Posted on 01/31/2007 1:12:31 PM PST by primeval patriot
U.S. District Judge James Cohn has forced a Guatemalan dishwasher to surrender nearly all his life savings to the government because he didn't sign a declaration form before trying to board an airplane.
Pedro Zapeta of Stuart had $59,000 in his bag when Customs agents searched it and confiscated the money at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport on Sept. 18, 2005. Mr. Zapeta, a 39-year-old Mayan whose native language is Quiche, has said that he was unaware of the requirement to disclose amounts greater than $10,000. On Monday, Judge Cohn ruled that the $10,000 was all that Mr. Zapeta could keep. He must forfeit the rest - $49,000. Mr. Zapeta has no real option for appealing, and is likely to be deported soon.
"It is unconscionable for the government to take that money," said Robert Gershman, Mr. Zapeta's attorney. "They do it because they can. That's the only reason. It's just not right. He could have left with all $59,000 if he had signed the form."
In his six-page ruling, Judge Cohn said that the government had dropped earlier claims that the cash was drug money, and that prosecutors were accusing Mr. Zapeta of a civil currency violation, not a criminal offense. Mr. Gershman argued that Mr. Zapeta should pay a fine of no more than $5,000 for being negligent; he never had flown on a plane. "There is no rule of thumb in these cases," the lawyer said. "They shouldn't just rubber-stamp them with a decision like this."
Mr. Zapeta entered the country illegally 11 years ago and worked as a dishwasher for numerous Stuart restaurants, often holding two jobs at a time for little more than minimum wage. He intended to start a business with relatives upon returning to Guatemala. Mr. Gershman believes that the dishwasher's immigration and social status worked against him: "If Mr. Zapeta were a professional man, or more intellectual, or more mainstream, there's no question that he would not have been treated this way."
This is the guest worker President Bush has in mind when he proposes immigration reform. Pedro Zapeta didn't come to stay. He came to make investment money he can't make back home. Having done so, he was ready to deport himself. Judge Cohn had a chance to make sense out of this bureaucratic bungling. Instead, he displayed little logic and even less compassion.
In other words, both my points went right over your head.
No education?
Right on. Ignorance that they made something that should be legal a crime SHOULD be an excuse.
Reminds me of the star trek where Weasley is held for the "crime" of stepping inside a forbidden boundary while catching a frisbee. THe penalty is death, and in the end the captain decides that ignorance of that law WAS an excuse.
He could have walked back across the border the same way that he came. Then he would not have had to declare it.
What a dope this guy is.
Well, there is judicial review, just not a trial.
If it's his money, he shouldn't have trouble proving it. There should be a paper trail of employment.
After all, all we have is his word that it's his. What if he's laundering cash to drugrunners in Central America?
Why didn't he wire it through Western Union? Carrying that much cash is dangerous. Even if he had no fear of US law, (for some reason?!), he still has banditos to worry about.
Maybe you don't like the law, but you either follow it or you break it. If you break it, you can get caught and suffer consequences.
How much in back taxes do you think a guy working as a dishwasher will have? If he was legal, he probably would have gotten earned income tax credits.
Some of you folks think illegals live and earn money in a vacuum. What if his entire family was here going to school on my dime? Do you know that in Florida the children of illegal migrants get in-home tutors paid for by the state of Florida. In-home tutoring for God's sake!
I consider the $59k a down payment for every dime stolen from Americans by their very nature of being here.
What about the Kingdom of God?
That's your problem. You don't make points, you play "What if" games.
Are you trying to say it was OK for this economic terrorist to invade our country?
Are you an Al Qaeda fan, too?
Yes, but he likely would have been robbed by bandits at the border without the protection of the US legal system. That's so ironic...
That really gets to the heart of the matter. I think you're exactly right about that, and it would make good political sense for one of the parties to do something about that.
I won't hold me breath, though.
GO read ANY thread about the BP agents. Within the 1st 10 posts, SOMEONE will say "what's the problem with shooting him anyway, he was an illegal".
Someone later will say "their crime was that they were bad shots".
Invincible ignorance?
How are you, by the way? I hope everything is well.
My comments on this thread stand for themselves. Not my problem if you do not understand them . . . others did.
Say this again, I don't think anyone else heard you. You can be against asset forfeiture laws but I would think it would help to make your case if you tell the truth.
legally robbed vs. illegaly robbed [chuckle]
I wonder about all the laws you may have broken. Now hand over all your money until you can prove that it is yours!
Oh come on! If he had earned it legally, I could see letting him go with the entire stash. But he's an illegal who had no right to be here, no right to work, no right to earn that money to begin with. He took a job that should have been filled by a legal American citizen! I say send him home naked and penniless!
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.