We have previously discussed “policing for dollars” or “churning” where they seize cash, particularly on highways, as suspected drug money even without actually arresting or charging the drivers. It raises a huge amount of money for police departments and has been widely criticized as abusive. The latest victim of churning appears to be Charles Clarke, 24, who was on his way to take classes at the University of Central Florida. He was stopped at the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport in Hebron, Ky. with his life savings that he was taking with him for safe keeping and to support his education. Since he could not “prove” the source of the money, agents seized the $11,000 and, despite dropping all charges against him, has thus far refused to return the money despite Clarke’s efforts.
The stop at the airport occurred after an airline employee reported that Clarke’s luggage smelled of marijuana. Police told him that he was free to go but asked to search him and his bags. Rather than walk away, Clarke consented and immediately told them that he had the cash on him. They found no drugs and he admitted that he had smoked marijuana before going to the airport.
DEA agent William Conrad, a Cincinnati-based officer with a DEA task force,and Detective Christopher Boyd said that when they grabbed the money, Clarke grabbed approached Boyd’s wrist. They responded by criminally charging him with resisting arrest and disorderly conduct — charges later dropped after they took the money.
Conrad’s affidavit insisted that the seizure was perfectly justified “based on probable cause that it was proceeds of drug trafficking or was intended to be used in an illegal transaction.” The “Mitigating factors” cited by Conrad was the purchase of a one-way ticket, inability to provide documentation noting where the money came from, a positive hit by a drug dog and the strong smell of marijuana on his checked luggage. Yet Clarke admitted to smoking pot and there was a perfectly good reason for a one-way ticket for a college student. Finally, if Conrad was asked to prove the source of the money in his wallet, I expect he would have had the same difficulty in producing receipts or a financial statement.
The United States attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky appears to have no comment on the arrest, dropped charges, or money seizure. There is a presumption of guilt until proven otherwise. It is simply thrown on the pile of $6.8 billion in cash and property has been seized through the “Equitable Sharing Program.” While only two agencies were involved in stripping Clarke of his life savings, some 11 agencies across Kentucky and Ohio claim cuts in such proceeds.
Reblogged this on Finding Truth In an Illusory World.
If I went in for jury duty and declared the defendant must be guilty otherwise he would not even be on trial, they would reject me immediately (or they should). What prevents the police from randomly stopping anyone for a “suspected” crime, seizing all of their assets and then once no charges are filed keeping the assets? At least if I’m being mugged I am well within my rights to defend myself, but the moment a “law” enforcement official takes on the role of mugger all claim of rights to defend my life, liberty and property are gone? THAT is when you know we have completely abandoned the constitutional rule of law. History has proven what happens next.
The justice department(s) and various police departments are at fault here. If they are directed by the state and federal administrations is another question. There have been cases taken to court to counter the freewheeling moves made by police, money seizures included, but the judge always finds some convoluted and maybe even fabricated construction of a precedent or reference to an ancient law to stand behind the police. The police can seize your vehicle, smash it up, and you are left with the mess. These cases of seizure of funds are supported by the courts.
The logic of, ‘If I was not charged then I should get my money back.’, does not even require a lawyer. Yet in court it don’t mean a pinch of coon sh*t. This is how far our society has fallen. This has nothing to do with too much government, liberal government, conservative government, or Obamacare. This is a branch of our society, that which we put in place to protect us, run amok. This is no different than the cop who stops you in Mexico and lets you pay him a fine directly, in cash, or you go to jail.
The greatest impediment to stopping this travesty of justice is the constant finger pointing at ‘government’, liberals, progressives, conservatives, etc. The fact of the matter is that the police are, when allowed, above the government, the Constitution, and the law.
The controls on the denomination[$100 bill highest] and bank reporting of cash has only made it a bit more difficult for illegal activity. The “catch” more good guys than bad ones w/ the reporting. That’s what needs to be reported. Maybe JT can channel his police obsession on this aspect of police, DA, US Attorney, IRS thuggish behavior.
“Which is why the boy was not charged. But yes, they took the money because they had valid reasons to believe that the money were drug-related.”
Vad,
The issue is not why they seized the assets. Once they determined he had not committed a crime then they MUST return any property seized…PERIOD. Keeping the assets without a trial completely undermines our entire system of justice. This is straight up THEFT and any attempt to color this otherwise is pure ignorance of our natural right to property.
This was theft – plain and simple.
Police and DA’s can dress it up any way they want, but the fact is that anybody who participates in civil forfeiture where there are no criminal charges is a thief.
We need to speak up. JT and others have to keep publicizing these thefts. Perhaps public pressure will succeed where our representatives have failed us.
“He would probably produce bank receipts of withdrawal, or opened bank website on his phone or nearby computer, and showed the transaction. ”
If the world was just, police agencies weren’t corrupt, and innocence was the rule rather than a pesky barrier to overcome, it would be incumbent on police to prove the money was ill-gotten, not on the victim that it is legitimate. Which is why police use civil forfeiture – they have no evidence of guilt, but their lust for money tells them not to care.
Reblogged this on Scoop Feed.
I wish there was more reporting on the seizure of assets. It might lead to the revolution against the bloated and overreaching govt. in place for decades now. It is not only the police. The IRS seizes assets and we know the IRS has been politicized by this Administration. The govt. hates cash because they can’t control it. But, they do love to take it. People need to use cash more often to curb the monitoring done by both the govt. and corporations. We need to change the cash rules and make larger bills. Instead of taking Alexander Hamilton off the ten dollar bill to make way for a woman. We need to put women on the $500 and $1000 new bills.
> BUT we used to be innocent until proven guilty”
Which is why the boy was not charged. But yes, they took the money because they had valid reasons to believe that the money were drug-related. Lots of people pass through the airport, so imagine how strong the smell had to be in order to separate his luggage from everybody else’s. Plus the dog, plus his own admission. The forfeiture program is created in order to financially undermine drug trade, with realization that seizing couriers does not reach the goal, while the real criminals remain unreachable. And, sure, you can count on every caught courier to claim that his is honest student and these are his life savings and so on.
> Finally, if Conrad was asked to prove the source of the money in his wallet, I expect he would have had the same difficulty in producing receipts or a financial statement.
He would probably produce bank receipts of withdrawal, or opened bank website on his phone or nearby computer, and showed the transaction. In this country, the percentage of people who receive their income through the bank is sufficiently high in order to move the proof of exceptions to the accused.
vad – unless it just came from the US Printers, all US currency will have traces of drugs on it. We stopped making bigger bills to force drug lords to deal in shipments of currency. Then we made it illegal to structure withdrawal (Denny Hastert).
Civil forfeiture is a process that has been seriously abused by local police departments (and other alleged “law enforcement” agencies) who see this one sided process as an income producer for their departments. The money is used for everything from policing equipment to pizza and beer parties. The victims are soft targets for this kind of abuse. Police Departments like to hear how heroic they are and from time to time heroic acts are performed but on a day to day basis corruption and citizen abuse seems to be more the rule than the excretion. Of course, it is interesting to note that civil forfeiture is rarely if ever used against bankers or CEOs whose billions are clearly the result of criminal activity but then of course they have lawyers so they are not soft targets.
Police officers and others who engage in this process should be treated for the thieves they are. It is time to crack down.
25 years ago, when I was teaching classes in criminal justice, I did a major section on asset forfeiture abuses. The problem has not gotten better. I remember one case involving a nurseryman who was traveling to the Houston area to purchase wholesale products for his nursery. Because of the perishability of the plants, he needed to pay in cash. All of his purchase money was seized, yet he was not charged with any crime. The cost to recover the money consumed most of it. See the PBS documentary and article at
When a government steals from it’s citizens the game is over.
“I understand there is a legal purpose for seizing assets BUT we used to be innocent until proven guilty”
Fixed that for you.
“It raises a huge amount of money for police departments and has been widely criticized as abusive.”
I understand there is a legal purpose for seizing assets BUT we are still innocent until proven guilty and once it is determined no charges are to be filed or a court of law has found us not guilty then all seized assets should be UNSEIZED. THIS IS THEFT! Your sentence I quoted sounds as if this is okey dokey to you and it is far from it. I don’t even see any gray area here, MY PROPERTY IS MY PROPERTY, why is that so difficult to accept for progressives?
Thank you BarkinDog for that information.
I’ve looked for organizations that go into the schools to teach civil rights to students /what to do if you are stopped, or illegally detained, etc. but can find none. I wish I could help educate young adults that way…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83lF1qZq2N4 In this video clip, from four days ago a police officer is tasing a 13 year old skateboarder (he was trying to bring him home to his Mom). In the raw version on Youtube which I cannot find now, another skateboarder in the background hollers “Call the police!”, someone replies, “That IS the police!” there is a pause then, “Well,…call ANOTHER police!”
Sad to see them all feel so violated and powerless.
Maybe the Innocence Project could take this on?
This happens a lot to travels who are wearing cash in money belts, too. Since it costs more money to get the money back than the money itself, most let it go. In this case, the legal fees will be far more than 11k.
The DEA has become a terrorist organization, motivated by profit above all else. And the AUSAs that enable them to become robbers are reprehensible. There needs to be charges filled against them with the state bar associations.
*in light of the recent actions by the New York USA office, I am stating I do not advocate any actions to be taken by any persons based upon my statement above. No subpoena is necessary, no grand jury need be convened.
More lawyers need to be dutiful and need to invoke civil rights statutes. When you sue the Federal pigs you need to sue under the 18 U.S.C. provisions. When you sue State, county or municipal pigs you must sue under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, Section 1985 and Section 1988. The seizure was a violation of his due process and was a theft. If some state court judge rules against him along the way then sue him/her and make a claim that the judge has stepped outside the box of judicial immunity. Seek actual and punitive damages and attorney fees. If the student was in California or some legal pot state then the smoking of pot before he got there to the search scene would have not been onerous would it?
Too few lawyers are conversant in civil rights litigation. Too many lawyers know how to handle a divorce or a bankruptcy. The profession is sinking to low point levels in all states.