Man Acquitted of Crime, Cops Still Take His Cash

[mfcorey1]

Iowa State troopers can keep more than $30,000 in cash taken during a traffic stop, even though the owner was found not guilty, the Iowa Court of Appeals ruled last week.

In June 2012, Robert Pardee was riding in a car through Powesheik County, Iowa on I-80, when an Iowa State trooper pulled the driver over for a non-working taillight and tailgating. During the stop, state troopers found “a small amount of marijuana” and $33,100 in cash. Pardee was arrested and charged with possessing cannabis. In Iowa, first-time offenders can face up to six months in jail and/or $1,000 in fines.

One year later, a district court found him not guilty. As the criminal case proceeded against Pardee, the state also filed a civil forfeiture case against his seized cash. Despite his acquittal, first the district court and then the Iowa Court of Appeals ordered Pardee to forfeit his cash to the state.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2015/03/04/man-acquitted-of-crime-cops-still-take-his-cash/

[hobbit709]

1. The drug war needs to go.

[Scuba]

2. Yet executives at banks that launder drug money get bonuses.

[Orrex]

3. I'm sure that they do this to rich people all the time.

Sure.

[Bay Boy]

4. A guy

carrying around $30,000 isn't a rich guy?

[pipoman]

5. No, not if he owes $28k to someone else, or if it is inventory money for a business,

Or if he is moving,...no $30k isn't much if it is all you have....rich guys keep their money in banks and use gold cards....

[Bay Boy]

6. I don't believe this is unusual

I think the driver now needs to prove the money wasn't from an illegal source, which sounds wrong but what if the guy had illegal guns confiscated? would we expect him to have those returned?

[elias49]

7. I have to disagree. The driver isn't obliged to prove anything.

The state should have to prove it WAS drug money.

Hey, if you're driving the interstate and get pulled over with your 1-year-old in a car seat in the back should you have to prove that it's your child?
Crazy.

Charging him with possession is all they have a right to do.
Confiscation sucks and it happens more and more ften, esp in the south!

[TheKentuckian]

8. Weirdly framed question. Yes, the burden of proof should be on the state to prove

the weapons are illegal and failing that the property should be returned.

Using fear/hate of guns to support these gross forfeitures in order to maintain some logical consistency is dangerously sick, I don't see how it is difficult to see how this is already out of hand. People are losing everything and it provides some terrible and perverse incentives for police, prosecutor, and judicial abuse.

To defend stealing people's property even after they are determined by the courts to be not guilty is way past fucked up.

[PatrickforO]

9. The forfeiture laws are just one more blatantly unconstitutional thing that adds

a few inches of depth to the SLIME we have to wade through.