- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: OK Sheriff indicted for bribery, extortion after traffic stop
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:51 pm to jdd48
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:51 pm to jdd48
quote:
Is anything over a certain amount of cash automatically considered the result of drug proceeds? I am not sure how this money could be proven to be drug related unless this was a sting.
Well if the money is legal it is relatively easy to prove your innocence. This is guilty until proven innocent, and I hate that on principle, but it's not as if you should drive around on pins and needles if you go get $50k in cash from the bank in order to purchase a vehicle.
On a slightly related note, there are an incredibly small amount of legal and/or practical reasons someone needs that much cash on hand. However, that doesn't make CAF okay by any means.
This post was edited on 4/1/16 at 2:03 pm
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:00 pm to slackster
quote:
Well if the money is legal it is relatively easy to prove your innocence. This is guilty until proven innocent, and I hate that on principle, but it's not as you should drive around on pins and needles if you go get $50k in cash from the bank in order to purchase a vehicle.
If you read the link from earlier on the page you'll hopefully feel more empathy. The departments do this to steal money from people and fund their own salaries. The expense of fighting an appeal process to have your money returned is a terrible cost since it costs people time and money and may mean they have to prove their innocence in a kangaroo court which receives funding from the seizures.
The entire process runs exactly opposite to our core values (of freedom from unreasonable search and seizure and the right to be presumed innocent).
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:02 pm to slackster
quote:is it though? Being out whatever was seized, and then spending more money on a lawyer that may or may not be returned after trial. I have read about stories where after initial arrest, bonds are set just high enough where defendants in jail can't attend their seizure hearings. Only after seizure is finalized are they released without charges shortly afterward.
Well if the money is legal it is relatively easy to prove your innocence.
![](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/Images/icons/casty.gif)
More often than not defendants spend more money on counsel than what was seized. This is by design to discourage people from fighting seizures.
Popular
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/TDIcon.jpg)