Fed seized $181,500 in cash at airport

joko104 said:

I always have a few thousand in cash for opportunistic buys. Cash is persuasive. Almost no one accepts a check for large purchases anymore. It is hard for a person who needs money NOW to turn down cash. I also sell cars, boats etc for cash. Anyone can challenge a credit card charge and often successfully steal by it. A check can bounce or a person can stop payment. Certified checks can be fake and even those can be contested.

It used to be that American currency was to be considered absolutely safe. Now it isn't - it's not safe from the government. Such seizures equate to the US government refusing to honor money it issues. Because of this policy, your American money might be absolutely worthless to you.

Click to expand...

Many cities love asset forfeiture because they get to keep it and use it for whatever they please. They used to just steal money from drug pushers. Now all they have to do is say the cash was obtained through some sort of illegal activity and it is up to the individual to prove otherwise. It is guilty until proven innocent. Just like they did with Trump.

Hatuey said:

Sure, you walk around airports with 150k often? What are the transfer fees on 150K that are worth the risk of getting robbed?

Lol, come on.




Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

Click to expand...

A person is probably safer from robbery in an airport than elsewhere. Certainly safer than in a police station.

It isn't always big money. They also will steal $20, $50, $100 from people knowing there is absolutely nothing they can do about it.

Hatuey said:

Yeah, not going to really get worked up about people trying to get though an airport with bags of cash.

I'd understand if it was 2K and some guy trying to get rent money to his kids, but this just isn't it.

Pay for a wire transfer.




Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

Click to expand...

There is little doubt that somebody going to the airport with a couple hundred k in cash is up to something dodgy. Still not the point, though.

joko104 said:

A person is probably safer from robbery in an airport than elsewhere. Certainly safer than in a police station.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I can see why getting robbed on your way from or to the airport wouldn't dawn on someone like you.

Lol.


Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

Hatuey said:

Yeah, not going to really get worked up about people trying to get though an airport with bags of cash.

I'd understand if it was 2K and some guy trying to get rent money to his kids, but this just isn't it.

Pay for a wire transfer.

Click to expand...

Fine, make it a law, set the limit, and the penalty for breaking it.

What happens all the time is that guy with $2,000 is stopped and his cash seized, and the rationale is identical to the case here - because the LEO randomly and capriciously decided it was suspicious. I don't see how that is defensible.

I sold my last car for a little less than $10,000, in cash at my demand. The guy who bought it absolutely risked getting it seized and then having to prove his innocence, that he had several $thousand in an envelope to buy my car versus some cocaine or oxy. Why the hell should he have to risk that? It's LEGAL to buy my car for cash, and therefore to have cash on hand.

joko104 said:

It isn't always big money. They also will steal $20, $50, $100 from people knowing there is absolutely nothing they can do about it.

Click to expand...

There was a story about a guy who had around 100K in cash in his possession a year or so ago. He was an older guy and certainly not involved with drugs. He said he had saved it up over the years. The police or feds just confiscated it and claimed that he couldn't prove where he got it. They wouldn't give it back no matter what. He had to sue them. I don't know what the result was.

Cardinal said:

There is little doubt that somebody going to the airport with a couple hundred k in cash is up to something dodgy. Still not the point, though.

Click to expand...

Kinda like the billions they flew into Iran.

JasperL said:

Fine, make it a law, set the limit, and the penalty for breaking it.

What happens all the time is that guy with $2,000 is stopped and his cash seized, and the rationale is identical to the case here - because the LEO randomly and capriciously decided it was suspicious. I don't see how that is defensible.

I sold my last car for a little less than $10,000, in cash at my demand. The guy who bought it absolutely risked getting it seized and then having to prove his innocence, that he had several $thousand in an envelope to buy my car versus some cocaine or oxy. Why the hell should he have to risk that? It's LEGAL to buy my car for cash, and therefore to have cash on hand.

Click to expand...

But I wouldn't agree with the LEO that 2k in cash is suspicious. I would agree with 180k being suspicious enough to require investigation.

Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

Why would anyone get a certified check for $150,000 if they hadn't even seen or driven the truck? How can person negotiate the price with a certified check? Or risk losing a good deal to someone else who does have cash?

The last time cash made the difference for me was last month - and I posted about it on the forum. At a small parking lot car show, I saw a beautiful older pickup truck with a for sale sign. The price was extremely low. VERY low. Just the paint and body work was more than the price - and the entire interior, suspension, exhaust, tires, wheels, everything under the hood - all new. Without driving it, within maybe 90 seconds I told him I'll take it, handing him $500 and telling him I have the rest in my truck.

Within seconds, two old fellas walked up. They asked if was sold. Yes. They ask if the seller had gotten the money - and then offered 50% more for the truck. The seller said no, I had given a deposit and was going to proceed to pay him.

If I had said "I'll take it. I'll go get the money?" He would have sold it to the other person.

When someone is selling something, they don't want IOUs, they don't want a check, they would rather not have a credit card even if they can accept them for the fees and the very real potential charge back. A seller who accepts other than cash is risking what they are selling being stolen by a fake or disputed check or cashiers check, a credit card charge back etc.

Paying by cash as a RULE also avoids spending money you can't afford to spend and otherwise prevents debts.

It is rare for a person to produce 6 figure cash for a real estate purchase? Definitely. But for a fact when I made the offer, saying "it will be cash" - the person said "do really mean cash?" Response: "Yes, green cash." Seller? "Absolutely we got a deal." The realtor said that had never happened in their office before. There is absolutely nothing illegal about that or indicating criminal activity. It indicates a person who is very safe with their money and a person who will make it as fast and easy for a seller as is possible as motivation to accept the offer.

Who knows why? Maybe they don't want their wife or husband to know they got the money or how much. Maybe they are overdrawn at the bank and need the money for their mortgage, pay utilities, a car payment, a tank of gas and/or food. Maybe, like me, when I sell something I want to sell it.

I do not want to spend a hour or two driving to their bank chain to see if the check or cashier's check is good - which is impossible in the evening and on weekends. When I buy something, I want it NOW - not tomorrow or after the bank opens on Sunday. Maybe the person will change their mind. Maybe they'll drive it 150 mph or take something off it or swap something out. Maybe they'll wreck it or it get's stolen.

I don't want an IOU (check). I don't want any subsequent battle over a check or credit card charge. I want MONEY. Sellers want MONEY too.

The government criminalizing having cash is outrageous - but it is NOT only cash they summarily seize. They can summarily seize anything. They opt for cash because - like I just wrote - they too want CASH.

JasperL said:

That's my feeling. Bottom line is if the feds and state and locals want to outlaw doing business with cash over a certain dollar limit, or to carry cash over a dollar limit, pass a damn law. Make it illegal. Put us all on notice that failing to comply with this LAW (versus the whim of the LEO, depending on how he's getting along with his mistress or what kind of new gear the police chief wants) is to risk forfeiture of the entire amount. As is it's arbitrary and IMO indefensible.

Click to expand...

Yes, formalize that American money increasingly is completely worthless. :roll:

No one should be deprived of their property without due process first - like it says in the Bill of Rights. Cash is "property" in law.

There is NOTHING suspicious about that person having $150,000. If it was a criminal undertaking they would not have gone to the airport with it and would have known the government would steal it.

Nor can they show up where they are going and go to their bank wanting $150,000 in cash. Nearly every bank will truthfully say they don't have it - and require you to fill out a lot of forms - plus the bank may close your account over it. The government is doing all it can to basically outlaw cash by harassment, paperwork and theft practices.

What the government ultimately wants is a chip put in your skin with GPS and that you do all commerce with so you can monitored at all times in everything you do - trying to figure how to get (take) anything from you they can. But for now, they push to force everyone to do commerce electronically so they can monitor all of it - all in the name of "anti-terrorism" and "the war on drugs."

The war on drugs and war on terrorism increasingly in really the government's war on we-the-people.

Hatuey said:

But I wouldn't agree with the LEO that 2k in cash is suspicious. I would agree with 180k being suspicious enough to require investigation.

Click to expand...

Maybe you wouldn't agree, but the reasoning is identical. They arbitrarily determine holding that much cash is suspicious, seize it, and then the person has to prove he's innocent.

And, fine - $180k is suspicious. I agree! So investigate it all they want, and if they can find a crime, charge him and seize the money. Maybe it's about income tax fraud, and a future-crime, like in the movies. Make a law allowing LEOs to anticipate your future tax fraud crime and punish you in advance for the future-crime they have determined you might very well commit! Fine with me! Just be transparent about it, so we all know what future-crimes we can be penalized for possibly committing.

Or just outlaw doing business in cash > $100 or whatever limit the legislature decides. I don't care what that limit is, but IMO the public should be put on notice and not rely on the arbitrary decisions of some asshole LEO who might be having a bad day, doesn't like how you look, or whose department REALLY wants a dozen of the new AR-15s with all the extras, plus a few new squad cars.

joko104 said:

Yes, formalize that American money increasingly is completely worthless. :roll:

No one should be deprived of their property without due process first - like it says in the Bill of Rights. Cash is "property" in law.

Click to expand...

I hope you realize I don't actually support this, but if an LEO is going to seize someone's money, it damn sure ought to be based on a law passed by the legislature and signed by POTUS or a Governor.

We don't agree on much but we do here, and I've indicated it several times. I'm all for bipartisanship when we can come together, and IMO this issue shouldn't be partisan. eace

Hatuey said:

Yeah, I can see why getting robbed on your way from or to the airport wouldn't dawn on someone like you.

Lol.


Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

Click to expand...

And if the person was robbed by a mugger on the way to or from the airport, we could all agree that yes, it's risky to carry that much cash.

The issue here is that the person was robbed by the police. The question is, is it OK for the police to take the money, without any evidence of a crime?

I live in the Greater Tampa Metropolitan area and have flown out of and into Tampa International countless times. I currently have a TSA-issued Fast Pass for quicker pass-thru.

Note to self (not that I need a reminder): DO NOT BRING THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF CASH INTO TAMPA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT!

A lot about the story raises eyebrows.... for instance: 1. obviously unusual, dangerous and suspicious to carry $191,500 in cash into an International Airport. 2. The unexplained discrepancy ($21,550) in the amount of cash reportedly confiscated. 3. the mystery of the amount written on the receipt given to the courier. 4. a lack of solid evidence of criminal activity on the part of the courier.... (please cite the law(s) allegedly violated).

The discrepancy in the amount reportedly confiscated suggest possible criminal activity on the part of TSA personnel.

swing_voter said:

I'm not 100% on board with the government seizing large sums of cash, but the story sounds fishy. In this day and age, why would you carry all that cash to buy trucks with? There are a lot of alternatives to cash, bank transfers are one, cashier's check are another.

Click to expand...

Depends on what's in the trucks...

The man actually had $191,000 with him from his employer to purchase 4 trucks.

The feds let him keep $10,000 of that cash. If they thought the money was ill gotten gains, they would not have let him keep the $10,000.

Here is an attorney analyzing this case. He has some interesting views on this.

Hatuey said:

Sure, you walk around airports with 150k often? What are the transfer fees on 150K that are worth the risk of getting robbed?

Lol, come on.




Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

Click to expand...

How do people know how much cash anyone has on them?

Moonglow said:

How do people know how much cash anyone has on them?

Click to expand...

I don't. I can't imagine it would be hard to train AI to look for 2 bricks worth of cash though.

A wire transfer would have been a few hundred bucks tops and avoided all of this.

Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

dcsports said:

And if the person was robbed by a mugger on the way to or from the airport, we could all agree that yes, it's risky to carry that much cash.

Click to expand...

It is risky to try to pass that much cash through and airport without law enforcement questioning it's provenance too.

That's why we are here.

Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

JasperL said:

Maybe you wouldn't agree, but the reasoning is identical.

Click to expand...

One involves a transaction the average person takes, and the other doesn't. It's the difference between trying to pass a bottle of liquor for personal consumption, and trying to pass a liquor store's worth of alcohol through customs and claiming it's for personal consumption.

You can use the same reasoning, but law enforcement is more justified in looking into one than the other.

Quantities matter at airports.



Я Баба Яга [emoji328]

Taking the money is stealing the money. If they are suspected of a crime, charge them. If not, its their money. So what if someone carries around a ton of cash? Is that a crime now? Why? This is just another example of the police stealing from all of us and creating some excuse to rob this man.

swing_voter said:

I'm not 100% on board with the government seizing large sums of cash, but the story sounds fishy. In this day and age, why would you carry all that cash to buy trucks with? There are a lot of alternatives to cash, bank transfers are one, cashier's check are another.

Click to expand...

Civil asset forfeiture is a truly egregious activity. The burden is on the government to prove illegal activity is taking place. It’s not up to their targets to prove their innocence. It’s just a revenue generating scheme that local law enforcement and the feds have dreamed up.

Hatuey said:

One involves a transaction the average person takes, and the other doesn't. It's the difference between trying to pass a bottle of liquor for personal consumption, and trying to pass a liquor store's worth of alcohol through customs and claiming it's for personal consumption.

You can use the same reasoning, but law enforcement is more justified in looking into one than the other.

Quantities matter at airports.

Click to expand...

But they're not "looking into" a damn thing. It's months later and no one has been arrested or charged in a crime. That is NORMAL. They're pronouncing guilt and seizing the cash, based on nothing but their own whims. I seriously don't know why you're defending this. It's rife with abuse everywhere it exists, and for the very simple reason LEOs just find some cash and help themselves!

It's also Orwellian, and I thought it was a joke the first time I read about the details. The 'defendant' here isn't the man or the company, but the CASH. So the case will read something like, "DHS v. $171,501.23" or whatever. And the owner isn't charged with a crime, but the CASH is, and to be returned the owner has to prove the cash wasn't involved in anything criminal.

Seriously, it's the most absurd thing I've ever heard of and IMO there's no defense of it as it's currently being used. This man is suspected of NOTHING. The LEOs released him with $10,000 in cash in his pockets! Does that sound like they believe he's a drug dealer or terrorist or other criminal?

You've picked a losing horse here...