Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Miss. Police Find $360K in Secret Car Compartment and STOLE ( CONFISCATED ) IT


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 05:16 PM

http://abcnews.go.co...ar-compartment/

 

Technically that is called theft, but our gov't don't like that word when they do it so they have a better more PC word... confiscate :)

 

Here is my issue with this and my issue with our future police state...

 

While there maybe suspecion that the money is ill gotten... That is a ASSUMPTION at best, when we allow police and state gov't or gov't in general to take and confiscate under assumption of guilt, I have to wonder why we have a COnstitution and Bill of Rights.

 

The money is REAL, so that is legal

 

If you cannot even carry a certain XXXX amount of money, why even bother using/owning money ( these pieces of fiat that the gov't print out of nowhere and force upon us as a medium of exchange )

 

If I was driving a super nice car, that is worth $$$$$$$$$$$$$$, in nothing but jeans and t-shirts can the police or gov't confiscate that because I don't look like someone who can own that type of property?

 

What about if I own a PS3 but do not have a job, does that mean I possibly stole it and it is up for confiscation

 

What about if I live in a nice house, but dress like a bum, does that assumption make the house a ill gotten gain because I do not look the part of a rich owner?

 

 

So why do we allow the gov't to confiscate MONEY based on apperence?

 

Is this what a country based on FREEDOM and INNOCENCE until proven guility do to their citizens?



#2 willardhaven

willardhaven

    Thief of Life

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 05:20 PM

Your threads are kind of crazy and hard to read but that is definitely not acceptable police behavior.


PaulManda.png


#3 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 05:21 PM

It's fucking simple. Show how you came across the money (or in your instance purchased the PS3) and you can have it back.

What is so difficult to understand about that?

 



#4 willardhaven

willardhaven

    Thief of Life

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 05:23 PM

It's fucking simple. Show how you came across the money (or in your instance purchased the PS3) and you can have it back.

What is so difficult to understand about that?

 

Why?


PaulManda.png


#5 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 05:30 PM

Why?

 

Because it is unusual to have large amounts of money hidden in a secret compartment in your car. If it was legitimately earned money don't you think the owner would have disclosed this information to police?

I'm going to guess it was obtained illegally and that the car owner has no record of declaring this money on his taxes. So pick your poison in regards to which and how many crimes he has committed.

 

But then again I do suppose some people on this site have the mindset that we need to reward criminals or at the very least protect them and their enterprises



#6 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 05:33 PM

Because it is unusual to have large amounts of money hidden in a secret compartment in your car. If it was legitimately earned money don't you think the owner would have disclosed this information to police?

I'm going to guess it was obtained illegally and that the car owner has no record of declaring this money on his taxes. So pick your poison in regards to which and how many crimes he has committed.

 

But then again I do suppose some people on this site have the mindset that we need to reward criminals or at the very least protect them and their enterprises

 

Your a idiot to even be ok with that

 

Why do I have to explain to anyone how I got my stuff?  Even so, do you want the GOV'T to go that route?

 

Are you ok with letting the gov't listen in on your phone calls, opening and reading your mail, while we are at it?



#7 willardhaven

willardhaven

    Thief of Life

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 05:35 PM

Because it is unusual to have large amounts of money hidden in a secret compartment in your car. If it was legitimately earned money don't you think the owner would have disclosed this information to police?

I'm going to guess it was obtained illegally and that the car owner has no record of declaring this money on his taxes. So pick your poison in regards to which and how many crimes he has committed.

 

But then again I do suppose some people on this site have the mindset that we need to reward criminals or at the very least protect them and their enterprises

 

Sounds guilty to me. Lock 'em up.


PaulManda.png


#8 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 05:48 PM

Sounds guilty to me. Lock 'em up.

I live in a part of the country where it isn't unusual for people to bury their money in their backyard or carry large sums around. You know who carries around large sums of cash? Fisherman---specifically lobsterman. You know why? Because they prefer to get paid in cash so that they can hide large sums of their income. Nothing like claiming poverty (in the eyes of the government) while you're driving around in brand new heavy duty trucks and own outright millions of dollars in boats and fishing equipment.

 

Either way I'd say the odds are in favor that this guy has in fact committed a crime. Better in my opinion to hold onto the money for safe keeping then give it back where he can dispose of it or wash it or fund something illegal.

 

But then of course if he is innocent it shouldn't take long for him to prove that money was earned legitimately. Letting the police hold onto it a day or two isn't going to cause him any harm---it's not like he was gaining interest on his stash that he had hidden in his car.

 

Your a idiot to even be ok with that

 

Why do I have to explain to anyone how I got my stuff?  Even so, do you want the GOV'T to go that route?

 

Are you ok with letting the gov't listen in on your phone calls, opening and reading your mail, while we are at it?

 

Because the law says you have to. If you have a problem with the law fine----your problem shouldn't be with people enforcing it appropriately. I'm not a big fan of the seized assets laws that some places use to take the cars or homes of people that use them in drug operations but again if its a law your problem should be with the law itself and not the police.

 

The "GOV'T" isn't going to waste time reading and listening in on me. Think logically for a second... of the roughly 300 million people in this country (not to mention the thousands of people of interest around the world) how many people do you ACTUALLY think are actively being monitored?



#9 willardhaven

willardhaven

    Thief of Life

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 06:02 PM

I live in a part of the country where it isn't unusual for people to bury their money in their backyard or carry large sums around. You know who carries around large sums of cash? Fisherman---specifically lobsterman. You know why? Because they prefer to get paid in cash so that they can hide large sums of their income. Nothing like claiming poverty (in the eyes of the government) while you're driving around in brand new heavy duty trucks and own outright millions of dollars in boats and fishing equipment.

 

Either way I'd say the odds are in favor that this guy has in fact committed a crime. Better in my opinion to hold onto the money for safe keeping then give it back where he can dispose of it or wash it or fund something illegal.

 

But then of course if he is innocent it shouldn't take long for him to prove that money was earned legitimately. Letting the police hold onto it a day or two isn't going to cause him any harm---it's not like he was gaining interest on his stash that he had hidden in his car.

 

 

Suspicion should not give police the right to confiscate property. If they want to investigate someone it's their decision. The burden of proof is supposed to be on law enforcement. Or do you disagree with the whole innocent until proven guilty cliche?


PaulManda.png


#10 durpy

durpy

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 06:03 PM

whats up with the driver being "oh you found it? sure, take it, its not mine" what a moron. and then the police just searching it and finding it and being like "oh wow look at all this money we found in your car. finders keepers!"



#11 willardhaven

willardhaven

    Thief of Life

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 06:34 PM

whats up with the driver being "oh you found it? sure, take it, its not mine" what a moron. and then the police just searching it and finding it and being like "oh wow look at all this money we found in your car. finders keepers!"

 

I didn't see anything like that mentioned in the article. It said he gave them consent to search his car. There's not much you can do. If you start to get mad they'll arrest you for obstruction or some other trumped up charge.


PaulManda.png


#12 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 12 July 2013 - 06:51 PM

Because it is unusual to have large amounts of money hidden in a secret compartment in your car. If it was legitimately earned money don't you think the owner would have disclosed this information to police?

I'm going to guess it was obtained illegally and that the car owner has no record of declaring this money on his taxes. So pick your poison in regards to which and how many crimes he has committed.
 
But then again I do suppose some people on this site have the mindset that we need to reward criminals or at the very least protect them and their enterprises


So, on the most basic level, you're saying that you are okay with agents of the government assuming that an individual is guilty of a crime and punishing them for said crime with no evidence that any crime has taken place and that the burden of proof should be on the individual w/r/t his or her innocence.

I don't want to live in that world.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#13 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 06:59 PM

So, on the most basic level, you're saying that you are okay with agents of the government assuming that an individual is guilty of a crime and punishing them for said crime with no evidence that any crime has taken place and that the burden of proof should be on the individual w/r/t his or her innocence.

I don't want to live in that world.

 

 

How is the driver being punished?

Certainly there are people who live a lifestyle where they can legitimately drive around with $300K in their car. When they get stopped I'm pretty sure their money isn't being confiscated.

 

However 99% of the population can't and doesn't do that. Now where in the article does it state he said the money was his? 



#14 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 12 July 2013 - 07:07 PM

Driver had $300k in his posession.

Driver no longer has $300k in his posession.

How is that anything but punishment?
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#15 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 07:14 PM

Driver had $300k in his posession.

Driver no longer has $300k in his posession.

How is that anything but punishment?

 

 

If it was his money I would of thought he would have notified the officers that he was "rollin' dirty" with 300K in his car prior to the start of the search. At the very least I would have expected him to plead his case prior to the money being confiscated---but the article makes no mention of that so let's assume he didn't.

 

And let's also assume there are reasons he didn't. I know that is a lot of assuming but you can bet that if that was his legitimate life savings, gambling winnings, inheritance, etc. he would have taken the time to explain that.

 

Let me put it this way. If you have a gun in your car and it's being searched aren't you supposed to reveal that prior to the search... and wouldn't you if the gun was yours and you were transporting it lawfully? 

I will start caring when people are having their paychecks and over earning confiscated/seized. That obviously isn't the case here.



#16 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 07:20 PM


I will start caring when people are having their paychecks and over earning confiscated/seized. That obviously isn't the case here.

 

Its called child support, IRS hold for back taxes, account freeze, there are plenty of ways the gov't can confiscate your earnings.... 



#17 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 07:22 PM

If it was his money I would of thought he would have notified the officers that he was "rollin' dirty" with 300K in his car prior to the start of the search. At the very least I would have expected him to plead his case prior to the money being confiscated---but the article makes no mention of that so let's assume he didn't.

 

 

 

Like this BUSINESSman

 

http://www.newschann...nnocent-victims

 

Hey even the news did something on it, but well Americans love their police state.. hold police as "heroes"

http://www.newschann...cing-for-profit

 

But hey the only difference btw criminals and police is one has a badge :)



#18 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 12 July 2013 - 07:28 PM

A gun isn't a wad of cash.

Regardless, this goes back to what I stated before and you're supporting again. Driver has *no* responsiblity to tell an officer that he has the money, where he got the money from, why he has it, etc. prior to or after the search.

You're supporting a set up where the government agents are acting as if the individual is guilty and it is up to the individual to prove his or her innocence.

I do not support that.

A cop can't walk up to you and say "I don't think that's your >insert property here<.", take the >insert property here< and force you to come by the station later with a receipt to prove it is your >insert property here<.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#19 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 07:35 PM


A cop can't walk up to you and say "I don't think that's your >insert property here<.", take the >insert property here< and force you to come by the station later with a receipt to prove it is your >insert property here<.

 

They can and they just did.

 

It's no different then someone being picked up and held because they are suspected of doing something of a crime. They aren't keeping his money (yet) just like someone who has been picked up for questioning isn't necessarily going to be charged with or convicted of a crime.

 

Please explain to me HOW the police don't have the ability to confiscate (temporarily) his money if they believe it is tied to something criminal?

 

You don't know this guys back story... do you?



#20 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 12 July 2013 - 07:55 PM

If they have evidence that it is tied to something criminal, then that's a different story (and is left out of the original article).

The simple fact that the money exists and is *there*, however, is not evidence that it is tied to something criminal.

Do you know this guy's back story?
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#21 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 08:01 PM

They made it CLEAR:  It was a ROUTINE traffic stop, did you read it...

 

Meaning they could of pulled him over for THOUSANDS of reasons, probably something as dumb as a broken light, passing lane without a blinker, etc etc etc etc...



#22 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 08:06 PM

They made it CLEAR:  It was a ROUTINE traffic stop, did you read it...

 

Meaning they could of pulled him over for THOUSANDS of reasons, probably something as dumb as a broken light, passing lane without a blinker, etc etc etc etc...

 

“After suspecting that there could be some type of criminal activity..."



#23 Finger_Shocker

Finger_Shocker

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 08:11 PM

“After suspecting that there could be some type of criminal activity..."

 

Sure when they found MONEY....LOL

 

Cause have alot of money = you are up to no good..

 

So does driving a $300K car make a car confiscateable due to its value?

Whats so special about money that makes everyone want to "confiscate" it?

How about a $300K house?



#24 GBAstar

GBAstar

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 08:14 PM

Sure when they found MONEY....LOL

 

Cause have alot of money = you are up to no good..

 

So does driving a $300K car make a car confiscateable due to its value?

Whats so special about money that makes everyone want to "confiscate" it?

How about a $300K house?

 

Reading Comprehension 101...

 

AFTER suspecting illegal activity (or the possibility thereof) they did the search. After doing the search they found the money.



#25 davo1224

davo1224

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:20 AM

There's suspicious behavior which can be considered subjective and then there's having almost half a million in your car and when asked about it, you say "I dunno mmmkk?" Don't think the police are in the wrong. The guy isn't telling them what it is because there's no good explanation. It's either mattress money or money obtained through ill gotten gains.



#26 Knoell

Knoell

    Achievement Unlocked

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 21 July 2013 - 04:34 AM

I agree, it is pretty suspicious. I think you guys would do well to read the stolen property laws and the rights our government have provided police have when they suspect it.

 

If you dislike it, then get mad at the laws not the people charged with indiscriminately enforcing them. I definitely have a problem with them being able to keep it and reallocate to their own budgets though. That is definitely a conflict of interest there.



#27 willardhaven

willardhaven

    Thief of Life

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 23 July 2013 - 03:07 PM

I agree, it is pretty suspicious. I think you guys would do well to read the stolen property laws and the rights our government have provided police have when they suspect it.

 

If you dislike it, then get mad at the laws not the people charged with indiscriminately enforcing them. I definitely have a problem with them being able to keep it and reallocate to their own budgets though. That is definitely a conflict of interest there.

 

I can fault both the enforcer and the creator of unjust policy/law. "Just doing my job" is not a sufficient excuse in my book.


PaulManda.png