Judge orders return of stripper's 1 Million Dollars
 

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs...151044009.html

Awesome judge.

Maybe the the dog confused the smell of vagina with drugs.

million in cash in a trunk of a rented car... sounds legit... :2 cents:

try explaining that to your pimp....

Hummm IRS will be pleased to see that now that she as money back she can pay Sam's share of that mill.

so they found trace amounts of blow on 100 bills

so much for law

lol :thumbsup

Stripper SAVING $. Oh yeah thats legit. haha

Strippers know how to save money if they don't have a drug addiction.

It shouldn't be ANY of the cops or the govt's business how much money a person has.

That people think it's "okay" just blows my mind.

The govt. is supposed to work FOR you...not run your life.

Lots of bills especially larger ones always have trace amounts of drugs.. And feces, lol, lots of germs. It's not their business but she deserves an audit if she hasn't paid taxes in the range of being consistent with having that much cash in her possession.

And for the record... I've met a career dancer with a million dollars in assets, more than half in cash. And it wasn't from drugs or prostitution. I'm guessing she's the 1:1,000,000

Brad

This!

Fucking police are thieves!

Must have been a pain counting all those 1's

i know some working girls...who rake it in large...never drink..dont do drugs
they buy property...and pay it off

1 is retired already..32
the other another year or so i guess

32 when did she start 30

Read the story from a real news outlet:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ugs-money.html


Part of the judges decision rested on the fact that she had paid taxes on the money. That million was the left over proceeds.

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/4195977472/h484B6AFB/

:stoned

ADG

This make sense...

There was a report once that in Miami you could get high with the trace amounts of cocaine on 50$ bills.

Holy Hell How can that be????

There is no such thing as a honest stripper LOLOL

I've always found it disturbing that cops can seize money if you are carrying a lot of cash. They claim it must be drug related, which is bull shit.

Should be unconstitutional and why the hell should she have to go to the legal system to get it back.

I agree...

I would imagine that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and the rest of the Founding Fathers of this country never envisioned the things that our local, state, and federal govt's do to people in 2013

its a big racket for em.. especially highway patrols

Nixon's "War On Drugs" has turned into the biggest excuse for authorities to just do damn near anything they want to people. And has ended up with the United States incarcerating more of it's citizens than any country on Earth now or in all of history. :(

You do get that this was illegal money right? No way she saved a million in suitcase over the last ten years. You do gt that?

What are you talking about? Last I checked money is "legal".

The police should have no right to stop you and take your money. Period.

If the police suspect someone is doing something "illegal", then they should do an investigation and arrest that person if it turns out to be true.

Just taking the money from anybody who has a lot of it? If I did that to you, it would be called "theft".

They literally pulled a car over for speeding, searched the car (which should be unconstitutional and WAS until a couple of decades ago when the Supreme Court started falling in line with "the war on drugs" and tossing our privacy and freedom out the window), and then took that girl's money.

They basically fucked her over. She was trying to use that money to invest in a business.
IF you have ever had a chance to invest in a business oportunity, then you know that she lost that particular opportunity.

She needed to invest at that moment. AND...the people she might have been about to do the business deal with, would no longer want anything to do with her anyway after being involved with the police...even IF they would have waited over a year (that's how long it took for her to get her money back).

it reeks of some crime from a mile away... perhaps not necessarily drugs related, but probably tax evasion or some other crime... chances that that money is 100% legit is 1 in a million...

we can argue whether they had the right to search her car, seize the funds, etc... but we both know damn well that chances that money is legit is slim to none.... or do you honestly believe that money is 100% clean, all taxes paid on it, etc?

How the hell is it the government's business if I decide to carry my money in cash and not trust a bank.... And what is having x amount of cash proof of wrong doing??? It's insane that there are so many people OK with government seizures of cash these days




.

good for her :thumbsup:thumbsup

Well thanks for you legal opinion...but first of all: The cops shouldn't be able to do that to anybody.

Second of all...after over a year went by and her business opportunity that she had worked all her life towards was down the drain...the Judge FINALLY said that the money was 100% legally made and taxes paid on it (I guess you may not have read the story).

So the govt., instead of serving the people...once again proved itself to be harassing and a detriment to new business being started. AND basically stole her money for a year (though IF you read the story you would see that the Judge ordered interest to be paid to her for them having her money that long).

Great. Boiled down to facts we have one Indian transferring money from a cash business to another Indian about to buy another cash business.

Glad my tax money goes to support an environment where so many from other countries can beat the system.

Agreed.

And where do they draw this imaginary confiscation line? So...a million is okay to just seize without justification. How about $500k? Or $100k?

In principle...and although it may sound ridiculous - why not confiscate your lunch money, too.

http://imgboo.me/upload/small/2013/0...032630c3ea.png

Fuck that's a lot of money.

Pigshit.

$10,000 or above.

If a cop had tried to take Thomas Jefferson's cash off of him by telling him to get out of his carriage and they were going to search it...Jefferson would have gotten a rope and found the first tree and hung that son-of-a-bitch.

They are supposed to be public SERVANTS. Not act like mini-Gods and ruin your life at their discretion.

It is the people that support the politicians that make the laws...so blame the voters not the cops. The government only has the power that the people allow them to have.

Not true...the Supreme Court gave them these powers over the last couple of decades to support the "War On Drugs"
They have given cops pretty much unlimited powers to do any damn thing they want to...and they do.

I remember very clearly in the 1970's and 1980's that cops couldn't search my car or me. They couldn't go into my wife's purse etc.
And real cops? They will search you, frisk you, talk to you like you are a dog...and if you ask they "why" it just pisses them off.
Hell, You go to a fucking concert and you have non-cops searching your wife's purse and running wands over you.

Disgusting.

Thank you Richard Nixon for the "War On Drugs" and subsequent jailing of more citizens in the United States than ANY country on Earth in all of history.

Google it up for yourself. Prison industry is a multi-billion dollar corporate monster. And the cops are the ones who keep it supplied.

The Supreme Court does not "give" powers or make law...the Supreme Court makes a decision as to a law...made by the law makers that the people support...being constitutional or not.

Hope she sues those cunts for distress, loss of potential earnings, and any other bs she can tack on.

Are you deliberately trolling or something?

THE SUPREME COURT ruled it was constitutional for police to search your car, search YOU, search your wifes purse, take people's property and money if they "suspected" it has anything to do with drugs.

Has nothing to do with politicians and everything to do with cops. The minute the Supreme Court made those rulings....every law enforcement agency in America started doing it.

Fuck man...pay attention to what's going on around you.

Up until the Supreme Court started making those "war on drugs" type rulings starting in the late 1980's...they could not do that and did not do that.

Any pictures of this stripper?

No I am not trolling you. I have...and do...pay very close attention to every thing that goes on around me. I know very well how our system of governance works which includes the Supreme Court and its rulings...sport.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Please don't call me "sport". It's disrespectful. And if you know the Supreme Court made those rulings then WHY would you argue with me about it?

Makes zero sense.

Because you told me that what I posted is not true and of course it is true...so it is you that is arguing with me. Reread my posts and your responses.

Fuck...what part of the cops could not search you or your car or take your money UNTIL the Supreme Court ruled that they could as part of the "war on drugs"?

Yes, politicians make laws. No, they don't make law enforcement protocol.

Yes politicians make laws...law enforcement acts upon those laws...some one challenges either the law or the ways law enforcement acts upon those laws...the challenge works its way through the courts to the Federal Supreme Court. The Supreme Court then rules... either upon the law or the way law enforcement acted upon the law...or both. It is those nine members of the court that decide whether or not the law...or the way law enforcement acted upon the law...is constitutional or not.

Thus as I previously stated...

"It is the people that support the politicians that make the laws...so blame the voters not the cops. The government only has the power that the people allow them to have."

The government consists of three branches...the Executive...the Congress...and the Judicial. The people elect the President (the Executive)...the members of both houses of Congress...and the Executive (whom the people elected) nominates the members of the Supreme Court and the Congress (whom the people elected) either approves or disapproves the nominee.

The power of the government...which makes the laws...and the power of the Judicial which upholds the law...is all approved and supported by the people...via their votes...or via their silence. Government by the people and for the people.

Of course not all of the people are happy with the government. There is absolutely no way to please more than three hundred million people. There will always be millions of people unhappy with the government and its laws...but conversely the majority are usually somewhat pleased with the government and its laws.

Of course I am aware that you are aware of all of what I have said...so you really do not have an argument with me.

You aren't even talking about the same thing as I am.

Law enforcment protocol has nothing to do with what you are talking about.

Politicians don't make laws telling cops to pull you out of your car, search your car, frisk you like a criminal, etc.

Politicians making laws VS The Supreme Court telling cops that it IS constitutional for them to search you, search your car, AND take your money if they "suspect" it "might" be "drug money"

I'm not discussing the LAW. The draconian drug laws were already jacked up when Nixon declared "War On Drugs"

The ONLY difference I'm talking about, as related to what happened to this woman and her money...is that the Supreme Court ruled it was constitutional for cops to do what they did.

I really have ZERO idea of why you are continuing this.

You're talking about laws put in place by bureaucrats. I'm talking about the constitutionality of cops being able to do what they did to that woman because the Supreme Court made those rulings a couple of decades ago.

You aren't even having the same discussion as I am.

Laws are made then law enforcement act upon those laws. Law enforcement did not take it upon themselves to start searching cars or sizing money etc. etc. etc. until law makers passed laws saying they could do so...in the "war" against whatever...and they would have stopped doing so if the Supreme Court had ruled that the law or the way they were enforcing the law was/is unconstitutional. The Court certainly does not make law enforcement protocol.

paper trails always lead back to sovereign indian tribes :2 cents: