this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2024
443 points (99.6% liked)

Privacy

610 readers
41 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/13145612

(edit) Would someone please ship some counterfeit money through there and get it confiscated, so the police can then be investigated for spending counterfeit money?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

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

I’m sure they get plenty of doggie treats, likely procured with civil forfeitures. Which motivates the dogs to find more. I’m not the least bit worried that the dogs are unfairly exploited from the dog’s standpoint.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days 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...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

I too watched ‘Rebel Ridge’ last week on Netflix.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

I could not reach that enshitified article but judging from the title, FedEx’s contemp for Black Lives Matter is consistent with their extreme right politics:

  • FedEx is an ALEC member (thus opposes labor rights, women’s rights, environmental protection, gun control, taxation, consumer protection, financial regulation, public education, welfare…)
  • FedEx used to give a discount to NRA members
  • FedEx ships sharkfins, hunting trophies, and slave dolphins
  • FedEx was founded by an ex military serviceman (a mostly right wing demographic)

Being on the extreme right would be consistent with BLM contempt. And indeed, fighting unions is FedEx’s core reason for being an ALEC member. Photos of DVDs were leaked and circulated on social media with FedEx on the label and some title like “how to mitigate unions”.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

First money being speech, now they're giving money rights! /s

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day 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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

As it is openly stated that it will not be carried by FedEx, it’s no stretch that the police will consider it contraband.

It is a stretch. Enforcing contractual agreements is not the job of the police. And it’s also a stretch to say the police are looking to protect the contractual interests of FedEx.

It’s also strangely inconsistent with FedEx’s anything goes practices, whereby FedEx is known for shipping morally dubious payloads:

  • #sharkFins (illegal in countries that have a shred of respect animal welfare and the environment)
  • hunting trophies
  • slave dolphins

Normally, FedEx could normally claim that they are simply maximizing the bottom line in their duty to their greedy shareholders. But the cash ban is not consistent with that. Unless FedEx believes that anyone who loses an insured pkg would claim the pkg included cash as a way to max out the insurance payout. But in that case, it is not in FedEx’s business interest to enforce the policy -- just to be able to point to the policy when an insurance claimant say cash was lost.

(update) In fact, police are preventing crime prevention by grabbing the cash. This inspired me to propose a new rule.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Most criminals know to use USPS as unlike others a warrant is required to open any mail.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

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

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

[–] [email protected] 50 points 3 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 days ago (4 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

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days 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)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

IIRC, New Mexico banned civil forfeiture. But the cops kept doing it anyway. So a law change is not enough... enforcement is also needed. Yes, against the police, sadly enough.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

They can still perform asset forfeiture if they believe there is criminal probability. So they only need to have weak evidence criminal activity is at issue, to search, and confiscate things. Since this is the majority of what they did already, it didn't do too much. This was mostly an attempt, by the state DA, to get ahead of the movement against asset forfeiture. A way for them to keep doing what they are doing, while paying lip service to civil rights. However their argument didn't work as all forms of asset forfeiture are in the sights. They hoped having more cause, and a stricter documentation, would give them the leeway needed, but the case being brought is that if the item isn't specifically evidence, it can't be seized, if it is evidence it can't kept, or there are other laws determining what is to be done when a conviction is had. So FIRE has said while it is nice it is a little more strict there, it is in no way outside of the scope of their lawsuits.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

I’ve been boycotting FedEx for over a decade. Not for this reason but for the other reasons I mention in this thread.

It’s quite hard because many sellers do not disclose who they use for shipping. I can sometimes add a comment to my order saying “Do not use FedEx. If that’s the only option then cancel my order.” This makes online shopping tedious, so I’ve been driven to just shop locally.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago

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

[–] [email protected] 89 points 3 days ago (5 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.)

[–] [email protected] 22 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 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.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 3 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 105 points 3 days ago (4 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)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days 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?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days 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..

[–] kevin 37 points 3 days 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 3 days ago (3 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 51 points 2 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

It is against FedEx policy. These are terms you would agree to if signing for a shipment.

https://lemmy.world/comment/12402455

[–] [email protected] 34 points 3 days ago

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

[–] [email protected] 25 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days 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.~~

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 days ago (2 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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›