Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime

You are the one not listening to logic. You are the one claiming he should have his money taken away because of "how you feel" -- the facts be damned. You "think", he "may", his friends "could be" etc. Now you are claiming he had no "proof" of his status. Can you "prove" you are a citizen? Birth certificate or Social Security card? Birth certificates and Social Security cards can be forged. Testimony from you parents that you were born here? Must be an indication that you have no proof then. See how easy it is to play that game? The fact is he is here legally. There's no "if" involved.

In the end it doesn't matter, because all you are arguing is moot anyway. Do you know the government didn't even depose him? They didn't ask him where the money came from. They didn't ask about his immigration status. They didn't ask about his friends. They didn't ask why he was in Chicago. They didn't ask him anything. They just took his money based solely on the dog's preference to over 4,000 bills in Gonzolez' possession as opposed to the measly seven bills from the policemen at the station.

Listen to the government lawyer argue their appeal here. Decide for yourself.

Be that as it may, I find it hard to believe that they are telling the truth. How can they expect to run a business "without first starting with a bank account, a cashier's check, anything but over $100 grand in a cooler? Who the heck buys a commercial truck with cash in the first place? We can all understand a few thousand in cash for a used car, but who makes deals like this in cash? Who would accept that kind of money in exchange for a truck anyway?

I think there is more going on here than is presented in this article"

Why does it matter "who would buy a truck with cash"? Your feelings or anyone's feelings that he should not have that much $ on him is not relevant. What is relevant is that his property was confiscated without a real cause or evidence of crime.

"I doubt that this was a dealership but instead an individual selling a truck. Gonzoles said that he flew to Chicago to buy a truck, but it had sold by the time he had arrived. If it had been a dealership there would have been more than one truck.
Most dealerships will not accept over $9000 cash. If you want to buy a vehicle without credit you will usually have to pay with a combination of check, cash and multiple cashier checks all less than $9000 each."

I bought my car (of which they had only 1) with $13,500 cash.

"Throughout my posts on this topic, I have tried to argue how such a transaction could raise red flags in a reasonably-minded person. I have also tried to point out the hazards that may arise from such deals (such as the increased risk of theft, accidental loss, or damage to reputation if one party turns out to be not on the up-and-up)."

Why would the accidental loss of someone else's $ or damage to someone else's reputation concern you?

"You'd rather this "doofus without a clue" be criminally charged and tell his "story" on the witness stand in front of a jury? Kind of a "winner take all" strategy? You'd do that to a client of yours?"

No, his $ never should have been taken in the first place.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.