I remember seeing a tv show, probably ‘60 minutes’, that told the story of a guy that had saved up and bought a plane or small jet and flew people for money, kind of an air taxi service.
One of his customers, unbeknownst to the pilot, had a suitcase full of drug cash and the authorities moved on the customer and seized the plane of the pilot as well.
They never prosecuted the pilot, but did charge the plane! I think I even saw a copy of the charging sheet (?): “US vs Cessna #....” or some such. They said the guy only had 30 days from the time of the seizure to contest it, else forfeit the property. The kicker was he also had to post a bond or something of 10% of the value of the plane, which the pilot didn’t have.
They never charged the pilot, but they kept the plane. And they dropped charges against the customer with the drug money!
Does that story ring a bell, and have I remembered it correctly? And if I have, did the feds do the right thing? Civil asset forfeiture of the plane, but no offense ("civil offense" ?) charged against the plane's owner?
I believe the 30 day requirement refers to the pilot/owner filing an interest in the aircraft. A lot of times people will walk away from the cash and/or the property just so they don’t get dragged into an investigation. For some dealers losing a car to forfeiture was just the cost of doing business.
Again, drug dealers adapt just as police agencies do. After losing many cars to LE agencies due to forfeiture laws, the dealers started renting cars. When the mule was stopped, the drugs would be found and the car seized. But since the owner of the vehicle was a rental agency and the owner had no knowledge of the use of the car, the vehicle would be returned to the rental car company with the admonition that if the RENTOR was picked up in one of their vehicles again with a quantity of drugs, the forfeiture would go forward. This would force the rental car companies to flag certain customers to make sure they couldn’t rent cars again. A national “blacklist” if you may.
The drug king pins then started buying the buy-here pay-here lots and using dealer tags to move the drugs. The excuse would be “I bought the car at auction in Texas and I had no knowledge it was being used to transport drugs to Detroit”....Right...They would have the auction paperwork and the car was returned. These were a little tougher to crack, but they were.
I’ve read case histories where scenarios involving aircraft like the one you mentioned were involved. I also seem to remember that there were times that a bond was required, but I honestly can’t say for certain because I never seized an airplane.
As an aside, USA Today used to publish the legal notice of intent to forfeiture and also the case dispositions. Remember, a third party could legally make a claim against the governments interest in property or currency.
The problem with this story is everyone is making assumptions without having all the facts at hand.
I won a few cases and I lost a few. The ones I won didn’t benefit me directly (I didn’t get a cut of the funds) and the ones I lost just made me work harder to cover the bases that caused the case to go south. I’ve also done investigations that returned to property to the owner because we couldn’t PROVE the item was proceeds or facilitation.
I played it straight and I think the guys I worked with (financial investigators) did as well.
Working a financial case isn’t easy, it takes a ton of paperwork, interviews, and attention to detail. At the end of the day, you may not be able to prove the case, but you didn’t cut corners or juice the evidence to get there.