Indiana police have dogs that sniff specifically for cash at the US’s 2nd biggest FedEx hub, then they simply keep the money : privacy

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 105 points 2 months ago (3 children)

ACAB, but that headline gave me a chuckle, at just how fucking blatantly criminal, and more importantly immoral, but also so so ridiculous they are. Can't you just picture a bunch of cops in full tactical gear standing around in some room in a post office, patting each other on the back as they successfully empty a bunch of birthday cards in to a pile.. 😂

(having read the article, and knowing cops, I know there were serious amounts of money stolen, this was just the image I got from the headline)

[–] kevin@programming.dev 37 points 2 months ago (1 children)

My first thought was the same thing. But then I realized that birthday cards go in envelopes. Usually they go through USPS, not FedEx.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 months ago

That's a very good point that I completely missed lol

[–] activistPnk@slrpnk.net 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

They probably weigh the birthday cards to see if anything seems worth opening.

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 months ago

True, though I can also see it being a lot more about the taking for them, than it is about the money. Plus, cops aren't known for liking any extra work, or making good decisions..

[–] Monument@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Do you think the wall behind them has one poorly drawn ‘fundraising goal meter’ with big ticket items on it, like machine gun robot dogs, amwraps, machine gun drones, tanks, next-gen stingray devices, or networked city-wide camera systems so they can spy on their ex-girlfriends; or do you think each officer has their own chart, with smaller, more personal items, like shooting targets of POC and pets, vaguely white supremacist decals for their cars, training sessions on how to manufacture evidence, or discrete GPS tracking, first aid kits, and bruise concealing makeup for their wives?

[–] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago

Oof.. Maybe a mixture of both? Like at the ticket "shop" at the arcade, so the robot dog is the super mega prize hanging at the top as the unattainable temptation, but most pigs only collect enough for the minor prizes, and can't figure out that pooling tickets would get them better things..

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 90 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Indiana law requires any assets seized in a civil forfeiture case to go directly to the school fund — likely to mitigate the moral hazard and incentive to steal citizens’ assets — but little money is actually going to that fund. Instead, police departments are keeping it for themselves, and a 2019 Indiana Supreme Court case upheld that, allowing police, prosecutors or private lawyers contracted to carry out the cases to keep a minimum of 90%.

Naked corruption.

Something similar happened to me. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) seized money from a bank transfer paying rent to my landlord (years ago). It took five days of calls to the bank to find out why the transfer didn't go through. I got a case number and filled out paperwork disputing it (with OFAC) and the letter I received in response said they had no record of the case.

The best I could hypothesize what happened was that because my landlord had a Middle Eastern-sounding name, maybe this was suspected to relate to terrorism. I gave up. I knew it wasn't worth my time to pursue because to get justice, I'd have to invest more time and energy than the cash was worth. I nearly got evicted because of this shit and I still judged the bureaucracy too great to address (I think I made the right choice; no sense fighting the government unless my freedom is on the line or it's some huge sum of money).

I got money orders at the post office and deposited them directly into my landlord's bank account after that. Huge pain in the ass to make sure my money went where I wanted. I live in a building owned by a corporation, now. I don't think I'd rent from a private citizen again because of that bullshit. (It's not like I'll ever own a home, given that I like living in the Bay Area.)

[–] activistPnk@slrpnk.net 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Since it’s a small amount of money, the legal process would be with small claims court. You don’t need a lawyer for that. Small claims is cheap and easy going. It’s typically under $100 to file (which you get back if you win) and in some states a registered letter is sufficient to serve the other party.

You would not want to sue OFAC though. In this case you would ideally keep a paper trail of your payment attempt and carry on. Give your landlord the proof of payment (attempt) and wait for the landlord to act against you. That’s the easiest.. you wait for the court date and show up with proof of your attempt to pay and a copy of your landlord’s payment procedure (which you followed). OFAC apparently did a money grab on the landlord, not you, so you would come away clean so long as you paid as per your landlord’s instructions.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (3 children)

That's not going to work for long. Best you're going to get is a stay until you pay. Might as well make it right with the landlord while you actually do take OFAC to small claims court. Because they'll find it then.

But also, this is what your Congress critter is for. All kinds of things get magically resolved when the congressional office of the honorable so and so makes an inquiry.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That’s wild!

You ever check OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals list for your landlord?

Two plot twists that come to mind: landlord was actually ISIS with a great cover story, bank manager stole the money and made up a case number.

[–] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Tbh strictly speaking the bank probably shouldn't have told him anything about the OFAC intervention, they're not supposed to tip off in these circumstances - so it could well have been a made.up number.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Djtecha@lemm.ee 51 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So people should sue FedEx and let FedEx either stop transporting through the state or sue the state with those deep pockets. Or idk maybe the doj should fucking take this up as they are now fucking with interstate commerce and committing felonies as a state.

[–] Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago (5 children)

The institute for justice FIRE and a couple other major civil rights organizations have been working working on getting civil forfeiture over turned and made unconstitutional for decades now

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

for decades now

When obvious criminal activity requires decades to solve you should kind of take the hint...

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 37 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Is it illegal to mail cash or something? Or are they just blatantly stealing from people?

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 51 points 2 months ago

It's not illegal. It's also not illegal for the police to claim it's criminal profits and seize it. The courts decided your money, (and other property), does not enjoy the same rights you do. So you have a right against search and seizure but your money and other property does not. This does three things. It opens your stuff up to be seized without a warrant, it makes it a civil case to get your stuff back, and you have to prove you're not a criminal and your stuff wasn't used by criminals.

It is absolutely unconstitutional on the grounds that it's a naked evasion of our 4th, 5th, and 6th amendment rights. But good luck explaining that to the guys with the guns.

[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 35 points 2 months ago

No it's not illegal. Yes they are blatantly stealing. Fuck cops. Fuck Republicans voting laws to allow this shit.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 37 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh yes, Civil Forfeiture. But I'm sure that they would never use the counterfeit money to buy new toys for their precinct.

[–] FunCube 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You mean like... let's say... A Margarita machine?

[–] scottywh@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

That movie was pretty good.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 30 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I bet those good boys spend it all in toys and snacks. Lol

Edit: Nvm the dogs don't get to keep the money.

[–] Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

So it is theft twice then. First from the sender, then from the good boys and girls who find it.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] voracitude@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Edit: the following only applies to USPS, so it's probably a good idea to only use USPS for mail.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1708

Whoever steals, takes, or abstracts, or by fraud or deception obtains, or attempts so to obtain, from or out of any mail, post office, or station thereof, letter box, mail receptacle, or any mail route or other authorized depository for mail matter, or from a letter or mail carrier, any letter, postal card, package, bag, or mail, or abstracts or removes from any such letter, package, bag, or mail, any article or thing contained therein, or secretes, embezzles, or destroys any such letter, postal card, package, bag, or mail, or any article or thing contained therein; or

Whoever steals, takes, or abstracts, or by fraud or deception obtains any letter, postal card, package, bag, or mail, or any article or thing contained therein which has been left for collection upon or adjacent to a collection box or other authorized depository of mail matter; or

Whoever buys, receives, or conceals, or unlawfully has in his possession, any letter, postal card, package, bag, or mail, or any article or thing contained therein, which has been so stolen, taken, embezzled, or abstracted, as herein described, knowing the same to have been stolen, taken, embezzled, or abstracted—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

~~A cop who commits a crime is a criminal. A cop who commits a felony crime is a felon. Arrest them.~~

[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

FedEx is a private company providing delivery services. I’m not a lawyer but I’m guessing the statute you’re referencing only applies to USPS.

[–] voracitude@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Shit, you're right. The only recourse here is a suit against FedEx I think, from anyone who's had money stolen, and it would have to be based in how they present themselves as a mail carrier such that the average consumer thinks their mail is protected when it's not. Risky.

[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 18 points 2 months ago

Since it’s civil asset forfeiture what actually happens is the state/municipality sues to take the money so it has to be fought in court against the state/municipality.

The problem is the state sues the money directly so the suit itself would be something like Indiana vs. $48,000 or Marion County vs. $48,000. This makes it a lot harder and more expensive to recover your money since they are suing an inanimate object, not the owner directly.

Civil asset forfeiture laws need to be scrapped and rewritten because this has been going on in the US for years.

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 25 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

However, that is extremely difficult, because the assets themselves — inanimate objects — are listed as the defendants, and such cases often tie the money up in long and challenging legal proceedings.

The money is being treated as a defendant.

No surprise that FedEx isn't union.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

It's a massive violation of our Constitutional rights, but it turns out it is fine to do because of playing some games pretending the object is the defendant.

[–] loutr@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The money is being treated as a defendant.

Saw this shit in a movie last week, it sounded too dumb to be true...

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ironic, I just watched Rebel Ridge which outlines this exact problem with civil asset forfeiture.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] crimsoncobalt@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What are the dogs going to do with all that money?

[–] activistPnk@slrpnk.net 21 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I’ve never heard of cops being called dogs. Pigs, sure. Anyway, money confiscated in this way usually finances police station frills like high-end coffee machines.

[–] watson387@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Dogs is more accurate. Pigs are cleaner than dogs.

[–] NABDad@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

But, a dog's got personality. Personality goes a long way.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] BilboBargains@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

Who knows the type of bitches those dogs are dropping that cash on.

[–] ninjaphysics@beehaw.org 10 points 2 months ago

Hey, that's "Civil" Forfeiture in 2024.

"We have guns and riot gear. Wtf you gonna do about it?" -- Signed, Bullies with Badges

[–] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Pack your shit up tight, and send it with USPS. They need a reason (real suspicion) to open your package, so don't give them any.

[–] activistPnk@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 months ago (3 children)

But wouldn’t a particular dog with particular training who then becomes very interested in your unopened USPS package be a real reason to open the pkg?

[–] yeather@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 months ago

USPS is federally regulated and have different protections. Mail shipped through USPS cannot be opened by anyone other than the recipient for any reason besides a warrant. A dog indicating on your package would mean nothing to postal inspectors. Fedex and UPS are private companies and your packages do not have the same protections.

[–] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 months ago

I have never heard of dogs being used to mass inspect USPS packages. I'm unsure if that would qualify as a reason for opening USPS packages. I can tell you as someone who lives in a community infamous as the source of many illicit packages (and the destination of the subsequent illicit payments), common knowledge here is to use USPS.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Only if the dog is meant to detect illegal substances. The USPS system doesn't allow local police to go fishing.

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Makes one wonder how many other teams there are. FedEx, UPS, USPS all have multiple hubs. If your own doesn't have a hub, what does it have?

[–] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

I'd say there's a good chance this occurs at every logistics hub.

[–] MethodicalSpark@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Cash is commonly banned by most logistics companies. As it is openly stated that it will not be carried by FedEx, it’s no stretch that the police will consider it contraband.

Source: I work for a competing company that also will not ship cash. Any of our employees will tell you no. Ship cash at your own risk.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 months ago

Always ship usps

Privacy