Replies

In this case, this man was NOT even suspected of committing a crime or that the money was illegally acquired. It was sufficient that it was $124,000 worth of cash. That's all that's needed to confiscate YOUR assets - you have more than the police think you should be allowed to have. We don't even live in a free country anymore.

( No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo!)

You are correct. No matter how much some on this thread think it smells that he was in possession of $124,700, the fact is that he was never charged with a crime. So he was never tried and convicted of one. Yet his assets were confiscated.

About a year ago there was a lady $46,950 taken by the cops at Boston Logan Airport. She was on her way to have breast enhancement surgery, for which she was going to pay cash. Again, no crime charged, no trial, no conviction.

Strange but true: The law gets around the inconvenience of charging the individual by charging the asset. That's why the suit in this thread was entitled "US v. $124,700". It's as crooked, nonsensical and tyrranical a concept as exists anywhere in law.

In these cases you can sue to recover your confiscated assets. Of course, if your attorney fees stack up into six figures, that's your tough luck. And, as this truck-shopper has shown in the current suit, being NOT charged with any crime is no defense. Not when a judge can still say "I still think he had something to do with drugs." There is no presumption of innocence. Forget about a trial by peers or the right to face your accuser or the least shred of habeus corpus. There is no burden of proof, no right to due process. And I'm here to tell you that having tens of thousands of dollars taken from you is as good as a guilty verdict.

Unfortunately, there are some on this thread who would say, "Well if you can sue to get your assets back and you don't, well that must be an admission of guilt." How much of the breast-enhancement lady's $47k would be left, assuming she won? How much is Gonzolez in the hole now, and no closer to getting his $124,700 back?

(There's something of a precedent in tax law. In that, the burden of proof is on the accused.)

I don't care what a politician's party is: the guy who stands up and says he'll get legislation passed to do away with asset forfeiture gets my vote. Asset forfeiture has no place in America.