Seller Fi. Everyone in Nevada and the USA owes thanks to this Marine. For his service, his loyalty to the oath he took, and now for this. If only the police and politicians were true to their oaths to serve the public. Instead of becoming tyrants and parasites.
@@jesspeinado480 erm, seller fi? Ironic, to put it mildly, largely due to its accuracy. The United States of America has the absolute best government that money can buy. Semper Fidelis, Steve! De oppresso liber!
While I appreciate the emotional desire to coin invectives, the reality is that they are law enforcement conducting legal confiscation under methods approved by the judiciary. Luckily this is a democracy, and we have a legislative body that can make this horrible practice illegal by passing a bill. It needs to stop, and writing your representatives goes a long way toward this once there is a critical mass for it to show up in their summary of voter issues. They are police, what they are doing is legal, and we can advocate for a law to make it illegal. It's less fun than posting to RUclips, but each time I fire off an email and fill out the form (depending on the legislator's contact methods) it is satisfying to know that I did something actually useful. If enough of us do it, that is. Also, you can do both! Since it's fun -- I'd say the best term is "buccaneer" which makes them "the blue buccaneers." It works with "bandit" as well, although "the blue bandit" really sounds like a 1950s kid's show masked cowboy. "Next week: Zorro and the Blue Bandit team up to fight the menace of the Marine Grandpa with Savings!"
Agreed. You need to get rid of qualified immunity the second someone’s rights are violated. To many times these criminals use a badge to justify their behavior. One of the biggest issues I have always had with police is they can protect each other but yet if you try to protect a criminal they can charge you with a crime. Cops are not above the law and should be held to a higher standard than civilians, not the other way around.
Had a cop sniffing for an asset forfeiture once. Stopped on the way to the bank, after a holiday weekend at the liquor store. He asked what was in those bank bags on the passenger seat. Went immediately to the deposit claim being a cover for illicit cash. When his supervisor/back-up arrived, I immediately handed him my phone with the state liquor commission ready to dial. Told him he could explain to the state why my booze distributor bills would be late. They looked so sad driving away after dodging a can of worms above their pay grade.
Until the Police lose something valuable to them, they have no incentive to change. Until they have to pay more than they seized they have no reason to stop. Can we take it out of ALL the police pensions?
@@windywednesday4166 They won't stop until the risks are too high to gamble. Somewhere there's someone that needs their money and doesn't have time for government games and doesn't value the worthless life of a leo who would steal his hard earned money. God speed.
@bjmccann1 Exactly. I believe the whole thing is considered unintended consequences of laws enacted, I think it was the 1990s? They were meant to seize the assets of drug dealers and criminals. But the idiots who passed the laws didn't require a conviction? ...and they have been too dysfunctional to fix it for 3 decades. Is Criminal Incompetence a thing?
@@windywednesday4166 No. That is the perfect level to create change - the few percent of cops in leadership obviously is already corrupt, but you hit the 97% hard and the anarchy that would ensue would be intolerable. Then change would occur.
Forfeitures are unconstitutional, period. Jefferson condemned them in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence and called them "statutory plunder."
They don't want it to go to trail because they know FULL WELL they'll lose. And worse yet, it sets a precedent that could eventually get CAF laws ruled unconstitutional, thereby getting rid of their cash cow.
Imagine how this Marine felt, seeing his life savings being stolen by troopers. I'm so glad he didn't quit after they returned his money. Perhaps his greatest service to his country!
You can't do something unless there is a law that permits it. I keep seeing this more and more the older I get. Do they not teach what it means to live in a FREE country anymore? You are free to do most anything unless there is a law that prohibits it, and that law is constitutional, and a jury agrees with how it's enforced. I am thankful for The Institute for Justice and all the great work they do to protect us.
Yeah, there should definitely be a law against civil forfeiture. The only reason it's currently legal is because it's an action taken against an object rather than a person
My understanding is that unlike some countries, America is a "permissive" rather than "prohibitive" society, in which that which is not expressly prohibited, is permissable. So unless Nevada has a law prohibiting suits against the state, which they did not indicate they did, the plaintiff should be totally free to bring suit. Perhaps the state's counsel needs to go back to public school for a refresher in American Government.
@@joelee2371 There's an old joke comparison of legal systems: In America, Everything not forbidden is permitted. In Germany, Everything not permitted is forbidden. In France, Everything forbidden is still permitted. In Russia, Everything permitted is still forbidden.
AS IMPLIED CITIZENS' REPRESENTATIVES, "CONGRESS" HAS A "SELF CHOSEN?" MANDATE TO REPRESENT TO OUR OTHERED 2 BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT THE REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY AND ALL JUST CHANGES THAT ARE PLED?
As a Nevada resident, I appreciate what you are doing to bring attention to this egregious highway robbery, what IJ is doing for EVERYONEs rights and what this Marine is fighting for all of us.
This Marine was a total class act and perfect gentleman. I hope he gets some punitive damages for not being able to have access to his money or to be able to give it to the daughter he was visiting. My hat's off to him.
Unfortunately punitive damages are paid by taxpayers, so there’s virtually no incentive for them to stop. Now if it was deducted from their department’s pension fund, I’ll guarantee this would get under control quick, fast in a hurry.
@@b1gsteve251 when every SOB in office is under threat of a pissed off public replacing them, there's plenty of incentive. The incentive to the public, increased taxes to cover those penalties. It's warfare 101. Make the fight so damned expensive, disruptive and destructive to the other side that they'll beg for peace.
@@spvillano a pissed off public can't really replace them though since police officers aren't elected. You can maybe swap the sheriff but chances are the new guy will be just as bad and will likely keep all the bad officers right in place anyway.
Can you explain why they didn’t pursue the suit against Nevada in Federal court so that the outcome has more of a chance of setting national precedent? If he wins at the state level, Nevada is not likely to appeal it to the Supreme Court. Also, if he wins in Nevada, can the Institute for Justice then ask for a summary judgement to vacate more civil asset forfeitures statewide?
@@gringofett3944I wouldn't be so sure. A lot of politicians will REALLY not want that precedent on the federal books, so the backroom political pressure to eat it and drop it without appealing to the federal courts will be extreme. Like "if you do this I guarantee you will have no party funding for any campaign ever, much less the possibility of a federal political career"
Well, since asset forfeiture was created by the lawmakers, they aren’t “just as guilty”, they are 100% guilty. The police aren’t breaking any laws. They are enforcing what the lawmakers created. Those same lawmakers can remove what they alone created.
I recently purchased a car and the seller wanted cash. I backed out of the deal because I would have had to travel 3 hours with a good deal of cash. He ultimately accepted a cashier’s check to complete the deal. I refuse to be a victim of Civil Asset Forfeiture. They don’t need a reason to economically terrorize you.
@@steveducell2158I am implying that so long as the people collectively let themselves be walked all over, then this will continue to happen. The rich can fight it out in court (and MAYBE win), but many aren't able to do that so the next best thing is to shut it down from go. Theft is a violation of natural law as well as criminal. If you're going to steal the food of myself and my family and hinder our survival, then that would be dealt with the same as money, personal, property, land, etc. There are boundaries that both people and government are way too comfortable to cross these days.
It is daunting to go take the government or a huge corporation to court, given their deep pockets defense capabilities. However, in truly obvious cases of right vs wrong, no amount of legal weight can tip the scales in their favor. Even if they jigger the law to "win", public opinion (and its effects on elected representatives) will cause things to change. The only time my wife and I ever sued anyone was a moving company that took six months to get our stuff to us, broke half of it, then offered us a pittance compensation. (My wife was alone for a few months in a remote home with almost none of our belongings in the mountains of NM, having had foot surgery and watching our six-month old daughter while I finished up my job several hundred miles away. Talk about a trooper!) As we presented our case, not only was the judge on our side, but the representative from the moving company agreed that they screwed up big time, and we got even more than we were suing for. In that case, I guess they messed with the wrong sailor.
The Supreme Court has addressed civil asset forfeiture before, they side with law enforcement. People need to understand, it doesn't matter what the Supreme Court says, they are NOT the final authority. The People are. Civil asset forfeiture is a blatant violation of the 4th, 5th, and 14th amendments. The Supreme Court is GOVERNMENT. Government courts decided government thugs can do exactly what the constitution forbids government from doing, and We the People are allowing it. It is NOT lawful, and the court has blatantly violated the constitution.
I remember seeing this when it first happened and glad to see he is fighting it. This is instrumental to other cases nationwide to have cases to reference. Praying 🙏 for this to have a swift resolution and corruption exposed even further!!
Semper Fi Marine! Your fight is just. Best of luck. My Dad was a MSGT in the Corps. Much respect from this old Marine brat. Keep us posted on this case Steve.
I watched that traffic stop and it was so heart breaking, here is this guy who litteraly put his life on the line to serve this nation and thats how he was treated. Not only do I believe he needs to be refunded the whole amount but he also needs to compensated for the wrong done to him.
The fact that the state and Feds would do that to anyone, let alone a Marine, shows you that these people know no boundaries. The public service is continuing to act as though we serve them, that they are the masters. It's getting crazy.
This was disgusting and heartbreaking, at the same time.😞😞😞😡😡😡So glad, He got his money,and glad he is still fighting. These thieves need to be held accountable.😡😡😡
Great win for all of us, even though it hasn't gone to trial yet. I have worried about corrupt police departments abusing this law, and your video has truly made my day. I watch a lot of cop-watch videos, and many of them get me mad, but this one soothes my soul. Keep up the great work, Steve!
I cannot express how glad I am this positive news regarding this case. I remember hearing about this case and one other and wondered if they made any headway.
I've been waiting for this update for years. That video was downright appalling. Nevertheless, those troopers damn well robbed him blind and left him stranded. Shameful doesn't even begin to describe it. And it was clearly just another day at the office for those rotten leos.
Can't wait for this trial. Hopefully it will be open to cameras in the court room. I also what to hear the states lawyers explain this one 🧐😂😅. Should be a blast 😁. And yes the Institute for Justice deserves our support. I have donated and encouraged all your listeners to do so. We never know when we could be in a similar situation!!!
There are currently domestic enemies at the upper echelons of government that are allowing an invasion of foreigners at the southern border. Any chance you guys can do something about that.
I am personally aware of a case where a friend of mine took $154,000 in cash to Seattle to pay his late wife’s medical bill. TSA tried to take the money when they couldn’t really articulate why they could, they notified the TSA in Seattle, who then tried to take the money. he managed to get away with it by standing his ground and saying if you’re going to take my money, I want you to charge me with something right now not later but right now and they backed down which was a surprise. But it wasn’t very smart of him to take that much money anyway, because despite TSA or any other operatives, the money could’ve gotten lost or stolen I mean really he should’ve had a check made out to the hospital and just sent the check down to them and that would’ve been the end of it. I’m not sure what his theory was of taking the money there in person, but he is old-fashioned.
Thank you, Steven, for this video. Thank you to Stephen, for sticking to is guns. Thank you to the Institute for Justice for helping make the US a better place.
Yes!!! Let's get rid of the soft language and call it what it really is. I wonder how many people don't really care about this because they see the word forfeiture instead of confiscation.
How about we call it what it truly is! Armed Robbery! These agents of the state have guns, they are stealing something that doesn't belong to them. That's unequivacally Armed Robbery!
I can't wait to see how this plays out. Unfortunately here is Texas (Houston) civil asset forfeiture is deemed a good thing. We all need the IJ to win this case so we can start siting similar cases in Utah.
Try the Tenth Amendment. Your claim of a law not being in the Constitution is ridiculous. Find DWI in the Constitution. It is there, as mentioned, in the Tenth Amendment.
@@tvc1848 Driving a car is not a right, there are other ways you can travel from place to place. Also the supremacy clause of the Constitution forbids states having laws or provisions in their state constitutions that violate the US Constitution. CAF violates the fourth and fourteenth amendments on unreasonable search and seizures and due process.
@@bobmorgan1575 I never said nor implied that driving was a right. If it was a right then states couldn’t likely have driver’s license requirements. I only said that it was covered under the Tenth Amendment and the right of states policing powers…. just like CAF (as well as the federal government). The OP’s claim of civil asset forfeiture not being in the Constitution so it must be unconstitutional is ludicrous. The Constitution doesn’t enact laws. That is the only reason that I brought up DWI as an example. If traffic laws are somehow a hangup for you, trespassing and robbery aren’t in the Constitution either (along with thousands of other examples). The problem with your claim of CAF violating the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments is that social media or your or my opinion matters. Article III of the Constitution says that the judicial power of the US shall be in one supreme court and they will have jurisdiction on all matters under the Constitution. To date there have been several cases in front of the Supreme Court about CAF and none has ruled that CAF is unconstitutional. There is another in front of the right now and oral arguments were heard about 11 weeks ago so I am assuming that we might have another precedent from the Supreme Court on CAF any day now. Who knows, someday your opinion on CAF violating the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments might become a case law. At the moment that simply isn’t true. As far as my opinion on CAF, I think that it should be used in conjunction with a filed criminal case. At moment there isn’t any Supreme Court precedent to back that up. The current case on CAF at the Supreme Court deals with the dragging of the government’s feet over years in hoping that the people give up. It seems the justices wanted to know why a hearing isn’t held within a couple of weeks under due process to see of the government could make a case of criminal activity connected to the seized property and if not, returning the money almost immediately. The current case awaiting a ruling is Culley v. Marshall.
Thank you Stephen! Thank you for your ongoing service to our country. I was outraged the 1st time I saw that video and I'm sure a jury will be outraged too.
This made my day, Steve. I learned of this case, saw the police cam recording, early on and I was appalled by what happened. Slowly over time I'd see something mentioned but I was so happy to hear your reporting on the case. I donate to IJ because of this kind of thing. Keep up the good work and the information. I think in the original video it was said they left him stranded with only $10 in his pocket in a State he didn't live in and w/o his vehicle - they towed it!
Great news for this Saturday afternoon. God bless him in his continued fight and God bless IJ ❤ Thank you for the update Mr. Lehto. Have a wonderful weekend all!
Fee shifting plus a statutory award of double that was seized in the case of error would go a long way to curbing the abuses by law enforcement. But it also comes down to law enforcement playing with house (either the municipal insurer or the taxpayer's money) and do not have an incentive to change. Making them buy professional liability insurance would be a start.
I agree. Liability insurance plus from his or her pocket and the pockets of his higher ups would go along way to curb this practice. Another thing especially in non-criminal asset forfeiture, the interest from the money taken would come from that department’s budget and the budget for the following 3 years will be 25% less than that year’s budget.
I wonder if the NDPS' next swing at making this suit go away are claiming that since they gave the money back, Steven no longer has standing to bring the suit.
@@mhfuzzball My counterargument would be to take the amount of the money, multiply it by the prevailing market interest rate, and say "well, my damages were still at least that amount".
They didn't return the money immediately. He had to go to the DEA (feds) to get the money back. The locals immediately sent it to the feds to try to block him. The feds weren't involved in the state level suit. It does mean he can't go after the _feds_, but that's part of what went on with this judgement.
First of all, to the marine at the center of this story: Thank you for your service! It means a lot to us all and I, for one, appreciate it greatly. As for the government of Nevada: Has the governor not heard about this case? The attorney general? I would like to see government agencies concede cases where they are clearly in the wrong or have little chance of winning. You don't need a law degree to see that such cases are completely at odds with due process. How can these people go to work with a straight face and a clear conscience?! A great example of the fact that legal does not mean moral. (or vis-versa)
The Institute of Justice is an amazing organization! I discovered them through this channel and eagerly follow their work. If you have a few extra dollars this year, toss them over to the IJ.
Wonderful update! Please know this quality guy calling you Sir is more about him and his values. Just politely accept it. You are a thoughtful, highly ethical lawyer and deserve top respect. Remember young people are looking at you trying to decide career. Give yourself respect due.
Pretty sure theft is prohibited by natural law. The state saying there’s no law allowing someone to sue ignores the basic fundamental rights of due process
The c-note is on top of the microphone on the far right end of the shelf, right under "The Boss" license plate. I'm a retired Marine, retired in 97, I've driven cross country many times with thousands in pocket having gotten a duty station change. We bought two houses while on active duty, spent almost four years in Hawaii, most expensive place I've lived in. My own perspective on civil asset forfeiture is simply theft, plain and simple. I took an oath that binds me to this day, three years after I lost my wife to long term disease, I just lost my son, 48, to heart disease this past summer. I've also left half a dozen vehicles behind, never recouped, because the military has no patience, I got to Kaneohe, Hawaii in 84, a week later I was in the south Pacific on a ship for six months. Thanks for making this video, service personnel deal with these issues on a regular basis. John McClain, GySgt, USMC ret.
It's not just the U.S. Marines, it's each and every branch of the U.S. military, not one of us have ever been relinquished of our oath to defend our country, not even by any corrupt politicians, who, by the way, are almost all guilty of perjury of their own oath to the Constitution of The United States of America
@@DerykRobosson once a soldier, always a soldier, we may be relieved of duty to country, but we are never relieved of our oath to defend ourselves, our family, or our country, never, because we made that oath in front of God himself
@@DerykRobosson Our oath isn't too the government. Our oath is to the people and the constitution, and no there is not an expiration. Our morals and principles are typically higher than the average sheep.
Ben Hundo's on the 2nd shelf down, on top of the stack of lawbooks 2nd from the right, directly below the "71" in the red coupe (to the left of the OTHER SIDE OF THE NIGHT book)
I hope he's learned to never allow cops to search his property with his consent. So happy he's got his savings back and proud as heck that he's going to follow up for the sake of so many! Thank you for great news Steve!
One of two things happened here: either he consented to a search or he volunteered to holding a large amount of cash. Both are stupid actions. I agree, I hope he learned a lesson. Don't trust a cop.
I've had so many problems with police as a tax paying mom without any criminal record, just for simply standing up for the rights of myself, my property and family that I could not agree more. NEVER trust police.
Nah, wouldn't work. Cops tend to view refusals as suspicious. Subsequently, they justify getting a dog to "alert" on the vehicle and conduct the search anyway. When they find the cash, they claim that it is evidence of drug involvement (this is despite the fact that the government has already reported that over 90% of all money in circulation has had some contact with drugs). Then, they seize it. It's a rigged game.
“Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the Marines don't have that problem.” - President Ronald Reagan
The concept and the thought of civil asset forfeiture is bad for my blood pressure. We have what we call law enforcement yet they ignore the highest law of the land... The US Constitution. When we have people in our justice system who struggle to discern justice from blatant criminality, we know we are in trouble. Thank you Steve for your channel.
I'll second, third, and fourth Steve's comments about the Institute for Justice! I discovered IJ both through Steve and another RUclips civil rights attorney who's involved with IJ and feel they are absolutely the most deserving organization of whatever money I can spare. They really do fight for "everyman" in the most righteous of cases. I now receive their magazine and emails detailing current cases and look forward to both as sources of hope in this rather bleak world we inhabit these days. And if you are wondering if they are effective: The Institute for Justice has won eight U.S. Supreme Court cases, and currently has **two cases pending argument this term**.
Thanks, Steve. I'm anxiously awaiting this one. If given the chance, please convince them to allow video in the courtroom. I'm sure there are many who would love to see this argument.
I've found it difficult in the past to get some sort of corrective action done by the police, or any law enforcement agency. I had a vehicle parked on the street in front of my apartment that was tagged for removal as if it had been abandoned. It was not. Thankfully I had not been out of town that weekend, and I saw the tag. So I took it to the place that issued the tag, a law enforcement agency that was in the parking lot right across the street and informed them of the mistake. Then I asked them what could be done by them, so this never happens again in the future. All I got was a dumb look and silence. Isn't there something inherently wrong with towing a vehicle which could be thought of as a personal effect, without some sort of due process? They didn't reach out to me at all about this matter. They simply tagged my vehicle for removal. I could wonder if their reasoning had been abandoned.
Steve, You met a Texan and a Marine and didn't expect the yes'irs? Lol. The two characteristics combined in one man is an unstoppable force. This civil asset forfeiture may have been an immovable object in the past but I believe he's abt to bust it wide open. Yeehaw from another Texan to Mr. Lara and Oorah from a Texas veteran's wife (even if my veteran was a squid instead of a jarhead) to Mr. Lara as well. Sir, get'em! I was just telling an uncle who is in communications for his local PD that we have plans to go on a trip and it means driving 14 hrs. We often carry a few hundred dollars when we travel just to make it easy to split bills with friends or buy things along the way. I was saying that we try not to carry too much bec of this issue and his advice was to pick a casino, wire the money to the pit in advance, pick it up when we get there and spend an hr or so gambling at the penny slots or some such small thing and then cash out the full amount. The sheer mechanics of going on a simple trip and trying to avoid having our hard earned money unlawfully seized with things like this is absurd. I hope the IJ and Mr. Lara eat the State of Nevada for lunch and set a great precedent that IJ can use in other states. It hasn't happened to us, yet, but my husband took that same oath and I'm afraid it might break our bank to pursue it but we'd damn sure want to. I know they do it in my community bec they put that as a line item on the budget that they print in the newspaper! This community is at least 40% indigent population evidenced by our school district being Title I and the requirements to receive that designation in Texas, if I understand them correctly. Carrying $100 might look suspicious to officers here yet a week's groceries cost double that for a family of 4.... all the more reason to refuse a search and always shut up and get an attorney, especially while driving while innocent! Thanks for the update sir! A Texan
Hey Steve! Love the show!! I have watched the entire traffic stop video on RUclips. It is absolutely infuriating the level of disrespect show to this veteran. I’m curious, can the 2 officers involved be sued along with the state? They should definitely suffer some sort of punishment from their actions!
Or better yet: Cops: 'We're seizing this cash.' Me: *2nd Amendment intensifies* Government: 'Errrrrrrrrrrrr!' It should have never gotten this far in the first place.
As another Marine, I wonder if the cops thought it might have been Army money ... This despicable type of action (civil asset forfeiture) needs to be stopped! As you mentioned, there is no such thing as an Ex-Marine! I became a Marine by graduating from Parris Island SC on November 10 1967. I finished my active and Reserve duty 6 years later, but even now I am STILL a United States Marine. Not as lean, not as mean, but STILL A MARINE!
Much respect for this Marine who refuses to bow down to the extortion gang in blue and their enablers.
He would have had no choice but to give up if IFJ had not went to bat for him after all he was completely broke.
Seller Fi. Everyone in Nevada and the USA owes thanks to this Marine. For his service, his loyalty to the oath he took, and now for this.
If only the police and politicians were true to their oaths to serve the public. Instead of becoming tyrants and parasites.
@@markmixon1121 Here here.
@@markmixon1121he could have gotten his own lawyer you know…..
@@jesspeinado480 erm, seller fi? Ironic, to put it mildly, largely due to its accuracy.
The United States of America has the absolute best government that money can buy.
Semper Fidelis, Steve! De oppresso liber!
These cops are nothing more than road pirates. Thank you Steve and thank you IJ.
Pirates are rogue outlaws. I think privateers is the term that best suits.
@@alphabravo8703 Privateers are privately owned and manned, which doesn't quite fit here. I think the term Tyrants fits best.
@@MiniDevilDF Privateers are state sanctioned marauders. They're highwaymen with lettres de cachet.
While I appreciate the emotional desire to coin invectives, the reality is that they are law enforcement conducting legal confiscation under methods approved by the judiciary. Luckily this is a democracy, and we have a legislative body that can make this horrible practice illegal by passing a bill. It needs to stop, and writing your representatives goes a long way toward this once there is a critical mass for it to show up in their summary of voter issues. They are police, what they are doing is legal, and we can advocate for a law to make it illegal. It's less fun than posting to RUclips, but each time I fire off an email and fill out the form (depending on the legislator's contact methods) it is satisfying to know that I did something actually useful. If enough of us do it, that is.
Also, you can do both! Since it's fun -- I'd say the best term is "buccaneer" which makes them "the blue buccaneers." It works with "bandit" as well, although "the blue bandit" really sounds like a 1950s kid's show masked cowboy. "Next week: Zorro and the Blue Bandit team up to fight the menace of the Marine Grandpa with Savings!"
Thieves. Yes And they need jail time. In general population.
Abolish Qualified Immunity and Civil Asset Forfeiture Now.
Institute for Justice 👍🏻
yup
Or make those that used it difficult to find.
Agreed. You need to get rid of qualified immunity the second someone’s rights are violated. To many times these criminals use a badge to justify their behavior. One of the biggest issues I have always had with police is they can protect each other but yet if you try to protect a criminal they can charge you with a crime. Cops are not above the law and should be held to a higher standard than civilians, not the other way around.
Neither one is constitutional and how they were ever created as law is beyond me. It's the definition of Government over reach.
Amen
Had a cop sniffing for an asset forfeiture once. Stopped on the way to the bank, after a holiday weekend at the liquor store. He asked what was in those bank bags on the passenger seat. Went immediately to the deposit claim being a cover for illicit cash. When his supervisor/back-up arrived, I immediately handed him my phone with the state liquor commission ready to dial. Told him he could explain to the state why my booze distributor bills would be late. They looked so sad driving away after dodging a can of worms above their pay grade.
Not to mention the fat stack they would pocket in the car.
dont put your goods in plain sight and they cant pull you over.
Thieves pure and simple
@@ChrisWijtmansThat's what trunks are for.
thats what hidden spaces in cars are for. they are there for a reason.@@WildBikerBill
Until the Police lose something valuable to them, they have no incentive to change. Until they have to pay more than they seized they have no reason to stop. Can we take it out of ALL the police pensions?
Seriously, I think you're aiming a little too low. If the police at that level are doing this somebody up higher is instructing them to.
@@windywednesday4166 They won't stop until the risks are too high to gamble. Somewhere there's someone that needs their money and doesn't have time for government games and doesn't value the worthless life of a leo who would steal his hard earned money. God speed.
It's not just the police. It's also the legislators who write such laws.
@bjmccann1 Exactly. I believe the whole thing is considered unintended consequences of laws enacted, I think it was the 1990s? They were meant to seize the assets of drug dealers and criminals. But the idiots who passed the laws didn't require a conviction? ...and they have been too dysfunctional to fix it for 3 decades. Is Criminal Incompetence a thing?
@@windywednesday4166
No. That is the perfect level to create change - the few percent of cops in leadership obviously is already corrupt, but you hit the 97% hard and the anarchy that would ensue would be intolerable. Then change would occur.
A Real Marine... going above and beyond, to not leave anyone behind.
yup
Cops are enemies of the law abiding citizens and traitors to the constitution
I'm not in the military. But I salute this man
A hero twice
Forfeitures are unconstitutional, period. Jefferson condemned them in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence and called them "statutory plunder."
As a constitutional republic that PRACTICES Democracy, we literally have no say in the matter.
@FeedMeSalt we have the second amendment which is supposed to keep the tyrants in check. In practice though you are absolutely correct
Forfeiture is a China tactic to rob the people of their money and making it cost more to get it back than it is worth.
Yeah… gotta get that bully to stop taking your money…yolo
Yeah… gotta get that bully to stop taking your money…yolo
They don't want it to go to trail because they know FULL WELL they'll lose. And worse yet, it sets a precedent that could eventually get CAF laws ruled unconstitutional, thereby getting rid of their cash cow.
I don't like it but the state should never have seized his money. Pick the next victim that would get way less pushback.
Imagine how this Marine felt, seeing his life savings being stolen by troopers. I'm so glad he didn't quit after they returned his money. Perhaps his greatest service to his country!
Imagine being robbed by the very government that you served...
@@ianbattles7290 Happens often except they serve US
@@ianbattles7290no one serves the government. Government is the servant. The Marine became a govt asset while joined up.
yup
@@jacobvantuinen5426
Well, your last sentence is true. The 1st two ideals are long gone.
You can't do something unless there is a law that permits it. I keep seeing this more and more the older I get. Do they not teach what it means to live in a FREE country anymore? You are free to do most anything unless there is a law that prohibits it, and that law is constitutional, and a jury agrees with how it's enforced. I am thankful for The Institute for Justice and all the great work they do to protect us.
We don’t have rights
Yeah, there should definitely be a law against civil forfeiture. The only reason it's currently legal is because it's an action taken against an object rather than a person
My understanding is that unlike some countries, America is a "permissive" rather than "prohibitive" society, in which that which is not expressly prohibited, is permissable. So unless Nevada has a law prohibiting suits against the state, which they did not indicate they did, the plaintiff should be totally free to bring suit. Perhaps the state's counsel needs to go back to public school for a refresher in American Government.
@@joelee2371 There's an old joke comparison of legal systems:
In America, Everything not forbidden is permitted.
In Germany, Everything not permitted is forbidden.
In France, Everything forbidden is still permitted.
In Russia, Everything permitted is still forbidden.
AS IMPLIED CITIZENS' REPRESENTATIVES, "CONGRESS" HAS A "SELF CHOSEN?" MANDATE TO REPRESENT TO OUR OTHERED 2 BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT THE REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY AND ALL JUST CHANGES THAT ARE PLED?
Imagine struggling to pay for food and then watching your tax dollars go to fund the states court costs for this travesty.
It's absolutely disgusting what they do with out tax dollars!
As a Nevada resident, I appreciate what you are doing to bring attention to this egregious highway robbery, what IJ is doing for EVERYONEs rights and what this Marine is fighting for all of us.
WHOA! ARE YOU CONDONING THE USURPATIONS OF OUR CONGRESS' CREATED CONSTITUTIONALLY?
This Marine was a total class act and perfect gentleman. I hope he gets some punitive damages for not being able to have access to his money or to be able to give it to the daughter he was visiting. My hat's off to him.
Really shows the true nature of these cowards doing all that to him. What a way to show your appreciation of their service...
Unfortunately punitive damages are paid by taxpayers, so there’s virtually no incentive for them to stop. Now if it was deducted from their department’s pension fund, I’ll guarantee this would get under control quick, fast in a hurry.
The cops should be charged withthieft and corruption .
@@b1gsteve251 when every SOB in office is under threat of a pissed off public replacing them, there's plenty of incentive. The incentive to the public, increased taxes to cover those penalties.
It's warfare 101. Make the fight so damned expensive, disruptive and destructive to the other side that they'll beg for peace.
@@spvillano a pissed off public can't really replace them though since police officers aren't elected. You can maybe swap the sheriff but chances are the new guy will be just as bad and will likely keep all the bad officers right in place anyway.
Can you explain why they didn’t pursue the suit against Nevada in Federal court so that the outcome has more of a chance of setting national precedent? If he wins at the state level, Nevada is not likely to appeal it to the Supreme Court.
Also, if he wins in Nevada, can the Institute for Justice then ask for a summary judgement to vacate more civil asset forfeitures statewide?
They will appeal. Otherwise Nevada courts will prohibit forfeiture.
@@gringofett3944I wouldn't be so sure. A lot of politicians will REALLY not want that precedent on the federal books, so the backroom political pressure to eat it and drop it without appealing to the federal courts will be extreme. Like "if you do this I guarantee you will have no party funding for any campaign ever, much less the possibility of a federal political career"
I'm so glad to see that the Institute for Justice is getting their hooks into this.
Law makers are just as guilty for not outlawing Forfeiture
Well, since asset forfeiture was created by the lawmakers, they aren’t “just as guilty”, they are 100% guilty.
The police aren’t breaking any laws. They are enforcing what the lawmakers created. Those same lawmakers can remove what they alone created.
The bigger issue is the ability of lawmakers to craft unjust legislation.
The Patriot ACT started this crap
yup
Tim Walberg. Michigan
Right on.
The cops gotta learn it from somewhere and what better place than the legislature?
The returning of these moneys seized is, to me, an implied admission of theft.
I recently purchased a car and the seller wanted cash. I backed out of the deal because I would have had to travel 3 hours with a good deal of cash. He ultimately accepted a cashier’s check to complete the deal. I refuse to be a victim of Civil Asset Forfeiture. They don’t need a reason to economically terrorize you.
Not knocking you for doing the safe thing, but it's depressing we feel unsafe having CASH something the government issues.
Cower some more. People need to stand up for themselves when being robbed at the roadside by those without badges and those with. Stand your ground.
@@joshuagibson2520 "stand your ground" are you implying that we should resort to violence ?
Perfect or meet halfway at the bank. Then Noone has to drive around with valuables. Some teller isn't going to get their cut though.
@@steveducell2158I am implying that so long as the people collectively let themselves be walked all over, then this will continue to happen. The rich can fight it out in court (and MAYBE win), but many aren't able to do that so the next best thing is to shut it down from go. Theft is a violation of natural law as well as criminal. If you're going to steal the food of myself and my family and hinder our survival, then that would be dealt with the same as money, personal, property, land, etc. There are boundaries that both people and government are way too comfortable to cross these days.
It is daunting to go take the government or a huge corporation to court, given their deep pockets defense capabilities. However, in truly obvious cases of right vs wrong, no amount of legal weight can tip the scales in their favor. Even if they jigger the law to "win", public opinion (and its effects on elected representatives) will cause things to change.
The only time my wife and I ever sued anyone was a moving company that took six months to get our stuff to us, broke half of it, then offered us a pittance compensation. (My wife was alone for a few months in a remote home with almost none of our belongings in the mountains of NM, having had foot surgery and watching our six-month old daughter while I finished up my job several hundred miles away. Talk about a trooper!)
As we presented our case, not only was the judge on our side, but the representative from the moving company agreed that they screwed up big time, and we got even more than we were suing for.
In that case, I guess they messed with the wrong sailor.
This needs to be addressed by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has addressed civil asset forfeiture before, they side with law enforcement. People need to understand, it doesn't matter what the Supreme Court says, they are NOT the final authority. The People are. Civil asset forfeiture is a blatant violation of the 4th, 5th, and 14th amendments. The Supreme Court is GOVERNMENT. Government courts decided government thugs can do exactly what the constitution forbids government from doing, and We the People are allowing it. It is NOT lawful, and the court has blatantly violated the constitution.
Corrupt bunch of political appointees, they're not working for our best interests either!
This conservative court will trample on your individual liberty... they do it all the time.
Only public pressure can get the Supreme Court to move on this. Real strong public pressure.
This Supreme Court configuration would declare that it’s legal and that the funds go to bribe Clarence Thomas.
I remember seeing this when it first happened and glad to see he is fighting it. This is instrumental to other cases nationwide to have cases to reference. Praying 🙏 for this to have a swift resolution and corruption exposed even further!!
Good for him! I remember this. Saw the police video and was totally disgusted by what they did to him. Institute for Justice >>Respect!
Semper Fi Marine! Your fight is just. Best of luck. My Dad was a MSGT in the Corps. Much respect from this old Marine brat. Keep us posted on this case Steve.
I watched that traffic stop and it was so heart breaking, here is this guy who litteraly put his life on the line to serve this nation and thats how he was treated. Not only do I believe he needs to be refunded the whole amount but he also needs to compensated for the wrong done to him.
Compensated by those who did the wrongdoing.
People should know who the cops were and where they are on a regular basis so they can stay away from them
We all know that there are no honorable men in law enforcement.
This is truly great news. Two people not to mess with, a Marine and The Institute For Justice. This story just makes me feel proud and happy
@SadPuppySoup NO! ARE NOT BOTH CITIZENS BEFORE THE LAW? WHY DO YOU ENABLE SUPREMACIES ABOVE THE CITIZENS TO MARINES,THE I.J. AND SCOTUS?
@@georgedunkelberg5004 when you learn to speak in a way I can understand you maybe I will
The fact that the state and Feds would do that to anyone, let alone a Marine, shows you that these people know no boundaries. The public service is continuing to act as though we serve them, that they are the masters. It's getting crazy.
"You can't sue us!"
- "Why>"
"Because it might set a case precedent!!!"
@@MonkeyJedi99 yup
cops are corrupt . when they can get away with something they go for it.
You’re exactly right, and it is damned disturbing!
Does anyone have a spare bulldozer?
This was disgusting and heartbreaking, at the same time.😞😞😞😡😡😡So glad, He got his money,and glad he is still fighting. These thieves need to be held accountable.😡😡😡
If only our elected officials care as much about their oath to the Constitution and Steven does.
Thank you Devil Dog and Institute of Justice.
yup
This case definitely needs to go to the Supreme Court. They absolutely need to address civil asset forfeiture as it stands.
I sure hope everyone watching this will support Institute for Justice..... Keeping Just-us criminals in check!
Great win for all of us, even though it hasn't gone to trial yet. I have worried about corrupt police departments abusing this law, and your video has truly made my day. I watch a lot of cop-watch videos, and many of them get me mad, but this one soothes my soul. Keep up the great work, Steve!
God bless you for your service, Steven. You are still standing in our defense.
I cannot express how glad I am this positive news regarding this case. I remember hearing about this case and one other and wondered if they made any headway.
I've been waiting for this update for years. That video was downright appalling. Nevertheless, those troopers damn well robbed him blind and left him stranded. Shameful doesn't even begin to describe it. And it was clearly just another day at the office for those rotten leos.
Thanks for the update. I really hope that he succeeds in his lawsuit, it is about time to end this very awful abuse of government.
End civil asset forfeiture. End Qualified immunity.
THANK YOU, INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE! Hope Stephen wins big!
They (law enforcement) aren't called the *Blue Line Gang* for nothing. Qualified Immunity is a helluva drug!
"I don't know how many civil asset forfeitures happen across America"
One is too many.
Can't wait for this trial. Hopefully it will be open to cameras in the court room. I also what to hear the states lawyers explain this one 🧐😂😅. Should be a blast 😁. And yes the Institute for Justice deserves our support. I have donated and encouraged all your listeners to do so. We never know when we could be in a similar situation!!!
The state attorney explaining this should be shared.
A marine never relenquishes their oath and the government cannot ever take it away! Once a Marine, always a Marine.
Semper Fi ❤
Ooh Rah! Been retired over twenty six years, still stand on that oath! I appreciate your comment, Thanks
Rah! 3/4 Lima CO.
There are currently domestic enemies at the upper echelons of government that are allowing an invasion of foreigners at the southern border. Any chance you guys can do something about that.
Semper Fi gents!
Members of the other branches of military service aren't released from their oaths upon separation, either.
I am personally aware of a case where a friend of mine took $154,000 in cash to Seattle to pay his late wife’s medical bill. TSA tried to take the money when they couldn’t really articulate why they could, they notified the TSA in Seattle, who then tried to take the money. he managed to get away with it by standing his ground and saying if you’re going to take my money, I want you to charge me with something right now not later but right now and they backed down which was a surprise. But it wasn’t very smart of him to take that much money anyway, because despite TSA or any other operatives, the money could’ve gotten lost or stolen I mean really he should’ve had a check made out to the hospital and just sent the check down to them and that would’ve been the end of it. I’m not sure what his theory was of taking the money there in person, but he is old-fashioned.
Thanks institute for justice good lawyer helping good people
Thank you, Steven, for this video. Thank you to Stephen, for sticking to is guns. Thank you to the Institute for Justice for helping make the US a better place.
They need to rename the forfeiture part of that term to confiscation.
Yes!!! Let's get rid of the soft language and call it what it really is. I wonder how many people don't really care about this because they see the word forfeiture instead of confiscation.
Or outright theft.
How about we call it what it truly is!
Armed Robbery! These agents of the state have guns, they are stealing something that doesn't belong to them. That's unequivacally Armed Robbery!
Not theft. Armed robbery.
I can't wait to see how this plays out. Unfortunately here is Texas (Houston) civil asset forfeiture is deemed a good thing. We all need the IJ to win this case so we can start siting similar cases in Utah.
I have carefully read once more the Constitution and I cannot find a reference anywhere for civil asset forfeiture, so it seems to be totally illegal.
Try the Tenth Amendment.
Your claim of a law not being in the Constitution is ridiculous. Find DWI in the Constitution.
It is there, as mentioned, in the Tenth Amendment.
@@tvc1848 Driving a car is not a right, there are other ways you can travel from place to place. Also the supremacy clause of the Constitution forbids states having laws or provisions in their state constitutions that violate the US Constitution. CAF violates the fourth and fourteenth amendments on unreasonable search and seizures and due process.
@@bobmorgan1575
I never said nor implied that driving was a right. If it was a right then states couldn’t likely have driver’s license requirements. I only said that it was covered under the Tenth Amendment and the right of states policing powers…. just like CAF (as well as the federal government).
The OP’s claim of civil asset forfeiture not being in the Constitution so it must be unconstitutional is ludicrous. The Constitution doesn’t enact laws. That is the only reason that I brought up DWI as an example. If traffic laws are somehow a hangup for you, trespassing and robbery aren’t in the Constitution either (along with thousands of other examples).
The problem with your claim of CAF violating the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments is that social media or your or my opinion matters. Article III of the Constitution says that the judicial power of the US shall be in one supreme court and they will have jurisdiction on all matters under the Constitution.
To date there have been several cases in front of the Supreme Court about CAF and none has ruled that CAF is unconstitutional.
There is another in front of the right now and oral arguments were heard about 11 weeks ago so I am assuming that we might have another precedent from the Supreme Court on CAF any day now. Who knows, someday your opinion on CAF violating the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments might become a case law. At the moment that simply isn’t true.
As far as my opinion on CAF, I think that it should be used in conjunction with a filed criminal case. At moment there isn’t any Supreme Court precedent to back that up.
The current case on CAF at the Supreme Court deals with the dragging of the government’s feet over years in hoping that the people give up. It seems the justices wanted to know why a hearing isn’t held within a couple of weeks under due process to see of the government could make a case of criminal activity connected to the seized property and if not, returning the money almost immediately.
The current case awaiting a ruling is Culley v. Marshall.
Great news Steve! You are making growing impacts for improving justice!
If there hadn't been cameras, I suspect the response to his lawsuit would have been "What money?"
Thank you Stephen! Thank you for your ongoing service to our country. I was outraged the 1st time I saw that video and I'm sure a jury will be outraged too.
Way to go, Institute for Justice!
This made my day, Steve. I learned of this case, saw the police cam recording, early on and I was appalled by what happened. Slowly over time I'd see something mentioned but I was so happy to hear your reporting on the case. I donate to IJ because of this kind of thing. Keep up the good work and the information. I think in the original video it was said they left him stranded with only $10 in his pocket in a State he didn't live in and w/o his vehicle - they towed it!
IS THIS? THE APPEALS TO MOST MIGRANTS FOR THEIR DEATH DEFYINGS' ATTEMPTS AT "FREEDUMBS"AND 'JUS TUS" AS HIPOCRATIZED BY THE U.S. CONSTITUTION? ? ? ?
Great news for this Saturday afternoon. God bless him in his continued fight and God bless IJ ❤
Thank you for the update Mr. Lehto. Have a wonderful weekend all!
If someone was to look for great stories for dystopian movies, this channel is a gold mine...
Fee shifting plus a statutory award of double that was seized in the case of error would go a long way to curbing the abuses by law enforcement.
But it also comes down to law enforcement playing with house (either the municipal insurer or the taxpayer's money) and do not have an incentive to change.
Making them buy professional liability insurance would be a start.
I agree. Liability insurance plus from his or her pocket and the pockets of his higher ups would go along way to curb this practice. Another thing especially in non-criminal asset forfeiture, the interest from the money taken would come from that department’s budget and the budget for the following 3 years will be 25% less than that year’s budget.
Returning the money immediately upon notice of intent to sue is pure damage control to minimize liability when they lose.
I wonder if the NDPS' next swing at making this suit go away are claiming that since they gave the money back, Steven no longer has standing to bring the suit.
@@mhfuzzball My counterargument would be to take the amount of the money, multiply it by the prevailing market interest rate, and say "well, my damages were still at least that amount".
They didn't return the money immediately. He had to go to the DEA (feds) to get the money back. The locals immediately sent it to the feds to try to block him. The feds weren't involved in the state level suit. It does mean he can't go after the _feds_, but that's part of what went on with this judgement.
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.~Thomas Paine
Sometimes one has to wonder whether government, and some other things, or more necessary evils, or evil necessities.
Thanks for bringing this to light goes a long way to exposing the corrupt system and informing people just how bad they really are
The marine oath is for life.
Politicians take the same oath, but have made a joke of it. Well, a lot of us ain't laughin'.
No all military oath of office is for life.
@@terryquinn7765 Correct. I was Army -- I'm a Vietnam veteran. I took the exact same oath the Marines take.
@@williamwallace9826 USAF here, me too! (Vietnam _era_ veteran - I served elsewhere than VN)
First of all, to the marine at the center of this story: Thank you for your service! It means a lot to us all and I, for one, appreciate it greatly.
As for the government of Nevada: Has the governor not heard about this case? The attorney general? I would like to see government agencies concede cases where they are clearly in the wrong or have little chance of winning. You don't need a law degree to see that such cases are completely at odds with due process. How can these people go to work with a straight face and a clear conscience?!
A great example of the fact that legal does not mean moral. (or vis-versa)
It sucks this good man has/had to go through this debacle but I am glad that this has stirred the hornets nest and gotten the attention it needs.
The Institute of Justice is an amazing organization! I discovered them through this channel and eagerly follow their work. If you have a few extra dollars this year, toss them over to the IJ.
I wish they would go after the troopers involved.
Good for him, I hope Americans everywhere are behind him!
Wonderful update! Please know this quality guy calling you Sir is more about him and his values. Just politely accept it. You are a thoughtful, highly ethical lawyer and deserve top respect. Remember young people are looking at you trying to decide career. Give yourself respect due.
These people are all heroes. Thank you for keeping us updated!
Pretty sure theft is prohibited by natural law. The state saying there’s no law allowing someone to sue ignores the basic fundamental rights of due process
I live in Carson City, NV. About 3 miles from the court house. I’m going to try to attend the trial. I’ll keep you updated.
The c-note is on top of the microphone on the far right end of the shelf, right under "The Boss" license plate. I'm a retired Marine, retired in 97, I've driven cross country many times with thousands in pocket having gotten a duty station change. We bought two houses while on active duty, spent almost four years in Hawaii, most expensive place I've lived in. My own perspective on civil asset forfeiture is simply theft, plain and simple. I took an oath that binds me to this day, three years after I lost my wife to long term disease, I just lost my son, 48, to heart disease this past summer. I've also left half a dozen vehicles behind, never recouped, because the military has no patience, I got to Kaneohe, Hawaii in 84, a week later I was in the south Pacific on a ship for six months. Thanks for making this video, service personnel deal with these issues on a regular basis. John McClain, GySgt, USMC ret.
Wow! Thank you for your service, Gunny! From a grateful fellow American.
My pleasure! Thanks@@MrTruckerf
Thank you for your service, from down under in Australia 🇦🇺
far left, not far right
Ben keeping the snow off that silver ball looking thing . 👍😁
It's not just the U.S. Marines, it's each and every branch of the U.S. military, not one of us have ever been relinquished of our oath to defend our country, not even by any corrupt politicians, who, by the way, are almost all guilty of perjury of their own oath to the Constitution of The United States of America
Are you suggesting that there was no expiration on your contract with the government?
@@DerykRobosson once a soldier, always a soldier, we may be relieved of duty to country, but we are never relieved of our oath to defend ourselves, our family, or our country, never, because we made that oath in front of God himself
@@DerykRobosson Our oath isn't too the government. Our oath is to the people and the constitution, and no there is not an expiration. Our morals and principles are typically higher than the average sheep.
@@DerykRobossonthe oath is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. There’s not even one word about the government.
@@jamesalinio5277 I took the oath. I didn't see any God present.
Ben Hundo's on the 2nd shelf down, on top of the stack of lawbooks 2nd from the right, directly below the "71" in the red coupe (to the left of the OTHER SIDE OF THE NIGHT book)
I hope he's learned to never allow cops to search his property with his consent. So happy he's got his savings back and proud as heck that he's going to follow up for the sake of so many! Thank you for great news Steve!
One of two things happened here: either he consented to a search or he volunteered to holding a large amount of cash. Both are stupid actions. I agree, I hope he learned a lesson. Don't trust a cop.
I've had so many problems with police as a tax paying mom without any criminal record, just for simply standing up for the rights of myself, my property and family that I could not agree more. NEVER trust police.
Nah, wouldn't work. Cops tend to view refusals as suspicious. Subsequently, they justify getting a dog to "alert" on the vehicle and conduct the search anyway.
When they find the cash, they claim that it is evidence of drug involvement (this is despite the fact that the government has already reported that over 90% of all money in circulation has had some contact with drugs). Then, they seize it.
It's a rigged game.
Thank you Steve. Just simply thank you for using your platform to do good.
Everyday I check Lehto’s Law headlines hoping to see topics just like this… plus all the other stuff is great too !
I just sent the IJ a donation, everyone that is able should do the same!
“Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the Marines don't have that problem.” - President Ronald Reagan
Thanks for the update on this case.
Appreciate it.
So nice to hear this great news! Thanks to everyone who kept this going until the money was returned to its owner! Semper Fi!
The concept and the thought of civil asset forfeiture is bad for my blood pressure. We have what we call law enforcement yet they ignore the highest law of the land... The US Constitution. When we have people in our justice system who struggle to discern justice from blatant criminality, we know we are in trouble. Thank you Steve for your channel.
It's sad that B.S. like this, HAS TO GO THIS FAR, SOO MANY TIMES, FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, "HAS TO HAPPEN," TO "FIX IT!"
I'll second, third, and fourth Steve's comments about the Institute for Justice! I discovered IJ both through Steve and another RUclips civil rights attorney who's involved with IJ and feel they are absolutely the most deserving organization of whatever money I can spare. They really do fight for "everyman" in the most righteous of cases. I now receive their magazine and emails detailing current cases and look forward to both as sources of hope in this rather bleak world we inhabit these days. And if you are wondering if they are effective: The Institute for Justice has won eight U.S. Supreme Court cases, and currently has **two cases pending argument this term**.
My Dad corrected me when I was younger about calling him a "former Marine" - very true, he's a Marine until this day and he's nearly 80.
I got shivers when you mentioned the oath to uphold the Constitution as he fights Civil Asset Forfeiture. 2:00 mark.
I sent a donation to IJ " In Honor of Steve Lehto". 😁
Thanks, Steve. I'm anxiously awaiting this one. If given the chance, please convince them to allow video in the courtroom. I'm sure there are many who would love to see this argument.
This should have never gotten this far in the first place
…and Steve and followers thanks for keeping up on this topic
Man, I've been wondering about this for yrs. Thx for the update!
Thank you to this Marine and the Institute for Justice.
Can someone tell me the difference between getting robbed of your life savings by police or by pirates?
Pirates have a code of conduct.
The police robbery is sanctioned by the state.
Yes, the majority of the public thinks police are heroes because that's what police propaganda keeps telling them.
Love the total story. Glad Stephen is continuing with case. I am also ex military and understand the statement always a Marine.
I've found it difficult in the past to get some sort of corrective action done by the police, or any law enforcement agency. I had a vehicle parked on the street in front of my apartment that was tagged for removal as if it had been abandoned. It was not. Thankfully I had not been out of town that weekend, and I saw the tag.
So I took it to the place that issued the tag, a law enforcement agency that was in the parking lot right across the street and informed them of the mistake. Then I asked them what could be done by them, so this never happens again in the future. All I got was a dumb look and silence.
Isn't there something inherently wrong with towing a vehicle which could be thought of as a personal effect, without some sort of due process? They didn't reach out to me at all about this matter. They simply tagged my vehicle for removal. I could wonder if their reasoning had been abandoned.
Police towing is highway robbery.
Apparently it was parked illegally.
Removing the tag proves it's not abandoned, which is usually the entire reason for the tag. If nobody removed it, then it is a problem.
Steve,
You met a Texan and a Marine and didn't expect the yes'irs? Lol. The two characteristics combined in one man is an unstoppable force. This civil asset forfeiture may have been an immovable object in the past but I believe he's abt to bust it wide open. Yeehaw from another Texan to Mr. Lara and Oorah from a Texas veteran's wife (even if my veteran was a squid instead of a jarhead) to Mr. Lara as well. Sir, get'em! I was just telling an uncle who is in communications for his local PD that we have plans to go on a trip and it means driving 14 hrs. We often carry a few hundred dollars when we travel just to make it easy to split bills with friends or buy things along the way. I was saying that we try not to carry too much bec of this issue and his advice was to pick a casino, wire the money to the pit in advance, pick it up when we get there and spend an hr or so gambling at the penny slots or some such small thing and then cash out the full amount. The sheer mechanics of going on a simple trip and trying to avoid having our hard earned money unlawfully seized with things like this is absurd. I hope the IJ and Mr. Lara eat the State of Nevada for lunch and set a great precedent that IJ can use in other states. It hasn't happened to us, yet, but my husband took that same oath and I'm afraid it might break our bank to pursue it but we'd damn sure want to. I know they do it in my community bec they put that as a line item on the budget that they print in the newspaper! This community is at least 40% indigent population evidenced by our school district being Title I and the requirements to receive that designation in Texas, if I understand them correctly. Carrying $100 might look suspicious to officers here yet a week's groceries cost double that for a family of 4.... all the more reason to refuse a search and always shut up and get an attorney, especially while driving while innocent!
Thanks for the update sir!
A Texan
God bless this Marine who is truly looking after the American people!
Hey Steve! Love the show!!
I have watched the entire traffic stop video on RUclips. It is absolutely infuriating the level of disrespect show to this veteran. I’m curious, can the 2 officers involved be sued along with the state? They should definitely suffer some sort of punishment from their actions!
Cops: 'We're seizing this cash.'
Marine: 'Ok I'm hiring an attorney.'
DA: 'Errrrrrrrrrrrr!'
Or better yet:
Cops: 'We're seizing this cash.'
Me: *2nd Amendment intensifies*
Government: 'Errrrrrrrrrrrr!'
It should have never gotten this far in the first place.
As another Marine, I wonder if the cops thought it might have been Army money ...
This despicable type of action (civil asset forfeiture) needs to be stopped!
As you mentioned, there is no such thing as an Ex-Marine! I became a Marine by graduating from Parris Island SC on November 10 1967. I finished my active and Reserve duty 6 years later, but even now I am STILL a United States Marine. Not as lean, not as mean, but STILL A MARINE!