Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

OMNIVOROUS FROG

EOG Master
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

No, Perry Mason. Who said there was a crime? Yet. They let the girl go.

But I would like to hear your defense for the release of the money.

Judge: "JC, your client was stopped with $750,000 hidden in her vehicle. She claims to have no knowledge of the money. What do you have to say?

JC: Well see, Judge, I liken it to having a diamond necklace around your neck."

Maria may need new legal counsel.


I stopped the vehicle for traffic violations.

Then my dog barked.

I found lots of money. We kept it.

We always pull people over for routine traffic violations on drug patrols.

My dog barks at everything, I hit the siren, he really barked then.

We have lots of money now for lots of new stuff.

Best Wishes...OF :cheers
 

JC

EOG Veteran
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

No, Perry Mason. Who said there was a crime? Yet. They let the girl go.

But I would like to hear your defense for the release of the money.

Judge: "JC, your client was stopped with $750,000 hidden in her vehicle. She claims to have no knowledge of the money. What do you have to say?

JC: Well see, Judge, I liken it to having a diamond necklace around your neck."

Maria may need new legal counsel.

Assume she said the money was hers. Then what? Are the police still justified in taking it? Should she be subject to any further interrogation?
 

OMNIVOROUS FROG

EOG Master
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Assume she said the money was hers. Then what? Are the police still justified in taking it? Should she be subject to any further interrogation?

That's not how it works and you know it. No matter what she says, once they find it, it's gone whether she says it's hers or not. Just like grand jury, burden of proof is on the defendent. She has to show where the funds came from, even if she saved it her entire life, and it is legit, without proof of it's origin, they keep it. Even if the supreme court ruled it unconstitutional, they still do it. Especially to someone like her, she is a profile special. And if she does fight it, she has to foot an immense legal bill, against the gubment, always a dicey proposition. They just rule she did not prove it, she starts getting audited, citizenship reviewed, phones tapped, E mail read, followed from home to work, you name it. Chances of her saying it is hers and getting it back? Close to zero.

Best Wishes...OF :bank:
 

texansfan

EOG Master
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

It's always good to have a believer. Not many of them left these days. I bet you salute the flag with one hand while jacking with the other, good for you.

Best Wishes...OF :cheers

Sometimes OF you are not always as smart as you believe yourself to be. Stick to posting because in this matter you are clueless. Give me your law enforcement experience before you run off at the mouth.
 

texansfan

EOG Master
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Damn, some of you people are clueless. Just because you watch Cops on TV doesn't make any of you an expert.
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

The cash is none of the police's business anymore than if the driver had bought a diamond necklace and was wearing it around their neck when they got stopped.

Stopping a car for speeding should not be a valid reason to search a car, or bring out the dogs. See this case:

Oyez: Knowles v. Iowa, 525 U.S. 113 (1998), U.S. Supreme Court Case Summary & Oral Argument

Justices Question Iowa Law Allowing the Police to Search Cars in Traffic Violations - New York Times

From the article:

With a speeding violation, ''the offense is complete when the car is brought to a stop,'' Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist said, adding, ''There is no more evidence to look for.''

If the police have no other reason to suspect there was a crime committed, then they should have no standing to confiscate the money and place the burden on the driver to prove it was acquired legally.

Innocent until proven guilty should be the standard. Asking the driver to explain the origin of the money is guilty until proven innocent. The end does not justify the means.

Thank you for your reply, JC, but I asked you a specific question...

But I most certainly do get it, JC...do you? I don't think so. Let's talk about this specific case, what exactly were the police supposed to do? According to your post, where you said...
"Carrying cash, even large amounts of it, should not be a crime. Cash should not be subject to forfeiture because everyone "knows" it had to come from criminal activity."
...the police should have just issued her a ticket for speeding and told her to try to find the rightful owners of the cash when she returned home to Iowa. Since that is what your post implies, I would like you to step up to the plate and try to justify how this is the right thing for the police to do. I'll wait for your reply(before calling you an idiot!)

..."what exactly were the police supposed to do?"(in this specific case). In my prescient wisdom(and from discerning your past post), I even anticipated correctly your reply, ie. that the police should let the lady go with the money that she claimed was not hers. So then I asked you to justify how this is the right thing for the police to do, and your answer, although replete with evasive eloquence, does not so justify that this is the right thing for the police to do.
Texasfan is correct in that the article does not explain every little detail of the traffic stop, but it does tell us a lot. It tells us that $750,000 in cash was found in the truck; but it doesn't tell us who owns the truck; if she owned the vehicle, wouldn't she know that secret compartments had been added?; it tells us that the truck was searched by drug sniffing dogs; but it doesn't tell us if the police officer asked the driver for permission to search the truck; I'm assuming the police officer did ask for and receive such permission, just by the fact that he did search the truck; if the driver denied permission then it would have been very easy for him to obtain a court order to search it because he did have probably cause in that the drug sniffing dog did alert him to the probability of illegal drugs being present.
As a law-abiding citizen, I am proud and grateful that we have dedicated police officers who do their jobs effectively and conscientiously. They don't always do the right thing, afterall, they're human just like the rest of us, but in this particular case, they did the right thing and no ones rights were violated! On the contrary, if the police had done what you proposed, that is letting this person go with $750,000 of cash which she did not know to whom it belonged, that would be a violation of my rights, ie. the right to live in a crime free nation. And remember, according to the article...
"The woman, who had two children with her, told police she was on her way to California on vacation. She was released with no charges filed, but police kept the truck and the cash for further investigation."
...so there is a chance that there is a logical explanation for this truck to have been altered with secret panels and for $750,000 to be hidden inside it. Yeah, right JC....would you like to try again to justify that letting this lady go with the truck and the cash, which did not belong to her, is the proper thing for the police to do?

<!-- google_ad_section_end -->
 

OMNIVOROUS FROG

EOG Master
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Sometimes OF you are not always as smart as you believe yourself to be. Stick to posting because in this matter you are clueless. Give me your law enforcement experience before you run off at the mouth.

I have a real life experience in this arena, it costs me a lot of legal fees and was dismissed. You are making a major assumption that I am clueless. You stick with your support of the police state and I will stick with my position. If you have to assume someone is clueless to prove a point and say that I am running off at the mouth I would rather choose not to speak with you anymore. Happy trails.

OF...:whatever:
 

JC

EOG Veteran
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Thank you for your reply, JC, but I asked you a specific question...

But I most certainly do get it, JC...do you? I don't think so. Let's talk about this specific case, what exactly were the police supposed to do? According to your post, where you said...
"Carrying cash, even large amounts of it, should not be a crime. Cash should not be subject to forfeiture because everyone "knows" it had to come from criminal activity."
...the police should have just issued her a ticket for speeding and told her to try to find the rightful owners of the cash when she returned home to Iowa. Since that is what your post implies, I would like you to step up to the plate and try to justify how this is the right thing for the police to do. I'll wait for your reply(before calling you an idiot!)

..."what exactly were the police supposed to do?"(in this specific case). In my prescient wisdom(and from discerning your past post), I even anticipated correctly your reply, ie. that the police should let the lady go with the money that she claimed was not hers. So then I asked you to justify how this is the right thing for the police to do, and your answer, although replete with evasive eloquence, does not so justify that this is the right thing for the police to do.
Texasfan is correct in that the article does not explain every little detail of the traffic stop, but it does tell us a lot. It tells us that $750,000 in cash was found in the truck; but it doesn't tell us who owns the truck; if she owned the vehicle, wouldn't she know that secret compartments had been added?; it tells us that the truck was searched by drug sniffing dogs; but it doesn't tell us if the police officer asked the driver for permission to search the truck; I'm assuming the police officer did ask for and receive such permission, just by the fact that he did search the truck; if the driver denied permission then it would have been very easy for him to obtain a court order to search it because he did have probably cause in that the drug sniffing dog did alert him to the probability of illegal drugs being present.
As a law-abiding citizen, I am proud and grateful that we have dedicated police officers who do their jobs effectively and conscientiously. They don't always do the right thing, afterall, they're human just like the rest of us, but in this particular case, they did the right thing and no ones rights were violated! On the contrary, if the police had done what you proposed, that is letting this person go with $750,000 of cash which she did not know to whom it belonged, that would be a violation of my rights, ie. the right to live in a crime free nation. And remember, according to the article...
"The woman, who had two children with her, told police she was on her way to California on vacation. She was released with no charges filed, but police kept the truck and the cash for further investigation."
...so there is a chance that there is a logical explanation for this truck to have been altered with secret panels and for $750,000 to be hidden inside it. Yeah, right JC....would you like to try again to justify that letting this lady go with the truck and the cash, which did not belong to her, is the proper thing for the police to do?

<!-- google_ad_section_end -->

Her saying it is not hers complicates things. If she had said nothing, yes she gets to drive off with it.

If she says it's not hers and the police take it so if the rightful owner comes forward they can claim it, fine. What is the procedure when someone turns in lost property and nobody claims it? Does it go to the person who turned it in? Does it go to the state? Can she calim it since it was found in her car if nobody claims it?

I am still unclear why they brought out a dog and were searching the car for a speeding stop. Actually, I am clear, I just don't think it is legally justified.

So, if she said nothing, does she owe them an answer? Do they get to take it?
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Assume she said the money was hers. Then what? Are the police still justified in taking it? Should she be subject to any further interrogation?

Of course she should be! Are you really that naive or are you just an idiot? Criminals commit crimes all the time; do you want a police force to have a chance to catch them or not? When an officer makes a traffic stop, he asks you for your license and registration; please tell me you agree with the police having the right to do this; we register motor vehicles so that people can not steal them but unfortunately we can not do this with cash; and criminals, even dumb criminals, know this and so they make all their transactions in cash(this is why we don't have any bills larger than $100 in circulation, we used to but this is designed to make it as inconvenient as possible for criminals)
So why should the possessions inside the vehicle be any different? She had 2 children with her, according to your logic, or lack thereof, the police officer should not have the right to ask her if those children belong to her. They could be kidnapped. Likewise with any possessions in the car, the police should have the right to ask if those possessions belong to the driver. In your hypothetical case, if she says yes, the $750,000 belongs to her then fine, like I said, maybe there is a logical explanation for someone from Iowa to be driving around with $750,000 on her way to California, even though Beatty in not on the way to Califonia from Iowa. But a police officer would be derelict of his duty if he actually did what you suggested and let this lady go with a truck she didn't own and $750,000 that she says she owns but can't account for how she came to possess! But all that is hypothetical, she did not say she owned the cash and we're discussing what exactly the police allegedly did wrong in this case. I say they did nothing wrong and I am still patiently waiting for you to explain why they should have let this lady go with a truck she did not own and $750,000 in cash that she did not know to whom it belonged.
 

JC

EOG Veteran
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

You are suggesting the police are entitled to go on a fishing expedition every time they pull someone over. With no evidence of any other crime than speeding, they shouldn't be allowed to go on a fishing expedition.

What more evidence of speeding are they going to find by searching the car? Unfortunately the police treat every stop like a lead handed to a telemarketer, a chance to dig deeper. I'm not saying they don't catch a lot of crimes with this technique. they do. It doesn't make it right. The end does not justify the means.

She says it's not hers. So they take it. Who gets to keep it? Can she claim it if nobody else does?

Does she owe them any answer at all is what I am saying? If she says nothing, and the police can't find any case of missing money, what grounds do they get to keep it on? There should have to be a crime charged and the person who the money is taken from should have the opportunity to contest the charges.
 

The Prophet

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

RETURNING IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS TO TOWN FROM A VERY LONG DAY DOUBLE-HEADER WAS STOPPED BY STATE IN CITY LIMITS.

DRIVING MY BUDDY?S SUV, THERE WERE THREE WOMEN WITH US AND A COOLER IN THE BACK.

THE COP CLAIMS HE PULLED US OVER UNDER VEHICLE SUSPICION OF SOME RECENT INCIDENT (COMPLETE FABRICATION)?WITH HIS FLASH LIGHT HE PEEKS AROUND THE VEHICLE SEEING THE COOLER IN THE BACK.

HE ASKS ME TO STEP OUT AND FOLLOWING HIM TO HIS CAR?WE GET INSIDE, HE RUNS MY LICENSE WHILE ASKING PERMISSION TO SEARCH THE VEHICLE.

INFORMED HIM THAT HE COULD SEARCH THE VEHICLE FOLLOWING A SEARCH OF HIS HOME BY MY PARTY...

HE CHUCKED?SAYING NO DEAL


SENDING US ON OUR WAY.



.
 

Woody

EOG Veteran
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

You are suggesting the police are entitled to go on a fishing expedition every time they pull someone over. With no evidence of any other crime than speeding, they shouldn't be allowed to go on a fishing expedition.

Sure, why not? I thought you guys weren't bothering about the 4th amendment any longer since the Federal Government doesn't seem to care about it.
 

Wise Guy

EOG Addicted
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

. . .I think the poster wise guy is the one who lives in a TV related fanstasy world. How many years do you have in law enforcement? Again, people who can prove ownership of property will always get it back unless it was gotten through illegal means.

This has nothing to do with TV. I watch little TV. I live on the streets of Las Vegas and I do know what is going on out there.

I would never work in any capacity in law enforcement. I would never work for our offensive federal government.

Billy Walters agrees to settlement with police - MajorWager Forums

If you want a bit of truth, set your google to => "Billy Walters" cash seized <= and read the info that pops up.

Billy spent enormous sums to get his own money back. Few of us can afford his attorneys (can you spend that kind of money and 6 years to get your cash back?). The government never proved a single thing in a court of law and yet, our offensive local government in Las Vegas refused to return his cash that they ripped off.

This is only one example. I have many other examples, but you have communicated to me that nothing we say will convince you that our governments (local, state, federal) are out of control.
 

Wise Guy

EOG Addicted
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Damn, some of you people are clueless. Just because you watch Cops on TV doesn't make any of you an expert.

THE ASSET FORFEITURE

Mr. Texas Fan, you might want to do a little reading. Time to brush up on this subject.

"Government Seizures Victimize Innocent
By Andrew Schneider and Mary Pat Flaherty

Part One: The Overview
February 27, 1991. Willie Jones, a second-generation nursery man in his family's Nashville business, bundles up money from last year's profits and heads off to buy flowers and shrubs in Houston. He makes this trip twice a year using cash, which the small growers prefer.​


But this time, as he waits at the American Airlines gate in Nashville Metro Airport, he's flanked by two police officers who escort him into a small office, search him and seize the $9,600 he's carrying. A ticket agent had alerted the officers that a large black man had paid for his ticket in bills, unusual these days. Because of the cash, and the fact that he fit a "profile" of what drug dealers supposedly look like, they believed he was buying or selling drugs. He's free to go, he's told. But they keep his money - his livelihood - and give him a receipt in its place.​


No evidence of wrongdoing was ever produced. No charges were ever filed. As far as anyone knows, Willie Jones neither uses drugs, nor buys or sells them. He is a gardening contractor who bought an airplane ticket. Who lost his hard-earned money to the cops. And can't get it back.


That same day, an ocean away in Hawaii, federal drug agents arrive at the Maui home of retirees Joseph and Frances Lopes and claim it for the U.S. government. For 49 years, Lopes worked on a sugar plantation, living in its camp housing before buying a modest home for himself, his wife, and their adult, mentally disturbed son, Thomas.​


For a while, Thomas grew marijuana in the back yard - and threatened to kill himself every time his parents tried to cut it down. In 1987, the police caught Thomas, then 28. He pleaded guilty, got probation for his first offense and was ordered to see a psychologist once a week. He has, and never again has grown dope or been arrested. The family thought this episode was behind them. But earlier this year, a detective scouring old arrest records for forfeiture opportunities realized the Lopes house could be taken away because they had admitted they knew about the marijuana. The police department stands to make a bundle. If the house is sold, the police get the proceeds.​


Jones and the Lopes family are among the thousands of Americans each year victimized by the federal seizure law - a law meant to curb drugs by causing financial hardship to dealers. A 10-month study by The Pittsburgh Press shows the law has run amok. In their zeal to curb drugs and sometimes fill their coffers with the proceeds of what they take, local cops, federal agents and the courts have curbed innocent Americans' civil rights. From Maine to Hawaii, people who are never charged with a crime had cars, boats, money and homes taken away. In fact, 80 percent of the people who lost property to the federal government were never charged. And most of the seized items weren't the luxurious playthings of drug barons, but modest homes and simple cars and hard-earned savings of ordinary people


But those goods generated $2 billion for the police departments that took them.. The owners' only crimes in many of these cases: They "looked" like drug dealers. They were black, Hispanic or flashily dressed. Others, like the Lopeses, have been connected to a crime by circumstances beyond their control. Says Eric Sterling, who helped write the law a decade ago as a lawyer on a congressional committee: "The innocent-until-proven-guilty principle has been overturned."​

...​

...​

Ethel Hylton of New York City has yet to regain her financial independence after losing $39,110 in a search nearly three years ago in Hobby Airport in Houston. Shortly after she arrived from New York, a Houston officer and Drug Enforcement Administration agent stopped the 46-year-old woman in the baggage area and told her she was under arrest because a drug dog had scratched at her luggage. The dog wasn't with them, and when Miss Hylton asked to see it, the officers refused to bring it out. The agents searched her bags, and ordered a strip search of Miss Hylton, but found no contraband. In her purse they found the cash Miss Hylton carried because she planned to buy a house to escape the New York winters which exasperated her diabetes. It was the settlement from an insurance claim, and her life's savings, gathered through more than 20 years of work as a hotel housekeeper and hospital night janitor.​


The police seized all but $10 of the cash and sent Miss Hylton on her way, keeping the money because of its alleged drug connection. But they never charged her with a crime. The Pittsburgh Press verified her jobs, reviewed her bank statements and substantiated her claim she had $18,000 from an insurance settlement. It also found no criminal record for her in New York City. With the mix of outrage and resignation voiced by other victims of searches, she says: "The money they took was mine. I'm allowed to have it. I earned it."​


Miss Hylton became a U.S. citizen six years ago. She asks, "Why did they stop me? Is it because I'm black or because I'm Jamaican?" Probably, both - although Houston police haven't said.​


Drug teams interviewed in dozens of airports, train stations and bus terminals and along other major highways repeatedly said they didn't stop travellers based on race. But a Pittsburgh Press examination of 121 travellers' cases in which police found no dope, made no arrest, but seized money anyway showed that 77 percent of the people stopped were black, Hispanic, or Asian.​

...​

...​

Last year, the 72 deputies of Jefferson Davis Parish led the state in forfeitures, gathering $1 million - more than their colleagues in New Orleans, a city 17 times larger than the parish. Like most states, Louisiana returns the money to law enforcement agencies, but it has one of the more unusual distributions: 60 percent goes to the police bringing a case, 20 percent to the district attorney's office prosecuting it and 20 percent to the court fund of the judge signing the forfeiture order. "The highway stops aren't much different from a smash-and-grab ring," says Lorenzi, of the Louisiana Defense Lawyers association.
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

You are suggesting the police are entitled to go on a fishing expedition every time they pull someone over. With no evidence of any other crime than speeding, they shouldn't be allowed to go on a fishing expedition.

What more evidence of speeding are they going to find by searching the car? Unfortunately the police treat every stop like a lead handed to a telemarketer, a chance to dig deeper. I'm not saying they don't catch a lot of crimes with this technique. they do. It doesn't make it right. The end does not justify the means.

She says it's not hers. So they take it. Who gets to keep it? Can she claim it if nobody else does?

Does she owe them any answer at all is what I am saying? If she says nothing, and the police can't find any case of missing money, what grounds do they get to keep it on? There should have to be a crime charged and the person who the money is taken from should have the opportunity to contest the charges.

I am suggesting no such thing! What in the world would make you say that? Especially after I posted this in my previous post...

"Texasfan is correct in that the article does not explain every little detail of the traffic stop, but it does tell us a lot. It tells us that $750,000 in cash was found in the truck; but it doesn't tell us who owns the truck; if she owned the vehicle, wouldn't she know that secret compartments had been added?; it tells us that the truck was searched by drug sniffing dogs; but it doesn't tell us if the police officer asked the driver for permission to search the truck; I'm assuming the police officer did ask for and receive such permission, just by the fact that he did search the truck; if the driver denied permission then it would have been very easy for him to obtain a court order to search it because he did have probably cause in that the drug sniffing dog did alert him to the probability of illegal drugs being present."

....and furthermore, read the very next post by the poster, "The Prophet", whom I am going to go out on a limb here and assume that he is no neo-con, where he confirms that the police did not search his vehicle after he refused permission. I will say this, if I were the cop and I knew only as much about The Prophet as I know from his posts here, I would have called the judge!

I still don't see you trying to justify that the police in this case should have let the lady go with the cash and the truck. I still contend that they did the right thing in this case;the police make enough mistakes, afterall, they are only human and they have a VERY difficult job to do. So go ahead and take your shots at them when they do make a mistake, for instance, apparently in the example you gave about them seizing the life savings of some guy on a bus. But WTF does that mistake have to do with this case? Likewise, I'm sure I speak for the entire forum when I thank the inimitably misnamed poster, "Wise Guy", for going back 17 years to find an example of the Govt making a mistake.
 

The General

Another Day, Another Dollar
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

I believe the lady could have been arrested for reckless driving if nothing else. Speeding and running a stop sign seems enough for that and I ASSume that is still possible as the investigation moves forward. With That alone, an officer, has reason to use extreme caution upon approaching the vehicle and also have his dog at his side until he determines that the situation is not dangerous to him or whomever inside is deemed a non threat to others. A violation of law took place just by her driving actions which, again, gives the officer fair right to use caution and investigate the driver and the truck, along with his dog, too, IMO.
 

The General

Another Day, Another Dollar
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Cash Car

BEATTY -- Maria Villananeda, 33, was found to be driving a Ford F-150 pick-up truck with more than the usual pocket change -- $750,111 in cash, to be exact-- stashed inside it Monday, April 1.

Villananeda was driving on Highway 95 when she was pulled over at mile marker 60 and First Street for speeding and not stopping at a stop sign.

Sheriff's Office Dep. Daniel Pineau, accompanied by his K-9 partner, Dep. Derek, approached the truck from which he reported he could "smell a strong odor of a masking agent."

The press release also said other unspecified "indicators of criminal activity" were present.

Villananeda was given a verbal warning and reportedly gave Pineau verbal and written consent to search the vehicle, and he and K-9 Derek began to do so.

The officers located a hidden compartment inside the vehicle above the transmission.

At that point, the truck was taken to the sheriff's office for a more thorough search.

Two more compartments, located in the driver's side and passenger side front fenders, were found stuffed with cold, hard, U.S. cash.

Villananeda said she did not know the money was there and did not claim ownership of the truck.

The money was seized and is awaiting forfeiture to the Nye County Sheriff's Office.

Pineau was assisted by Lt. Frank Jarvis, Highway Patrolman Chris Bennett, and Det.'s T. Meade and J. Powell of the sheriff's Scorpion task force.

Pahrump Valley Times - Nye County's Largest Newspaper Circulation
 
Last edited:

JC

EOG Veteran
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

I believe the lady could have been arrested for reckless driving if nothing else. Speeding and running a stop sign seems enough for that and I ASSume that is still possible as the investigation moves forward. With That alone, an officer, has reason to use extreme caution upon approaching the vehicle and also have his dog at his side until he determines that the situation is not dangerous to him or whomever inside is deemed a non threat to others. A violation of law took place just by her driving actions which, again, gives the officer fair right to use caution and investigate the driver and the truck, along with his dog, too, IMO.

How much more evidence of speeding and running the stop sign or reckless driving would you hope to turn up in a search?

Police take every traffic stop as an opening to dig deeper and it is not right.
 

roscoe

EOG Veteran
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

The Supreme Court decision Illinois v. Gates (1983) lowered the threshold of probable cause by ruling that a "substantial chance" or "fair probability" of criminal activity could establish probable cause. A better-than-even chance is not required.
 

JC

EOG Veteran
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

The Supreme Court decision Illinois v. Gates (1983) lowered the threshold of probable cause by ruling that a "substantial chance" or "fair probability" of criminal activity could establish probable cause. A better-than-even chance is not required.

I don't know if this case has since been overturned, but it seems to address the issue square on.

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1998/1998_97_7597/

Facts of the Case

After stopping him for speeding, an Iowa police officer issued Patrick Knowles a citation and conducted a full search of his car without probable cause or Knowles' consent. When his search turned up a "pot pipe" and some marijuana, the officer arrested Knowles on state drug charges. Knowles challenged these on grounds that because he was not arrested at any time prior to the search, the search was unconstitutional. On appeal from consecutive adverse rulings in lower courts, the Supreme Court granted Knowles certiorari.

Question

Can a search of a stopped vehicle, that occurs prior to the driver's arrest, be sustained under the "search incident to arrest" exception that permits officers to search stopped vehicles without first obtaining a search warrant?

Conclusion

No. In a unanimous opinion that Court held that full stopped-car searches can only be conducted when the safety of the officers is at risk. One significant indication of such danger is when an officer arrests the subject as a reaction to possible or actual threat. In the present case, no serious danger accompanied the stop of Knowles car as evidenced by the officer's initial decision not to arrest Knowles or even issue him a ticket. As such, regardless of its uncovered contents, the subsequent search violated the "search incident to arrest" power and the Fourth Amendment's prohibition again unlawful search and seizures.
 

roscoe

EOG Veteran
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Searches of the Car
  • The police may generally search a car without a warrant if the car has been validly pulled over and there is probable cause to believe that the car contains evidence or illegal goods
  • If the police have probable cause, then the entire car and all of the contents in the car can be searched
  • Generally the police cannot search the car for a minor traffic infraction, but the driver and passengers may be searched for weapons as long as there is reasonable suspicion they are involved in criminal activity beyond the traffic infraction.
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Thanks General, for posting that followup article....it seems the police did NOTHING wrong in this case, in spite of JC's protestations otherwise.
JC, you are making a lot of posts in this thread but you still haven't justified that the police should have let this lady go with a truck and $750,000 that did NOT belong to her. Evidently, in your mind, the police can NEVER do anything right.
And since you love to post what my posts suggest instead of what they really say, please feel free to suggest that I am really saying you are an idiot!
 

JC

EOG Veteran
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Thanks General, for posting that followup article....it seems the police did NOTHING wrong in this case, in spite of JC's protestations otherwise.
JC, you are making a lot of posts in this thread but you still haven't justified that the police should have let this lady go with a truck and $750,000 that did NOT belong to her. Evidently, in your mind, the police can NEVER do anything right.
And since you love to post what my posts suggest instead of what they really say, please feel free to suggest that I am really saying you are an idiot!

I said since she said it wasn't hers, that makes it a more difficult question. If it does not belong to her, who does it belong to?

I said I am ok with them taking it if she said it did not belong to her. I am not ok with the search in the first place. Yes, I see she signed off on the search. What you don't see is how intimidated she felt at the time.

I once consented to a search of my car because I feared what might happen if I did not. Cops lie. Cops have planted evidence. No, I am not suggested they planted anything here. I am explaining why one might feel compelled to consent to a search when they didn't have to by law.

But now that I have agreed that in this case the cops should have taken the money, if nobody claims it, who should get to keep it?

A) Local authorities/police

B) Returned to the woman

C) Returned to the rightful owner of the truck

D) Turned over to the Federal Treasury
 

parlayin

EOG Enthusiast
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

JC, you've altered your position in light of other posts. First, you said the government impermissibly criminalizes carrying lots of cash and cited the example of the guy whose $30K in life savings was seized. People responded that hidden compartments and carrying $750K is suspicious, and if Maria could have established a legitimate source for the funds, she would have been able to keep the money. Now you're saying the cops did not have probable cause to search the truck, which is very different and cannot be determined from the article.
 

The Prophet

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Cash Car

BEATTY -- Maria Villananeda, 33, was found to be driving a Ford F-150 pick-up truck with more than the usual pocket change -- $750,111 in cash, to be exact-- stashed inside it Monday, April 1.

Villananeda was driving on Highway 95 when she was pulled over at mile marker 60 and First Street for speeding and not stopping at a stop sign.

Sheriff's Office Dep. Daniel Pineau, accompanied by his K-9 partner, Dep. Derek, approached the truck from which he reported he could "smell a strong odor of a masking agent."

The press release also said other unspecified "indicators of criminal activity" were present.

Villananeda was given a verbal warning and reportedly gave Pineau verbal and written consent to search the vehicle, and he and K-9 Derek began to do so.

The officers located a hidden compartment inside the vehicle above the transmission.

At that point, the truck was taken to the sheriff's office for a more thorough search.

Two more compartments, located in the driver's side and passenger side front fenders, were found stuffed with cold, hard, U.S. cash.

Villananeda said she did not know the money was there and did not claim ownership of the truck.

The money was seized and is awaiting forfeiture to the Nye County Sheriff's Office.

Pineau was assisted by Lt. Frank Jarvis, Highway Patrolman Chris Bennett, and Det.'s T. Meade and J. Powell of the sheriff's Scorpion task force.

Pahrump Valley Times - Nye County's Largest Newspaper Circulation


"...reportedly gave Pineau verbal and written consent to search the vehicle...



"REPORTEDLY?" :rolleyes:

...GAVE VERBAL & WRITTEN CONSENT TO SEARCH. :+textinb3



HERE'S THE LESSON KIDS...

IF LAW ENFORCEMENT EVER REQUESTS PERMISSION OR CONSENT (LEGAL PROCEDURE)...ALWAYS DENY THE REQUEST.


THE REQUEST IMPLIES YOUR PERMISSION IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO FURTHER ACTIONS BEING TAKEN...

FURTHERMORE, BY IMPLEMENTING YOUR RIGHT TO DENY SEARCH REQUESTS YOU TAKE THE FIRST-STEP IN PROTECTING YOURSELF/PROPERTY FROM BEING CONTAMINATED WITH ILLICIT PARAPHERNALIA...PARAPHERNALIA ROUTINELY OBTAINED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT.



.



.

.
 
Last edited:

The Prophet

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

ANOTHER TIP...

WHENEVER POSSIBLE ALLOW LEGAL COUNSEL TO SPEAK UPON YOUR BEHALF...

WHEN LAW ENFORCEMENT BEGINS THEIR INTERROGATING QUESTIONS AND/OR REQUESTS...

BEFORE ANSWERING/RESPONDING TO ANY QUESTIONS/REQUESTS...

INDICATE TO LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT YOUR RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT HAS BEEN INVOKED AND QUESTIONS MAY BE ANSWERED THROUGH YOUR LEGAL REPRESENTATION...THAT'S WHAT YOU PAY COUNSEL TO DO...REPRESENT YOUR INTERESTS.

IN SHORT...KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT!



.
 
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

ANOTHER TIP...

WHENEVER POSSIBLE ALLOW LEGAL COUNSEL TO SPEAK UPON YOUR BEHALF...

WHEN LAW ENFORCEMENT BEGINS THEIR INTERROGATING QUESTIONS AND/OR REQUESTS...

BEFORE ANSWERING/RESPONDING TO ANY QUESTIONS/REQUESTS...

INDICATE TO LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT YOUR RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT HAS BEEN INVOKED AND QUESTIONS MAY BE ANSWERED THROUGH YOUR LEGAL REPRESENTATION...THAT'S WHAT YOU PAY COUNSEL TO DO...REPRESENT YOUR INTERESTS.

IN SHORT...KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT!



.

Exactly. How many people do you see that admit to something when that is the ONLY shot that have at being caught.
 
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

I'm not sure if it matters to anyone here, but Supreme Court precedent holds that a dog sniff is not a search. Unfortunately, between 80 to 90 percent of all currency in circulation has cocaine residue on it. Ergo, large collections of cash will invariably draw a dog hit.
Yes, a dog hit is sufficient to get a warrant; though here she gave consent (cops don't need any justification to request consent to search). Though not applicable here, the only successful attacks that I've seen from the defense side on a search based on a dog hit are where it can be shown that this particular dog has a poor accuracy record (too many false positives), or where the dog unit took too long to get to the scene of the traffic stop (anywhere near 20 minutes approaches unreasonableness).
I can also attest that forfeiture is BIG business in Texas; the cops and DA's take it very seriously, since they get to split the money at the local level. I had a client get $7000 confiscated from a Fedex envelope because of a dog hit (Fedex regularly allows the police to run the drug dogs in their facilities). The currency was entirely in $20 denominations, so there was quite a bundle of cash (perhaps using larger denominations would emit less of a drug "footprint" for the dogs to hit?). My guy was legit and had a semi-decent story about the money; we ended up settling with the DA by letting them keep one-quarter of the money because my client didn't want to travel from where he lived to go to trial.

BTW: I entirely agree with the concept of "lawyering up" when the cops start asking questions. You aren't likely to talk them out of suspecting you, so there's not much good you can do for yourself by talking to them.
 
Last edited:

OMNIVOROUS FROG

EOG Master
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Damn, some of you people are clueless. Just because you watch Cops on TV doesn't make any of you an expert.

And you are one? Amazingly you vanished from this thread. Don't tell me about forfeiture laws, I have a very bad memory in that arena. You have already lost before the game begins.

Who shot off their mouth in this thread?


Best wishes...OF :+clueless
 

The Prophet

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

FOLLOWING A FINAL AFTERNOON SHIFT THREE OTHER WORK MATES AND I WENT TO HAVE A COUPLE DRINKS BEFORE THE ESTABLISHMENTS CLOSED AND WE RETIRED FOR THE EVENING…

ON THE WAY HOME STATE PULLS MY BUDDY DRIVING OVER CLAIMING HE WAS WEAVING…

I WAS IN THE FRONT PASSENGER-SEAT AND ADVISED THE OFFICER THAT THE THREE OTHER WITNESSES IN OUR VEHICLE DID NOT OBSERVE THE “WEAVING” HE CLAIMED AND THAT WE JUST GOT OFF WORK AND WERE HEADING HOME...

HIS REPLY?

“…HAVE A SAFE EVENING GENTLEMEN,” LETTING US CONTINUE HOME.




.
 

OMNIVOROUS FROG

EOG Master
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Not that I have ever done this, but moving large sums of cash can be tricky. First, always deal in 100's low denominations too much bulk. Second kill the original scent, either by storing it in old coffee can with grounds residue on bottom, or a freshener/sanitizer. Then move it in zip loc freezer bags mininum, not the little porous sandwich bags, but the heavy freezer bag. A quart sized one will easily hold 40 dimes. Not that I have ever had that much money. Also, ziploc air removal or tupperwear works well. Seal o meal, same, anything that draws a vacuum. That is your police state tip of the day.


Best wishes...OF :smokesmal
 
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Unfortunately, in some jurisdictions you just described a DWI and 3 PI arrests. . . .(Talking about Prophet's story).
 
Last edited:

OMNIVOROUS FROG

EOG Master
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

FOLLOWING A FINAL AFTERNOON SHIFT THREE OTHER WORK MATES AND I WENT TO HAVE A COUPLE DRINKS BEFORE THE ESTABLISHMENTS CLOSED AND WE RETIRED FOR THE EVENING…

ON THE WAY HOME STATE PULLS MY BUDDY DRIVING OVER CLAIMING HE WAS WEAVING…

I WAS IN THE FRONT PASSENGER-SEAT AND ADVISED THE OFFICER THAT THE THREE OTHER WITNESSES IN OUR VEHICLE DID NOT OBSERVE THE “WEAVING” HE CLAIMED AND THAT WE JUST GOT OFF WORK AND WERE HEADING HOME...

HIS REPLY?

“…HAVE A SAFE EVENING GENTLEMEN,” LETTING US CONTINUE HOME.




.

Same with me, have old crown vic, full of passengers, suspect looking. Drive a good 8 miles with police tailing me. Never made a wrong move. Not a one. So get pulled over anyway, for weaving.

I pulled you over for weaving back there. I'm thinking this road has barely a shoulder, and is uneven everywhere, how is that again? Instead, been a long drive sir, I must need some coffee. He flashlights Mrs. Frog and 4 kids. Well, get that coffee and drive safely. No driver's license, proof of insurance, and they run tags on pc before pullover.

Shit, talk about a fishing mission. Car full of hispanics, dog gets out and he accidentally steps on it's foot. May I search your vehicle? Scary times. Cops looking to score, not protecting or serving.

Best wishes...OF :+cops-2+
 

The Prophet

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

RIDING WITH A BUDDY ONE AFTERNOON WHO SWEAVERED WHILE MAINTAINING CONTROL AND WITHIN HIS LANE, TO AVOID DEBIS ON THE ROADWAY?

UNFORTUNATELY A LOCAL HAPPENED TO BE BEHIND US AT A DISTANCE?

PULLING US OVER?THE OFFICER ISSUED A CITATION CLAIMING THAT WE HIT THE CURBING RUNNING UP ON THE GRASS ETC?(COMPLETE FABRICATION)

I REQUESTED TO MY BUDDY THAT WE GO RETRIEVE MY CAMERA?WE RETURNED TO THE SCENE AND I TOOK SOME PHOTOS.

IN COURT, ME BEING THE ONLY ?IMPARTIAL? WITNESS TO THE INCIDENT, I SUBMITTED TO THE OLD-TIMER ON THE BENCH THE PHOTOS AND TESTIFIED WHAT HAD ACTUALLY HAPPENED?

THE JUDGE WARNED THE COP FOR ISSUING THE CITATION, WHILE DISMISSING THE CASE.



UNFORTUNATELY I HAVE FAR TOO MANY COP STORIES I COULD SHARE...BUT I THINK I'LL TAKE A BREAK AND ALLOW OTHERS TO SHARE THEIR EXPERIENCES IF THEY'D LIKE.





.
 

OMNIVOROUS FROG

EOG Master
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

RIDING WITH A BUDDY ONE AFTERNOON WHO SWEAVERED WHILE MAINTAINING CONTROL AND WITHIN HIS LANE, TO AVOID DEBIS ON THE ROADWAY?

UNFORTUNATELY A LOCAL HAPPENED TO BE BEHIND US AT A DISTANCE?

PULLING US OVER?THE OFFICER ISSUED A CITATION CLAIMING THAT WE HIT THE CURBING RUNNING UP ON THE GRASS ETC?(COMPLETE FABRICATION)

I REQUESTED TO MY BUDDY THAT WE GO RETRIEVE MY CAMERA?WE RETURNED TO THE SCENE AND I TOOK SOME PHOTOS.

IN COURT, ME BEING THE ONLY ?IMPARTIAL? WITNESS TO THE INCIDENT, I SUBMITTED TO THE OLD-TIMER ON THE BENCH THE PHOTOS AND TESTIFIED WHAT HAD ACTUALLY HAPPENED?

THE JUDGE WARNED THE COP FOR ISSUING THE CITATION, WHILE DISMISSING THE CASE.



UNFORTUNATELY I HAVE FAR TOO MANY COP STORIES I COULD SHARE...BUT I THINK I'LL TAKE A BREAK AND ALLOW OTHERS TO SHARE THEIR EXPERIENCES IF THEY'D LIKE.




.

More and more ordinary people have stories like this in today's police state. My Dad drove for over 40+ years and got pulled over once for a legit no passenger mirror while trailering a boat. This is a newer tactic, that we get to witness and hear horror stories of abuse about. But huge revenue earner for the police agencies and affiliates.

Best wishes...OF :hung



Before it was we need to get so and so a retirement present, need to issue 100 traffic tickets this weekend. Meet that quota. Now it's lotto, pull over right vehicle, you score 3/4 of a mil, don't even have to buy a ticket, you issue them one.
 

The Prophet

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

RECOMMENDATION REGARDING TRAFFIC CITATIONS…

WHENEVER PRACTICAL, ALWAYS CHALLENGE YOUR TRAFFIC CITATIONS…

THEORY; IF EVERYONE CHALLENGED THEIR TRAFFIC CITATIONS, THERE’D BE FAR FEWER ISSUED. THERE'S OTHER REASONS I WON'T GO INTO...BUT...

NOTE: CASES ARE DISMISSED WHEN COP(S) DON’T SHOW FOR TRIAL…KEEPING IN MIND, MANY HAVE TO TRAVEL DISTANCES TO THE COUNTY COURT HOUSE…

TIP: CHECK THE COP’S WORK SCHEDULE AND HAVE YOUR TRIAL SCHEDULE ON HIS/THEIR DAY-OFF…COPS’ DON’T LIKE GOING TO TRIAL ON THEIR DAYS-OFF AND MORE TIMES THAN NOT THEY WON’T SHOW AT TRIAL FOR MINOR TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS.





.
 
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

Not that I have ever done this, but moving large sums of cash can be tricky. First, always deal in 100's low denominations too much bulk. Second kill the original scent, either by storing it in old coffee can with grounds residue on bottom, or a freshener/sanitizer. Then move it in zip loc freezer bags mininum, not the little porous sandwich bags, but the heavy freezer bag. A quart sized one will easily hold 40 dimes. Not that I have ever had that much money. Also, ziploc air removal or tupperwear works well. Seal o meal, same, anything that draws a vacuum. That is your police state tip of the day.


Best wishes...OF :smokesmal

You cant even spell 40K. Does Fed EX allow loose change to be sent across the country? :finger004 :finger004
 

OMNIVOROUS FROG

EOG Master
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

I would not trust Fed Ex to send you a bible Travis. Arf arf arf. How about 4 bands of 100's?

Best wishes...OF :doh1
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
Re: Traffic stop in Beatty reveals $750,000 stash

IBut now that I have agreed that in this case the cops should have taken the money, if nobody claims it, who should get to keep it?

A) Local authorities/police

B) Returned to the woman

C) Returned to the rightful owner of the truck

D) Turned over to the Federal Treasury

Thank you, JC....I feel like I have just cured cancer, although that would not be nearly as remarkable as getting you to admit the police handled this situation flawlessly.
To answer your question, C, if the rightful owner of the truck can explain why and how the money legitimately ended up in the truck. In lieu of that one in a billion case occurring, then A.
 
Top