Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Man wants his $400K back from the FBI
LimaOhio.com ^ | 12/18/07 | Greg Sowinski

Posted on 12/21/2007 12:14:30 AM PST by LibWhacker

LIMA — Two robbers who broke into Luther Ricks Sr.’s house this summer may have not gotten his life savings he had in a safe, but after the FBI confiscated it he may not get it back.

Ricks has tried to get an attorney to fight for the $402,767 but he has no money. Lima Police Department officers originally took the money from his house but the FBI stepped in and took it from the Police Department. Ricks has not been charged with a crime and was cleared in a fatal shooting of one of the robbers but still the FBI has refused to return the money, he said.

“They are saying I have to prove I made it,” he said.

The 63-year-old Ricks said he and his wife, Meredith, saved the money during their lifetime in which both worked while living a modest life.

A representative of the FBI could not be reached for comment.

During the fatal shooting incident inside the house June 30, Ricks and his son were being attacked by two men and his son was stabbed. Ricks broke free, grabbed a gun and shot to death 32-year-old Jyhno Rock inside his home at 939 Greenlawn Ave.

Police originally took the money after finding marijuana inside Ricks’ home, which Ricks said he had to help manage pain.

“I smoke marijuana. I have arthritis. I have shingles, a hip replacement,” he said.

Ricks, who is retired from Ohio Steel Foundry, said he always had a safe at home and never had a bank account.

American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Legal Director Jeff Gamso said Ricks has a tough road ahead, not impossible, but tough to get back his money.

“The law of forfeiture basically says you have to prove you’re innocent. It’s terrible, terrible law,” he said.

The law is tilted in favor of the FBI in that Ricks need not be charged with a crime and the FBI stands a good chance at keeping the money, Gamso said.

“The law will presume it is the result of ill-gotten gains,” he said.

Still Ricks can pursue it and possibly convince a judge he had the money through a lifetime of savings. Asking the FBI usually doesn’t work, he said.

“The FBI, before they would give it up, would want dated receipts,” he said.

If the FBI does keep the money, it would be put toward a law enforcement use, if the city of Lima does not fight for it because the city discovered it, Gamso said.

Lima Law Director Tony Geiger said he has not been asked to stake a legal claim for the money.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: 400k; asset; banglist; cash; constitution; donutwatch; fbi; forfeiture; highwayrobbery; marijuana; policestate; seizure; thugwithabadge; unconstitutional; wod; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 281-296 next last
To: offduty

>FYI....I am a retired forfeiture detective. It is highly unlikely the police “seized the money” without PROBABLE CAUSE. There is no way a mere possession charge is going to trigger a forfeiture.<

How many times have you heard about someone who was stopped by the highway patrol for some driving offense having a suitcase full of money in the vehicle, and the money was seized by the highway patrol?

Yes, I know that in most cases this money is laundered drug money and the friver isn’t taking claim to it but just the same it is government snatching cold hard cash because they have the power to do it.


161 posted on 12/21/2007 9:50:02 AM PST by B4Ranch (( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share." ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Poison Pill
From the ACLU president of that area, in the article:

American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Legal Director Jeff Gamso said Ricks has a tough road ahead, not impossible, but tough to get back his money. “The law of forfeiture basically says you have to prove you’re innocent. It’s terrible, terrible law,” he said. The law is tilted in favor of the FBI in that Ricks need not be charged with a crime and the FBI stands a good chance at keeping the money, Gamso said. “The law will presume it is the result of ill-gotten gains,” he said. Still Ricks can pursue it and possibly convince a judge he had the money through a lifetime of savings. Asking the FBI usually doesn’t work, he said.

He has a stated method of obtaining his money. All he has to do is tell his case to a judge. Not a "jack booted thug". A judge. A judge in a probably very, very liberal area. Now - I repeat: why wouldn't the ACLU happily and quickly help this man out?

162 posted on 12/21/2007 9:59:40 AM PST by Shryke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
Yes, I know that in most cases this money is laundered drug money and the friver isn't taking claim to it but just the same it is government snatching cold hard cash because they have the power to do it.

I wonder how many of those highway cash seizures are actually bribes. In the accounts I've read about, the driver is free to go on his merry way.

Just tell the mule to take this here $200,000 and drive on I-70 east from Columbus. Meantime, someone is tipped off to be on the lookout for this vehicle on I-70. Voila - a "legal" bribe.

163 posted on 12/21/2007 10:00:29 AM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Shryke
Don’t bother to explain. Everyone here insists this guy can’t get any lawyer help because this is secretly somehow a gun case. It has nothing to do with drug money. Oh no.

And of course everyone else is wrong and you're right.

Merry Christmas
164 posted on 12/21/2007 10:09:45 AM PST by mkjessup (Hunter-Bolton '08 !! Patriots who will settle for nothing less than *Victory* in the War on Terror!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch
Once again you’re not seeing the big picture. The Ohio State Patrol has been very good in regards to large seizures on the Interstate (I-75) and the Ohio Turnpike.

In days of old it was fairly easy to do these types of interdictions. The cops usually has a CI that would let them know that something was headed either north (drugs) or south (money). The car would be pulled over on a traffic stop, PROBABLE CAUSE; the driver would begin to act suspiciously, especially when a drug dog was on the scene and the dog would “alert” to the drug residue on the cash. This would be the “probable cause” to allow the seizure of the cash pending a court review.

Now, since so much money in circulation has had some contact with drugs, it is highly unlikely you could seize the money just because a dog alerts on it. Also this is usually the purest form of profiling. You’d have a car headed north with Texas plates, or what was being done just before I retired, the car would be a rental. The driver usually was a casual user as well and would do a little weed on the trip. The smell lingers for a long time and of course there is the residue in the vehicle.

The driver would have some BS story that could easily be proved to be not true. Like “I’m going to Toledo to visit some friends: But he doesn’t have an address.

This just gets you the PC to seize the money. You still haven’t had a forfeiture hearing. Then my office would get involved and try to prove/disprove that the person with the large form of funds had the means necessary to have acquired the sum of cash. I still had to go to court and prove to a judge by a PREPONDERENCE OF THE EVIDENCE that the cash was either proceeds or facilitation. The burden of proof is still on the state. While the legal standard is lower, it is a fallacy to think the suspect has to prove the cash is his. I have to prove it isn’t.

While I respect most of the opinions of my fellow freepers, I take offense to the cavalier attitude of some who think law enforcement officers spend their waking hours trying to screw the public. Most of my former brothers and sisters who “protect and serve” do so at an enormous risk to themselves and at a cost to our families as well. If you think this job is a piece of cake. It’s pretty obvious you’ve never been involved in law enforcement other than the time you were stopped for DUI or stopped for speeding (both illegal acts, by the way)Police work is both boring and dangerous. I was lucky to retire with nothing more than two knee surgeries, 1 back surgery, and hypertension.

Next time you feel like making disparaging remarks about the men and women in law enforcement, think about what the alternative would be like.

Do we have bad apples...yes....do they reflect the attitude of all...certainly not.. Have a Merry Christmas a SAFE and Happy New Year and I am now stepping off my soap box :)

165 posted on 12/21/2007 10:15:45 AM PST by offduty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Awful story.

I wonder what the fine is in Lima for possession of pot (misdemeanor, assuming less than 2 ounces, for instance). Maybe $500? At most, $1,000?

Yet in this case, the essential penalty is a couple’s life savings, more than $400,000.

That’s terrible. Not at all what our forefathers envisioned for us as citizens.


166 posted on 12/21/2007 10:17:16 AM PST by buckleyfan (WFB, save us!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meyer
I just get pretty fired up watching the freedoms we had, even as little as 25 years ago, getting tossed aside. The 4th amendment has been desecrated, and the 6 years of Republican control did NOTHING to undo the damage. It's really sickening!

Oh you are 100 percent on target there FRiend.

Have you ever considered how the colonists who met the British with armed resistance at Lexington and Concord in 1775 would today, if confronted with federal troops acting in violation of the Constitution, be charged under U.S. Law (The Smith Act) for attempting to "overthrow the government of the United States by force or violence"?

Ironic is it not?
167 posted on 12/21/2007 10:18:41 AM PST by mkjessup (Hunter-Bolton '08 !! Patriots who will settle for nothing less than *Victory* in the War on Terror!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup

“against our heroes of law enforcement who protect and defend us with their very lives”

Hahahaha....!!!!!Man, that’s a good one!


168 posted on 12/21/2007 10:19:52 AM PST by VRing (Happiness is a perfect sling bruise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
And one day, when someone like Mr. Ricks goes over the edge and storms a local FBI office somewhere and starts shooting people and throwing their bodies out of the windows, people will gasp in horror and say "how could someone DO that to the heroes who protect and defend us with their very LIVES?!?"

Every day that goes by and this doesn't happen I'm amazed given what fedgov thinks is within their power to do to us.

169 posted on 12/21/2007 10:22:39 AM PST by zeugma (Hillary! - America's Ex-Wife!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
I take it back. There are a few people in the thread that have actually not leapt to their Brownshirt Alert buttons.

Merry Christmas to you as well.

170 posted on 12/21/2007 10:24:08 AM PST by Shryke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
decided its just much easier to victimize people who can't fight back.

I think the real key is that they won't fight back, at least not physically, which is all that would be understood.

171 posted on 12/21/2007 10:24:40 AM PST by zeugma (Hillary! - America's Ex-Wife!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: offduty
I for one, appreciate your service and thank you.

Did you retire after Broderick Crawford's "Highway Patrol", or was it after Efrem Zimbalist Jr.'s "The FBI" finished it's run?

Because that era of law enforcement is long gone FRiend, and I think both of us know it.

Merry Christmas to you and yours.
172 posted on 12/21/2007 10:25:00 AM PST by mkjessup (Hunter-Bolton '08 !! Patriots who will settle for nothing less than *Victory* in the War on Terror!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: offduty

You need to ping everyone in this thread to your posts.


173 posted on 12/21/2007 10:25:56 AM PST by Shryke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
I retired within the past 10 years, and yes there is a change in the quality of some of our officers, but the system hasn’t. I’ve lost many cases I thought were a slam dunk because some liberal judge gave the defendant “reasonable doubt.” Have you every purchased an American made automobile that wan’t well made? Does that make all auto workers goof-offs,or engineers less professional? It is very easy to paint ALL LE officers with a broad brush because most of the posters here have never been involved in law enforcement unless they were stopped for a traffic infraction. I am not going to defend every one who wears a badge because the job has a HUMAN element, but I am also not going to let the profession take a hit from people who haven’t even READ the forfeiture statutes. It is not the slam dunk everyone here thinks it is. By the way, when was the last time YOU picked up a copy of the ORC (Ohio Revised Code.) Thank you and Merry Christmas.
174 posted on 12/21/2007 10:35:26 AM PST by offduty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
Is there a law that says you can’t have X amount of money in cash

Yes.......

So what's the max amount of cash we're allowed to have in our possession before it becomes illegal?

175 posted on 12/21/2007 10:39:57 AM PST by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: offduty

>Next time you feel like making disparaging remarks about the men and women in law enforcement, think about what the alternative would be like.<

Do you have an example of the “disparaging remarks”?


176 posted on 12/21/2007 10:42:06 AM PST by B4Ranch (( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share." ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

A decent *possibility*. When you have lots of cash flowing, bribes are a normal business practice.


177 posted on 12/21/2007 10:44:15 AM PST by B4Ranch (( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share." ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup; meyer

>I just get pretty fired up watching the freedoms we had, even as little as 25 years ago, getting tossed aside. The 4th amendment has been desecrated, and the 6 years of Republican control did NOTHING to undo the damage. It’s really sickening!<

Which Republican candidate do you think would do anything about this?


178 posted on 12/21/2007 10:47:36 AM PST by B4Ranch (( "Freedom is not free, but don't worry the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share." ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Shryke

“why wouldn’t the ACLU happily and quickly help this man out?”

Nice try at slight of hand. The answer is; Because they know they would lose and they want to spend their time with a case they think they can win. Know what that proves? Absolutely nothing. Even the ACLU must get tired of tilting at windmills after a while. The ACLU guy also said it was a “terrible terrible law”.

“All he has to do is tell his case to a judge. Not a “jack booted thug”. A judge. A judge in a probably very, very liberal area.”

Really, is that all? It was a federal seizure by federal agents. The judge would be federal, not some local Democrat elected hack. And do you think he just walks in to court and gets to talk to a judge? No. The judge can just refuse to here it, which he will. This ant can be safely ignored. Maybe if some of that 400K had been a political contribution he might have had a shot. As it is,his right to redress of grievance is zero. That’s not the way it is supposed to be.

If the FBI got all geared up because they knew the guy was crooked then charge him. It looks like he may well be guilty. If he is, how hard can the conviction be?

The defacto judge here is the FBI. The whole point of our justice system is you don’t get to be judge, jury and executioner. If they have evidence then let them make their case in front of a jury.

For some reason you think the guy does not deserve a trial. Why?


179 posted on 12/21/2007 10:52:18 AM PST by Poison Pill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch

Sure....take a look at post 4 “FBI are thieves with badges and guns..” Post 8; Post 56,59,60,64,67, and 124.


180 posted on 12/21/2007 10:58:18 AM PST by offduty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 281-296 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson