America's insane drug laws have turned cops into robbers.
Back in September, Davidson County, North Carolina sheriff's deputies pulled over a car traveling on Interstate 85, southwest of Lexington. The officers said the car was following too closely to another vehicle.
While searching the car, the officers found $88,000 in cash. The driver and passenger insisted the money was to buy a house in Atlanta.
The officers didn't believe them. So they called in a drug-sniffing dog.
According to the Davidson County newspaper The Dispatch, the dog "found a strong odor of narcotics inside the car."
But no drugs were found. Nor any evidence of wrong-doing. So the two men weren't charged with any crime and were free to leave.
But not with their $88,000. The sheriffs kept that.
Incredibly, thanks to federal and state civil asset forfeiture laws, police can seize property and cash on the mere suspicion that they may be connected with drugs. The lack of proof of a crime is no protection. The sheriff's department called in federal investigators, and they are now preparing to argue in federal court that the government should be able to keep the money.
If they win -- and the over-powerfull government does win the vast majority of asset forfeiture cases -- the local sheriff's office cut will be 75 percent ($66,000) of the confiscated money.
Asset forfeiture has been quite lucrative for the Davidson County Sheriff's Office: $1.6 million in 2005 and $1.4 million in 2004.
"It allows us to buy equipment without using taxpayers' money," said Sheriff Grice.
Police departments across the country report similar windfalls.
This practice, common for many years, was given a strong boost in August. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled that if a motorist is carrying a large sum of cash, that money is automatically subject to confiscation. "Possession of a large sum of cash is 'strong evidence' of a connection to drug activity," the court ruled.
In other words, for all practical purposes, driving with a lot of cash is now a crime in the United States of America.
(See the following links for an article on the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals case, and the full text of that court's ruling.)
Article on Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals case
Text of U.S. v. $124,700, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, August 19, 2006 (Note: Downloadable PDF)
Back in September, Davidson County, North Carolina sheriff's deputies pulled over a car traveling on Interstate 85, southwest of Lexington. The officers said the car was following too closely to another vehicle.
While searching the car, the officers found $88,000 in cash. The driver and passenger insisted the money was to buy a house in Atlanta.
The officers didn't believe them. So they called in a drug-sniffing dog.
According to the Davidson County newspaper The Dispatch, the dog "found a strong odor of narcotics inside the car."
But no drugs were found. Nor any evidence of wrong-doing. So the two men weren't charged with any crime and were free to leave.
But not with their $88,000. The sheriffs kept that.
Incredibly, thanks to federal and state civil asset forfeiture laws, police can seize property and cash on the mere suspicion that they may be connected with drugs. The lack of proof of a crime is no protection. The sheriff's department called in federal investigators, and they are now preparing to argue in federal court that the government should be able to keep the money.
If they win -- and the over-powerfull government does win the vast majority of asset forfeiture cases -- the local sheriff's office cut will be 75 percent ($66,000) of the confiscated money.
Asset forfeiture has been quite lucrative for the Davidson County Sheriff's Office: $1.6 million in 2005 and $1.4 million in 2004.
"It allows us to buy equipment without using taxpayers' money," said Sheriff Grice.
Police departments across the country report similar windfalls.
This practice, common for many years, was given a strong boost in August. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled that if a motorist is carrying a large sum of cash, that money is automatically subject to confiscation. "Possession of a large sum of cash is 'strong evidence' of a connection to drug activity," the court ruled.
In other words, for all practical purposes, driving with a lot of cash is now a crime in the United States of America.
(See the following links for an article on the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals case, and the full text of that court's ruling.)
Article on Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals case
Text of U.S. v. $124,700, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, August 19, 2006 (Note: Downloadable PDF)
No comments:
Post a Comment