Originally Posted by
We Will Never Forget
To address your first point, he can legally ask what his rights are to his heart's content. What his intentions were, are more than likely another story.
You don't know his intentions, and neither do I. You make ASSumptions about his intentions. I make assumptions about his intentions, too -- and I applaud them.
Originally Posted by
We Will Never Forget
On your second point, I'm sure they will say the money was found incident to a lawful search for WEI.
I don't think that fact is in dispute.
Originally Posted by
We Will Never Forget
This discovery resulted in the police being notified who subsequently assumed the investigation.
Why?
Originally Posted by
We Will Never Forget
The legal questions I see here are:
1. Can the $10,000 directive be upheld?
2. Was the money discovered during a search for WEI and located in a place where WEI could be?
3. At what point was it discovered that the amount of cash was below the directive's threshold?
4. Was there reasonable suspicion before the amount was confirmed?
5. After the amount was confirmed, was there a reason to continue the investigation?
6. If there was reason to continue the investigation, what facts determined the outcome?
IANAL, but this is my take on it:
1. No.
2. Yes.
3. Irrelevant. IMHO, the directive won't be allowed by the courts.
4. Reasonable suspicion of what?
5. There was no reason to BEGIN the "investigation", much less to continue it at any point.
6. The fact that there was no WEI.