@@jeffbybee5207 While I understand what you are saying, and it is valid. I suspect they were more interested in the colour of the money in this case. However, it may have impacted there calculation of can this guy fight back against this abuse of power.
Those who recover their cash seized by Civil Asset Forfeiture should be able to charge interest at the highest rate of any legal "payday loan" outlet in the U.S. Those rates, allowed by the government, amount to usury, and since the government allows it, the government should also be willing to pay it.
Punitive damages equal to the value stolen paid to the victim on top of the returned property would be great. But let's be honest, we don't hold ourselves that accountable.
@@E.Asinus those are the good drugs to the government. So many in Congress have gotten wealthy on it. They just don't like being cut out of the loop with pot.
@@neilkurzman4907 since the mid 70s with the de de deinstitution and mothballing of nearly all mental health programs. The prison population has exploded in the USA. To a level 12x that of any country in Europe. Even multitudes higher than authoritative com muňist Country's. These incarcerated millions are predominantly low lvl non violent drug crimes. Look into it, then tell me how on earth locking drug addicted mentaly I'll people up is going to help them, become anything but a better educated felon that will never be able to find work ever again! This cycle repeats itself hundreds of times a hour.....
As I continually say. THERE SHOULD NOT NEED TO BE A PRECEDENT! It's called FOLLOWING THE LAW AND USING COMMON SENSE! Two things that Cops DO NOT DO with this cases.
He got his money back - fine, but what about his expenses, time & trouble? Government should compensate all of this - hopefully, using assets of involved officials.
Where\When did he get his money back? The announcement was that they were dismissing the case. I'll be surprised if the authorities remit the money they stole.
It violates the US constitution by making the accused prove they were not planning a future crime as well as having not committed a past one just to keep their own property. It is not just money they take decades ago a retired DA actually had an apartment complex taken the excuse one person in the complex turned out to be a drug dealer. They claimed because he paid rent using drug money the complex was connected to the drug trade. By the time he won in court the place had to be condemned because the government evicted the people he rented to and made it a low income housing project and some of the people the government rented to tore out all the copper destroying the place and had an actual drug den on one floor. Then of course I am sure we all heard the news story when they tried to use this asset forfeiture to steal a cruise liner because a crewmember was arrested for having a small amount of drugs. They claimed it was used to smuggle drugs into the US ie the tiny amount that crewmember had.
@@fcterryb it's just government sponsored extortion, and strongarm robbery. All the officials involved should have their assets seized to reimburse their victims, as well as ALL of their businesses, and associates investigated for potential involvement. Those who actually care about proper government should go full scorched earth.
Why are you happy to hear this he plainly said that if there hadn't been publicity he wouldn't have gotten his money he's not saying they're changing their laws or ways of doing things they just didn't want to be scrutinized by the media for this one case. This continues to happen every day
This will sound like a conspiracy theory, but they don't want you carrying cash because it is harder to track. Add on qualified immunity and they have no reason to stop this bullying behavior.
Also incentivizes you to use large banks, where you can expect to find a branch from which to withdraw almost anywhere, rather than a credit union that's only local to you.
Exactly. Just look at the recent FBI raid of private (non-bank) safe deposit boxes in Los Angeles. The judge issued warrant was only against the business of safe deposit boxes and specifically excluded the contents of customer boxes. However, the FBI ceased all of the box contents and is requiring the owners to 'come forward and prove that the valuables were obtained legally'. Case is still ongoing and there has been some push back so hopefully the FBI will be forced to return the property that they stole.
I'm going to start asking politicians why they favor assett forfeiture. When they say they don't, then ask them where is the legislation they introduced to stop this practice. Next, ask the same question about qualified immunity.
@@jdschauss we had a government without it until 1982. You are confusing it with sovereign immunity, perhaps? Or do you not realize that not violating rights is already an absolute defense against a 42 USC 1893 claim?
@@jdschauss Then regulate lawyers and lawsuits. Why can't you see the big picture and confine yourself to the status quo? Imagine having that mindset during slavery: "but it's always been this way!"
@@jdschauss The court won't do it, but legislation can, like in Colorado. H.R.7085 was introduced in Congress 6/4/2020 with 66 co-sponsors and sent to the Judiciary Committee for a national law to end it.
@@jdschauss _"Qualified immunity will never be taken away."_ You should ask the police in Colorado about that. Sure, it may not ever disappear en toto, but it can _certainly_ be stripped / limited in it's application to police / law enforcement...
@@neilkurzman4907 Conservatives get banned from private enterprise run social networks: _"Whut about the 1st Amendment?!"_ Also Conservatives: _"Whuddya mean gov't can't promote my religion over all the others?!"_
It should triple every day they have it. That will: A) make the punishment fit the crime B) actually make wronged citizens whole Day 1 is x3 Day 2 is x9 Day 3 is x27 Day 4 is x81 And enforcement needs teeth. Failing to adhere to this rule by anyone, citizen, cop or judge, should result in a mandatory minimum of a decade in federal prison
The actual "fair rate" since he owns a business would be investing it in things such as SPY and that's like insane this last year so they could have argued for that.
There need to be statutory damages including attorney's fees when the agencies(s) seizing funds are forced to return them. They need to be substantial, and divided between the agencies(s) budget(s) AND the officers' pension funds. Finally, there need to be strict time limits for filing criminal charges post-seizure and liquidated damages if charges are not filed in a timely manner, regardless of the final disposition of the matter.
That's where the other unethical thing called Qualified Immunity comes into play. In other words, yes we shot you to death and stole your money, but we have badges and blue uniforms, and judges in black nightgowns that say its OK.
George, George. You seem like a nice guy but what you are saying makes waay too much sense. Its dangerous. It would make government officials and leo's responsible for their actions and you need to stop.
Why everyone always after the pension fund? a working officer doesn't care about the balance of the pension fund until they're retired. and even then it's the union's pension fund not an officers so they still don't care. It should come straight from the budget of the agency that robbed the guy.
These agencies need to be compelled to not just return the money, but to pay the legal fees, and punitive damages. preferably from the pockets of the corrupt agents that are taking he cash.
STEVE, I’d like to grab your attention for a moment. Civil asset forfeiture isn’t limited to cash grabs only. In reference to your comments on owning a home/experiencing burglary I would to point out a better point to make would be…. Any home owner in the country can experience civil asset forfeiture regarding their home! So for the people saying “don’t carry cash and you’ll have nothing to worry about” the best response is “also, don’t own a home or a car (or really anything of value).”
Yes I saw a story, elsewhere, about some woman pulled over in a "routine traffic stop". As part of the cops' spiel, they asked if she was still making payments on the car. Being polite and co-operative as she was, in conversation she said no, it was fully paid off. So that then encouraged and enabled the cops to take her car (easily, under civil asset forfeiture) knowing that there was no lien or security on the car's title from a Bank or Finance agency. The car was nothing flash, not a Ferrari or anything, just a typical family car that was already a few years old.
@@KiwiCatherineJemma Yeap! I saw a story about an older lady who’s younger relative had been staying with her in her home. He bought drugs at an undercover op and instead of just arresting him they followed him home. Once he went inside with the drugs they busted him, and then tied the home to drug activity and seized it. AN ENTIRE HOUSE. It always has been, and always will be, completely out of control.
We can make it go away if we actually punished those who try to use it. Claim civil asset forfeiture and seize a person's money? That's theft. If the money is over a certain amount, that's grand larceny. Let's send those officers to prison. Let's have mandatory minimums of a decade. And let's enforce it before we do anything else.
@@1rstBorn it takes choice to make it reality, as it's taken years of the choice of complacency to get here. Yes, static friction is greater than kinetic friction. But we can enact change. Last summers' unrests began the process. But we slipped back into complacency and comfort.
@@mgaus _"That's theft"_ You do understand that your layman's interpretation _of the words_ doesn't _actually_ constitute an erudite legal assessment _of the _*_law_* right? _"Let's send those officers to prison"_ Who, _exactly,_ is it that you imagine is going to charge/arrest/try/convict them? Remember that the courts already support both *CAF* _and_ *Qualified Immunity* !! _"Let's have mandatory minimums of a decade"_ Being as these actions directly benefit cash-starved legislative jurisdictions, who, again, is it that you think will pass the laws needed to effect this? _"And let's enforce it before we do anything else"_ Do you _genuinely_ want to see a practice implemented where laws that haven't even been written, let alone passed, can somehow be enforced? *_Seriously?!_* 😲🤯 Maybe you should try actually thinking these things all the way through _before_ you pronounce them, by fiat, as though they were somehow either reasonable or rational? 🤦🙄
@@neilkurzman4907 Except that our system leads to politicians in higher offices being subservient to the special interests who fund their campaigns. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) said all the right things to get elected but now only talks to the special interests and avoids her own citizens.
@@ghz24 "Previous attempts at reform have largely been stymied due to intense lobbying from law enforcement groups, for whom asset forfeiture can be a significant source of revenue. From a political standpoint there's something for everyone to hate about the practice. Liberals note that it disproportionately affects poor and minority citizens, while conservatives are inclined to see it as a gross overreach of state power." So if you hate CAF, then... let's defund the police. Also: the War on Drugs was and is an abject failure (thanks Nixon and Reagan!) and Christian conservatives and other "marijuana is bad" groups like parents and federal and state politicians who won't legalize and decriminalize it and take it off the Schedule 1 list ate to blame, going back all the way to oligarchs like William Randall Hearst.
@@SayAhh Well law enforcement shouldn't be able to "lobby" at all for anything. The drug war is a carbunkle on the face of freedom and CAF is the puss seeping out of it. Defund the police is a simplistic chant for protesters not a solution. We do need law enforcement. We just need to change the rules that allow them to trample our rights. We need to teach ourselves and our kids to know and respectfully stand up for our rights. Knowledge and attitude are the keys to defending against all but the completely corrupt cops. I'm going to digress a little here. When I first looked into building an electric bicycle I looked up every instance of bicycles in my states laws. Latter I was pulled over late at night riding home from work on a fully legal regular bike on an unavoidable 2 block section of a state highway. I had waited for a big break in traffic with no cars on sight except one in the left lane. That was the cop car and they slowed down to my speed so for a block I'm getting frustrated that this car wasn't passing me so I could turn left in a block and get off this dangerous highway. When they pulled me over I ask why I was stopped they told me I wasn't allowed to ride on the state highway and should use the sidewalk. I said " Bullshit first off there is no sidewalk and the right of way where there should be a sidewalk is all torn up by the local fiber optic crew AND even if there were a sidewalk I am fully within my rights to ride on that highway and furthermore I'm not required to stay on the edge I can ride right down the center of MY lane." Then I asked them why they were trying to lie to me. They claimed it was for my safety to which I said seems like you're trying to infringe on my rights. They stressed how dangerous the road was and left with a "stay safe". I was ready with the final challenge of "OK just write me the ticket and we'll see what the judge has to say." But I didn't get to use it.😞 Knowledge is power. How much money do you have? None of your business, am I being detained? Can I go now?
@@ghz24 Agree on all points. However, defund the police doesn't mean eliminate all police departments; it means giving them only money to police, not having them wear several hats, like: police, counselor, psychiatrist, etc., and taking that money to hire professionals in those fields and, say, build more homeless shelters and provide them free meals instead of letting the PD take the money and buy tanks. Poor and particularly poor black and Hispanic population seem to be targeted often, hence BLM and why even white and Asian protesters join BLM groups during protests. Truck drivers and out-of-state light vehicles also get pulled over, and those who do not know their rights and/or document their encounters will sometimes lose everything, including but not limited to their freedom, their money, their load or even their car. I like the "Audit the Audit" channel, and justice isn't always served, but that's why income inequality and education are important; if there isn't such a major discrepancy in income, then ppl wouldn't need to steal cars to buy food or pay for drugs or college or medical bills, and there wouldn't be high speed pursuits and there might be fewer domestic abuse problems. More money = more problems, but no money = ppl are going to have trouble staying alive. I digressed, too, but it's all related: there is a need for higher (and adjusted for inflation and cost of living) minimum wage, tax reform that close the loopholes and fund enforcement that recoups money from filthy rich offenders and not going after middle and lower class citizens who was a dollar or even 100 dollars short on their taxes, universal/single-payer healthcare system without reasonable, nominal copays and loe to no dedictibles, free 2- and 4-year college to everyone (without difference in tuition for out-of-state students), better accountability of police officers and required use of bodycams (audio and video) that cannot be turned off or would result in immediate termination plus jail time, legalize cannibis (I don't smoke not eat edibles but I don't want to be jailed if I or others did), and all that should be step 1 in making this country safer and fairer.
Support the Institute for Justice! They are do great work for people who don't have the resources to fight themselves. The federal government is despicable.
"cops/feds need jail time"? For that to happen we need to ELIMINATE qualified immunity. That has happened in 2 states but been up for vote in many others and been shot down by police unions. Talk to your state legislature person from your district and tel them no vote unless you promise to eliminate qualified immunity.
@@robert5 I write my state representatives monthly. I don't just want qualified immunity eliminated; I want higher standards for those responsible for the safety of society. If a normal citizen would get 2 years for something, a cop should get 3 for the same crime. That's Qualified Responsibility
I'm curious if the DEA and DOIJ (Department of In-Justice) also paid for the Lawyer's Fees (if IJ wasn't a 'Non-Profit' Law firm that is), and for the 'Emotional Hardship' Damages caused by them confiscating this money for over a year? I doubt it, but if it had gone to Jury Trial, I could see both being awarded to Mr. Kermit and his Lawyer!! I'm also pretty sure that the Department of In-Justice was also very very worried that this Case could have ended their future Civil Asset Forfeiture schemes.
@@veramae4098 When I saw Steve's videos about this I found it so evil that I immediately started donating to IFJ and writing everyone with power about the issue. Please call, write, email and communicate with your elected officialls to stop this.
@dragonstalon1001 just because an entity is legally structured as a not-for-profit that does not mean that they cannot charge for their services or compensate employees. It's mainly means from a legal standpoint they cannot pay returns or dividends to shareholders, though there are often other restrictions.
Nope. You have to pay your own court costs and lawyer fees. That usually comes to more than the amount they took (average cash seizure in civil asset forfeiture is less than $2000) so they feel confident you won't spend $5000+ on a lawyer to get it back. And the worst thing that happens to them if you win is that they have to give the money back. That's their worst-case-scenario. Imagine if the only penalty for bank robbery was that you had to give the money back if you got caught. That would be a bank-robber's dream. Basically that is what the cops have.
Bruce was great to listen to. First guy who ever taught the masses to show up to real estate closings with an attorney... And not just sign 30 pieces of legal paperwork without knowing what it is.
Good result is heartening. I would love it if you would give us updates on the class action lawsuit that the Institute for Justice is bringing against the DEA & the TSA. Thanks Steve.
Watching your videos about this has made me an activist. I donate IFJ and last week I signed up for a meeting with Senator Marco Rubio's rep and was the only person there without an immigration issue but this issue is so evil and wrong that I made sure to stay and insure that my thought were shared with my Senator. If more people did this this theft may stop.
This is sickening!!! If we had any sense these forfeiture acts would be stopped dead. People in our government who advocate confiscation without proof of a crime need to be removed from their positions ASAP!!!
10:48 And another argument (from your past episodes): "If you had the proper documentation for the money's source, it's suspicious as if you knew you were committing a crime and needed to prepare for being stopped by the police".
NO! that won't work. the cops know what they are doing and they do this on purpose for revenue. this is why people can't trust cops, nor should they trust them.
@@jdschauss when I need help, I’ll use my second amendment, that’s why we have a second amendment to protect ourselves and families. We do not need police. You’re a state agent / revenuer with no duty to protect the public or individuals, that’s been proven & stated by the Supreme Court. To me the police are nothing more than Nazi’s. They to were just doing their job, taking orders, following the law & policy right 😂
@@jdschauss People like to use the old _'one rotten apple'_ adage to refer to this phenomenon, often without conceptualizing that the end result, in that saying, is that the 'whole bunch' is ruined. Your problem is, in fact, _not_ with the significantly deleterious, and well-earned, perception, within the contemporary zeitgeist, of corrupt police wantonly abusing/killing people, and/or hiding behind qualified immunity, and/or abusing civil asset forfeiture etc. -- The _actual_ problem you need to address is the ubiquitous 'blue wall of silence' that actively works to shield/protect such individuals from being exposed and expunged from the system and so perpetuates the population's conflation of the whole with the few 'rotten apples'. As a law enforcement professional, you _must_ be familiar with the concept of what 'criminal conspiracy' is right? Well, even if you don't engage in illicit activities personally, merely upholding simple camaraderie with _'those who do evil',_ via silence, nevertheless makes you tacitly complicit in their acts. If you _genuinely_ don't want to be painted with the same brush, please tell us, just how much _active_ work are you routinely engaged in, within the context of your own employment, to shatter the so-called blue-wall, including disregarding such commonplace behaviours such as extending ( or _accepting!_ ) 'professional courtesy' treatment to/from other LEO's on things like traffic violations etc.? 🤔🤨🙄
@@jdschauss Your problem is its the overwhelming majority doing bad things. You are the minority. And while you were doing the job did you do anything to stop the bad apples? I doubt it.
@@jdschauss: _"How do you know I haven't already paid a significant price fighting that system? "_ _"How do you claim I am a part of that system when you don't even know me?"_ brtle: _"...please tell us, just how much active work are you routinely engaged in, within the context of your own employment, to shatter the so-called blue-wall, including disregarding such commonplace behaviours as extending ( or accepting! ) 'professional courtesy' treatment to/from other LEO's on things like traffic violations etc.?"_ Perhaps you should start by learning the difference between a _question_ and a _statement_ ? 🤔🙄 _"Why do you assume every single one of us is involved in some sort of cover up?"_ I 'assume' that the concept of 'the Blue Wall of Silence' wasn't simply an idea concocted out of whole cloth, and, indeed, your own rebuttal freely acknowledges that it exists as your _"academy classmates shunned [you] for [your] attitude about that system, and [you] have felt the weight of it for fifteen years"_ _"Do you know each and every single officer?"_ The aptness of the _whole_ 'rotten apple' analogy (and criminal conspiracy / complicity via silence) was explained to you. If you don't/can't/won't understand it, that's pretty strong evidence in favour of my point. _"Your wanton prejudice does not carry the support of empirical evidence"_ 🤣🤣🤣 -- the subject video above, as well as a simple Google News search for 'police killings', 'qualified immunity' and/or 'civil asset forfeiture' will amply disprove this facile claim...
Now that it’s been settled he should sue for the interest that would have come from having the amount in savings during the time it was out of his possession.
No. He should receive interest in the amount that would be paid over the same period of time as a loan from one of the "payday loan" bandits, which are also legal per the government's definition. If the government allows such rates to be charged, the government should be forced to pay those rates as well.
No he should receive the amount of money he would have made if it was invested in the in stock market with the security that had the greatest return over the period he was not in possession of the money.
This is great news! We are turning the tide! Also, another reason to carry cash, if you negotiate a lower price, you can pay that rather than a cashiers cheque which has a previously fixed amount.
The walls between agencies allowed terrorists to hijack aircraft and fly them into buildings. What the TSA did was absolutely wrong, but agencies do need to communicate and coordinate...they just need to do it against ACTUAL CRIMINALS, not elder deacons trying to make a living.
@@neilkurzman4907 Let me broaden you thought process. Money isn’t the only thing you can get out of suing. Bringing something to light may cause others to speak up. When we as a collective speak up, it has a greater chance at letting the judges and powers to be see we’re fed up with the bull. In turn, overturning or getting rid of said practice. Same as with the push for qualified immunity. You get the issue ruled on first THEN you go after the money if they break that law.
Another problem is cash is the only way to make a large purchase outside of your home area. When I moved a few states away I had trouble coming up with the deposit for renting a house because I didn't have my bank in that area and the ATM only allows for a certain amount. You'e pretty much forced to carry the cash.
Hey Steve, in the early 90's I worked checkpoint security at BWI Airport before the TSA existed. They trained us how to spot large amounts of money on the X-Ray machine. We were also told we would get a reward for finding it. Actually a bigger reward than if we found a weapon or drugs.
I am in the process of selling a special Corvette and ran into this. Told the buyer he has to be here during banking hours and if he doesn't want to carry cash, bring a cashiers check drawn from my national bank. Didn't think about the "you cash it and hand me the cash" process. I was just going to deposit the check but it is much safer for me to deposit the cash. Thanks.
In the middle of 'Covid', in November, 2020, I rode a Greyhound bus from my home here in Springfield, OR to Tacoma, WA, with $7,800 in cash in my pockets, to buy a used pickup. EXTREMELY sketchy, although I was more worried about catching Covid-19 than I was about getting robbed for the cash. I was back home that evening without the cash, but with the truck.
I saw the article and considered sending it to you but figured you would be flooded. Thank you for shining a light on this subject that the gov't (both state and federal) has abused for too long. It's roots in stopping criminals has been corrupted by the easy money they make by taking first and making you hire an atty to get your $ back.
Steve, just yesterday I went to buy a car from a private party. I live in Palm Springs and the car was in Long Beach. The seller would only take cash. Because of your videos I didn't want to travel with $4,800 in cash. I asked a friend of mine, also a pretty good mechanic, if he could meet me at Wells Fargo in Long Beach and go with me to the sellers house where he could check out the car and have safety in numbers. For a mere $150 he evacuated the car and give me a little security. I'm not planning on anything happening but just being cautious. Neil .
9:30 *QUESTION:* What's the difference between any of these statements? 1) "You shouldn't wear outfits like that, you're begging to be raped." 2) "You shouldn't drive a car like that in this neighborhood, you're begging to be carjacked." 3) "You shouldn't carry so much cash, you're begging to be robbed."" 4) "You shouldn't use your credit card online, you're begging to have your identity stolen. *ANSWER:* #3 can be used against you by the government, and defended by the SCOTUS. All of the others are illegal.
Thank you for keeping us aware of these cases. Freedom is not free and the most difficult war front for freedom is against one’s own government. Thank God for lawyers willing to take up the cause of freedom.
We need for news agencies to start doing "stings" on this. I.e. a reporter books a flight and does a small bit with camera and camera man before on how he or she is going to see if the cash gets confiscated for no reason. It would be well worth the cost of $10-$25K per sting for news agencies to expose this. Could be done all over the country and the feds. would not only get a black eye but have to give the money back as well.
Anyone could join the fun. Just carry stacks of cash with real notes front and back, but with newspaper in between. Have a cellphone recording video for when the "bust" happens.
@@johnstack5008 They have no choice, legally, expect with regards to stuff such as narcotics. They are taking possession of your items with or without your consent and this can lead to chain of custody issues. Without said receipt, you cannot legally prove they took it from you, and neither can they.
'Get your property back...', maybe, and only after spending thousand of dollars in legal fees. The citizen remains further damaged regardless of whether the get back the money from civil asset forfeiture.
This is theft and it ought to be stopped. I had a hard time even taking out a bunch of cash from the bank to buy a truck once. The bank had to report it to the Feds. Never heard anything come of it and bought my truck.
_"They should start fining police services for these illegal seizures."_ Q1: Who is 'they'? Q2: What law, exactly, is it that you think they're a contravention of? Seriously, why doesn't anyone seem to ever stop and think through what they're saying _before_ committing it to the screen? 🤔🤯🤦
@@brtle A1: The court ordering the return of the illegally seized goods. A2: Freedom against unreasonable search and seizure. There some big law against it in the US. Some kind of Amendment or some such. Oh Yeah! the FOURTH AMENDMENT. I'm sure a punitive damage award could be assessed.
It's unfortunate that there are so many people who don't understand how important it is to make the government follow the rules and to hold it accountable.
Not a chance in hell. If that were the case, then anybody acquitted of a crime would file suit for slander. The American criminal justice system would cease to operate.
I'm surprised Civil Asset Forfeiture hasn't gone to the next logical level. Here's an example: A Mercedes Benz registered, titled, and insured in New Mexico is driving along Interstate 40 in Tennessee, and makes a lane change without a turn signal. Tennessee Highway Patrol stops the vehicle, and during the course of the stop the Trooper wonders how this 57-year-old man came to own a Mercedes. SEIZE IT! How is that not happening yet?
I have to wonder if the case was dismissed to keep it from getting to the supreme court which could end up with civil asset forfeiture being entirely abolished.
As with Qualified Immunity I believe, sadly, that the getting the Supreme Court to act will be a serious uphill climb. It's the Legislators who have the power to change these practices, but many of them are one and the same who wish to get the IRS invovled in your bank transactions and mine. Wait until you start getting calls: "This is agent Nosy from the Internal Revenue Service. We have obtained information about deposit transactions in excess of $600 to your bank account. Where did that money come from?" "I sold a Lawn mower and a dishwasher." "Do you have evidence of that? Receipts, Invoices, etc." "No. It was at a yard sale." "We don't believe you. Your bank account is now forfeit."
Simplest way for me to buy a cheap car is stop at the ATM machine and pull out some money, even if I have to do it several times over a few days due to withdraw limits at the ATM; the people selling cheap cars typically don't take Visa or Mastercard, lol.
Thanks for the update Steve, but again the justice system brings to the table "way too little, way too late." The man is still out his lawyer fees, court cost, lost time, and his dignity. If a class action suit is brought and won, I'm sure some very large law firm will be very happy, and very rich. The complaintants will all wind up with a check for .36 cents. We the population are growing tired of feeding the piggy known as the Judicial System. All of it.
Great update! Good news for a Saturday morning. Sadly, the government got part of what it wanted, when the Victim said, “I will never keep cash in the house again!” FEDS: “Thanks for that! Can we get it in writing?” Question for Steve: Is it legal for the TSA to inform law enforcement about anything you are carrying if it’s not illegal on its face? We submit to TSA’s otherwise unreasonable searches on the idea it’s for our safety. But I thought it was for the strictly limited purpose of Security. Now, if they see a gun, sure. But cash?
@@gbenother8755 I don't think he's missing the point at all, lol. The TSA's searches are ostensibly for _safety_ purposes, not looking for an unrelated potential illegal activity. No weapons, no bombs...that's just fine and dandy. But anything that's not a threat to the safety of the aircraft or its occupants isn't in their purview...which is why they didn't have the authority to do anything about it themselves. The problem here is that they backdoored the information to someone else.
I wonder if you could use the IRS as a weapon in this... "Please pay x amount of tax by..." "I already paid ten times that amount in tax this year. If you want your share, I suggest you contact the DEA, who seized all my money last month. I don't have any. And I refuse to pay anyone any more tax until we're even."
Civil Asset Forfeiture had, at its grass roots, some really good intentions. It is a shame that the personnel responsible for implementing the program have handled it in such a way.
Over the course of several years, I saved up something like $3500 because I wanted a really nice Martin guitar. I wasn't aware of civil asset forfeiture at that time, and have no criminal history, but I was carrying it when I bought the guitar. Glad I drive like an old grandmother, because this travesty of justice upsets me now. I recently went on a fishing trip that involved a lengthy car ride, and had about $500 in my wallet. Glad I didn't get pulled over then (and $500 isn't life changing money for me) but if I had been pulled over, I would hand over license, proof of insurance, the rental car agreement, and simply kept my mouth shut. You "lawyer dogs" have taught me that it is never a good idea to offer anything to police other than identification and necessary documents. "I'd prefer not to have a conversation" is now stuck in my head. Oh, and I am not a "Sovereign Citizen" that won't comply with lawful commands from LEOs, but I do NOT have to engage in any witty repartee with them.
I have been a law enforcement officer for 46 years, I sometimes buy vehicles for cash and of course carry it with me to do so. I find this kind of insanity disgusting and I think criminal charges should be assessed on the law officers that did this, all the way to the prosecutors. If someone came into my home and stole from me they would be arrested, what is the difference? I am sure glad I am retired, this system is stupid, just like looking at me for depositing or taking $600 in my bank account.
This reminds me--has there been any updates about that guy from Morrisvlle, NC that's fighting to get his cash back? (That's my state so I've got what you might call a vested interest in the outcome.) I know the courts have ordered twice that he gets his money back but the city was pulling some questionable stunts to make sure he didn't, but has anything happened since the last update?
You mean the case where the city is saying "We're not responsible, since we turned over the money to the feds"? I hope that guy BANKRUPTS that city with a HUGE damage award.
Deacon 1
DEA Con 0
And the lost year
Rusty, that's the best one that could have been been made on the internet. My hats off to you sir. LOL
Actually the dea still wins
Mentioning that he is from lower 9th ward and decon in his church... could one assume he was traveling while black ?
@@jeffbybee5207 While I understand what you are saying, and it is valid. I suspect they were more interested in the colour of the money in this case. However, it may have impacted there calculation of can this guy fight back against this abuse of power.
Those who recover their cash seized by Civil Asset Forfeiture should be able to charge interest at the highest rate of any legal "payday loan" outlet in the U.S. Those rates, allowed by the government, amount to usury, and since the government allows it, the government should also be willing to pay it.
I absolutely agree, but since they make the rules, I doubt that will happen.
Dam good idea
I find it difficult to disagree with this.
Interest should be continuously compounded, of course, as court cases can often take years to resolve.
Punitive damages equal to the value stolen paid to the victim on top of the returned property would be great. But let's be honest, we don't hold ourselves that accountable.
Justice should include punishment for the agencies.
Cash should not be FREE MONEY for cops to steal.
As soon as I saw this story somewhere else, I knew you'd jump right on it Steve!
ABOLISH CIVIL ASSET FORFEITURE!
I absolutely livid at it being phrased as "Police seized there cash!" Call it what it is! "Police STOLE there cash!!"
The “war on drugs” has destroyed far more lives than drugs ever have.
@@E.Asinus those are the good drugs to the government. So many in Congress have gotten wealthy on it. They just don't like being cut out of the loop with pot.
It's not a war on Drugs! It's a war on poor people! And yes it Does absolutely no good!
But, But, But, it's for the Public Good!
Don't you get it?
@@neilkurzman4907 since the mid 70s with the de de deinstitution and mothballing of nearly all mental health programs. The prison population has exploded in the USA. To a level 12x that of any country in Europe. Even multitudes higher than authoritative com muňist
Country's. These incarcerated millions are predominantly low lvl non violent drug crimes. Look into it,
then tell me how on earth locking drug addicted mentaly I'll people up is going to help them, become anything but a better educated felon that will never be able to find work ever again! This cycle repeats itself hundreds of times a hour.....
@@neilkurzman4907 ruclips.net/video/R49fi-rHhAM/видео.html
By dismissing the case, the government ONCE AGAIN avoids a precedent being entered into case history.
As I continually say.
THERE SHOULD NOT NEED TO BE A PRECEDENT! It's called FOLLOWING THE LAW AND USING COMMON SENSE!
Two things that Cops DO NOT DO with this cases.
He got his money back - fine, but what about his expenses, time & trouble? Government should compensate all of this - hopefully, using assets of involved officials.
Where does the "gov't" get its money? From the willing taxpayers!
Why isn't a gov't employee FIRED? Oh and if you re-elect a politician (totally different from a statesman) you're adding to the problem!
Where\When did he get his money back? The announcement was that they were dismissing the case. I'll be surprised if the authorities remit the money they stole.
Very happy to hear about this. This practice is crazy.
It's a violation of the 4th Amendment.
It violates the US constitution by making the accused prove they were not planning a future crime as well as having not committed a past one just to keep their own property.
It is not just money they take decades ago a retired DA actually had an apartment complex taken the excuse one person in the complex turned out to be a drug dealer.
They claimed because he paid rent using drug money the complex was connected to the drug trade.
By the time he won in court the place had to be condemned because the government evicted the people he rented to and made it a low income housing project and some of the people the government rented to tore out all the copper destroying the place and had an actual drug den on one floor.
Then of course I am sure we all heard the news story when they tried to use this asset forfeiture to steal a cruise liner because a crewmember was arrested for having a small amount of drugs. They claimed it was used to smuggle drugs into the US ie the tiny amount that crewmember had.
@@fcterryb it's just government sponsored extortion, and strongarm robbery. All the officials involved should have their assets seized to reimburse their victims, as well as ALL of their businesses, and associates investigated for potential involvement. Those who actually care about proper government should go full scorched earth.
Why are you happy to hear this he plainly said that if there hadn't been publicity he wouldn't have gotten his money he's not saying they're changing their laws or ways of doing things they just didn't want to be scrutinized by the media for this one case. This continues to happen every day
@@lady4191 because he got his money back dummy.
Amazing story! Speak truth and share far and wide. And USE CASH!!
This will sound like a conspiracy theory, but they don't want you carrying cash because it is harder to track. Add on qualified immunity and they have no reason to stop this bullying behavior.
Hence the story. Making crypto more acceptable & "sensible" suits the agenda.
Big Brother loves when people use paper or electronic. currency, then IRS can ask where did you get it, OH by the way you owe tax on it
This is accurate and not a conspiracy since the government has openly stated this (minus the qualified immunity part).
Also incentivizes you to use large banks, where you can expect to find a branch from which to withdraw almost anywhere, rather than a credit union that's only local to you.
Exactly. Just look at the recent FBI raid of private (non-bank) safe deposit boxes in Los Angeles. The judge issued warrant was only against the business of safe deposit boxes and specifically excluded the contents of customer boxes. However, the FBI ceased all of the box contents and is requiring the owners to 'come forward and prove that the valuables were obtained legally'. Case is still ongoing and there has been some push back so hopefully the FBI will be forced to return the property that they stole.
Guilty until proven innocent is the American way.
I'm going to start asking politicians why they favor assett forfeiture. When they say they don't, then ask them where is the legislation they introduced to stop this practice.
Next, ask the same question about qualified immunity.
Start with Biden, he was a champion for that type of legislation.
@@jdschauss we had a government without it until 1982. You are confusing it with sovereign immunity, perhaps? Or do you not realize that not violating rights is already an absolute defense against a 42 USC 1893 claim?
@@jdschauss Then regulate lawyers and lawsuits. Why can't you see the big picture and confine yourself to the status quo? Imagine having that mindset during slavery: "but it's always been this way!"
@@jdschauss The court won't do it, but legislation can, like in Colorado. H.R.7085 was introduced in Congress 6/4/2020 with 66 co-sponsors and sent to the Judiciary Committee for a national law to end it.
@@jdschauss _"Qualified immunity will never be taken away."_
You should ask the police in Colorado about that.
Sure, it may not ever disappear en toto, but it can _certainly_ be stripped / limited in it's application to police / law enforcement...
The Institute for Justice, doing God's work!
Way to go IJ. This is what the ACLU used to do before they got woke.
@@neilkurzman4907 Conservatives get banned from private enterprise run social networks: _"Whut about the 1st Amendment?!"_
Also Conservatives: _"Whuddya mean gov't can't promote my religion over all the others?!"_
Should be treble damages. Just restoring the original $$$$ in a few cases will not inhibit the bad behavior.
Actually, by many distinct religious texts, four times the amount was standard.
Not to inject religion in this in any way, but it sounds reasonable.
It should triple every day they have it. That will:
A) make the punishment fit the crime
B) actually make wronged citizens whole
Day 1 is x3
Day 2 is x9
Day 3 is x27
Day 4 is x81
And enforcement needs teeth. Failing to adhere to this rule by anyone, citizen, cop or judge, should result in a mandatory minimum of a decade in federal prison
At the very least they should pay interest
@@admthrawnuru ... And go to jail. It's grand larceny by every standard and definition
The actual "fair rate" since he owns a business would be investing it in things such as SPY and that's like insane this last year so they could have argued for that.
There need to be statutory damages including attorney's fees when the agencies(s) seizing funds are forced to return them. They need to be substantial, and divided between the agencies(s) budget(s) AND the officers' pension funds. Finally, there need to be strict time limits for filing criminal charges post-seizure and liquidated damages if charges are not filed in a timely manner, regardless of the final disposition of the matter.
That's where the other unethical thing called Qualified Immunity comes into play. In other words, yes we shot you to death and stole your money, but we have badges and blue uniforms, and judges in black nightgowns that say its OK.
George, George. You seem like a nice guy but what you are saying makes waay too much sense. Its dangerous. It would make government officials and leo's responsible for their actions and you need to stop.
Why everyone always after the pension fund? a working officer doesn't care about the balance of the pension fund until they're retired. and even then it's the union's pension fund not an officers so they still don't care. It should come straight from the budget of the agency that robbed the guy.
@@christianmiller6046 the higher the pension the earlier you can retire. I can live quite comfortably on 2k a month for the rest of my life.
What? And take money out of the DOJ and Police slush funds?
Thank you so much Kermit, for fighting this and for making your public statements about the illegal behavior of the DEA and the prosecutors.
These agencies need to be compelled to not just return the money, but to pay the legal fees, and punitive damages.
preferably from the pockets of the corrupt agents that are taking he cash.
STEVE, I’d like to grab your attention for a moment.
Civil asset forfeiture isn’t limited to cash grabs only. In reference to your comments on owning a home/experiencing burglary I would to point out a better point to make would be…. Any home owner in the country can experience civil asset forfeiture regarding their home! So for the people saying “don’t carry cash and you’ll have nothing to worry about” the best response is “also, don’t own a home or a car (or really anything of value).”
Yes I saw a story, elsewhere, about some woman pulled over in a "routine traffic stop". As part of the cops' spiel, they asked if she was still making payments on the car. Being polite and co-operative as she was, in conversation she said no, it was fully paid off. So that then encouraged and enabled the cops to take her car (easily, under civil asset forfeiture) knowing that there was no lien or security on the car's title from a Bank or Finance agency. The car was nothing flash, not a Ferrari or anything, just a typical family car that was already a few years old.
@@KiwiCatherineJemma Yeap! I saw a story about an older lady who’s younger relative had been staying with her in her home. He bought drugs at an undercover op and instead of just arresting him they followed him home. Once he went inside with the drugs they busted him, and then tied the home to drug activity and seized it. AN ENTIRE HOUSE.
It always has been, and always will be, completely out of control.
That's why I toss everyone who enters my house or car.
Institute for Justice are “rock stars”. Repeal civil asset forfeiture and qualified Immunity, we the people! 🇺🇸
Civil Asset Forfeiture will never go away because they have used it as a funding mechanism for too long.
We can make it go away if we actually punished those who try to use it.
Claim civil asset forfeiture and seize a person's money? That's theft. If the money is over a certain amount, that's grand larceny. Let's send those officers to prison. Let's have mandatory minimums of a decade. And let's enforce it before we do anything else.
That would require equality under the law. I've seen too many Utube videos to believe that's the reality and not the ideal.
@@1rstBorn it takes choice to make it reality, as it's taken years of the choice of complacency to get here.
Yes, static friction is greater than kinetic friction.
But we can enact change. Last summers' unrests began the process. But we slipped back into complacency and comfort.
Using CAF as a funding mechanism is corrupt.
@@mgaus _"That's theft"_
You do understand that your layman's interpretation _of the words_ doesn't _actually_ constitute an erudite legal assessment _of the _*_law_* right?
_"Let's send those officers to prison"_
Who, _exactly,_ is it that you imagine is going to charge/arrest/try/convict them? Remember that the courts already support both *CAF* _and_ *Qualified Immunity* !!
_"Let's have mandatory minimums of a decade"_
Being as these actions directly benefit cash-starved legislative jurisdictions, who, again, is it that you think will pass the laws needed to effect this?
_"And let's enforce it before we do anything else"_
Do you _genuinely_ want to see a practice implemented where laws that haven't even been written, let alone passed, can somehow be enforced? *_Seriously?!_* 😲🤯
Maybe you should try actually thinking these things all the way through _before_ you pronounce them, by fiat, as though they were somehow either reasonable or rational? 🤦🙄
Class action lawsuit sounds like the best way of ending this since the SCOTUS still keeps looking the other way.
Um, SCOTUS created this in the first place.🙄
@@dragonhealer7588 ...and SCOTUS can UNCREATE it.
@@jdschauss
You mean do their job?
If only.....
What in the world makes you think the Supreme Court can't/won't (over)rule a civil suit if it wants to? 🤔🤨
@@neilkurzman4907 Except that our system leads to politicians in higher offices being subservient to the special interests who fund their campaigns. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) said all the right things to get elected but now only talks to the special interests and avoids her own citizens.
We need to bring this up in every election
IIRC Obama addressed it thanks indirectly to John Oliver's piece on his show, but Trump rolled it back a bit, I think.
@@SayAhh NO CAF skyrocketed under Obama not that Trump was any better, I saw one of his reactions to this subject and it was sickening.
@@ghz24 "Previous attempts at reform have largely been stymied due to intense lobbying from law enforcement groups, for whom asset forfeiture can be a significant source of revenue. From a political standpoint there's something for everyone to hate about the practice. Liberals note that it disproportionately affects poor and minority citizens, while conservatives are inclined to see it as a gross overreach of state power." So if you hate CAF, then... let's defund the police.
Also: the War on Drugs was and is an abject failure (thanks Nixon and Reagan!) and Christian conservatives and other "marijuana is bad" groups like parents and federal and state politicians who won't legalize and decriminalize it and take it off the Schedule 1 list ate to blame, going back all the way to oligarchs like William Randall Hearst.
@@SayAhh Well law enforcement shouldn't be able to "lobby" at all for anything.
The drug war is a carbunkle on the face of freedom and CAF is the puss seeping out of it.
Defund the police is a simplistic chant for protesters not a solution. We do need law enforcement. We just need to change the rules that allow them to trample our rights.
We need to teach ourselves and our kids to know and respectfully stand up for our rights.
Knowledge and attitude are the keys to defending against all but the completely corrupt cops.
I'm going to digress a little here.
When I first looked into building an electric bicycle I looked up every instance of bicycles in my states laws.
Latter I was pulled over late at night riding home from work on a fully legal regular bike on an unavoidable 2 block section of a state highway.
I had waited for a big break in traffic with no cars on sight except one in the left lane.
That was the cop car and they slowed down to my speed so for a block I'm getting frustrated that this car wasn't passing me so I could turn left in a block and get off this dangerous highway.
When they pulled me over I ask why I was stopped they told me I wasn't allowed to ride on the state highway and should use the sidewalk.
I said " Bullshit first off there is no sidewalk and the right of way where there should be a sidewalk is all torn up by the local fiber optic crew AND even if there were a sidewalk I am fully within my rights to ride on that highway and furthermore I'm not required to stay on the edge I can ride right down the center of MY lane." Then I asked them why they were trying to lie to me. They claimed it was for my safety to which I said seems like you're trying to infringe on my rights.
They stressed how dangerous the road was and left with a "stay safe".
I was ready with the final challenge of "OK just write me the ticket and we'll see what the judge has to say." But I didn't get to use it.😞
Knowledge is power. How much money do you have?
None of your business, am I being detained? Can I go now?
@@ghz24 Agree on all points. However, defund the police doesn't mean eliminate all police departments; it means giving them only money to police, not having them wear several hats, like: police, counselor, psychiatrist, etc., and taking that money to hire professionals in those fields and, say, build more homeless shelters and provide them free meals instead of letting the PD take the money and buy tanks. Poor and particularly poor black and Hispanic population seem to be targeted often, hence BLM and why even white and Asian protesters join BLM groups during protests. Truck drivers and out-of-state light vehicles also get pulled over, and those who do not know their rights and/or document their encounters will sometimes lose everything, including but not limited to their freedom, their money, their load or even their car. I like the "Audit the Audit" channel, and justice isn't always served, but that's why income inequality and education are important; if there isn't such a major discrepancy in income, then ppl wouldn't need to steal cars to buy food or pay for drugs or college or medical bills, and there wouldn't be high speed pursuits and there might be fewer domestic abuse problems. More money = more problems, but no money = ppl are going to have trouble staying alive. I digressed, too, but it's all related: there is a need for higher (and adjusted for inflation and cost of living) minimum wage, tax reform that close the loopholes and fund enforcement that recoups money from filthy rich offenders and not going after middle and lower class citizens who was a dollar or even 100 dollars short on their taxes, universal/single-payer healthcare system without reasonable, nominal copays and loe to no dedictibles, free 2- and 4-year college to everyone (without difference in tuition for out-of-state students), better accountability of police officers and required use of bodycams (audio and video) that cannot be turned off or would result in immediate termination plus jail time, legalize cannibis (I don't smoke not eat edibles but I don't want to be jailed if I or others did), and all that should be step 1 in making this country safer and fairer.
Good for him, but I hate that it was dismissed instead of being ruled on. This stuff has to stop.
Half of what Steve talks about has me shaking my head in wonderment. The other half has me pissed off.
Support the Institute for Justice! They are do great work for people who don't have the resources to fight themselves.
The federal government is despicable.
This needs to be viewed as theft and the cops/feds need jail time.
"cops/feds need jail time"? For that to happen we need to ELIMINATE qualified immunity. That has happened in 2 states but been up for vote in many others and been shot down by police unions. Talk to your state legislature person from your district and tel them no vote unless you promise to eliminate qualified immunity.
@@robert5 I write my state representatives monthly.
I don't just want qualified immunity eliminated; I want higher standards for those responsible for the safety of society. If a normal citizen would get 2 years for something, a cop should get 3 for the same crime. That's Qualified Responsibility
I'd love to see the judges who allow civil asset forfeiture tried and and found guilty of violating their oath to defend the US constitution.
I'm curious if the DEA and DOIJ (Department of In-Justice) also paid for the Lawyer's Fees (if IJ wasn't a 'Non-Profit' Law firm that is), and for the 'Emotional Hardship' Damages caused by them confiscating this money for over a year? I doubt it, but if it had gone to Jury Trial, I could see both being awarded to Mr. Kermit and his Lawyer!! I'm also pretty sure that the Department of In-Justice was also very very worried that this Case could have ended their future Civil Asset Forfeiture schemes.
Many people simply leave the money because an attorney will cost more than the 7 or 8 thousand dollars that was stolen.
@@veramae4098 When I saw Steve's videos about this I found it so evil that I immediately started donating to IFJ and writing everyone with power about the issue. Please call, write, email and communicate with your elected officialls to stop this.
Qualified immunity?
@dragonstalon1001 just because an entity is legally structured as a not-for-profit that does not mean that they cannot charge for their services or compensate employees. It's mainly means from a legal standpoint they cannot pay returns or dividends to shareholders, though there are often other restrictions.
Nope. You have to pay your own court costs and lawyer fees. That usually comes to more than the amount they took (average cash seizure in civil asset forfeiture is less than $2000) so they feel confident you won't spend $5000+ on a lawyer to get it back.
And the worst thing that happens to them if you win is that they have to give the money back. That's their worst-case-scenario. Imagine if the only penalty for bank robbery was that you had to give the money back if you got caught. That would be a bank-robber's dream. Basically that is what the cops have.
Very good news to hear!!!
I got HALF my money back!.. then come to find out that is a kind of common situation for people allowed to get any money back.
@@richardg8651 no good reason besides maybe judge's suspicion against prosecutor and defendant? I had my legal proof and a lawyer, crooked system.
They should file bar complaints against the federal prosecutors for lying in court.
In the words of my late favorite radio host Bruce Williams, "In God we trust, all others pay cash".
Bruce was great to listen to. First guy who ever taught the masses to show up to real estate closings with an attorney... And not just sign 30 pieces of legal paperwork without knowing what it is.
Been a long time since I last heard him. He was good to hear. When did he pass?
Finally...justice. Not JUST US.
Good result is heartening. I would love it if you would give us updates on the class action lawsuit that the Institute for Justice is bringing against the DEA & the TSA.
Thanks Steve.
I support the Institute of Justice. Great organization, that really helps Americans that are abused by American Law Enforcement.
Watching your videos about this has made me an activist. I donate IFJ and last week I signed up for a meeting with Senator Marco Rubio's rep and was the only person there without an immigration issue but this issue is so evil and wrong that I made sure to stay and insure that my thought were shared with my Senator. If more people did this this theft may stop.
This is sickening!!!
If we had any sense these forfeiture acts would be stopped dead. People in our government who advocate confiscation without proof of a crime need to be removed from their positions ASAP!!!
10:48 And another argument (from your past episodes): "If you had the proper documentation for the money's source, it's suspicious as if you knew you were committing a crime and needed to prepare for being stopped by the police".
NO! that won't work. the cops know what they are doing and they do this on purpose for revenue. this is why people can't trust cops, nor should they trust them.
@@jdschauss when I need help, I’ll use my second amendment, that’s why we have a second amendment to protect ourselves and families.
We do not need police. You’re a state agent / revenuer with no duty to protect the public or individuals, that’s been proven & stated by the Supreme Court.
To me the police are nothing more than Nazi’s. They to were just doing their job, taking orders, following the law & policy right 😂
@@jdschauss People like to use the old _'one rotten apple'_ adage to refer to this phenomenon, often without conceptualizing that the end result, in that saying, is that the 'whole bunch' is ruined. Your problem is, in fact, _not_ with the significantly deleterious, and well-earned, perception, within the contemporary zeitgeist, of corrupt police wantonly abusing/killing people, and/or hiding behind qualified immunity, and/or abusing civil asset forfeiture etc. -- The _actual_ problem you need to address is the ubiquitous 'blue wall of silence' that actively works to shield/protect such individuals from being exposed and expunged from the system and so perpetuates the population's conflation of the whole with the few 'rotten apples'.
As a law enforcement professional, you _must_ be familiar with the concept of what 'criminal conspiracy' is right? Well, even if you don't engage in illicit activities personally, merely upholding simple camaraderie with _'those who do evil',_ via silence, nevertheless makes you tacitly complicit in their acts. If you _genuinely_ don't want to be painted with the same brush, please tell us, just how much _active_ work are you routinely engaged in, within the context of your own employment, to shatter the so-called blue-wall, including disregarding such commonplace behaviours such as extending ( or _accepting!_ ) 'professional courtesy' treatment to/from other LEO's on things like traffic violations etc.? 🤔🤨🙄
@@jdschauss Your problem is its the overwhelming majority doing bad things. You are the minority. And while you were doing the job did you do anything to stop the bad apples? I doubt it.
@@jdschauss: _"How do you know I haven't already paid a significant price fighting that system? "_
_"How do you claim I am a part of that system when you don't even know me?"_
brtle: _"...please tell us, just how much active work are you routinely engaged in, within the context of your own employment, to shatter the so-called blue-wall, including disregarding such commonplace behaviours as extending ( or accepting! ) 'professional courtesy' treatment to/from other LEO's on things like traffic violations etc.?"_
Perhaps you should start by learning the difference between a _question_ and a _statement_ ? 🤔🙄
_"Why do you assume every single one of us is involved in some sort of cover up?"_
I 'assume' that the concept of 'the Blue Wall of Silence' wasn't simply an idea concocted out of whole cloth, and, indeed, your own rebuttal freely acknowledges that it exists as your _"academy classmates shunned [you] for [your] attitude about that system, and [you] have felt the weight of it for fifteen years"_
_"Do you know each and every single officer?"_
The aptness of the _whole_ 'rotten apple' analogy (and criminal conspiracy / complicity via silence) was explained to you. If you don't/can't/won't understand it, that's pretty strong evidence in favour of my point.
_"Your wanton prejudice does not carry the support of empirical evidence"_
🤣🤣🤣 -- the subject video above, as well as a simple Google News search for 'police killings', 'qualified immunity' and/or 'civil asset forfeiture' will amply disprove this facile claim...
Thanks for your work.
Now that it’s been settled he should sue for the interest that would have come from having the amount in savings during the time it was out of his possession.
No. He should receive interest in the amount that would be paid over the same period of time as a loan from one of the "payday loan" bandits, which are also legal per the government's definition. If the government allows such rates to be charged, the government should be forced to pay those rates as well.
There is a “statutory interest rate” in many jurisdictions; that is what should be awarded, by law.
@@arinerm1331 Good point!
No he should receive the amount of money he would have made if it was invested in the in stock market with the security that had the greatest return over the period he was not in possession of the money.
That is circular reasoning. Why do judges allow this happen?
This is great news! We are turning the tide!
Also, another reason to carry cash, if you negotiate a lower price, you can pay that rather than a cashiers cheque which has a previously fixed amount.
The other problem with the cash seizure is that the victim has no money to fund the lawsuit to get the money back.
I would sue the TSA also. Why do they have a backdoor agreement with the DEA in the first place. It all starts with them violating your rights.
The walls between agencies allowed terrorists to hijack aircraft and fly them into buildings. What the TSA did was absolutely wrong, but agencies do need to communicate and coordinate...they just need to do it against ACTUAL CRIMINALS, not elder deacons trying to make a living.
@@neilkurzman4907
Let me broaden you thought process. Money isn’t the only thing you can get out of suing. Bringing something to light may cause others to speak up. When we as a collective speak up, it has a greater chance at letting the judges and powers to be see we’re fed up with the bull. In turn, overturning or getting rid of said practice. Same as with the push for qualified immunity. You get the issue ruled on first THEN you go after the money if they break that law.
@@neilkurzman4907
My man 👍🏾
So happy to hear this, good on the judge.
Corrupt law enforcement abuses this law.
Preach on about assets forfeiture and major kudos to IJ.
What about the guy who lost the 140, 000 trying to buy that land?
Never tell cops that you have money! Never!
Another problem is cash is the only way to make a large purchase outside of your home area. When I moved a few states away I had trouble coming up with the deposit for renting a house because I didn't have my bank in that area and the ATM only allows for a certain amount. You'e pretty much forced to carry the cash.
Hey Steve, in the early 90's I worked checkpoint security at BWI Airport before the TSA existed. They trained us how to spot large amounts of money on the X-Ray machine. We were also told we would get a reward for finding it. Actually a bigger reward than if we found a weapon or drugs.
I am in the process of selling a special Corvette and ran into this. Told the buyer he has to be here during banking hours and if he doesn't want to carry cash, bring a cashiers check drawn from my national bank. Didn't think about the "you cash it and hand me the cash" process. I was just going to deposit the check but it is much safer for me to deposit the cash. Thanks.
Don't forget that large cash deposit is going to be reported to the IRS.
@@jeffragar3493 Yes, I've been through that exercise many many times.
Whoever signed to prosecute or charge should be disbarred, fired
In the middle of 'Covid', in November, 2020, I rode a Greyhound bus from my home here in Springfield, OR to Tacoma, WA, with $7,800 in cash in my pockets, to buy a used pickup. EXTREMELY sketchy, although I was more worried about catching Covid-19 than I was about getting robbed for the cash. I was back home that evening without the cash, but with the truck.
I saw the article and considered sending it to you but figured you would be flooded. Thank you for shining a light on this subject that the gov't (both state and federal) has abused for too long. It's roots in stopping criminals has been corrupted by the easy money they make by taking first and making you hire an atty to get your $ back.
"I'm not going to have cash in my house anymore." So, they won.
Not yet: they can still seize the house. :(
@@SayAhh and the bank will take his money... from a bank bail in xd
(when u put money in a bank u get an IOU from them, unsecured loan... )
Civil asset theft, perpetrators should be prosecuted.
Yeah criminals don't use cash anymore. Carrying cash should almost prove you're innocent.
Steve, just yesterday I went to buy a car from a private party. I live in Palm Springs and the car was in Long Beach. The seller would only take cash. Because of your videos I didn't want to travel with $4,800 in cash. I asked a friend of mine, also a pretty good mechanic, if he could meet me at Wells Fargo in Long Beach and go with me to the sellers house where he could check out the car and have safety in numbers. For a mere $150 he evacuated the car and give me a little security.
I'm not planning on anything happening but just being cautious.
Neil
.
Pretty much every US Federal dept. Is guilty of judicial overreach/abuse (DHS, TSA, CBP, FBI, DEA et. al)
9:30 *QUESTION:* What's the difference between any of these statements?
1) "You shouldn't wear outfits like that, you're begging to be raped."
2) "You shouldn't drive a car like that in this neighborhood, you're begging to be carjacked."
3) "You shouldn't carry so much cash, you're begging to be robbed.""
4) "You shouldn't use your credit card online, you're begging to have your identity stolen.
*ANSWER:* #3 can be used against you by the government, and defended by the SCOTUS. All of the others are illegal.
Thank you for keeping us aware of these cases. Freedom is not free and the most difficult war front for freedom is against one’s own government. Thank God for lawyers willing to take up the cause of freedom.
We need for news agencies to start doing "stings" on this. I.e. a reporter books a flight and does a small bit with camera and camera man before on how he or she is going to see if the cash gets confiscated for no reason. It would be well worth the cost of $10-$25K per sting for news agencies to expose this. Could be done all over the country and the feds. would not only get a black eye but have to give the money back as well.
Anyone could join the fun. Just carry stacks of cash with real notes front and back, but with newspaper in between. Have a cellphone recording video for when the "bust" happens.
Hell yeah !!!!! The IJ is awesome for helping this man and many others!!!!
Mic No 2 Steve's RHS, Saying I'm an aeroplane, I've got Ben wings...
The Institute for Justice does great work and it's privately funded.
I would love to see the self-declared racial/ethnic stats PER STATE on "Civil Asset Forfeiture" versus the actuarial proportions...
Now that's a good point! You got me researching that right now.
@@TreeLBollingTreeMan Would you come back here and tell us about it if you find anything?
@@Amanda-C. My wife and I must have researched at least 100 sites and we could not find anything per the race percentage of "Civil Asset Forfeiture"
Steve, tell us how you really feel. Please. Keep doing it until this abomination gets buried so deep, it will never again see light.
Make sure to always get an evidence receipt when they take away your stuff!
What if they refuse to give a receipt?
@@johnstack5008
They have no choice, legally, expect with regards to stuff such as narcotics. They are taking possession of your items with or without your consent and this can lead to chain of custody issues. Without said receipt, you cannot legally prove they took it from you, and neither can they.
'Get your property back...', maybe, and only after spending thousand of dollars in legal fees. The citizen remains further damaged regardless of whether the get back the money from civil asset forfeiture.
It’s sad you aren’t afraid of being robbed by thief’s, it’s by the cops you need to be afraid of robbing you.
But, you repeat yourself. :)
@@arinerm1331 haha, I thought about that when I wrote it. It’s like, damn, a repetitive cycle.
This is theft and it ought to be stopped. I had a hard time even taking out a bunch of cash from the bank to buy a truck once. The bank had to report it to the Feds. Never heard anything come of it and bought my truck.
They should start fining police services for these illegal seizures. $1million per incident should chill this practice.
why would you think police would care that the general public pays for their actions?
@@E.Asinus dam right. Act like a thief get treated like a thief!
@@3D_foos The police might not, the elected officials who set their budgets might.
_"They should start fining police services for these illegal seizures."_
Q1: Who is 'they'?
Q2: What law, exactly, is it that you think they're a contravention of?
Seriously, why doesn't anyone seem to ever stop and think through what they're saying _before_ committing it to the screen? 🤔🤯🤦
@@brtle A1: The court ordering the return of the illegally seized goods.
A2: Freedom against unreasonable search and seizure. There some big law against it in the US. Some kind of Amendment or some such. Oh Yeah! the FOURTH AMENDMENT. I'm sure a punitive damage award could be assessed.
7:44 -56 Earned a laugh.
A bums paper sack might be entitled to the same protections as a businessman's briefcase but only one has a lock.
Keep us updated on that class action!
He Should gets his money back with interest,,, for all the Hassle
Township Disaster Preparation Lists include: Take cash along with water, food, first-aid kit.
How much cash to avoid Forfeiture?
50 cents & a bus token.
Great point!
$1.
Thanks.
Ben laying flat on top of the cylindrical mic next to the red Viper.
It's unfortunate that there are so many people who don't understand how important it is to make the government follow the rules and to hold it accountable.
Would these people Have a case to sue for slander? Since the gov is basically calling them drug dealing scum or money launders a minimum
Good point
Nope. Standards for slander are pretty high. And qualified immunity protects cops, DA’s, virtually everyone in law enforcement.
Not a chance in hell. If that were the case, then anybody acquitted of a crime would file suit for slander. The American criminal justice system would cease to operate.
@@neilkurzman4907 the volt paragraph
@@neilkurzman4907 I finally found some comments that weren't Bohring to read, I've frequently found my gut hertz from laughter with the puns
I'm surprised Civil Asset Forfeiture hasn't gone to the next logical level. Here's an example:
A Mercedes Benz registered, titled, and insured in New Mexico is driving along Interstate 40 in Tennessee, and makes a lane change without a turn signal. Tennessee Highway Patrol stops the vehicle, and during the course of the stop the Trooper wonders how this 57-year-old man came to own a Mercedes. SEIZE IT! How is that not happening yet?
I have to wonder if the case was dismissed to keep it from getting to the supreme court which could end up with civil asset forfeiture being entirely abolished.
As with Qualified Immunity I believe, sadly, that the getting the Supreme Court to act will be a serious uphill climb. It's the Legislators who have the power to change these practices, but many of them are one and the same who wish to get the IRS invovled in your bank transactions and mine. Wait until you start getting calls:
"This is agent Nosy from the Internal Revenue Service. We have obtained information about deposit transactions in excess of $600 to your bank account. Where did that money come from?"
"I sold a Lawn mower and a dishwasher."
"Do you have evidence of that? Receipts, Invoices, etc."
"No. It was at a yard sale."
"We don't believe you. Your bank account is now forfeit."
Yup. Looked like they'd lose, quick, settle.
I'm glad you got my email on this subject Steve!
Simplest way for me to buy a cheap car is stop at the ATM machine and pull out some money, even if I have to do it several times over a few days due to withdraw limits at the ATM; the people selling cheap cars typically don't take Visa or Mastercard, lol.
Thanks for the update Steve, but again the justice system brings to the table "way too little, way too late." The man is still out his lawyer fees, court cost, lost time, and his dignity. If a class action suit is brought and won, I'm sure some very large law firm will be very happy, and very rich. The complaintants will all wind up with a check for .36 cents. We the population are growing tired of feeding the piggy known as the Judicial System. All of it.
Great update! Good news for a Saturday morning.
Sadly, the government got part of what it wanted, when the Victim said, “I will never keep cash in the house again!”
FEDS: “Thanks for that! Can we get it in writing?”
Question for Steve:
Is it legal for the TSA to inform law enforcement about anything you are carrying if it’s not illegal on its face? We submit to TSA’s otherwise unreasonable searches on the idea it’s for our safety. But I thought it was for the strictly limited purpose of Security. Now, if they see a gun, sure. But cash?
You're missing the point. Cash is nearly always involved in illegal activities, lol
@@gbenother8755 I don't think he's missing the point at all, lol. The TSA's searches are ostensibly for _safety_ purposes, not looking for an unrelated potential illegal activity. No weapons, no bombs...that's just fine and dandy. But anything that's not a threat to the safety of the aircraft or its occupants isn't in their purview...which is why they didn't have the authority to do anything about it themselves. The problem here is that they backdoored the information to someone else.
A government out of control !
03:19 I enjoyed this so much because I know some people who often make such irrelevant arguments for every discussion topic under the sun.
Anyone whose gone to college has met 50 people under that classification… I hated so many class discussions FOR EXACTLY THIS
Thank you for covering stories like this
Ben - Atop mic 2, nearest red viper.
My email was returned last night but glad you covered this one ASAP.
I wonder if you could use the IRS as a weapon in this...
"Please pay x amount of tax by..."
"I already paid ten times that amount in tax this year. If you want your share, I suggest you contact the DEA, who seized all my money last month. I don't have any. And I refuse to pay anyone any more tax until we're even."
Civil Asset Forfeiture had, at its grass roots, some really good intentions. It is a shame that the personnel responsible for implementing the program have handled it in such a way.
Over the course of several years, I saved up something like $3500 because I wanted a really nice Martin guitar. I wasn't aware of civil asset forfeiture at that time, and have no criminal history, but I was carrying it when I bought the guitar. Glad I drive like an old grandmother, because this travesty of justice upsets me now. I recently went on a fishing trip that involved a lengthy car ride, and had about $500 in my wallet. Glad I didn't get pulled over then (and $500 isn't life changing money for me) but if I had been pulled over, I would hand over license, proof of insurance, the rental car agreement, and simply kept my mouth shut. You "lawyer dogs" have taught me that it is never a good idea to offer anything to police other than identification and necessary documents. "I'd prefer not to have a conversation" is now stuck in my head. Oh, and I am not a "Sovereign Citizen" that won't comply with lawful commands from LEOs, but I do NOT have to engage in any witty repartee with them.
The problem with proving you had no criminal intentions is, that you cannot prove a negative.
I have been a law enforcement officer for 46 years, I sometimes buy vehicles for cash and of course carry it with me to do so. I find this kind of insanity disgusting and I think criminal charges should be assessed on the law officers that did this, all the way to the prosecutors. If someone came into my home and stole from me they would be arrested, what is the difference? I am sure glad I am retired, this system is stupid, just like looking at me for depositing or taking $600 in my bank account.
Thank you sir
Rules for thee and not for me.
Someone needs to tell you that you are part of the problem.
So Steve, why hasn't this illegal practice been stopped nationwide already!?!
This reminds me--has there been any updates about that guy from Morrisvlle, NC that's fighting to get his cash back? (That's my state so I've got what you might call a vested interest in the outcome.) I know the courts have ordered twice that he gets his money back but the city was pulling some questionable stunts to make sure he didn't, but has anything happened since the last update?
You mean the case where the city is saying "We're not responsible, since we turned over the money to the feds"? I hope that guy BANKRUPTS that city with a HUGE damage award.
Also live in NC and anxious to see that municipality pay through the mayor's nose.
@@jdschauss The city will just pass that expense back on to the tax payers, unforutnately.
It is not just money. They can seize your car and even your house.