Community
Wiki Posts
Search

So what exactly creates probable cause?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 3, 2009 | 12:09 pm
  #211  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Doha, Qatar
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan, Lufthansa Miles & More, Flying Blue, Hyatt Gold Passport
Posts: 1,894
Originally Posted by law dawg
That's the rub - in order for the officer to determine whether or not it's illegal they have to spend at least 1 second talking to you. My psychic powers only work on Wednesdays, so every other day I must actually talk to people to find out what's going on.
No, the "rub" is that you don't seem to understand simple concepts like "burden of proof" and "presumption of innocence". An officer doesn't get to detain you until you can demonstrate you have done nothing illegal. An officer gets to detain you only if there is evidence of wrongdoing.


Originally Posted by law dawg
Because there are times when you can mail it in. I don't believe carrying the cash out of the country or into it is one of them.
Again, I'd love to see an attempted prosecution based on the fact that the form was filed by mail in advance. The form also says that it should be filed "at time of departure." Therefore, a narrow reading of the instructions suggests you would actually be breaking the law by having it filed by the time you are passing the TSA checkpoint, since you are supposed to be there at least two hours BEFORE departure. Having filed before entering the jetway would also be illegal, as you are supposed to wait until "time of departure," meaning you should file at the moment the plane pulls away from the gate.

Again, this is the problem with most LEOs. They think the law says whatever it is they want it to mean. So if you are stopped and you say "I already filed", they tell you it should be "filed at the time of departure". Get stopped in the departure lounge and tell them you are waiting to file until "time of departure" as the instructions indicate, then they will undoubtedly tell you you are in violation because you haven't filed already. In their view, the "correct" interpretation is whichever one screws the civilian in that particular circumstance.
polonius is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 1:10 pm
  #212  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
20 Countries Visited
500k
All eyes on you!
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 30,990
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
Sorry dude you misread the instructions. You don't mail when you are carrying the cash only if you received the money or are mailing/shipping the money.

From FINCEN Form 105 (PDF Warning)

You are correct TK, I would have to file with the Port Officer, not Barney Fife.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 1:31 pm
  #213  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by polonius
They can "provide information" but they cannot reveal private information without a lawful order.
This is very, very incorrect. Sorry, but you're wrong.

Apparently, you believe you can stop people on the street and detain them until they have satisfied you that they haven't broken any laws, so I would say you don't know what you can do.
No, I don't believe that I believe that. I've been doing this for two decades - I know exactly what I can and cannot do, your straw man aside.

Now you're jumping a TSO finding cash, to RS, to an "investigation" that warrants sharing of information collected under the scope of the Privacy Act, all without anything that provides any evidence of a crime?
With a large amount of cash (over $10000) at an airport and no proof of submittal, that's exactly what I have - articuable facts leading to RS, which warrants a forced detention and investigation, not PC for an arrest.

Now you're trying to conflate the case of guy actively attempting to conceal cash, "willfully" attempting to smuggle it, and make false statements to a federal officer with the situation of most travellers who are over the limit who have no clue about the requirement and make no effort to conceal it. The actions in the link you provided are criminal, but they are entirely different from the situation we are discussing here. And please note, that even in this case, the court gave the guy his money back.
Yep, after a fine and probation. The guy was charged with false claim for the willful lies about the money. But that charge was dismissed. The only charge laid on him was failure to report - which still netted him probation. It is a crime, however you decide to ignore it. Statute provided. Refute the statutes and then we'll talk again.

And refuted above.
If you don't report it, it is a crime. Period.
law dawg is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 1:35 pm
  #214  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by polonius
I'd love to see an attempted prosecution for dropping the form in the mail instead of filing it at the airport. I'd say the words "dismissed with prejudice" would figure in there somewhere.
The phrase is - beat the rap, take the ride.

Without a form as evidence, an LEO can arrest you. What happens on the prosecution side is their purview. But the LEO can detain as RS, make the call to CBP, and then take it from there.
law dawg is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 1:38 pm
  #215  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by polonius
No, the "rub" is that you don't seem to understand simple concepts like "burden of proof" and "presumption of innocence".
Those are terms regarding successful prosecution in a court of law. They have nothing to do with field LE work. That's dictated by reasonable suspicion of a crime and probable cause of a crime.

An officer doesn't get to detain you until you can demonstrate you have done nothing illegal. An officer gets to detain you only if there is evidence of wrongdoing.
Correct. And possessing over $10000 in a airport without proper documentation is RS of such a crime.
law dawg is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 1:50 pm
  #216  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
You are correct TK, I would have to file with the Port Officer, not Barney Fife.
Is the port officer before or after the security checkpoint? If it is before the checkpoint then the TSO should call Customs if s/he suspects that the passenger has not filed, not a local cop.

If the port officer is after the security checkpoint the TSA needs to keep their nose out of it.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 1:54 pm
  #217  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by law dawg
Correct. And possessing over $10000 in a airport without proper documentation is RS of such a crime.
You need to reword the above.

Possessing over $10k in an airport is NOT reasonable suspicion of a crime without other indicators.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 1:56 pm
  #218  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
You need to reword the above.

Possessing over $10k in an airport is NOT reasonable suspicion of a crime without other indicators.
Without evidence of having submitted it? Without at least a verbal acknowledgment of such? I'd argue it would warrant a short detention and investigation.
law dawg is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 1:57 pm
  #219  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
Is the port officer before or after the security checkpoint? If it is before the checkpoint then the TSO should call Customs if s/he suspects that the passenger has not filed, not a local cop.

If the port officer is after the security checkpoint the TSA needs to keep their nose out of it.
Agreed.
law dawg is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 2:01 pm
  #220  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by law dawg
Without evidence of having submitted it? Without at least a verbal acknowledgment of such? I'd argue it would warrant a short detention and investigation.
Nope, it would only warrant an investigation if the person was PAST the security checkpoint.

Your statement hints that you could investigate anywhere on airport property.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 2:03 pm
  #221  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by PTravel
A common myth, but untrue.
Curses, foiled again.

Apparently you can't trust stories from politicians or the news.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 2:43 pm
  #222  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Programs: CO, UA, AA, WN, DL Gold
Posts: 2,981
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
You need to reword the above.

Possessing over $10k in an airport is NOT reasonable suspicion of a crime without other indicators.
Is the situation the same for domestic travel? It seems the statute posted only refers to entering and leaving the country.
thebat is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 2:46 pm
  #223  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
Nope, it would only warrant an investigation if the person was PAST the security checkpoint.

Your statement hints that you could investigate anywhere on airport property.
Oh, I see. You can't read my mind? I was speaking in the terminal.

Although any person I encountered with that much cash on them would warrnt some scrutiny, unless they were a courier or the like. Of course, to have stopped them I would need some kind of articuable facts anyway....
law dawg is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 3:38 pm
  #224  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by law dawg
Oh, I see. You can't read my mind? I was speaking in the terminal.

Although any person I encountered with that much cash on them would warrant some scrutiny, unless they were a courier or the like. Of course, to have stopped them I would need some kind of articuable facts anyway....
My psychic powers only work on alternating Thursdays.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old May 3, 2009 | 4:51 pm
  #225  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,704
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
My psychic powers only work on alternating Thursdays.
Interesting. Mine is every Wednesday.

Weird.
law dawg is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.