Commerce between master and slave is [still] ________?
Posted on 12/04/2017 10:53:15 AM PST by reaganaut1
The national revulsion against abusive civil asset forfeiture has not kept police from trying to pocket as much as they can from people who are innocent of any wrongdoing. A recent case shows how police can pressure motorists into waiving their right to contest seizure of money during a highway traffic stop.
Phil Parhamovich is a musician who lives in Wisconsin. For years, he’s been saving money for a music studio for his band – “The Dirt Brothers” – and had accumulated $91,800 by early 2017. He doesn’t much trust financial institutions and did not want to leave that large amount in his apartment, so he took the cash with him on a trip to Salt Lake City back in March. It was hidden inside one of the band’s large speakers.
He was driving along I-80 near Cheyenne, Wyoming on March 13, when he was pulled over by a state trooper because he wasn’t wearing his seatbelt. Phil answered the officer’s questions politely, but was soon ordered to get out of his vehicle and into the patrol car. The officer then began asking him questions that had nothing to do with his driving. After Phil said he was a musician, the officer probed him with questions about his band and its tour.
Then came the crucial, compound question that troopers probably practice, which went like this: “Is there anything in your vehicle that I should know about, such as guns, drugs, large amounts of cash, amphetamines, heroin, cocaine, marijuana, PCP, LSD, etc.?”
Questions like that, as the Institute for Justice notes in this release regarding the case, “are designed to be confusing because they group perfectly legal activities – like carrying large amounts of cash – with illegal ones – like trafficking in illegal drugs.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Whassamatter? Don’t you want to win the Drug War?
There should be asset forfeiture without a criminal conviction first.
I’ll go further to say that even then, even with a conviction, it should not exceed the limits on fines imposed by the law.
That's known as "custodial interrogation" which requires a Miranda warning and this guy should have told the cop he wanted a lawyer and would not say anything further until he consulted with his lawyer.
In the meantime, this trooper should be sued and removed.
I thought armed robbery was against the law.
And BTW, the answer to, “Is there anything in your vehicle that I should know about, such as guns, drugs, large amounts of cash, amphetamines, heroin, cocaine, marijuana, PCP, LSD, etc.?”
is
“Do you have reasonable suspicion (RS) that there is anything illegal in my car? If not, I’m free to go. If so, explain the RS and we’ll take it from there after my lawyer arrives.”
Commerce between master and slave is [still] ________?
Are you sure you meant that as typed?
Highway stop waivers? Nah...HIGHWAY ROBBERY!
Property directly resulting from, or that can be traced to, an illegal activity. Once a crime is identified, the government may seize any property flowing from the activity. In some cases, the government may seize property in lieu of provable criminal proceeds. Statutory innocent owner defenses provide a check on the seizure power, although this burden lies with the owner, not the government.
Bennis v. Michigan 517 U.S. 1163 (1996)
Highway robbery under color of law.
The forfeiture laws are BS and legalized theft, but:
“....He doesn’t much trust financial institutions and did not want to leave that large amount in his apartment, so he took the cash with him on a trip to Salt Lake City back in March. It was hidden inside one of the band’s large speakers....”
That was dumb as hell.
What I said was there should be no asset forfeiture apart from conviction etc.
Should.
There’s also the no excessive fines aspect from the Constitution.
Not that that old scrap of paper means much post FDR.
Yeah, there was supposed to be a “no” in there.
Back in the mid-90’s I was doing IT support for a car auction house. They dealt only in cash.
On auction days guys would show up with a car carrier and as much as $250,000 in cash to buy cars. Some of these guys looked like homeless guys you would try to avoid on the street.
Guess they were trying to keep a low profile.
The government has too much power. There is nothing illegal about having cash, but they have made it de facto illegal (an illegal act.)
They do not have the right to do this. However, they have the power, the guns, the mace, the handcuffs. That is power. Many people have the illusion that we live in the land of the free, etc. Wrong.
Policemen used to be peace officers.
Now they are just rogue tax collectors with a gun and a license to steal. I simply don’t understand how they can look at themselves in the mirror after doing something like this.
I wonder if the soul disappears before or after graduation from police academy?
Just be prepared to be arrested immediately.
Don’t get smart with a cop. Only caveat is if they are wearing a body cam, you may politely stand on your rights, but even then it is better to do as this guy did, and fight them later in the courts.
Most cops get very jumpy during traffic stops, and a jumpy cop can arrest you, or possibly shoot you, with little provocation.
There is a reason that the Constitution was written down in the clear, non-legalese language commonly used during the time it was drafted. It was written as a document that anyone could read and understand clearly so that they could defend themselves from the unconstitutional acts of government abuse of power.
The “penumbras and emanations” that the courts have invented are nothing but fantasies, phantoms, and outright lies.
Meant “Bill of Rights” not “I’ll of Rights”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.