Judge Orders $1 Million Returned to Exotic Dancer

[clownboy]

How exactly does it sound like someone was transporting drug money? As someone else pointed out, almost all cash has trace amounts of drugs on them. And other than that, which the cops discovered only after they siezed the cash if I'm remembering the story correctly, the cops had no evidence to link the cash to any illegal activity. I'm glad she got the cash back with interest. They should have to pay her legal bills as well for this case.

Because, as also previously noted, legitimate transactions for that princely sum don't generally happen in cash. AND cash from legal enterprise again generally, goes through a bank which does not wrap the money in old hair ties and plastic freezer bags.

I would imagine the cops will at least inform the IRS before they pay her back.

 

[Hard Truth]

Apparently they were lucky enough that the cops reported the amount of cash honestly. They easily could have stolen most of it, and no judge or jury would be believe a stripper's word over a cop's. I hope she gets paid interest and damages for the time they held her money. Asset seizure without a conviction is unconstitutional and should be ruled as such by the SCOTUS. It is well established that a large portion of our currency has trace amounts of drugs on it, that was an absurd reason for the seizure.

The lesson: NEVER, EVER consent to a search, even if you are innocent of any wrong doing. Simply say: "No,I do not consent to a search."
They may do one anyways, but then you can have the search ruled illegal and the evidence inadmissible in court.

 

[radcen]

Because, as also previously noted, legitimate transactions for that princely sum don't generally happen in cash. AND cash from legal enterprise again generally, goes through a bank which does not wrap the money in old hair ties and plastic freezer bags.

I would imagine the cops will at least inform the IRS before they pay her back.

I would suggest that it doesn't normally happen because it's a really dumb way to move large amounts money and most people are smarter than that.

It is also not all that uncommon for foreign born people to move money in this way as they have a visceral distrust of banks in general. Experience from the old country, and so on, though primarily with older generations.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

How exactly does it sound like someone was transporting drug money?

because a third party is transporting a million dollars along a popular drug route, based on the idea a stripper entrusted them with it after accruing that amount by hiding it under her mattress? Surely it could involve some other type of illegal activity, but if I was asked to judge that story, my response would be


http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120421232630/ultradragonball/images/8/82/TrollFaceForm2.png

As someone else pointed out, almost all cash has trace amounts of drugs on them.

Yeah, which is why I never even mentioned it

And other than that, which the cops discovered only after they siezed the cash if I'm remembering the story correctly, the cops had no evidence to link the cash to any illegal activity.

I never asserted they had a right to confiscate the money. I asserted the story given sounds like bull**** cobbled together to get illegal funds back from a shady police operation that is all too standard.

I'm glad she got the cash back with interest.

Meh, I can think of cases with more glaring issues

They should have to pay her legal bills as well for this case.

As I said in the very post you are responding to, how funds and property are confiscated and claimed by the police is an issue I well recognize. However, it doesn't make this story anymore believable (at least from what was reported above)

 

[Ikari]

mixed feelings about this. I believe the confiscation hand is often over played by law enforcement, but that sounds like someone was transporting drug money

And you'd need to be able to prove it. We can't punish people for "sounds like".

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

And you'd need to be able to prove it. We can't punish people for "sounds like".

What is with libertarians and being reactionary? I never suggested anyone should be punished, I raised skepticism at their story

 

[Ikari]

What is with libertarians and being reactionary? I never suggested anyone should be punished, I raised skepticism at their story

And I just stated that if one wishes to enact government force against another, they must be able to prove wrong doing. No need to get all butthurt over it.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

And I just stated that if one wishes to enact government force against another, they must be able to prove wrong doing.

And you were clearly trying to offere a rebuttal to something that was never asserted.

No need to get all butthurt over it.

I wasn't. It's just I'm noticing a trend here with self-identified libertarians being total reactionaries. I've heard people like Hay Market mention it in the past, but simply dismissed at as his usual political **** shoveling. But there seems to be some truth to it

 

[Ikari]

And you were clearly trying to offere a rebuttal to something that was never asserted.

Just a point of clarification, nothing more.

I wasn't. It's just I'm noticing a trend here with self-identified libertarians being total reactionaries. I've heard people like Hay Market mention it in the past, but simply dismissed at as his usual political **** shoveling. But there seems to be some truth to it

Mmmmhmmmm.

Just calm down already, take it easy. You're really just getting riled up over nothing.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Just a point of clarification, nothing more.



Mmmmhmmmm.

Just calm down already, take it easy. You're really just getting riled up over nothing.

Not worked up, mate. Just thought it was funny considering the interactions I've been having with "libertarians" the past few days

 

[Ikari]

Not worked up, mate. Just thought it was funny considering the interactions I've been having with "libertarians" the past few days

You can think anything you want. But to start rallying against people cause they post an opinion on an internet debate board seems well more reactionary than any point of clarification would ever be. Just chill out, let it go. Ain't got to be so knee-jerk to everything man.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

You can think anything you want. But to start rallying against people cause they post an opinion on an internet debate board seems well more reactionary than any point of clarification would ever be. Just chill out, let it go. Ain't got to be so knee-jerk to everything man.

rallying? lol, way to shed that reactionary label, mate.

 

[Ikari]

rallying? lol, way to shed that reactionary label, mate.

All I'm saying is that you're causing quite the reactionary stink for a simple statement. You need to calm down, chill out, and not get so worked up over these things. Just let it go, you'll feel better.

 

[Thoreau72]

Because, as also previously noted, legitimate transactions for that princely sum don't generally happen in cash. AND cash from legal enterprise again generally, goes through a bank which does not wrap the money in old hair ties and plastic freezer bags.

I would imagine the cops will at least inform the IRS before they pay her back.

Keep in mind that every single bill in the lady's possession had "LEGAL TENDER" printed on it.

Does that really mean what it says, or are you suggesting that possession of US Currency is actually ILLEGAL?

 

[Mason66]

I have a hard time believing the money was to be used to buy a business.

The seller could not walk into the bank and deposit 1 mil in cash. The bank would need to know exactly the cash came from all the way down the line.

What kind of business was it anyway?

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

I have a hard time believing the money was to be used to buy a business.

The seller could not walk into the bank and deposit 1 mil in cash. The bank would need to know exactly the cash came from all the way down the line.

What kind of business was it anyway?

night club

 

[Mason66]

night club

Well that just raises more questions.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Keep in mind that every single bill in the lady's possession had "LEGAL TENDER" printed on it.

Does that really mean what it says, or are you suggesting that possession of US Currency is actually ILLEGAL?

What are you talking about? No one suggested having money was illegal, but that the circumstances surrounding it made the situation look sketchy (well, because the entire scenerio is pretty sketchy). In fact, no one posting here has suggested 1) the money should have been confiscated, 2) support for existing confiscation schemes

Again, what is the deal with reactionary libertarians?

 

[Thoreau72]

What are you talking about? No one suggested having money was illegal, but that the circumstances surrounding it made the situation look sketchy (well, because the entire scenerio is pretty sketchy). In fact, no one posting here has suggested 1) the money should have been confiscated, 2) support for existing confiscation schemes

Again, what is the deal with reactionary libertarians?

Either you did not read the story, or you are very much out of touch with reality.

IN FACT, the police took her money. They acted as if the money itself was ILLEGAL. And such things have been happening in this country for years, thanks to the drug prohibition.

Thankfully, the court was honorable and returned the money, but most people aren't so fortunate.

The specious notion of "money laundering" became criminal in this country only in about 1985, at the height of the drug war hysteria in that decade, with the crack issue mostly.

The sophistry is that one stack of currency is legal, whilst another stack on the same table is illegal, because the government says so. :doh

 

[radcen]

Either you did not read the story, or you are very much out of touch with reality.

IN FACT, the police took her money. They acted as if the money itself was ILLEGAL. And such things have been happening in this country for years, thanks to the drug prohibition.

Thankfully, the court was honorable and returned the money, but most people aren't so fortunate.

The specious notion of "money laundering" became criminal in this country only in about 1985, at the height of the drug war hysteria in that decade, with the crack issue mostly.

The sophistry is that one stack of currency is legal, whilst another stack on the same table is illegal, because the government says so. :doh

Legally speaking, under civil asset forfeiture, the money itself is deemed illegal... hence no "need" for charges or even accusation of the people involved.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Either you did not read the story, or you are very much out of touch with reality.

I'm not sure how casting doubt on their story indicates either. But feel free to explain

IN FACT, the police took her money.

Uh, I never claimed they didn't. What I asserted to was that no one, particularly the person you were replying to, endorsed such an action or approved of the larger issue of such confiscation schemes ...

And such things have been happening in this country for years, thanks to the drug prohibition.

Yes, everyone in this thread seems well aware of such and they have even expressed their disapproval of it ...

 

[Peter King]

Well, if it was her money and the police could not prove that it was the result of ill gotten gains than the money has to be returned. It is a sad thing they a judge was even needed to get the money back to it's rightful owner.