Judge Orders $1 Million Returned to Exotic Dancer

[23536]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/07/judge-orders-1-million-returned-to-exotic-dancer/

A federal judge has ruled that Nebraska cops must return over $1 million confiscated at a traffic stop from a woman who saved the money $1 at a time during her 15 year career as an exotic dancer.

The money belongs to Tara Mishra, 33, of Rancho Cucamonga, Calif., who began putting aside her earnings when she started dancing at age 18, according to an opinion U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon wrote last week. The money was meant to start her business and get out of the stripping business, the judge wrote.

State troopers confiscated the money in March 2012 when they pulled over Rajesh and Marina Dheri, of Montville, N.J., for speeding in Nebraska, according to court documents. The Dheris are friends of Mishra and had been given the cash so they could buy a nightclub in New Jersey. Mishra would own half of the business and the Dheris would own the other half.

Mishra had packaged the money in $10,000 bundles tied with hair bands and placed in plastic bags, and it was stashed in the trunk of the Dheri’s rented car, which the Dheris were driving to Chicago. When they were pulled over for speeding, a state trooper asked the Dheris if he could search their vehicle, which they allowed, Bataillon explained.

The state trooper found the money and after suspecting it was drug money took the Dheris into custody, according to the judge’s opinion. But police did not find any evidence of drug activity in the car and a K-9 analysis found only trace elements of illegal drugs on the cash, according to Bataillon.

cont. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/07/judge-orders-1-million-returned-to-exotic-dancer/

 

[23536]

For future reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank

 

[Toz]

Why people would ever consent to a search of their vehicle is beyond me. Still nice to see it worked out in the end. Odd to pay in cash though, there must have been something illegal about the whole thing.

 

[slimvictor]

^ yeah, the fact that she was paying a million in cash for a business sounds pretty suspect.

 

[drug_mentor]

Regardless of how suspect this whole affair is the fair verdict was to give her the money back, I realise that stupidly, the burden of proof in these money seuizure cases is less than in a criminal case, but surely pure suspicion with zero evidence whatsoever should never be grounds for money or asset seizure.

I agree that there is something suspicious about this whole thing, but it is also quite plausible that the defendants story is the true one, there are a lot of people that don't like or trust banks and I would imagine this number has increased since the dodgy goings on that lead up to the GFC.

 

[my3rdeye]

At 20 bucks a song that's 50 thousand dances.

 

[slimvictor]

DM - I agree that she deserved her money back.
But, if she had been carrying an eighth of weed, she would not have gotten it back. How strange and terrible is that?

 

[23536]

over $1 million ... $1 at a time

That's over 1000 kg. Her trunk must have been dragging sparks all over the road.

Is that a ton or a tonne?

 

[opi8]

Haha, I wonder if it was all $1 dollar bills, or she had changed them into larger bills, even though she "earnt" them $1 at a time.

That is a lot of bills...

 

[LogicSoDeveloped]

Around my city, a news team documented what the local police were doing instead of what they should be doing...This video shows part 1 of 7 videos that document the teams 2 year investigation.

[video]http://www.newschannel5.com/category/211433/nc5-investigates-policing-for-profit[/video]

 

[23536]

The Feds are appealing:

http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_24113540/government-appeals-order-return-1m-woman

Lots more details in that story. The lady had claimed all of the money as earnings on her tax returns, and she had documentation that she was pursuing the bar's purchase. There's essentially no way she was smuggling drug loot.

Also, of course stripper tips are gonna smell like cocaine!

 

[!_MDMA_!]

a stripper with ambition huh

 

[treezy z]

15 years stripping, god damn. RATCHET as fuck

 

[neversickanymore]

I dont know about this story.. pretty fishy if you ask me.

 

[MyDoorsAreOpen]

*sigh* Good! About damn time! To all you lawyers out there reading this, don't forget that yours is a lifelong-learning profession. Do your homework and use this case as a precedent.

The US government might as well just outlaw the possession of more than a certain amount of cash in banknotes, because with this whole asset forfeiture racket, that's basically the de facto situation here. I seem to remember that there are a few countries with laws like this on the books, who've had serious problems with tax evasion and black market economies, though I can't name any off the top of my head.

The US government clearly does not want its citizens conducting business involving thousands of dollars or more in envelopes of cash, even if the business is entirely legal. As I've posted about before, the system here is definitely rigged in favor of people who use credit, or pay cash only with the services of a bank, so that some third party closely accountable to the government has florid documentation of the transaction. The government hates large sums of money changing hands without their knowing about it, because that opens up the possibility that they're not getting their taste of the pie. So why not just outright ban it? Why not just put a law on the books saying that if a law enforcement official finds more than, say, $1000 in US currency on your person or amongst your personal artifacts, and you don't have a special "cash handler's license", they'll just take it. Then at least the citizens would have fair warning.

I'm not saying this wouldn't be a controversial law. And I propose it only rhetorically; I'm no libertarian, but I'm actually a big fan of Hard Money and a citizen (or institution) having the right to operate only in cash. I'm just saying that a law like this would be a whole lot fairer and less hypocritical than telling the citizens they have a right to property, then turning around and stripping them of it (no pun intended) without any evidence of any lawbreaking.

From the names of the people involved, I'm going to jump to the conclusion they're of South Asian ancestry. In my line of work I've known a lot of Indian people, and I know that traditionally many of them save and transport their family's assets in jewelry, especially diamonds. I've heard stories from colleagues my age of being furtively pressured by their parents to stash gold or precious gemstone jewelry in their suitcases when passing through customs, so that their parents wouldn't have so much in their bags that they'd be forced to declare it and pay tax on it. I'd have to confirm this, but I'd bet this comes from the general Asian mistrust of anyone beyond family and other close knit in-groups, including big faceless institutions like banks.

Frankly, if I were about to make any purchase involving 6 or 7 figures or more, and I was able to do it without borrowing money, I think I'd want to keep it as hush hush as possible, even if what I was buying was legal in every way. When people (and institutions) find out you've got that kind of buying power, they tend to watch you and hang around you, for all the wrong reasons.

 

[poledriver]

 

[Hobble]

Can you imagine how it would feel to have the police steal your life savings? I really hope she gets her money back, plus intrest. Actually she should get 3X intrest.