re: Cali man has $29k siezed in Chicago airport without charges

quote:

---

Police-trained "drug" dogs are only slightly more accurate than lie-detector machines.

They can and will alert anytime for their masters.

---

yep

Police Dogs and False Alerts

quote:

---

In U.S. v. Bentley, we see just how damaging the Harris decision really was. Lex, the drug dog that searched Bentley’s car, had a 93 percent alert rate. That is, when Lex was called to search a car, he alerted 93 percent of the time. He was basically a probable cause generator. His success rate was much lower, at 59 percent. That is, the police actually found drugs just six of the 10 times Lex told them they would. That means that four of every 10 people Lex alerted to were subjected to a thorough roadside search that produced nothing illegal.

---

Slightly better than a coin flip is good enough for probable cause

quote:

---

It gets worse. Even a dog that was well trained initially can be conditioned to pick up bad habits once it’s in the field. This is exactly what was happening with Lex. It turns out that Lex’s handler gives the dog a reward every time he alerts, regardless of whether that alert is accurate. Lex isn’t getting rewarded for filtering innocent motorists from guilty ones. He’s being trained to authorize a search, each and every time he’s called to duty.

The Seventh Circuit found all of this troubling, even conceding that the reward policy was “a terrible way to promote accurate detection.” And yet according to the three-judge panel that heard the case, none of this was enough to amount to a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

---

I'll chime in here from an "other side" perspective. I am a fed from a three letter agency and have been involved with numerous bulk cash seizures. Sometimes they are Title 31 criminal violations while others are civil asset forfeiture seizures.

In every instance I can recall, these cash seizures were legit and the money was clearly being used for criminal purposes. For example, a woman was driving a car in Indiana when pulled over by the locals for speeding. The officer observes her Vermont license plates and asks her where she's heading. She answers California. She is visibly nervous and shaking. The cop looks in the back seat of a car and sees a stuffed duffel bag. He requests consent to search the bag; she grants permission. Inside the duffel are shrink-wrapped bundles of $20 bills totally almost $500,000. When asked where she got the money, she states that she doesn't know. When asked where she's going specifically and who she's going to meet, she can't give a clear answer that makes any logical sense. This pattern is often used by drug and money mules and based on that, seizures occur.

I'm certain there is more to this story than this individual is letting on. If there's any rational explanation or proof that he routinely flips cars in cash and moves this sort of money throughout the country in this fashion, then there are avenues to petition and have this money returned.

Having said all this, I do understand the demands to end civil forfeiture. A huge part of me is not comfortable with the legality of seizing money, vehicles, bank accounts and houses without clear-cut proof of criminal activity. There definitely needs to be additional layers of protection to the general public, such as an independent body of review BEFORE the seizure and not afterward.

quote:

---

Lex isn’t getting rewarded for filtering innocent motorists from guilty ones. He’s being trained to authorize a search, each and every time he’s called to duty. 

---

But not really.

quote:

---

That is, when Lex was called to search a car, he alerted 93 percent of the time. 

---

quote:

---

Either way. It doesn’t matter why he had the cash in him. He was not breaking any law. He was flat out robbed by the DEA.

---

People ITT are being wilfully obtuse. No one is agreeing with CAF but it is what it is.

Show me SSI or the FBI, CIA, NSA or any other alphabet agency in our founding.

Anyone should be able to carry any amount of cash on them that they want to. But the fact is the government might just take it. You can stand there and scream that is my cash but it doesn't change facts.

quote:

---

I don't know these people, not my problem.

---

Not only are you intelligent but you’re also principled.

You must be in your 20s and poor

quote:

---

In every instance I can recall, these cash seizures were legit and the money was clearly being used for criminal purposes. For example, a woman was driving a car in Indiana when pulled over by the locals for speeding. The officer observes her Vermont license plates and asks her where she's heading. She answers California. She is visibly nervous and shaking. The cop looks in the back seat of a car and sees a stuffed duffel back. He requests consent to search the bag; she grants permission. Inside the duffel are shrink-wrapped bundles of $20 bills totally almost $500,000. When asked where she got the money, she states that she doesn't know. When asked where she's going specifically and who she's going to meet, she can't give a clear answer that makes any logical sense. This pattern is often used by drug and money mules and based on that, seizures occur.

---

I dont think anyone doubts thay the law has a useful function. However at the moment it's way too easy for an agency to pull a dog out, get probable cause based on an "alert", and take whatever they want regardless of the realities on the ground. All the while knowing the defendant most likely wont even fight it in court, so the legalities dont matter (lawyers representing defendants are shockingly not free).

quote:

---

If there's any rational explanation or proof that he routinely flips cars in cash and moves this sort of money throughout the country in this fashion, then there are avenues to petition and have this money returned.

---

Yes there are- at the expense of the defendant. Imagine getting robbed then having to hire the police to get your money back- how is that fair?

quote:

---

There definitely needs to be additional layers of protection to the general public, such as an independent body of review BEFORE the seizure and not afterwards.

---

Agreed .

quote:

---

Pecker is trying to frick me.

---

sorry, I’m not into fatties.

quote:

---

I'm certain there is more to this story than this individual is letting on. If there's any rational explanation or proof that he routinely flips cars in cash and moves this sort of money throughout the country in this fashion, then there are avenues to petition and have this money returned.

---

You just touched on the problem, though. If an agency seizes cash from an individual and can’t tie it to criminal activity, they should have to give it back promptly. How in the hell did we get to a place where that burden falls to the person who has effectively been robbed?