Hacker News Reader

Comment by Fargoan | Hacker News Reader

He was doing some shady stuff, but they couldn't prove anything other than he had a lot of cash on him. So they seized the cash and charged him with money laundering. Once the cash is seized it's guilty until proven innocent. He couldn't prove that he legally acquired it, so the police kept the money. Civil asset forfeiture is modern day highway robbery.

View on HN

You just wrote the best defense for asset forfeiture.

Note that in most countries if you cannot prove where you got your money you will be in trouble, and it could be higher than just seizing your assets. The difference is that the money usually goes to the state, not the police department. But travel in most European countries with 50 000€ in cash without declaring it and you will have troubles

I disagree. I used to keep $10,000 cash in my apartment in case of an emergency. I earned it all from my job, but would I be able to prove that I had taken money out of particular paychecks and set it aside for my emergency fund? No, I would not have been able to.

So he was doing shady stuff, they caught him, and he lost the shady cash? Isn’t that kind of the point?

Is it that hard to prove where 80k of cash came from? Either you were paid in cash for a job, and you’ll have paperwork for that. Or you sold something expensive, and you’ll have proof of that too. Or you won it at a casino? I’m sure they can give you proof as wel

They didn't catch him doing anything shady other than traveling through Oregon with cash. They wouldn't have found it either if they hadn't illegally searched him.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com