10 ms·

FBI Seized $900K from Safe Deposit Box on 'Pure Conjecture,' Federal Judge Says

119 points by starkd 5y ago

mc32 5y ago
They sorely need oversight (with teeth). Grooming, instigating and then entrapping impressionable people, illegal seizures, ability to lie but then imprison people for "lying" to a federal agent... the list goes on. Sure, we need a national investigation unit, but it also needs oversight to prevent glaring abuses.
- robomartin 5y ago
  The asymmetry with respect to lying has always bothered me. In other words, the idea that a federal employee (not just law enforcement I believe) can lie to you with no legal consequences, yet, if you lie to them, the consequences are dire, truly bothers me at the core. Extend this further to the fact that politicians suffer no consequences whatsoever for lying and you have a situation where the political class can manipulate and twist matters to fit their objectives, while, if you do the same, you can end-up in prison for a long time. I have always felt this asymmetry is very wrong. Lying might have a place in law enforcement, for example, when infiltrating a human trafficking organization. No problem with that at all. It should, however, be treated like a warrant. In other words, a judge should authorize it and it should be documented. This is a silly example but it is the only one I have from personal experience. When I was younger I got a speeding ticket that was a complete lie. The cops knew it. And, in fact, the wrote it down. It was something like going 35 in a 25 zone, when, in reality, the posted speed limit was 45. This cost me both time and money, even when the ticket was summarily dismissed by the judge when I showed pictures of the speed limit sign. What did not happen was some kind of consequence trickling down to the cops who pulled me over and lied about the entire thing --and were stupid enough to document the lie. This isn't about being vindictive, I respect and appreciate cops, they do a job few of us would consider doing and it is hard. However, both cops and politicians should live by the same rules we have to live by. And, when it comes to lies, I could make a case that the consequences should be serious because they hold authority and power we don't have.
  - BuyMyBitcoins 5y ago
    You’re not the only one who feels this way. What also bothers me is the fact that even slightly misremembering something you had previously said to law enforcement can be used as evidence of lying and perjury. And we know that human memory and recollection is fallible. Prosecutors know this too. But government officials can freely abuse this in the name of getting a conviction. I’ve never been able to look at the justice system the same way since watching “Don’t talk to the police”.
    - robomartin 5y ago
      Yes, that is a presentation worth watching [0] and a follow-up [1]. Even as someone who is pro law enforcement, I have to keep in mind that their job does not always align with protecting you. In other words, if they pull you over for speeding, the relationship isn't the same as the case where you might be asking a cop for directions or if you are engaging with them because you were a victim of a crime. In the first case they will use their training and knowledge against you to the extent necessary given the circumstances, the the other two cases they will be helpful and supportive. I do not vilify police officers --the individuals-- for this. It is their job. This is what they do. They would not be doing the very difficult work they do every day if they did not, for example, gather evidence and use what suspects say as evidence, etc. My problem is with asymmetry of the law as it pertains to lying. When a politician gets on TV and lies, and lies and lies --for years!--, suffering no consequences whatsoever, well, I just don't think that's right. Thinking of this as an evolutionary process, if the fitness function responds positively to lies, the net result will be evolving towards a condition where lies are a normal part of how one gets ahead or survives. And this is precisely what we have. Some might say: Well, politicians would not be able to say much on so many subjects if the absolute veracity of their statement was a requirement. That's fine. I'd rather they shut the fuck up than lie to us with impunity. Or, more accurately, they would be forced to say things like "What I am about to say might not be accurate at all, I don't have first-hand information or supporting evidence for this", or something like that. Then they can go off and spew out their fabrications. Or, if they know they need to lie, they get a court order that allows them to do so on a very narrow basis. Government works for us. We can't do well if they are lying to us with impunity. I'll give you an example. We are about to spend an insane amount of money on roads, bridges, government buildings and who knows what else. One of the stories we hear is that we need this in order to be competitive. This is an absolute lie. Why? Name ten companies, in the last 50 years that opted not to locate their operations in the US due to the condition of our roads and bridges. Can anyone produce this list? No? How about one? Just one? No? Roads and bridges are not the problem then. We need to invest in whatever is required to inshore some portion (because we can't do 100%) of the industrial based lost over the last 50. Semiconductors is a good example of this. Instead of burning cash we don't have on redoing perfectly good roads, we need to have a national objective to bring back semiconductor manufacturing, even if that means subsidizing it for ten years. This is just one example. There are dozens, hundreds, of sectors that need the same treatment. And yet politicians are lying to us every day with bullshit urgency about roads that we don't need fixed. Just a block away from our home about a quarter of a mile of a perfectly good avenue got ripped-up and repaved. I have lived here for more than twenty years. This avenue has been fine that entire time, no issues at all. Nothing. I asked neighbors. Nothing. Well, we just spent a non trivial amount of money "fixing" it, for no good reason at all. Anyhow, the point is the asymmetry in this regard provides government and law enforcement with a great deal of power over us, whether that be to manipulate with impunity or incarcerate without consequence. This is wrong. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FENubmZGj8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FENubmZGj8
- starkd 5y ago
  Special agents have a lot of power. I think many are running little fiefdoms of their own. My eyes opened when I heard about the plot to kidnap the governor of MI was actually led and instigated by FBI agents. It was reported by BuzzfeedNews.
  - mc32 5y ago
    It’s bizarre the things they cook up to “attract” people to honeypots that many of those people would never venture to. We see the most egregious cases in the news , but that means there are many more less notable cases with the same degree of injustice for lots individuals who aren’t always bright. It’s as unseemly as having some guy in highschool talking the slow girl in class to go out with him. There are enough bad people trying to do bad things. Go after them, do it professionally. Not this “I got Martha for lying, gimme my promotion” quickie stuff.
    - rtkwe 5y ago
      Yeah I wonder how much safer we actually get when someone who's only criminal contact is with the FBI/Police, eg a 'terrorist' who only ever talked to, planned with, and bought for the police about or for their planned attack. Sure they probably didn't entrap them technically but it feels like it accomplishes very little except keeping people afraid and justifying the careers of agents.
  - tfigment 5y ago
    Sounds like you heard the sensationalized version. They knew about but we're contacted by someone who did not found it but became an informant and ultimately a leader because that person was ex-military and skilled. That was my understanding of how it was ultimately not successful.
    - ALittleLight 5y ago
      The Buzzfeed article makes it seem like the FBI had a dozen plus informants controlling the plot at every level.
  - 5y ago
- skissane 5y ago
  The state of New South Wales, Australia, has an independent "Law Enforcement Conduct Commission" whose explicit job is to investigate law enforcement misconduct (across all major state law enforcement agencies), and to refer cases to prosecutors. Some other Australian states have similar agencies. There is also a federal equivalent, the "Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity", although it does not appear to have been as effective as its state-based equivalents in uncovering law enforcement misconduct. Maybe the US could copy the idea?
  - flatline-84 5y ago
    NSW also employed the Fixated Persons Unit (a terrorist task force) to arrest a journalist who was critical of John "Pork" Barilaro. So far, there's been no word from the "Law Enforcement Conduct Commission" on whether the arrest was lawful (hint: it wasn't) and nobody has been punished for it (yet - there is the defamation case on-going but the terrorist task force isn't involved in it)
    - RileyJames 5y ago
      For those interested, they captured footage of the arrest itself. This is obviously only one side, but here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXtq4a8829g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXtq4a8829g
    - skissane 5y ago
      > NSW also employed the Fixated Persons Unit (a terrorist task force) to arrest a journalist who was critical of John "Pork" Barilaro A guy who worked for a YouTube comedian as a producer, and who allegedly was following a politician to public events and harassing him there, was arrested and charged with stalking. The "Fixated Persons Unit" has a broader mandate than purely terrorism offences, its mandate also extends to stalking and harassment of a "public office holder or internationally protected person, or other person/s nominated by the commissioner of police" > So far, there's been no word from the "Law Enforcement Conduct Commission" on whether the arrest was lawful (hint: it wasn't) LECC is unlikely to investigate an arrest while there is a pending criminal prosecution. For them to do so might be seen as interfering with the Court process. I don't know if the arrest was legal or not. But the police unit which carried out the arrest is irrelevant to the question of its legality.
underseacables 5y ago
The part that really gets me is that the warrant for bade them from seizing the boxes, and the FBI did it anyways. It might be a technicality to some, but we must hold the government accountable in all of its misdeeds. I am not a lawyer, but from what is written in this article, it seems the government has grossly overstepped when it could have achieved its goals legally. However that would require them to show cause, which avoidance of this basic and fundamental tenant, is very suspect.
- xscott 5y ago
  > However that would require them to show cause They can always fabricate cause. I got pulled over last week (I wasn't speeding or anything, I just had out of state plates visiting a friend). When I didn't consent to have him search my vehicle, he walked a dog around my car and fabricated probable cause. I don't do drugs and there have never been drugs in my car, and yet he said the dog "reacted"... Of course he didn't find anything - there was nothing to find. No ticket, just 30-40 minutes of him going through all my possessions. I guess I should be grateful he didn't "seize" something or shoot me.
  - throwawayboise 5y ago
    Funny because a friend of mine had his kid pulled over for rolling through a stop sign, the cop saw smoking paraphernalia in the center console (weed is not legal here), just told them "keep that stuff out of sight, boys" and gave them a warning for the stop sign.
    - xscott 5y ago
      Not sure what's funny about it... The cop told me two or three times that he wasn't interested in "small amounts". (Although they're allowed to lie to you.) I told him I didn't have any amount. I guess middle-age guys (like me) driving minivans with out of state plates through a flyover state is suspicious?!?
  - rasz 5y ago
    30-40 min is illegal https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-police-use-dogs-sniff-drugs-no-warrant.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-police-use-dogs-... >an officer who doesn't have reasonable suspicion may not extend a traffic stop in order to conduct a dog sniff. The officer who pulls a driver over may not prolong the detention "beyond the time reasonably required to complete" the stop's "mission." you could sue
vmception 5y ago
California and many states haven't been a market based economy for 18 months, so the Federal Government undermining private property assurances is on brand.
anonprinciples 5y ago
I was there during the raid which was multiple days. FBI setup a mobile command center and had dozens of agents there. On a separate issue, a person who ran a Trump group on IRC threatened to kill my family but in an inert way: “I look forward to watching your mom [violent threat].” This individual, allegedly a hacker, then fabricated a threat to the FBI. A few days later, 2 FBI agents showed up at my residence and asked my property manager if I was violent. They laughed at them. I spoke to them moments after this and they realized the claim was a lie. And “closed my case”. I gave the FBI the person’s cell phone. The one agent emailed me saying where the person was located but no updates. 5-months later nothing happened. Then this so-called hacker emailed anti-Semitic threats and emailed a message to the FBI agent and copied me. I confronted the FBI agent over this and asked if this individual was an FBI informant or agent. Considering this person is monitoring hacker groups, now impersonating me, and emailing FBI agents messages signed with “Hitler”, even though they have this person Verizon phone number, is incredibly sketchy. Beyond that, there’s been so many FBI scandals that it’s beginning to be embarrassing. I’m not scared of corrupt dumb people regardless if they have a federal badge.
- SOMA_BOFH 5y ago
  >I’m not scared of corrupt dumb people regardless if they have a federal badge. i envy you
devwastaken 5y ago
Don't forget the "probable cause" for lost gold either. https://youtu.be/h-fGAqAfozM https://youtu.be/h-fGAqAfozM Steve Lehto has a whole series on the safe deposit box scandal and some other FBI cases that are pretty insane.
max_ 5y ago
Slightly off topic but very informative YouTube Video. https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE
TroisM 5y ago
That reminds me of this article: Illinois Is The 1st State To Tell Police They Can't Lie To Minors In Interrogations: https://www.npr.org/2021/07/16/1016710927/illinois-is-the-first-state-to-tell-police-they-cant-lie-to-minors-in-interrogat https://www.npr.org/2021/07/16/1016710927/illinois-is-the-fi...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
simonblack 5y ago
If you don't hold it in your own hot little hand, it doesn't belong to you at all. Or as the old saying goes: "Possession is 12 tenths of the Law"

119 points by starkd 5y ago

mc32 5y ago

They sorely need oversight (with teeth). Grooming, instigating and then entrapping impressionable people, illegal seizures, ability to lie but then imprison people for "lying" to a federal agent... the list goes on. Sure, we need a national investigation unit, but it also needs oversight to prevent glaring abuses.

robomartin 5y ago
The asymmetry with respect to lying has always bothered me. In other words, the idea that a federal employee (not just law enforcement I believe) can lie to you with no legal consequences, yet, if you lie to them, the consequences are dire, truly bothers me at the core. Extend this further to the fact that politicians suffer no consequences whatsoever for lying and you have a situation where the political class can manipulate and twist matters to fit their objectives, while, if you do the same, you can end-up in prison for a long time. I have always felt this asymmetry is very wrong. Lying might have a place in law enforcement, for example, when infiltrating a human trafficking organization. No problem with that at all. It should, however, be treated like a warrant. In other words, a judge should authorize it and it should be documented. This is a silly example but it is the only one I have from personal experience. When I was younger I got a speeding ticket that was a complete lie. The cops knew it. And, in fact, the wrote it down. It was something like going 35 in a 25 zone, when, in reality, the posted speed limit was 45. This cost me both time and money, even when the ticket was summarily dismissed by the judge when I showed pictures of the speed limit sign. What did not happen was some kind of consequence trickling down to the cops who pulled me over and lied about the entire thing --and were stupid enough to document the lie. This isn't about being vindictive, I respect and appreciate cops, they do a job few of us would consider doing and it is hard. However, both cops and politicians should live by the same rules we have to live by. And, when it comes to lies, I could make a case that the consequences should be serious because they hold authority and power we don't have.
- BuyMyBitcoins 5y ago
  You’re not the only one who feels this way. What also bothers me is the fact that even slightly misremembering something you had previously said to law enforcement can be used as evidence of lying and perjury. And we know that human memory and recollection is fallible. Prosecutors know this too. But government officials can freely abuse this in the name of getting a conviction. I’ve never been able to look at the justice system the same way since watching “Don’t talk to the police”.
  - robomartin 5y ago
    Yes, that is a presentation worth watching [0] and a follow-up [1]. Even as someone who is pro law enforcement, I have to keep in mind that their job does not always align with protecting you. In other words, if they pull you over for speeding, the relationship isn't the same as the case where you might be asking a cop for directions or if you are engaging with them because you were a victim of a crime. In the first case they will use their training and knowledge against you to the extent necessary given the circumstances, the the other two cases they will be helpful and supportive. I do not vilify police officers --the individuals-- for this. It is their job. This is what they do. They would not be doing the very difficult work they do every day if they did not, for example, gather evidence and use what suspects say as evidence, etc. My problem is with asymmetry of the law as it pertains to lying. When a politician gets on TV and lies, and lies and lies --for years!--, suffering no consequences whatsoever, well, I just don't think that's right. Thinking of this as an evolutionary process, if the fitness function responds positively to lies, the net result will be evolving towards a condition where lies are a normal part of how one gets ahead or survives. And this is precisely what we have. Some might say: Well, politicians would not be able to say much on so many subjects if the absolute veracity of their statement was a requirement. That's fine. I'd rather they shut the fuck up than lie to us with impunity. Or, more accurately, they would be forced to say things like "What I am about to say might not be accurate at all, I don't have first-hand information or supporting evidence for this", or something like that. Then they can go off and spew out their fabrications. Or, if they know they need to lie, they get a court order that allows them to do so on a very narrow basis. Government works for us. We can't do well if they are lying to us with impunity. I'll give you an example. We are about to spend an insane amount of money on roads, bridges, government buildings and who knows what else. One of the stories we hear is that we need this in order to be competitive. This is an absolute lie. Why? Name ten companies, in the last 50 years that opted not to locate their operations in the US due to the condition of our roads and bridges. Can anyone produce this list? No? How about one? Just one? No? Roads and bridges are not the problem then. We need to invest in whatever is required to inshore some portion (because we can't do 100%) of the industrial based lost over the last 50. Semiconductors is a good example of this. Instead of burning cash we don't have on redoing perfectly good roads, we need to have a national objective to bring back semiconductor manufacturing, even if that means subsidizing it for ten years. This is just one example. There are dozens, hundreds, of sectors that need the same treatment. And yet politicians are lying to us every day with bullshit urgency about roads that we don't need fixed. Just a block away from our home about a quarter of a mile of a perfectly good avenue got ripped-up and repaved. I have lived here for more than twenty years. This avenue has been fine that entire time, no issues at all. Nothing. I asked neighbors. Nothing. Well, we just spent a non trivial amount of money "fixing" it, for no good reason at all. Anyhow, the point is the asymmetry in this regard provides government and law enforcement with a great deal of power over us, whether that be to manipulate with impunity or incarcerate without consequence. This is wrong. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FENubmZGj8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FENubmZGj8
starkd 5y ago
Special agents have a lot of power. I think many are running little fiefdoms of their own. My eyes opened when I heard about the plot to kidnap the governor of MI was actually led and instigated by FBI agents. It was reported by BuzzfeedNews.
- mc32 5y ago
  It’s bizarre the things they cook up to “attract” people to honeypots that many of those people would never venture to. We see the most egregious cases in the news , but that means there are many more less notable cases with the same degree of injustice for lots individuals who aren’t always bright. It’s as unseemly as having some guy in highschool talking the slow girl in class to go out with him. There are enough bad people trying to do bad things. Go after them, do it professionally. Not this “I got Martha for lying, gimme my promotion” quickie stuff.
  - rtkwe 5y ago
    Yeah I wonder how much safer we actually get when someone who's only criminal contact is with the FBI/Police, eg a 'terrorist' who only ever talked to, planned with, and bought for the police about or for their planned attack. Sure they probably didn't entrap them technically but it feels like it accomplishes very little except keeping people afraid and justifying the careers of agents.
- tfigment 5y ago
  Sounds like you heard the sensationalized version. They knew about but we're contacted by someone who did not found it but became an informant and ultimately a leader because that person was ex-military and skilled. That was my understanding of how it was ultimately not successful.
  - ALittleLight 5y ago
    The Buzzfeed article makes it seem like the FBI had a dozen plus informants controlling the plot at every level.
- 5y ago
skissane 5y ago
The state of New South Wales, Australia, has an independent "Law Enforcement Conduct Commission" whose explicit job is to investigate law enforcement misconduct (across all major state law enforcement agencies), and to refer cases to prosecutors. Some other Australian states have similar agencies. There is also a federal equivalent, the "Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity", although it does not appear to have been as effective as its state-based equivalents in uncovering law enforcement misconduct. Maybe the US could copy the idea?
- flatline-84 5y ago
  NSW also employed the Fixated Persons Unit (a terrorist task force) to arrest a journalist who was critical of John "Pork" Barilaro. So far, there's been no word from the "Law Enforcement Conduct Commission" on whether the arrest was lawful (hint: it wasn't) and nobody has been punished for it (yet - there is the defamation case on-going but the terrorist task force isn't involved in it)
  - RileyJames 5y ago
    For those interested, they captured footage of the arrest itself. This is obviously only one side, but here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXtq4a8829g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXtq4a8829g
  - skissane 5y ago
    > NSW also employed the Fixated Persons Unit (a terrorist task force) to arrest a journalist who was critical of John "Pork" Barilaro A guy who worked for a YouTube comedian as a producer, and who allegedly was following a politician to public events and harassing him there, was arrested and charged with stalking. The "Fixated Persons Unit" has a broader mandate than purely terrorism offences, its mandate also extends to stalking and harassment of a "public office holder or internationally protected person, or other person/s nominated by the commissioner of police" > So far, there's been no word from the "Law Enforcement Conduct Commission" on whether the arrest was lawful (hint: it wasn't) LECC is unlikely to investigate an arrest while there is a pending criminal prosecution. For them to do so might be seen as interfering with the Court process. I don't know if the arrest was legal or not. But the police unit which carried out the arrest is irrelevant to the question of its legality.

underseacables 5y ago

The part that really gets me is that the warrant for bade them from seizing the boxes, and the FBI did it anyways. It might be a technicality to some, but we must hold the government accountable in all of its misdeeds. I am not a lawyer, but from what is written in this article, it seems the government has grossly overstepped when it could have achieved its goals legally. However that would require them to show cause, which avoidance of this basic and fundamental tenant, is very suspect.

xscott 5y ago
> However that would require them to show cause They can always fabricate cause. I got pulled over last week (I wasn't speeding or anything, I just had out of state plates visiting a friend). When I didn't consent to have him search my vehicle, he walked a dog around my car and fabricated probable cause. I don't do drugs and there have never been drugs in my car, and yet he said the dog "reacted"... Of course he didn't find anything - there was nothing to find. No ticket, just 30-40 minutes of him going through all my possessions. I guess I should be grateful he didn't "seize" something or shoot me.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  Funny because a friend of mine had his kid pulled over for rolling through a stop sign, the cop saw smoking paraphernalia in the center console (weed is not legal here), just told them "keep that stuff out of sight, boys" and gave them a warning for the stop sign.
  - xscott 5y ago
    Not sure what's funny about it... The cop told me two or three times that he wasn't interested in "small amounts". (Although they're allowed to lie to you.) I told him I didn't have any amount. I guess middle-age guys (like me) driving minivans with out of state plates through a flyover state is suspicious?!?
- rasz 5y ago
  30-40 min is illegal https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-police-use-dogs-sniff-drugs-no-warrant.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-police-use-dogs-... >an officer who doesn't have reasonable suspicion may not extend a traffic stop in order to conduct a dog sniff. The officer who pulls a driver over may not prolong the detention "beyond the time reasonably required to complete" the stop's "mission." you could sue

vmception 5y ago

California and many states haven't been a market based economy for 18 months, so the Federal Government undermining private property assurances is on brand.

anonprinciples 5y ago

I was there during the raid which was multiple days. FBI setup a mobile command center and had dozens of agents there. On a separate issue, a person who ran a Trump group on IRC threatened to kill my family but in an inert way: “I look forward to watching your mom [violent threat].” This individual, allegedly a hacker, then fabricated a threat to the FBI. A few days later, 2 FBI agents showed up at my residence and asked my property manager if I was violent. They laughed at them. I spoke to them moments after this and they realized the claim was a lie. And “closed my case”. I gave the FBI the person’s cell phone. The one agent emailed me saying where the person was located but no updates. 5-months later nothing happened. Then this so-called hacker emailed anti-Semitic threats and emailed a message to the FBI agent and copied me. I confronted the FBI agent over this and asked if this individual was an FBI informant or agent. Considering this person is monitoring hacker groups, now impersonating me, and emailing FBI agents messages signed with “Hitler”, even though they have this person Verizon phone number, is incredibly sketchy. Beyond that, there’s been so many FBI scandals that it’s beginning to be embarrassing. I’m not scared of corrupt dumb people regardless if they have a federal badge.

SOMA_BOFH 5y ago
>I’m not scared of corrupt dumb people regardless if they have a federal badge. i envy you

devwastaken 5y ago

Don't forget the "probable cause" for lost gold either. https://youtu.be/h-fGAqAfozM https://youtu.be/h-fGAqAfozM Steve Lehto has a whole series on the safe deposit box scandal and some other FBI cases that are pretty insane.

max_ 5y ago

Slightly off topic but very informative YouTube Video. https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE

TroisM 5y ago

That reminds me of this article: Illinois Is The 1st State To Tell Police They Can't Lie To Minors In Interrogations: https://www.npr.org/2021/07/16/1016710927/illinois-is-the-first-state-to-tell-police-they-cant-lie-to-minors-in-interrogat https://www.npr.org/2021/07/16/1016710927/illinois-is-the-fi...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

simonblack 5y ago

If you don't hold it in your own hot little hand, it doesn't belong to you at all. Or as the old saying goes: "Possession is 12 tenths of the Law"