I could support at least some of these laws if they were modified from what I understand them to be now.OK,a guy is stopped for a broken tail light.The cop smells marijuana.Calls in the drug sniffing dog who alerts on the car,giving the cop the right to search.During the search he finds $25,000 (all $5 bills) under the floor board.I think they should be able to seize that cash for a limited period (30 days...maybe 60) and if criminal charges related to the money aren’t filed during that limited period the money must be returned.If charges *are* filed the money is held until a verdict is rendered or until the charges are dropped or dismissed.
What if it’s $25,000 in $100 bills in a bag on the front seat, there are no illegal drugs and you’re on the way to buy a new car?
I buy and sell used construction equipment now and then. It is always a cash sale. Why should my money be seized because some ignorant cop doesn’t understand that.
“The cop smells marijuana.Calls in the drug sniffing dog who alerts on the car,giving the cop the right to search”
The problem with this is that it’s always up to the LEO to determine whether the dog is detecting drugs. For an obvious reaction by the dog, yes. But for an equivocal or non-response, no.
“During the search he finds $25,000 (all $5 bills) under the floor board.I think they should be able to seize that cash for a limited period (30 days...maybe 60) and if criminal charges related to the money aren’t filed during that limited period the money must be returned.”
No. Innocent until proven guilty must be the standard. The focus needs to be on investigating criminal activity, upholding the law including property rights, not seizing money.
Lets face it. The big drug criminals can launder drug money through HBSC, and the take for the government is pennies on the dollar. Will the Federales go after the big cahunas? No, they are in bed with them.