ACLU sues DEA on behalf of truck whose money was seized

Houston Chronicle ^ | August 24, 2007 | The Associated Press

[microgood]

It is pretty bad when you have to take sides with ACLU. I hope this suit destroys the lives of every government official involved in this thievery.

[BipolarBob]

I wish I was on the jury. The govt. won’t let it go to a jury of taxpayers though.

[stephenjohnbanker]

BUMP

[lesser_satan]

I hope this suit destroys the lives of every government official involved in this thievery.

IF the Anti-American Communist Liar's Union is telling the truth, I agree with you, but I find it hard to trust an organization that was founded with the purpose of destroying the country.

[John Jorsett]

What happens if you deny them permission to search?

[dalereed]

The Gov. will lose this one!

In 1982 I took $63k cash with me to pay the balance on an airplane I was buying in Arizona.

It’s only illegal to take over $10k out of or into the country without declaring it, other than that you can carry as much as you want.

[eastforker]

$23, 700 is petty cash to operate a big rig. Just because the guy decides to keep it in cash rather than deposit it in a bank is no reason to confiscate it. Note, they sent the dogs in and found nothing, how in the world could they possibly establish probable cause.

[hosepipe]

The ACLU vs. DEA thieves.. man you give the hard questions..

[metesky]

What happens if you deny them permission to search?

Why denial = probable cause!

;O)

That's a beautiful catch there, that Catch 22.

[poindexters brother]

...to get it back, he'd have to prove it was his and did not come from illegal drug sales.

I daresay that the DEA officials involved in this incident would likely have a hard time proving that whatever money that is currently in their wallet is theirs and didn't come from illegal drug sales

[Lurker]

how in the world could they possibly establish probable cause.

They don't need 'probable cause' just a 'reasonable suspicion'. Those are two completely different legal standards.

L

[KoRn]

Since when did it become illegal to carry around large amounts cash? What has become of our once free country....

[Starwolf]

There are portions of current laws that presume large amounts of cash are prima facie evidence of illegal activity. They were instituted as part of the war on drugs. Some have indeed lost their money, or spent large portions of it trying to get it back.

[Dante3]

Strange that the ACLU would get involved, makes me think the trucker is involved in something contrary to US interests. ACLU did not utter a word in defense of the Duke lacrosse players - though maybe I missed it. Nor did it come to the defense of Terri Schiavo. Many other cases more worthy of attention this this one - and each time no ACLU.

[microgood]

What happens if you deny them permission to search?

Given who they are, they probably made him an offer he could not refuse. The government never got rid of the mafia, they just replaced it with themselves.

[elfman2]

"The lawsuit said Prieto does not like banks and customarily carries his savings as cash."

Nonsense.

I think it's probable cause to confiscate it, but there should be a very low bar of "proof" and expedited procedure to get it back.

[microgood]

I think it's probable cause to confiscate it, but there should be a very low bar of "proof" and expedited procedure to get it back.

So possessing cash is a crime?

[Brilliant]

Normally, I’d have to say “good for him” suing the government for taking the money for no apparent reason... But since the ACLU is involved, I know the money must be dirty. The ACLU only gets involved when the person whose rights were supposedly violated is a criminal.

[jdub]

I think any law that puts the burden of proof on the accused is unconstitutional.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

So possessing cash is a crime?

Only the government has the right to possess your cash.