for his day in court. Easy money, and a warning to the rest of us.

[robertpaulsen]

"Why do you care?"

I don't. And when the money hidden in that car is seized by the police, I won't care about that either.

I have no sympathy for criminals. Do you? Do you think these guys are NOT criminals?