Texas police shake down drivers, lawsuit claims

[Archangel M]

And a department caving in to media scrutiny isnt proof of wrongdoing either..yall will just have to trust me on THAT one.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

where exactly are you a member of the bar?

I am not a lawyer. I do not give legal advice. However, like many people, I have discovered that the law is freely available, as are court cases and SCOTUS judgments. One can learn all that one is able, if one is interested.

Plus, my college education towards my AAS in Criminal Justice contained a lot of Constitutional Law classes. For some reason, in Colorado, they want their cops to actually have some idea what the law is. Or at least they did back in the 1980's.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I would actually have to agree with Bill on that point..carrying large sums of cash is not typically PC in and of itself. You can carry as much cash as you wish as long as you are not crossing borders or entering the country (then a $10K limit applies)...

Thanks for the agreement, but I would also have add that the 10K limit is not really a limit - it is the maximum you can bring in without declaring it. If you declare it, you can bring in any amount, no maximum is specified.

However it is a common indicator of drug trafficking and will get some additional scrutiny from LEO's. I agree with Blindsages intent of his post though..some people are just unfamiliar with the differences between reasonable suspicion and probable cause.

I agree. Carrying large sums of cash (or having cats strapped to your forehead, anything 'weird' really) is reasonable suspicion to investigate further.

My question would remain, however. How would a police officer pulling over a motorist for speeding know that he or she had a large sum of cash on them unless they searched for it? And searches are either voluntary, subsequent to lawful apprehension, or by warrant. So I'd like to know how that came to pass. How can the police detect how much dosh the guy has on him without searching?

Assuming I were pulled over by the police, if they asked if they could search my car, I'd say 'no'. Unless they have PC at that time to arrest me or get a warrant, that's the end of it. They can certainly have me exit the car and pat me down for weapons, but they can't go into my wallet, they can't search my locked trunk, etc, etc. But let's assume they see a duffel bag sitting next to me on the car seat and it is open and they see money inside. If the question is "What's that money for?" The answer would be "I'm sorry, officer, that's none of your business." Again, end of situation - or it should be.

I find it rather fascinating, however, that the people most in fear of Big Brother and what abuses he might be planning against our civil liberties are utterly convinced that the police have the right to do just about anything they want.

 

[Archangel M]

My question would remain, however. How would a police officer pulling over a motorist for speeding know that he or she had a large sum of cash on them unless they searched for it? And searches are either voluntary, subsequent to lawful apprehension, or by warrant. So I'd like to know how that came to pass. How can the police detect how much dosh the guy has on him without searching?

Good question.

I would have to say that to be legit it almost HAS to be a consent search or be laying out in plain view.

 

[MJS]

Yea it has been several complaints butno arrest there have never been any eye witness or for that matter any sherd of evidence to support these alligations. I wish if it wa shappening somebody would proof this andget them off the force, it is bad for all Leos when this happens.

Something tells me that this dept. would never have those cameras in the cars, like we see in some areas.

 

[MJS]

Tenaha is like 15 minutes from me, very small town, less than 1000 people, less than 10 cops and this story is ********.

Teneha sits on 259, THE major drug route up from mexico. Oddly, travelers from the south to the north end of the state DONT use 259, it is mostly small 2 lanes, lots of speed zones, etc. So most people dont use it. But the drug runners all do.

listen to the details

"they took my 6000 in cash i was carrying"

who the hell carries 6K in CASH???

Well, this explains a bit more. I remember a phone call I took from a woman who lived in one of the high crime areas of the city where I work. She wanted to file a larceny complaint. So, she goes on to tell me that she gave 'some guy' $20 so he could buy her drugs. He scammed her out of the cash, and now she wanted to report that. Needless to say, the cop went there, and told her that the Police don't take complaints like that and he's not going to help her get her drug money back.

As for who carries 6 grand.....sure as hell isn't me! LOL!

 

[MJS]

So Twin Fist, are you now saying that the act of carrying the only legal tender recognized by the government is alone enough to confiscate that currency on suspicion of a crime?


-Rob

In all honesty, I think it would raise the suspicions of anyone who came across someone with that kind of cash. I would also say that if this PD is like most others, other things would be done to check out the people in the car. Have the occupants of the car had past run ins with the police? If so, what were the details? Do any of the occupants have prior drug convictions?

I can only go by what I read initially, but now that we actually have members of the forum who a) live in TX, and b) know that area and about past incidents that've happened there, I think this story makes more sense. Were the cops crooked? Don't know, again, I can only go on what I've read so far.

 

[MJS]

Absolutely. Try depositing that much cash in to a bank account and one can see the hoops one has to go through, for a legal deposit, of legal tender, on behalf of an established, reputable business.

Sorry...not buying in to the "corrupt cop" story that CNN desperately wants me to believe.

again with the theory vs reality thing

yeah, in theory you can walk around with your life savings in cash

here on planet reality, no one does that. No one deals in large sums of cash anymore.

And if you are, you are stupid for doing so since the risk of loss, etc whatever

But we do know WHO deals in cash and nothing but cash

druggies

Well, banks know that too. Carol is right, try to walk into a bank with more than 10K in cash, see what happens.

I remember one day I was standing in line. There was a guy at the counter and another in front of me. The guy at the counter had one of those cash bags with the zipper on it. He pulled out quite a bit of cash to deposit. A few major differences:

1) The tellers all knew him.

2) He was the owner of a business in town.

3) He was depositing the cash into the business acct.

Good points that you both bring up!

 

[MJS]

well, quick survey

Who here has more than 1000 in cash on thier persons, or even in thier home for that matter?

Not me.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

In all honesty, I think it would raise the suspicions of anyone who came across someone with that kind of cash.

Again, how do they know who has what kind of cash in a traffic stop?

That's the answer I'm looking for here. You pull someone over, how do you know how much cash they have? X-ray vision?

There is also the small problem of the 'civil forfeiture' not appearing to have anything to do with subsequent arrests or prosecutions. You take someone's 'drug money', where are the drug charges? Are we saying that the cops have the authority to cut deals with drug suspects, letting them go in exchange for their money?

Extortion applies EVEN when the police steal from bad guys - assuming these people were bad guys.

I'm not seeing much here that would tend to exonerate the police in this case.

 

[MJS]

Thanks for the agreement, but I would also have add that the 10K limit is not really a limit - it is the maximum you can bring in without declaring it. If you declare it, you can bring in any amount, no maximum is specified.



I agree. Carrying large sums of cash (or having cats strapped to your forehead, anything 'weird' really) is reasonable suspicion to investigate further.

My question would remain, however. How would a police officer pulling over a motorist for speeding know that he or she had a large sum of cash on them unless they searched for it? And searches are either voluntary, subsequent to lawful apprehension, or by warrant. So I'd like to know how that came to pass. How can the police detect how much dosh the guy has on him without searching?

Assuming I were pulled over by the police, if they asked if they could search my car, I'd say 'no'. Unless they have PC at that time to arrest me or get a warrant, that's the end of it. They can certainly have me exit the car and pat me down for weapons, but they can't go into my wallet, they can't search my locked trunk, etc, etc. But let's assume they see a duffel bag sitting next to me on the car seat and it is open and they see money inside. If the question is "What's that money for?" The answer would be "I'm sorry, officer, that's none of your business." Again, end of situation - or it should be.

I find it rather fascinating, however, that the people most in fear of Big Brother and what abuses he might be planning against our civil liberties are utterly convinced that the police have the right to do just about anything they want.

Then again, how many LEO shows that we see on TV or incidents that we've seen in RL, where someone knows damn well that they have drugs in the car, yet they let the cops search anyways. Happens all the time. The badguys are hoping, that being the key word, that the cops dont find anything. They're taking a gamble. And now, once they have the OK from the driver, simply calling for a dog is another option. Happens all the time where I work.

Also keep in mind Bill, that you are speaking and thinking like a LEO. You know the ins and outs, because IIRC, you mentioned that you are in that field or were at one point. However, I'd be willing to bet that your typical dealer, carrier, etc., doesnt have the mental know-how, to think like that.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Good question.

I would have to say that to be legit it almost HAS to be a consent search or be laying out in plain view.

So let's say it is a consent search. Cops ask to search, nervous driver gives permission. They find a bundle of cash. Now, that's a good reason to ask questions of the driver - and to attempt to develop PC - but where is the drug-sniffing dog that alerts on the money? Where are the drugs? Where is the crime? It looks very clearly as if the people involved are having their cash confiscated, but no charges filed. Since when do police do civil asset forfeiture without an arrest or charges being filed? And then they're essentially saying they are trading charges for cash? Letting bad guys go if they give up their money? That sounds like extortion to me.

Even if the cash is found subsequent to a voluntary search, where is the PC for seizing it?

 

[MJS]

Again, how do they know who has what kind of cash in a traffic stop?

That's the answer I'm looking for here. You pull someone over, how do you know how much cash they have? X-ray vision?

There is also the small problem of the 'civil forfeiture' not appearing to have anything to do with subsequent arrests or prosecutions. You take someone's 'drug money', where are the drug charges? Are we saying that the cops have the authority to cut deals with drug suspects, letting them go in exchange for their money?

Extortion applies EVEN when the police steal from bad guys - assuming these people were bad guys.

I'm not seeing much here that would tend to exonerate the police in this case.

Honestly Bill, I don't know, and frankly, nobody here does either, unless we were privy to being there at that given moment. Its all speculation at this point. We can what if this and come up with a million scenarios all day long. Fact of the matter is, we only have the articles to go by, and details of the town and the PD from members who live in Texas.

But, to answer your question.....they (the police) probably dont know, but as I said in another post, the average criminal is probably not playing with a full deck of cards. How many careless ones are out there? Ones that, as I said, give the ok to a search, knowing that a stash of drugs or cash is hidden. They're hoping and praying the cops dont find it.

If the cop pulled you over and you had a duffel bag full of cash, and the cop asked you what it was for, I"m damn sure you'd fire off an answer just as soon as the question was asked. Now, I'd be willing to bet the average criminal is going to stutter, act all nervous....."Well, ummm...er....well....ummm...." See my point? So even if the scumbag said it was for a new car and his rent money, the cop probably knows that he's full of ****, so he'll keep pressuring him, until he gets a search or an asnwer that'll allow him to dig deeper.

I'm NOT saying that there are no bad cops. I think we've gone around this block before in other threads. I also know cops that will take the small amount of drugs and give the badguy a break. They take it and process it in evidence. Yet they let the guy go with a "Dont let me ****ing see you driving in this area again, you got it!!!! I'm letting you off easy, but next time I'll haul your ****ing *** off to jail!" I've heard the stories of it happening and I've see it first hand happening.

Come on man, do I have to explain all this stuff? I'm sure you know how it is.

 

[MJS]

So let's say it is a consent search. Cops ask to search, nervous driver gives permission. They find a bundle of cash. Now, that's a good reason to ask questions of the driver - and to attempt to develop PC - but where is the drug-sniffing dog that alerts on the money? Where are the drugs? Where is the crime? It looks very clearly as if the people involved are having their cash confiscated, but no charges filed. Since when do police do civil asset forfeiture without an arrest or charges being filed? And then they're essentially saying they are trading charges for cash? Letting bad guys go if they give up their money? That sounds like extortion to me.

Even if the cash is found subsequent to a voluntary search, where is the PC for seizing it?

If you read my very first post, I was thinking the same thing...that this PD is FUBAR. If in fact this is what is happening, then YES, an investigation needs to be done. If this is a half baked, missing key info story that was cooked by the media...well, I for one am not basing my sole decision on that. God knows how often they **** up or leave key stuff out of the story.

 

[elder999]

WIthout commenting on the particular circumstances of the original post.

I sold a Harley back in 1995 for about $8000. Dude paid cash; I took cash, and the bank took cash-no problems.

I've been selling off the car collection over the last 2 or so years. With the exception of a couple of way more expensive ones, most of the buyers have paid cash;I took cash, and the bank took cash-no problems.

I keep fairly extensive records of those transactions, though-I think this alone would be enough to keep any suspicion of the source of my cash being nefarious.The banks usually don't blink an eye if you deposit less than $10,000-any deposits over that amount, checks included, and they have to report it to the feds. I have heard, though, that they might be reporting someone like me, who makes regular large cash deposits, to DHS or some other authority, which is somewhat amusing to me. With my work situation, though, it's likely that I'd be suspected of selling something besides cars for that money, and that's why I've been keeping records...

It's still legal, I can still carry it, and, while I have bit of plastic, I usually still do carry it, and yeah, usually not much less than $300, and often more.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

WIthout commenting on the particular circumstances of the original post.

I sold a Harley back in 1995 for about $8000. Dude paid cash; I took cash, and the bank took cash-no problems.

I've been selling off the car collection over the last 2 or so years. With the exception of a couple of way more expensive ones, most of the buyers have paid cash;I took cash, and the bank took cash-no problems.

I keep fairly extensive records of those transactions, though-I think this alone would be enough to keep any suspicion of the source of my cash being nefarious.The banks usually don't blink an eye if you deposit less than $10,000-any deposits over that amount, checks included, and they have to report it to the feds. I have heard, though, that they might be reporting someone like me, who makes regular large cash deposits, to DHS or some other authority, which is somewhat amusing to me. With my work situation, though, it's likely that I'd be suspected of selling something besides cars for that money, and that's why I've been keeping records...

It's still legal, I can still carry it, and, while I have bit of plastic, I usually still do carry it, and yeah, usually not much less than $300, and often more.

The Patriot Act and Sarbannes-Oxley require banks to fill out certain reports, some of which are keyed to amounts ($10K) and some of which are not tied to any particular amount. Examples are a SIR (suspicious incident report) and others of the sort. However, that does not make it illegal to perform those transactions. It just means a form is filed and an investigation 'may' be done. You probably would not know that the form was filed or that an investigation was done - the bank is not supposed to tell you.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

If you read my very first post, I was thinking the same thing...that this PD is FUBAR. If in fact this is what is happening, then YES, an investigation needs to be done. If this is a half baked, missing key info story that was cooked by the media...well, I for one am not basing my sole decision on that. God knows how often they **** up or leave key stuff out of the story.

When I read that the PD 'gave back' some of the money when challenged makes me think they've got something to hide. I will wait to hear more.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Then again, how many LEO shows that we see on TV or incidents that we've seen in RL, where someone knows damn well that they have drugs in the car, yet they let the cops search anyways. Happens all the time. The badguys are hoping, that being the key word, that the cops dont find anything. They're taking a gamble. And now, once they have the OK from the driver, simply calling for a dog is another option. Happens all the time where I work.

People often give consent to search ill-advisedly. However, if the consent is given, and money is found, now what? It's still not PC for an arrest, let alone a civil asset forfeiture. You have to tie the money to some illegal activity or it is just money. No one is required to explain why they have money in the absence of any other factors.

Also keep in mind Bill, that you are speaking and thinking like a LEO. You know the ins and outs, because IIRC, you mentioned that you are in that field or were at one point. However, I'd be willing to bet that your typical dealer, carrier, etc., doesnt have the mental know-how, to think like that.

Granted. I just still want to know what happened AFTER the money was found. If there was PC for arrest and civil forfeiture, where were the arrests, and where are the drugs? If the money is drug-tainted, there are many requirements tied to seizing the money - and if the Texas law being quoted in the news about civil asset forfeiture, there has to be a charge and a conviction - you can't just take people's money off them in exchange for letting them go.

 

[MJS]

People often give consent to search ill-advisedly. However, if the consent is given, and money is found, now what? It's still not PC for an arrest, let alone a civil asset forfeiture. You have to tie the money to some illegal activity or it is just money. No one is required to explain why they have money in the absence of any other factors.



Granted. I just still want to know what happened AFTER the money was found. If there was PC for arrest and civil forfeiture, where were the arrests, and where are the drugs? If the money is drug-tainted, there are many requirements tied to seizing the money - and if the Texas law being quoted in the news about civil asset forfeiture, there has to be a charge and a conviction - you can't just take people's money off them in exchange for letting them go.

Yes, I see your points. I was going more on the lines of the initial search. To just take the cash....no, without a good reason, probably not much they can do. I mean, aside from taking down info on the people in the car, info on the car, etc., they're probably going to just let them go. Of course, if there was that much cash, perhaps checking with surrounding towns to see if there were any burglaries, robberies, etc.

I still think that the person or people in the car are going to be grilled for a few though. I mean, if you pulled a car over and saw a bunch of electronic equipment in the back...who drives around with stuff like that? Sure, anyone is free to, but logically, who really does? I think that was the point Twin Fist was making earlier. You're free to carry a million dollars on you, but who does and why would you? Even if you carry cash to do all your business transactions, ie: bill paying, rent, etc., would you carry your life savings, or just what you need for the moment?

I'd be willing to bet that if we lined up 20 random people at the grocery store or shopping mall, not one would be carrying 6 grand. Again, I think people are looking at averages. The "average" person doesnt do it. Most people probably pay their bills online or by check. Could you run into someone like that? Sure, but IMO, I'm saying the majority probably doesnt.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I still think that the person or people in the car are going to be grilled for a few though. I mean, if you pulled a car over and saw a bunch of electronic equipment in the back...who drives around with stuff like that? Sure, anyone is free to, but logically, who really does? I think that was the point Twin Fist was making earlier. You're free to carry a million dollars on you, but who does and why would you? Even if you carry cash to do all your business transactions, ie: bill paying, rent, etc., would you carry your life savings, or just what you need for the moment?

Sure, I agree, it would be suspicious. But 'mere suspicion' is only good for asking questions. If PC isn't developed, as you said, do an FI card on them and send them on their way.

Let's say my backseat is jammed with electronics. I have no receipt, no explanation for the stuff. The police would be justified to check serial numbers against NCIC to see if it was reported stolen, contact their dispatch center to see if there were local reports of thefts, etc - but they have a fairly short window in which to do that. If nothing turns up, they have the Field Interview or Field Contact card, the serial number of the equipment, and the turn me loose. If something comes up stolen later, hooray. If not, they have no valid basis for detaining me, arresting me, or confiscating my equipment because it is 'suspicious'.