A trucker has sued the Drug Enforcement Administration, seeking to get back nearly $24,000 seized by DEA agents earlier this month at a weigh station on U.S. 54 in New Mexico north of El Paso, Texas.
Anastasio Prieto of El Paso gave a state police officer at the weigh station permission to search the truck to see if it contained “needles or cash in excess of $10,000,” according to the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the federal lawsuit Thursday.
Prieto told the officer he didn’t have any needles but did have $23,700.
Officers took the money and turned it over to the DEA. DEA agents photographed and fingerprinted Prieto over his objections, then released him without charging him with anything.
Border Patrol agents searched his truck with drug-sniffing dogs, but found no evidence of illegal substances, the ACLU said.
The lawsuit alleges the defendants violated Prieto’s right to be free of unlawful search and seizure by taking his money without probable cause and by fingerprinting and photographing him.
“Mere possession of approximately $23,700 does not establish probable cause for a search or seizure,” the lawsuit said…
DEA agents told Prieto he would receive a notice of federal proceedings to permanently forfeit the money within 30 days and that to get it back, he’d have to prove it was his and did not come from illegal drug sales.
They told him the process probably would take a year, the ACLU said.
The ACLU’s New Mexico executive director, Peter Simonson, said Prieto needs his money now to pay bills and maintain his truck. The lawsuit said Prieto does not like banks and customarily carries his savings as cash.
“The government took Mr. Prieto’s money as surely as if he had been robbed on a street corner at night,” Simonson said. “In fact, being robbed might have been better. At least then the police would have treated him as the victim of a crime instead of as a perpetrator.”
{ 71 comments }
“The government took Mr. Prieto’s money as surely as if he had been robbed on a street corner at night,”
I know the feeling. I feel the same way with every paycheck.
not the same thing at all, go put some “libertarians” balls in you mouth you stupid teabagger
brian, you should go breed yourself. you are a P-O-S.
Try having a useful thought – usually name calling results from stupidity or knowledge that you have lost.
Fuck yeah Brian
yeah fuck Brian
It’s funny how you (and those after you) call this guy out for making a crude statement about “brian” but seemingly give “brian” a pass for calling someone else a “stupid teabagger”. I know exactly what George means. I think we all know that the very large part of our taxes goes to pay for programs/wars/whatever that most of us want no part of and yet that money is taken out automatically… yes, it is quite a different situation as the truck driver in this story but it IS another example of our government taking/misusing/whatever the resources of its citizens.
On the topic at hand, I hope that this gentleman gets the money that was taken from him and then some. This kind of behavior goes on every day and needs to be stopped…
You want something for nothing? Stupid teabaggers.
“I think we all know that the very large part of our taxes goes to pay for programs/wars/whatever that most of us want no part of and yet that money is taken out automatically”
That’s what your taxes are for: paying for government programs that we all benefit from directly and indirectly. If you don’t want to pay your taxes for keeping the roads in condition, your health in check, your streets safe at night–I suggest you upright and die tomorrow, for the only sure thing is death and taxes.
Who do these people think they are? You don’t get something for nothing, so pay your taxes so we all benefit, and quit robbing the younger generation of their dues, old fucks making this country look bad.
is getting less freedom for taxes something for nothing??
800 dollar toilet seats?? cia intelligence that couldnt get babies pulled from incuabators correct??
Really King!? You may want to do some research before you open your mouth make it clear just how either uneducated you are or unfamiliar with the viewpoint of a limited government. No one is disagreeing with keeping roads in condition, or our streets safe at night. You’re right – those are things we ALL benefit from. But road maintenance is paid for by fuel taxes. Not income taxes. If you don’t want to contribute to maintenance of the roads, you don’t have to drive. You benefit by direct use. Safe streets are paid for by property taxes. If you don’t want to contribute you don’t have to own property. And these are all decided locally. However, keeping YOUR health in check is not something we ALL benefit from. paying for your retirement is not something we ALL benefit from. Yet a rats believe we should be forced into these collectivist programs.
State welfare programs and food stamp programs, state roads, public education – all things funded WITHOUT federal income taxes. The things that are theft are things we could each individually choose to purchase ourselves that we don’t need government to be able to obtain it for ourselves such as insurance, retirement planning, and 80% of our taxes wasted in bureaucratical overhead that not only doesn’t help us all – it doesn’t help anyone. Most of our taxes our being stolen from us to pay the debts the government owes…itself! On social security! If we wanted to waste our income we could flush it down the toilets ourselves – maybe even employ more plumbers.
you guy suck so much i scrolled down thinking i was going to read something that had to do with the article and all i found is you all calling eachother names as if you have nothing better to do and you probly dont. the even worse part is i feel like almost as much of a fool for writing this and im still doing it. but thats how much i wanted to tell you that you all suck
Prieto has a dire and critical threat to the sum and total of his economic existence. If income tax withholding is the worst form of government confiscation you have experienced, I don’t think you actually do feel the same way, George.
You know the next paycheck is coming in a few weeks. Prieto lives from the income derived from his truck. If his savings are wiped out, in this manner for which he could not possibly have predicted, what is he to do?
I understand pithy humor, but please don’t trivialize the enormity of Prieto’s problem.
Agreed completely, no matter how I look at this situation, this is wrong. There are a number of government policies which are unconstitutional. I wish there was an option to just start over, but starting over is not a viable option anymore either. It’s a sad day when our government which is meant to protect our people instead causes harm to them. I don’t mind the government taking my tax dollars, that’s what keeps all the federal programs that I and millions of other people around the nation rely on going; what I do mind is having my tax dollars go to stupid “law enforcement” agencies which have a long history of violating rights. And when they’re proven guilty of violating rights, what happens to them? Almost nothing, they just give you a little apology and send you off. I really hope the ACLU is successful in helping this guy, because you know he’s unlikely to get it anywhere else
Word to the wise: don’t give them permission to search you. Ever. And don’t voluntarily give them any information. Even if they just ask where you are going.
perhaps. i was leaavingn an all hours park some weeks ago on bicycle at around 10pm. i was the only one there when a cop pulled up with high beams in my face.
asking me where i was going how i got there (with a bike in my hands) and if everything was alright.
had i replied ‘its really nothing of concern officer go about you tasks’ i expect i would have been detained.
*Concurrence*
Prieto is the victim of a terrible crime. Theft is wrong in any form. Consider that the government’s role is to administer justice and protect rights, but now has become the author of the injustice it is suppose to oppose, and it makes the crime more heinous. However the title “Guilty Until Proven Innocent” holds a half truth. If a man commits a crime and he is never proven guilty he is not innocent. The crime was commited by him. His guilt or innocence is determined by his actions not that he managed to escape govenment punishment. The government should not make innocent men guilty and it should not make guilty men innocent. Both are terrible. Hopefully Prieto’s belongings are restored to him promptly but it seems the government will not be stopped from doing this again.
“The government took Mr. Prieto’s money as surely as if he had been robbed on a street corner at night,”
The fact that the ACLU, a company founded by avowed communists, is making this claim is at least one step in the right direction.
“Word to the wise: don’t give them permission to search you. Ever. And don’t voluntarily give them any information. Even if they just ask where you are going.”
My understanding is that the DOT requires commercial truck drivers to wave their right to unreasonable search and seizure – or they won’t issue a license. They also require truckers to log what they are doing every half hour, when they sleep, where they stop, to submit to random testing, and so on.
I understand pithy humor, but please don’t trivialize the enormity of Prieto’s problem.
I’m not sure that you do.
In any event, I am not trivializing anything. I fully recognize that this particular act of theft may be perceived as more serious by Mr. Prieto than the bimonthly theft that I experience, in the sense that it leaves him in more acute financial distress than when I am routinely robbed.
But that does not mean that the crime against him is worse than the crime against me. The crime of theft is not more severe because its owner has a higher marginal utility for the stolen property. I have been practicing law for a while, much of that time in constitutional criminal matters, and I have yet to come across that sort of legal principle.
Instead, the severity of the crime is measured objectively — more dollars stolen is a more severe crime. I have had considerably more than $23,700 stolen from me over the last few months by the same organization that robbed Mr. Prieto. (Incidentally, I have considerably less than $23,700 in cash savings at the moment, largely due to the routine theft of my money by said organization!)
You may have more sympathy for a poorer theft victim compared to a richer one, but that is not the basis of law. I dare say that the idea that stealing from a wealthier person is somehow less morally objectionable than stealing from a poorer person is one of the fundamentally erroneous ideas that gave us the income tax in the first place.
With your taxes you give money to the government and they give you services back, in Mr. Prieto’s case they took his money and didn’t give anything in return. Two totally different things.
with taxes your money is confiscated, not given, and they in turn give us some services that we might actually use, such as paved roads. All of my taxes more than pay for the gov’t services that I use, and the rest of it goes various & sundry “other” services, that I may or may not approve of.
That’s called being a part of society. If you don’t like it, there are still private islands for sale. You’re welcome to them.
Actually, as US citizens, your income is taxed anywhere in the world. Also, due to FBAR I have to report any savings over 10,000, even if I have no earnings. Evil Empire.
Would you give the same advice to German Jews in 1934, or to Kurdish Iraqis in the 1990′s? Tough luck, move out if you don’t like it?
some people are happy to pay taxes for services they receive and some they dont but others get.
I feel sorry for the poor truck driver. He was totally screwed by his government. I wonder if Bush feels sorry for him. I don’t think that his daughter caught a 24K fine for underage drinking? (That should not be the law anyway.)
Focus: My point is that in the end this whole mess from inspection to paper processing to hearings to court has cost the US a lot more than 24K. Law enforcement is the second most expensive way to control behavior next to the military performing the task. I think it is funny but hardly suprising or uncommon that the Government would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and push real violent criminal cases from dockets to pursue the confiscation of 24K.
My point is that in the end this whole mess from inspection to paper processing to hearings to court has cost the US a lot more than 24K…..
likely. and thats the sad part. just to find out maybe where 24k in cash came from. if he ran someone over in his truck then no problem.
maybe the story is fake.
When Congress passed these property forfeiture laws, all illusion of property rights disappeared. These laws are the main reason while you’ll never see the “war on drugs” ended.
The sad fact is that after reading this most neocons will still believe two things: Government only violates the rights of the guilty (so, do not fear the Patriot Act since you have nothing to hide); therefore, Prieto is inherently guilty of some offense, since government would not have done such to an innocent man.
Ever wonder how neocons fall asleep at night with the belief that government protects them: They live lives of self-delusion!
Repeat after me:
“You can do whatever you want, but I do not give you permission to do anything.â€
If you’re truly paranoid, print half a dozen copies with Date and “Received by:†signature blocks. Not that it will help at the side of the road, but it might make your resultant lawsuit easier…
Regards,
M.J. Taylor
Publisher
from Reason to Freedom
thanks
“However the title “Guilty Until Proven Innocent” holds a half truth. If a man commits a crime and he is never proven guilty he is not innocent.”
The statement refers to the American tradition of the presumption of innocence–presumed innocent until proven guilty. The title is showing that this man was presumed guilty until proven innocent.
The justice system does not prove innocence. It simply states guilt or lack of guilt. Not guilty is not the same thing as innocent.
“in constitutional criminal matters…the crime of theft is not more severe because its owner has a higher marginal utility for the stolen property.”
I can accept that this premise is what we use in America so let me use it to point to the fact that there is a better premise. According to what we can discover in the Bible a different picture of criminal justice is painted. Though theft is always wrong ,including legal plunder, it has varying degrees of punishment according to the circumstances and actions of the thief. A few quick examples include sentimental attachment, stealing food to eat. returning the belongings before the authoritys catch you and the punishments include restitution from half the value of the stolen goods all the way up to 12xs the value with corporal punishment at the discretion of the appointed judge.
stupid bible thumper, biblical law is not good, it’s out dated self supporting retarded laws sent down from a nonexistent being to a bunch of power hungry old jews.
My es- and i drove truck for many years- he is still an owner operator- there are many “TRUCKING” publications that have articles related to the search and seziure. Many Truck drivers utilize their cabs as their homes- therfore, an officer needs to aquire a search warrent to search said home. They also need probabale cause- Thsi driver should not have allowed the search- he should also be able to obtain documentation that the money was obtained legally- example- pay advances from his company for food, fuel, tolls, hotels, his pay- we used to make $1500.00/week take home (we had to do our own taxes etc. so it really wasn’t as much as it appears…)- this means pay stubs- broker sheets, etc. Thsi should all be easily obtained- and the companies etc. will be more then willing to assist because they would not wish this to happen to them, their families or drivers… If the money was in the truck because he doesn’t trust banks-ok, but if its there fo other reasons….well, it will be harder to document…
he should also be able to obtain documentation that the money was obtained legally…..
i dont think that is necessary. 10 years of mattress stuffing, etc. carrying cash should be of no concern to anyone unless there is a bloodstain on it.
It is impossible to prove a negative. The government is basically saying that Mr Prieto will never get his money back. If the State gave a crap about justice it would be up to them to prove him guilty, but they can’t and they wouldn’t, anyways.
I hate when people say you can’t prove a negative. It’s often easier to prove a negative. Stop spreading that meme. The rest of your points make sense, but have already been said.
Matt is basically correct. The standard that will suffice as proof is so high, that the claim that “I keep my savings as cash” will fail. Short of proof that he obtained this money in less than 5 transactions via a bank, he is basically out of luck.
This tells you what kind of society we have become.
If I were him, I would either get my money back or create 24,000 dollars worth of damage to their lives.
Yup, and then go to jail.
Let them feed and house me.
It seems that circumstances such as these come about due to the confluence of many Statist decisions, The War on Drugs, the requirement that if one is running a business they must have a bank account so as to be trackable, privacy issues, etc etc. And all “logically” dovetail once reality is tossed out the window.
So, perhaps redirecting too much, I can’t wait for Socialist Healthcare. Soon the possession of a twinkie will be a crime against The Body and a calculated blow to its treasury, subjecting the perpetator to all sorts of indignities. And, again, guilt is presupposed by the masses. I am not being funny here.
And as far as George’s pithiness, what is worse, having the State function come to its logical end of its anti-individualist stance, and come down to force against force, or have it continue to exist as a parasite, leaching until the host is dead? Sometimes I wish we would get on with the logic of the State to its ultimate endpoint so we can finally settle it. Existing in a Socialist Body that is called anything but that (it’s Capitalism I’m told), as 100% of my labor is either confiscated or promised to someone else down the road, perhaps a dollop rationed back to me, is merely a slow death that very few others even seem to be aware of. Perhaps if more Prieto’s were thrust out into the open people would wake the hell up.
I guess I would recommend that for the time being, a person be prudent enough to “pick his battles.” I understand the downhill slope we find ourselve on as it relates to a government that tends to make up the rules as they go along. But, the bottom line is this: the guy is out 24,000 dollars. He may likely never see it again. He would have done himself a huge favor by simmply not having that cash on him, in the form of cash. I totally understand that he should be able to have it, but in the face of the facts we have here, he’d have been far better off to have it in a bank account somewhere. If there was some “reason” he could “not” have put it into a bank, like most people do, then I am going to guess there was some “reason” why. I’m not defending illegal search and seizure, but for god sakes, this matter is just stupid on both accounts. Stupid for having had his money taken, and stupid for having 24,000 in cash, in his truck.
I don’t like the way the government is acting, but I’m not about to make it a 24,000 dollar lesson for me either. Put your money in the bank, and this becomes a non-issue. In other words, fight the battle before it gets to your doorstep. Just seems like a pretty stupid thing to do in the face of what is happening.
Hi Craig,
Most any society needs its Rosa Parks. I feel sorry for this guy, but like you I wouldn’t keep cash around just so some government goon can take it.
Unfortunately, the collectivistic ACLU seems to be the only group stepping up to right these wrongs. But they really don’t do enough for the amount of resources they consume. If they would start massively filing civil suits against individuals, we might have less statism.
# # #
Justin,
I added this to our Good Blog page.
Good Fighting All,
M.J. Taylor
Publisher
from Reason to Freedom
– - –
Writer? Pissed? Want to do something about it?
just because the man doesnt like to trust his money to people he doesnt know, doesnt mean hes dealing drugs. he may have trust issues, or may liek to have his money on hand instead of constantly going out of his way to go to a bank just to be able to buy lunch. He has a right to do what he wishes with his own money.
This is happening all over it’s not an isolated case!
Something has to be done to stop them.
If he kept his money in a bank the government would not have had to take it on the side of the road because they would of already had it. What you fail to realize is a bank account is not opened under your true and legal name, which is your name written with the first letter capitalized followed by lowercase letters, but instead it is opened as a legal fiction which is your name spelled in all capital letters. Any money you have in a bank account, real estate, stocks or bonds is not yours they can take it at anytime like it or not. Don’t believe me look it up in blacks law dictionary.
I recently moved all the way across the United States by car. Of course, there was no way I was going to trust the moving company or anyone else to move my bullion stash, nor my firearm. So those things went into the car along with our family photos. I was very careful while driving because I understood if we were ever pulled over and our car was searched, the police would surely steal our property. Gold and guns! I must be doing something illegal! Always careful to avoid undue risks, the police were my prime concern.
same thing happened to a friend of mine, but w/ 40,000. He’s still fighting to get it back. Cops are allowed to seize money if they feel it is an unusual amount to be carrying. They call some sort of preemptive effort to stop drug dealers. The police need to be policed. Our cops are running rampant doing whatever they want. Look into taser deaths, overtime hours for sitting in court, the statistics on traffic violations and the amount of money earned. More laws means more criminals, which means more money for the Police corporation of America.
I made a cash deposit (not that large, but in the thousands) at a bank several years ago, and I got a bunch of stares and mummering. Luckily, that was all.
I had a run in with the local NARCs once, pulled up in seven squad cars! had me up against the wall for 45mins thinking I was buying drugs. (I’m the only white male in my neighborhood haha.) I knew I didn’t have anything on me, so I was asking questions trying to figure out wtf was going on.. until one officer said, “You’re guilty until proven innocent, shut the fuck up.” I shut my mouth and a part of me died that day :] Now I pray everyday that the sun will explode because I’ve lost faith in humanity.
It does totally feel futile…like there’s no hope. It seems like they’re scrambling to get revenue by any means necessary now. I seldom commit crime and I certainly don’t want to hurt anyone but lately I’ve had to supress some urges.
More laws means more criminals….
maybe from the legislative end. if you didnt vote for the law i dont see where you necessarily have to be bound to it.
About ten years ago the Volusia County, Florida sheriff set up roadblocks on I-95. Using the assumption that people going south have money to buy drugs and people going north have drugs, having spent the money in Miami, he asked for permission to search for drugs after routine traffic stops outside Daytona, then had dogs sniff the cash and, finding cocaine residue on the cash, confiscated it under the same forfeiture laws. Guess what. The big car auctions in South Florida attract many with briefcases full of cash. After hurricanes, almost all major transactions are cash (repairs, etc.) and people go north to get the cash since banks are closed for weeks after a bad storm. And the casinos in south Florida attract cash. The Orlando Sentinel took a drug sniffing dog to ten top citizens (judges, newspaper editors, County Commissioners, etc.) and had their cash sniffed. Something like eight out of ten had cash positive for drug residue. Eventually after a “60 Minutes” expose and a series of news stories the sheriff was voted out of office and the illegal searches stopped. But most people lost all or most of their money. Our county, however, had a fleet of luxury boats, luxury cars, and aircraft–all trophies of the Sheriff who got to keep what he confiscated for “official use”. The prosecutor who aided and abetted him is still in office. Meanwhile, all that was accomplished for the taxpayers was that our deputies, instead of fighting crime on our streets, fought New York’s and other northern cities’ drug problem since that is where any drugs purchased in Florida and heading up I-95 are likely to have been headed.
he got the money back from the DEA, this article doesn’t include that update. the DEA even sped up the process for him fearing bad publicity or perhaps the ACLU lawsuit.
The DEA and other government agencies love these laws to keep us in fear and under control. No you don’t have the right to carry around your own money, nope you have to keep it in the banks of our fundraising sponsors so we can have it if we need it or use it to bail-out another Wall Street group of morons.
It always surprises me that we’re at a point in our existance that if you don’t know your rights, the police will take advantage of that….
instead of protecting the people.. the naive are being screwed…
My big question is , how can anyone who is a human being with a conscience do this to another fellow human being?
Guilty until proven innocent is SO wrong and it’s at the very crux of this issue. Absolutely every American should have it straight in his or her head that neither “innocent”nor “guilty” have much to do with your opinion of the truth. Sure, everyone who calls themselves an American has the right to claim a person is guilty or innocent based on their own opinion, but for you to actually incarcerate (or even inconvenience) a person who has not been proven guilty by due process is genuinely unconstitutional–even if he or she is in fact guilty as SIN. If you haven’t been proven guilty in court you ARE innocent, period. Those are the rules of the game and I believe in them. Those who THINK they know damn well that somebody is guilty deserve equal treatment when they suddenly find themselves under the microscope of suspicion.
Yes, this means that OJ is completely innocent of murder charges. I’m willing to live with that if it means that nobody who is actually innocent is ever imprisoned–which is the entire point!
Once again, the internet has provided an opportunity for people to critically analyse a piece of journalese writing at their own descretion and in accordance with their own personal, subjective sense of judgement; and once again you have all failed and turned this into another youtube-styled dick measuring competition. Leave your egos at the door gentlemen, and let us discuss this properly.
Here’s what the article has told us for CERTAIN.
A man carries his savings in cash.
Said man is told his vehicle must be searched. It is. No kontraband or evidence of any crime comes to light.
The government confiscate his money.
The question here is thus, not who or what, because we have that. But why?
If the government cannot account for the confiscation of the money and wishes to drag it’s return out over the course of the year again without cause, there is little more to conclude than that this is an act of sophisticated theft, neatly wrapped up in beauracracy.
To add some context and vigour to my view, it will be good for you to know that I’m a mixed race UK national and fierce socialist. If that offends you, fall back into your American Wet Dream, but don’t ask momma Europe to wash those stains from your undies when it all ends and you wake up in a puddle of your own mess. Peace.
wet dreams, puddles and undies??? did they search those too?
is the only real difference then that it used to not be so neat?
Never thought I would agree with something I found on this site. Shit’s fucked up, man. DEA has been way out of line for decades.
I do not know if the monies confiscated from Mr. Prieto are actually his or not. The thing that seems strange to me is that he has all that money just there. Even though I don’t like banks I still use them. I can easily understand the government’s skepticism. I can also understand Mr. Prieto’s frustration, if he doesn’t use a bank then the government probably won’t accept his proof that the monies are his. I guess that the bottom line is that if you regularly travel back and forth across the border you should expect this and be prepared to deal with it. If the monies actually are his, I have pity on him but alas it is his responsibility to keep his own records. PS: ANYTHING from the ACLU should ALWAYS be scrutinized!!
This is what we call American Justice
Why is he guilty for carrying a large sum of money? What is he guilty of? Don’t they have to prove that he is guilty of something in order to confiscate it? What the hell is wrong with these people?
First off, know your rights. “Anastasio Prieto of El Paso gave a state police officer at the weigh station permission to search the truck to see if it contained “needles or cash in excess of $10,000,” according to the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the federal lawsuit Thursday.”
The fourth amendment protects against unlawful search and seizure. He consented, therefore it was totally legal and totally constitutional.
Second, if there are regulations for how much cash he is allowed to carry on him during his business, it is his responsibility to know those regulations and to know his worker rights.
The law may not be just, but it’s the law and the constitution. He doesn’t have a case.
what is crooked cannot be straightend
Just to be pedantic. The term is correctly phrased as ‘INNOCENT unless PROVED Guilty’. Until infers that an event is predetermined, while unless requires the an action or event that is undetermined. A bit like the terms if/until/when/unless that computer programmers will be aware of. I would dismiss any lawyer as ignorant who defended me on the basis that I was ‘innocent until I was found guilty’. I know it seems such a small point, but language is everything when it comes to power.
I think that is the point.
There’s nothing “civil” about civil asset forfeiture. It seems to me that the only “civil” way to conduct these forfeitures is if there’s any questions where the money came from then take note of it and investigate the individuals later. Just taking someone’s money like that can and does completely ruin life’s, I should know I myself I’m fighting two cicvil asset forfeiture case’s.
If y’all have been victimized by big brother F.E.A.R (Forfeiture Endangers American Rights) is a really good resource for help. Also Eapen Thampy is a executive director of Americans for Forfeiture Reform, a nonprofit that works on issues of asset forfeiture he is ready and willin g to help.
I also made a video to help educate people on the subject it’s featured on my youtube channel votecnote. check it out!
http://www.youtube.com/user/voteCnote?feature=mhum
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }