- 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 2:37 pm to slackster
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:37 pm to slackster
quote:
It is a shame he had to go through that, but he got the money back when he threatened to sue them.
So if he doesn't have enough money for counsel, he's shite out of luck.
I know that you think this doesn't happen, but it does. It's so much a part of the fabric of LEO it's often a relied on portion of police budgeting. Without this, they are forced to downsize.
1
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:37 pm to Barf
quote:
People that say this kind of thing should be forced to wear a scarlet letter so the people who have been on the wrong end of CAF can slap the shite out of you anytime they see you on the street.
Everyone is on the wrong end of it. It should go away. How much clearer can I make myself?
I asked this the last time CAF came up on here - has anyone on this board had it happen to them and/or know of a first hand account of it occurring?
All I got was crickets. I'm genuinely curious of the experience from someone who was innocent and had to get their shite back - not an account that is the basis for a lawsuit.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:39 pm to slackster
quote:
asked this the last time CAF came up on here - has anyone on this board had it happen to them and/or know of a first hand account of it occurring?
All I got was crickets. I'm genuinely curious of the experience from someone who was innocent and had to get their shite back - not an account that is the basis for a lawsuit.
The other thing to consider is that if it did happen to them, confidentiality is often a term of the settlement agreement. They can't discuss it without violating the terms of the agreement. I can't say what % of people that happens to, but it's >0%.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:40 pm to NYNolaguy1
Happens every day...
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:43 pm to saintsfan1977
quote:
If you saved a little cash in your home safe that accumulated over years into $12,000 how would you prove its not drug money?
Why would you have to prove it's not drug money? The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove it IS drug money, not on the accused that it isn’t. One doesn't have to prove his innocence.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:44 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
17 yrs old with 10k. You really think it isn't drug money?
I didn't read anything about them carrying drugs. Did you?
Eta- if the police think it's drug money, they should say why (paraphanelia, suspect history, actual drugs found, were en route to a controlled buy, etc...).
Simply having cash shouldn't be probable cause for legalized theft- or in this case illegal extortion and bribery.
This post was edited on 4/1/16 at 2:55 pm
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:46 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
I didn't read anything about them carrying drugs
The only way I would ever in my life be upset with someone for carrying drugs, is if they were my drugs. If they were my drugs I would be wanting them back.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:48 pm to slackster
quote:
It is a shame he had to go through that, but he got the money back when he threatened to sue them. The system is abhorrent - make no mistake - but by and large it is illegal money being confiscated
You have no way of knowing this so you're basically talking out of your arse since you have so little regard for other people's property wouldn't it be karma for you to lose everything you have and be left penniless
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:48 pm to MikeBRLA
quote:
The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove it IS drug money, not on the accused that it isn’t. One doesn't have to prove his innocence.
That's a negative ghostrider. The property is not a human, therefore can be assumed guilty. The owner is required to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the money was not tied to criminal activity in order to retain ownership. If he can't, or can't afford an attorney, or is locked up on trumped up charges during the seizure hearings, then property is gone.
Also, because this is civil court, no criminal charges necessary for seizure.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:49 pm to MikeBRLA
quote:
Why would you have to prove it's not drug money? The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove it IS drug money, not on the accused that it isn’t. One doesn't have to prove his innocence.
Since when? In theory maybe, but we all know it doesnt work like that.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:56 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
I didn't read anything about them carrying drugs. Did you?
I was asking what you think...not based on the article
I am not defending the cops. They were indicted right
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:57 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
was asking what you think...not based on the article
Fair enough- see my eta above to my original response.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:59 pm to NYNolaguy1
If they accepted the bribe deal, then it was for sure drug money. If it were someone's personal cash, they would have said F You, it's mine.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 3:01 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
see my eta above to my original response.
are you an attorney?
Posted on 4/1/16 at 3:01 pm to GeeOH
quote:
If they accepted the bribe deal, then it was for sure drug money. If it were someone's personal cash, they would have said F You, it's mine.
? If someone says give us $10k or spend years in fmita prison, you choose to be locked up?
Posted on 4/1/16 at 3:02 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
are you an attorney?
Just married to one. She rubs off on me every once in awhile.
This post was edited on 4/1/16 at 3:04 pm
Posted on 4/1/16 at 3:05 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
So if he doesn't have enough money for counsel, he's shite out of luck.
It is like I'm talking to a wall - he shouldn't be in the situation in the first place and it is despicable that the system allows it to happen.
I want to hear/read stories of innocent people - you and me - who had this happen to them.
I've read many of the horror stories online, but they invariably have some incredibly suspicious activity involved on the part of the "innocent" owners. I don't seem to come across these perfectly innocent cases where people got their shite taken for life.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 3:07 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
That's a negative ghostrider. The property is not a human, therefore can be assumed guilty. The owner is required to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the money was not tied to criminal activity in order to retain ownership.
That isn't true in any case I've read. The money can be seized first, but in order for it to be kept the state/feds/IRS have to prove with a preponderance of evidence that is laundered/illegally obtained.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 3:08 pm to Barf
quote:
So when I leave for Florida Sunday morning to buy a boat I need proof my cash didn't come from selling dope?
Why would you ever bring that much cash with you? Just get a certified check like a reasonable person.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 3:10 pm to bencoleman
quote:
You have no way of knowing this so you're basically talking out of your arse since you have so little regard for other people's property wouldn't it be karma for you to lose everything you have and be left penniless
Yes, yes I do. The fact that more often than not nothing is done about it is pretty solid evidence, no?
Also, to the bolded portion, I've said throughout this thread that I hate the law. I don't want people getting their shite taken unless they're proven guilty of a crime. I don't understand how/why this is so damn difficult for some of you to comprehend.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News