DEA and airport courier seizures
Oct 8, 2017, 10:16 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on the path to perdition
Programs: Delta, United
Posts: 4,786
DEA and airport courier seizures
I thought this article would be of interest regarding the DEA and seizing money from suspected drug money couriers.
http://tucson.com/news/state-and-reg...284c029c1.html
http://tucson.com/news/state-and-reg...284c029c1.html
Oct 8, 2017, 4:16 pm
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,165
Here's a story about a guy "getting his money back" as long as he doesn't mind not being able to sue to get $10K in attorney fees paid by the government.
Wow -- this stuff is nothing sort of draconian.
Wow -- this stuff is nothing sort of draconian.
Oct 13, 2017, 1:06 pm
#5
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 574
There was a story a few years back at Detroit's airport where DEA took cash and a $50-K Rolex from a well-known poker player coming back from a tournament. No warrant or anything. What's the point of having a 4th amendment if rogue gov't agencies get to bypass it?
Didn't Henry Hyde change the law around 1999 such that the Feds had the
burden of proof in these forfeitures?
Didn't Henry Hyde change the law around 1999 such that the Feds had the
burden of proof in these forfeitures?
Last edited by yandosan; Oct 13, 2017 at 1:41 pm
Oct 13, 2017, 2:12 pm
#6
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SoCal (ONT), PVD/BOS, JAX, RSW
Programs: AA/US PlatPro & 1.05MM, DL Plat (challenge), UA dirt
Posts: 3,189
There was a story a few years back at Detroit's airport where DEA took cash and a $50-K Rolex from a well-known poker player coming back from a tournament. No warrant or anything. What's the point of having a 4th amendment if rogue gov't agencies get to bypass it?
Didn't Henry Hyde change the law around 1999 such that the Feds had the
burden of proof in these forfeitures?
Didn't Henry Hyde change the law around 1999 such that the Feds had the
burden of proof in these forfeitures?
Heck, I've had an inbound wire transfer seized by Treasury, it took just over 3 years to get that fixed, and I had taken the initiative to go to the 1st circuit, which agreed with my claim. However, Treasury insisted that was the incorrect venue, and that I needed to go into the Court of Federal Claims, even though the action happened at a bank based in Boston.
The sad part was that I had sent them all of the paperwork to prove that the money was mine and that I was wiring it to myself from France, and they accused me of giving them a false bank statement.
