AR-Judge rules cops can keep innocent man's $20k because "paperwork"

[Anti Federalist]

Arkansas Trooper Steals $20,000, Because Nobody Innocent Carries That Much Cash

https://reason.com/blog/2016/05/11/a...000-because-no

Prosecutors tried to drop the forfeiture case, but the judge would not let them.

Jacob Sullum|May. 11, 2016 10:31 am

The story of how cops stole $20,000 from Guillermo Espinoza, a construction worker with no criminal record, is sadly familiar in most respects: In July 2013, while driving through Arkansas on his way to Texas, Espinoza was pulled over by a state trooper who discovered a large amount of cash in the car, which he viewed as inherently suspicious. The money was seized and eventually forfeited based on vague allegations of drug-related activity. But there's a twist: There was so little evidence of such activity that local prosecutors decided to drop the forfeiture case. The judge would not let them, and last week a state appeals court declined to review that astounding decision because Espinoza had missed a filing deadline.

It's not clear why Arkansas State Police Sgt. Dennis Overton decided to stop Espinoza, who was traveling with his girlfriend, Priscila Hernandez. The legal justification for pulling Espinoza over was missing from the state's September 2013 forfeiture complaint, which referred without explanation to "the traffic stop," and from Circuit Court Judge Chris Williams' September 2014 order authorizing permanent confiscation of the money, which said only that the stop was "proper." In his response to the forfeiture complaint, Espinoza argued that the stop was illegal, so it would be nice to know what the rationale for it was. While police have no shortage of excuses for pulling motorists over, they are supposed to settle on at least one.

[Spikender]

20K is a nice down payment on a new Bearcat.

[TheTexan]

$20,000 from Guillermo Espinoza, a construction worker

Uh huh. Right.

[jkr]

Piracy

[mrsat_98]

Can't have the enemy accomplishing his objective.

[osan]

Latent government logic: He is a beaner, therefore he must be into drugs.

Why? Because $#@! you.

Have a nice day.

[phill4paul]

You steal $20k from me and you are gonna come to an agreement real quick. And that is all I'm gonna say on the internet.

[TheTexan]

Latent government logic: He is a beaner, therefore he must be into drugs.

Why? Because $#@! you.

Have a nice day.

Yes, if he was white the police officers surely would not have confiscated the $20k in cash

[mrsat_98]

Latent government logic: He is a beaner, therefore he must be into drugs.

Why? Because $#@! you.

Have a nice day.

[Mani]

We gonna make dem mexicans pay fer that wall one way or another! 20K is a good start. AMIRITE!!!!!!!


MURIKA! BURP.

[Ronin Truth]

What cut of the loot does the judge get?