Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 455 posts

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#291

Post by ndespres »

SixSigma wrote: post #40
ndespres wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't do a dismissive handwave over what's really an important element to this story. That the victim is a person of color is absolutely relevant to this story; it demonstrates a bias on behalf of the DEA agent, or perhaps simply a cynicism: they know what they can get away with in the eyes of the public. Of COURSE race is an important element of how law enforcement interacts with citizens. Race is part of the…

> a person of color There's one of your problems. Am I a person of no colour? Your (and this isn't a direct attack on you) use of language contributes to the situation while it is trying to be softly softly.

We should not define people in terms of what they are "not" or lump them into a group of who they are different from ("minority"). So no, if you are white you can be just that.

Maybe it doesn't have as much play outside the U.S. but the term PoC seems to work well here. For the whole semantic argument I'll point to http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_color .

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#292

Post by Dirlewanger »

leap_ahead wrote: post #221

Russian citizen here. This sort of things I have regularly been hearing about the US over the last decade make me really sad. Some 20 years ago America was a symbol of civil liberties for us. I considered one day maybe going there to work and live. A few years ago I still entertained an idea of going there for an internship. Today I'd be scared to go there even as a tourist or on a short business trip. Let's say I go…

Here's some advice: stop reading/believing everything you read on the Internet/see in movies and come over for a visit. Distorting your perceptions with solely sensationalist articles (though not saying this one is)/pop culture only does yourself a disservice.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#293

Post by bcook »

a3n wrote: post #58
bcook wrote: post #39

I keep seeing these stories and, yes, civil forfeiture is a problem, but why are these people traveling with CASH in these amounts? I always get a cashier's check or similar since it offers me some protection.

Who do you make it out to, and when?

If someone wants 16k, they can wait the 30min it takes me to go to the bank and get a cashiers check.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#294

Post by ubernostrum »

techlibertarian wrote: post #273
jqgatsby wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My hat is off to Frondo and notahacker. I've occasionally (regrettably, foolishly) tried to argue it out with the "taxation is theft" folks, and this is the first time I've seen one of them actually give up from exhaustion. I'm sure he'll recharge and come back tomorrow once he looks up the next argument in his playbook, but even temporary victories must be savored. Sorry, itistoday2, I'm sure you're a nice person in…

> Have you noticed how people get really annoyed when you make it? It's not because it's a good argument! People also used to get annoyed when people said the Earth wasn't the center of the solar system.

They laughed at Galileo, they laughed at Einstein, and they laughed at Bozo the Clown.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#295

Post by humanrebar »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #253
leap_ahead wrote: post #221

Russian citizen here. This sort of things I have regularly been hearing about the US over the last decade make me really sad. Some 20 years ago America was a symbol of civil liberties for us. I considered one day maybe going there to work and live. A few years ago I still entertained an idea of going there for an internship. Today I'd be scared to go there even as a tourist or on a short business trip. Let's say I go…

The internet happened. We are no less corrupt than we ever were. We are just more obvious about it now because of the internet. People always think, "oh, things were so much better back in the day". In reality, no, they weren't. It was just different. Back in the day, we wouldn't let blacks use the same bathroom or water fountain. Now we steal their money. It is the same America it always was. We just have more peopl…

> We are no less corrupt than we ever were.

I'm not sure. America used to be a lot more diverse in how it was governed. Thought Chicago was too corrupt? Move to California.

More and more issues are becoming federal issues (drugs, bridge maintenance, even), so corruption and injustice becomes a universal problem.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#296

Post by [deleted] »

techlibertarian wrote: post #274
Frondo wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxation isn't theft. The anti-tax crowd is just like the anti-vax crowd. They both want a free ride on the rest of our backs; the anti-vaxers want the benefit of herd immunity, and the anti-taxers want others to pay the cost of living in the modern world. (*edited to a missing word)

> the anti-taxers want others to pay the cost of living in the modern world This simply isn't true. Anti-taxers want to choose where their dollars go - each and every one.

[deleted]

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#297

Post by wahsd »

falcolas wrote: post #285
pionar wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> additionally charge you with some made-up crime and let you rot in jail until you sign the plea deal There are supposed to be other protections for this. The sixth amendment, for instance, says: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial...", which means that they can't just "let you rot in jail." In practice, though, sometimes you do rot in jail. :/

Speedy public trials, in this day and age, can take a year or more from the time of conviction. That's a long time to spend in jail - a location where you have no real freedoms.

That's the worst part of it, this process of flagrant violation of the Constitution. In essence, the government has become a treasonous organization in direct violation and contradiction to the Constitution.

If the original authors could define a speedy trial in terms of days and a couple weeks, there is no rational justification for why in this day and age a speedy trial can't be a matter of minutes or hours, or at worst days.

The most dangerous enemy is the one within and the traitor in your midst.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#298

Post by strictnein »

Qantourisc wrote: post #101

As a potential tourist or traveller (I am not to be fair), I wouldn't risk travelling to the US. I'm not sure if there are actual tourists who feel the same, but I'm sure there are other avoiding the US.

Whenever I'm overseas I try to watch whatever local news is available, plus channels like BBC and Russia Today (yes, I know, not great, but RT is entertaining). The portrayal of the US on the news is so out of whack with reality that it's really kind of depressing. Reporting bad news out of the US seems to be a hobby of the world's media, as does misreporting our politics and social issues.

I've worked for foreign companies whose workers would come over for 6-12 months and would enjoy themselves here greatly. Plus, like any tech worker, I work with a lot of H1Bs and first generation immigrants who have very little negative to say about the US and are also quite happy with things. Anecdotal, I know, but so is what you're reading here and seeing in your media.

Anyways, I'm biased (obviously), and have probably written more than anyone cared to read, but I'd still recommend visiting someday. Avoid the urban centers (they don't differ much) and visit our national parks. Places like Yosemite [0] and the Grand Canyon [1] are breathtaking. For some of my former colleagues, just visiting places like Idaho or Utah, where they could be miles and miles away from the nearest person, was enjoyable, as that was something they could never experience back home (and those states are beautiful as well). And if you want to be really alone, visit Alaska.

[0] http://www.nps.gov/yose/index.htm [1] http://www.nps.gov/grca/index.htm

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#299

Post by LordKano »

pionar wrote: post #250
justthistime_ wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't this just mean that the will rob you _and_ additionally charge you with some made-up crime and let you rot in jail until you sign the plea deal?

> additionally charge you with some made-up crime and let you rot in jail until you sign the plea deal There are supposed to be other protections for this. The sixth amendment, for instance, says: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial...", which means that they can't just "let you rot in jail." In practice, though, sometimes you do rot in jail. :/

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial..."

That varies from state to state. In my state, the District Attorney just has to get you to trial within a year of your arrest.

Not showing up to work for a year because you couldn't afford bail can have a negative impact on one's finances, to say the least.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#300

Post by talmand »

justthistime_ wrote: post #229
hackercurious wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The State of New Mexico has just banned asset forfeiture. HB 560, introduced by New Mexico Rep. Zachary Cook and passed unanimously in the legislature, replaces civil asset forfeiture with criminal forfeiture, which requires a conviction of a person as a prerequisite to losing property tied to a crime. The new law means that New Mexico now has the strongest protections against wrongful asset seizures in the country.…

Doesn't this just mean that the will rob you _and_ additionally charge you with some made-up crime and let you rot in jail until you sign the plea deal?

There's a difference between being charged and convicted. If the text is correct, they can't rob you until you've been convicted of a crime in a court of law. So that means while you rot in jail under a fake charge you at least still have your stuff.

Which you will then start to sell off so you can afford the legal defense required to fight the false charges. A person can be found innocent of all charges but still be wiped out financially from defending themselves. That's called "justice".

Post reply on HN