DETAINED by DEA

Dyepaintball12

Well-Known Member
I have been pulled over a lot of times in my life, and I mean a lot of times, but I have never been asked by an officer "How much Cash do you have on you?"

What would possess them to ask this? At the border, sure, but just on some highway I don't see the relevance.
 
DO NOT LIE TO THE POLICE. You can be misleading without telling a lie.

Are you carrying any cash?

1) I have $500 in my wallet.

If they find the money in your trunk. You asked if I was carrying any cash. I told you how much I had on me. You didn't say anything about my car. I am not sure this is the right course of action but don't lie.

2) Do I look like I am carrying a lot of cash? Look at my car and my clothes. Then change the subject like asking why you were pulled over or if you were speeding or maybe if you can call so and so to let them know you will be late or whatever.

You have never actually answered their question but they may think you did.

I would tell the truth and do my best to seem cooperative without giving up your rights. Any time they catch you in a lie they will up their interest in what you have or are doing.
 
Dyepaintball12 said:
Well yeah I get that, but other people keep adding stories of getting pulled over and getting asked about money!
Read your post and look for the key word in it. STORIES that's all they are nothing more nothing less. Fiction makes good reading real life is mundane who wants to read that.
 
Violations

Read a article today that local police are jealous of the powers of the FBI that the Patriot Act gave them to violate the Constitution and they want them now too!! Michigan is one pushing real hard, the same Nazi's that robbed Scobby.:whip:

CP
 

Jacob

Well-Known Member
creeping panther said:
Read a article today that local police are jealous of the powers of the FBI that the Patriot Act gave them to violate the Constitution and they want them now too!! Michigan is one pushing real hard, the same Nazi's that robbed Scobby.:whip:

CP
French cops vs American Cowboy Nazi cops


In his 9/24/2011 trip report of casinos in Bandol, France, BjTraveller mentioned that 7 French cops searched and found a self-defensive-weapon and +Euro$10,0000 in his car. The cops confiscated the weapon, but NOT the cash! He was free to go unharmed physically and financially! Perhaps Yankee, KKK, Nazi cops should learn something from French cops---the ethics & integrity ;).
 
mmeyers said:
This ruling by the Eighth Circuit Appeals Court shot a hole right through the HEART of the 4th Amendmend. :mad:

Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime
Eighth Circuit Appeals Court ruling says police may seize cash from motorists even in the absence of any evidence that a crime has been committed.

...
I like to fan the flames as much as the next guy, but with all due respect I don't think your post was particularly fair.

From the Eighth Circuit opinion,

"The route and circumstances of Gonzolez’s travel were highly suspicious.
Gonzolez had flown on a one-way ticket, which we have previously acknowledged is evidence in favor of forfeiture, see United States v. U.S. Currency in the Amount of $150,660.00, 980 F.2d 1200, 1206 (8th Cir. 1992), and he gave a vague explanation, attributed to advice from an unidentified third person, about why he elected to return by car. Gonzolez purportedly carried $125,000 in cash with him on his flight, for the purpose of buying a truck that he had never seen, from a third party whom he had never met, with the help of a friend whose name he could not recall at trial. This testimony does not inspire confidence in the innocence of the conduct. When he was stopped by the Nebraska State Patrol, Gonzolez was driving a rental car that was leased in the name of another person who was not present, another circumstance that gives rise to suspicion. Then, when Gonzolez was questioned by officers, he lied about having money in the car and about the names of his friends, thus giving further reason to question the legitimacy of the currency’s presence. See
$117,920.00 in U.S. Currency, 413 F.3d at 829. The totality of these circumstances – the large amount of concealed currency, the strange travel pattern, the inability to identify a key party in the purported innocent transaction, the unusual rental car papers, the canine alert, and the false statements to law enforcement officers – leads most naturally to the inference that Gonzolez was involved in illegal drug activity, and that the currency was substantially connected to it."
 
victorino said:
I like to fan the flames as much as the next guy, but with all due respect I don't think your post was particularly fair.

From the Eighth Circuit opinion,

"The route and circumstances of Gonzolez’s travel were highly suspicious.
Gonzolez had flown on a one-way ticket, which we have previously acknowledged is evidence in favor of forfeiture, see United States v. U.S. Currency in the Amount of $150,660.00, 980 F.2d 1200, 1206 (8th Cir. 1992), and he gave a vague explanation, attributed to advice from an unidentified third person, about why he elected to return by car. Gonzolez purportedly carried $125,000 in cash with him on his flight, for the purpose of buying a truck that he had never seen, from a third party whom he had never met, with the help of a friend whose name he could not recall at trial. This testimony does not inspire confidence in the innocence of the conduct. When he was stopped by the Nebraska State Patrol, Gonzolez was driving a rental car that was leased in the name of another person who was not present, another circumstance that gives rise to suspicion. Then, when Gonzolez was questioned by officers, he lied about having money in the car and about the names of his friends, thus giving further reason to question the legitimacy of the currency’s presence. See
$117,920.00 in U.S. Currency, 413 F.3d at 829. The totality of these circumstances – the large amount of concealed currency, the strange travel pattern, the inability to identify a key party in the purported innocent transaction, the unusual rental car papers, the canine alert, and the false statements to law enforcement officers – leads most naturally to the inference that Gonzolez was involved in illegal drug activity, and that the currency was substantially connected to it."
Guilty by inference. What happened to a beyond a shadow of doubt. It doesn't sound like they could prove anything. When the guy fails to incriminate himself they call that evidence? They found money, no drugs, or anything else illegal. How many APs in this thread suggest lying about money in their car? Sounds to me like a money hungry government hellbent on taking whatever they can get from anyone that is not connected. He is just lucky he didn't get shot when some fictitious move was made on his part. You used to have rights in this country. They weren't allowed to force a search for a roadside stop. You were presumed innocent unless given probable cause. How could an empty car be something that looked like it had a large weight of drugs in it? Was the rental cars suspension so shot it was dragging its bumper.

Since when is flying somewhere and driving back grounds for suspicion? So the theory is he flies to Chicago to buy drugs. He brings a lot of cash for this purpose. Then they pick him up in Nebraska and he still has the cash and no drugs. I might not be good at geography but he must be really lost to drive 700 miles from Chicago on the way to his drug source. Aren't the drugs curiously missing from the prosecution time line? I know when I want to buy something in North Carolina , I fly to Florida and rent a car and drive to North Carolina.:confused: His story might not make sense to english speaking people in this country but the only thing more hard to swallow is the idea he flew to Chicago but couldn't find any drugs to buy so he took a 700 mile detour through Nebraska looking for some.
 
Three

Well put, my thoughts exactly.

Actually he is lucky, if it happened today they would have called in a drone to blow up the car and him in it,,,,OH,,,wait, then they would have also destroyed the money they needed to pay for their, partys, prostitutes, drugs, girlfriends, tanning salons, buzz cuts, and really big guns,,,no, no, no drone!:laugh:

CP
 
Top