Laws that allow the seizure of assets when someone is convicted of a crime never bother me. But actions like this one strike me as heavy-handed, and lead me to question how they can be squared with our rights under the Constitution.

Driving 11 miles over the speed limit cost one driver more than a quarter-million dollars this weekend — at least for now.

A State Patrol trooper spotted a Honda Accord speeding southbound on Interstate 5 on Friday, according to State Patrol spokesman Jeff Merrill. It was raining, and the driver was cruising down the freeway at 71 mph. So the trooper pulled the driver over, Merrill said.

The 35-year-old from British Columbia, who had a valid driver's license, struggled to tell the trooper where he was going and how long he had been in Washington, prompting the trooper to search his car, Merrill said.

The trooper found two suitcases in the trunk — one filled with $276,640 in cash. The driver claimed he won the stacks of dollar bills at 23 casinos in Washington, California and Nevada, but he was unable to produce any receipts, according to Merrill.

The money was confiscated as the State Patrol investigates the incident. Merrill said if it is determined the man obtained the money legally it will be returned to him.

1) On what basis does one have to account for one's whereabouts to a police officer during a routine traffic stop?

2) How does the failure to do so constitute probable cause to search the vehicle?

3) Upon what basis does the government legitimately seize property and assets that are, on their face, legal to possess?

4) Shouldn't the burden here be the other way around -- why should any individual be required to prove that he obtained property legally to get it returned? Shouldn't the burden be on the state to prove otherwise?

Yes, I know -- I'm going to hear the phrase "War on Drugs". But doesn't that really beg the question?

Posted by: Greg at 10:39 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 341 words, total size 2 kb.