5 ms·

My brother was robbed of over $80k like this at an Amtrak station several years ago. They made up some story about following him from Chicago to Portland and it

My brother was robbed of over $80k like this at an Amtrak station several years ago. They made up some story about following him from Chicago to Portland and it was from heroin sales. 1. He got on the train 3 states away from Chicago, I know this because I gave him a ride to the station. 2. He never had anything to do with heroin sales. They were charging him with 3 felonies of 10+ years each and eventually got a plea deal for them to keep the money and he had like a couple years probation. All for carrying some money on a train.

tptacek 2y ago
I'm sure he wasn't a heroin dealer, but why was your brother carrying $80k?
- fusivdh 2y ago
  [dead]
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
  It's a free country and people should be allowed to transport money with them. He was on his way back to Northern California to pay someone for some stuff that had been fronted + re-up
  - tptacek 2y ago
    In cash? Did you tell him "this is a bad idea, you should wire the money instead"? What if he had been mugged? What if he lost the suitcase? I arranged the transportation of $25,000 in cash (I sold a car, it was a gag, I was very young, and it was an extraordinarily bad idea that cost me thousands of dollars), and just as a physical object that's pretty big. Also: where did he get the cash from? I had trouble getting it.
    - mixmastamyk 2y ago
      At larger banks, there’s usually a teller that has their own cubicle with a locked door. They buzz you in in and you ask for amounts > 1k.
  - mikeyouse 2y ago
    Sure, nobody (here) would disagree that people should be able to carry as much cash as they want without fear of illegal search but the whole “he plead guilty and had multiple years of probation” rightly makes people wonder what did he plead guilty to? since it clearly wasn’t civil asset forfeiture if they charged him with criminal charges and then he plead guilty to criminal charges.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - edm0nd 2y ago
    so it for was drugs, just not heroin.
  - jjulius 2y ago
    >He was on his way back to Northern California to pay someone for some stuff that had been fronted + re-up. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this very much sounds like "drugs". If that's the case, your point about him never being involved in "heroin" sales is now just semantics, because he's still engaged, to some degree, in the movement of drugs between states.
    - zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
      It's not semantics because that was their justification for the search. They claimed to have been following him since Chicago even though he had only got on the train in Fargo. They also claimed that the money was from the sale of heroin, another lie. I'm not saying what he was involved in was legal, I'm saying that he was targeted and arrested on false pretenses. I'm thinking they saw a young guy on a cross country trip who had purchased a ticket on short notice and decided to go after him. Maybe he was "acting suspicious" if he was nervous, but I kind of doubt that; he used to take beta blockers for that type of thing and what he was doing wasn't really out of the ordinary for him. Maybe they saw he had a history of taking the train that route. I don't know. But I do know that they lied in their justification for making contact with him.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    >It's a free country Obviously, it isn't.
- coolspot 2y ago
  [flagged]
- pcl 2y ago
  This sort of question should not need to be answered, or raised. Carrying a lot of money around should not be grounds for suspicion.
  - rwmj 2y ago
    Should the police take the money without cause? No. Can we question what he was up to? Yes. It's risky, as cash can be stolen from you with no recourse. It's also a very inconvenient way to pay someone, since it's physically large and would take a long time to count out.
    - lanthade 2y ago
      I think you are vastly over estimating the size of 80K USD in $100 bills. Each bundle of $10K is about 1/2” thick. You can easily carry 80K in 100’s without looking out of place.
      - tptacek 2y ago
        It'll fit comfortably in a shoebox.
  - tptacek 2y ago
    No, I think raising the question is just fine: if you tell a story about someone carrying more money than most Americans ever have in their bank accounts in their entire lives, in cash, on their person, you're describing something extraordinarily unusual. Again: I'm not saying he's a heroin dealer, and I said that specific to avoid this pointless preening about how it's everyone's right to carry large amounts of cash on them. Sure, I'm fine with that; in fact: I think you will find it difficult to find anyone to take the other side of that argument on HN (and HN is a big, complicated place, giving you some idea of just how banal that argument is.) So let's assume that's not what I'm talking about. If it helps, though this isn't really my intent, assume my subtextual allegation is that this story is copypasta.
    - alasdair_ 2y ago
andrewinardeer 2y ago
This feels like a ragebait comment and the entire story is clearly not being told.
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
  Nah that's about all of it
  - wing-_-nuts 2y ago
    Why the hell would you ever plead to something you didn't do if you had the resources to fight it? I get how they might pressure some kid into a plea, but they'd be taking my ass to trial, and yes, I'd gladly pay the legal fees if it came to it, over basically selling out my good name.
    - ssl-3 2y ago
      I have no relation to anyone here, but: Every time I've carried a large amount of money, it was essentially all of the money I had in the world. If I had lost it [for any reason, including theft by civil forfeiture], I'd have been essentially broke and have nothing to fight with. If I were additionally charged with crimes, I'd still be broke and still have nothing to fight with. The money is just...gone. --- Now, suppose a DA or prosecuter gives me a binary choice and I can select between the following options: 1. Be broke. 2. Be broke and in prison. ...then I think I'll cut my fucking losses and stick with option 1.
      - namaria 2y ago
        It's scary how people immediately side with authorities in these situations. You can lose everything in an instant by getting charged with something nefarious and it just takes a couple of bad cops.
        wing-_-nuts 2y ago
        I'm not 'siding with the authorities', I'm advocating fighting if you're innocent. Plea'ing out when you're innocent just encourages this sort of abuse. If everyone that remotely had the resources to fight charges actually fought them, this whole system would collapse on itself. Civil rights are only upheld when they're exercised.
rwmj 2y ago
Was there a particular reason he was carrying around nearly 6 figures in cash? How was he planning to ensure it didn't get stolen by robbers of the old fashioned sort?
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
  He owed someone money. The point is he hadn't been to Chicago and he hadn't been involved with the heroin trade. The whole point of the stop was fabricated.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
gamblor956 2y ago
The asset seizure part needs no explanation as that was common practice for many law enforcement agencies, but if your brother was not dealing heroin why did he plea to dealing heroin? There is no way they'd get a conviction solely on the basis of someone carrying a large amount of cash. They'd have needed something more than that to even reach the preliminary hearing stage.
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
  He plead to attempted money laundering or something like that
  - tptacek 2y ago
    What state was this in? We can look up the predicates for that charge in the state, and then be talking more coherently about what might have happened here. Thanks! I'm guessing North Dakota? That's 3 states away from Chicago on the only Amtrak route from there to Portland. Were the charges federal? Did North Dakota (or whatever) police intercept him, or a DEA TFG?
    - perihelions 2y ago
      What exactly are you trying to accomplish here? We can all see that person's HN comment history, see that fully half of it is drugs; and if this HN subthread is quiet about it, that is because we are politely avoiding confrontation.
      - tptacek 2y ago
        I have not looked at their comment history, and the guidelines ask us not to do that.
        zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
        You can read my comment history. It's right out in the open. Why would guidelines say not to look at it when it's right on the profile? Lol He got on the train in ND. A drug task force illegally searched his bags and arrested him in Portland. I believe it was all state charges from a state agency working with the DEA. I'd have to ask because I don't remember the details. This was like a decade ago

tptacek 2y ago

I'm sure he wasn't a heroin dealer, but why was your brother carrying $80k?

fusivdh 2y ago
[dead]
zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
It's a free country and people should be allowed to transport money with them. He was on his way back to Northern California to pay someone for some stuff that had been fronted + re-up
- tptacek 2y ago
  In cash? Did you tell him "this is a bad idea, you should wire the money instead"? What if he had been mugged? What if he lost the suitcase? I arranged the transportation of $25,000 in cash (I sold a car, it was a gag, I was very young, and it was an extraordinarily bad idea that cost me thousands of dollars), and just as a physical object that's pretty big. Also: where did he get the cash from? I had trouble getting it.
  - mixmastamyk 2y ago
    At larger banks, there’s usually a teller that has their own cubicle with a locked door. They buzz you in in and you ask for amounts > 1k.
- mikeyouse 2y ago
  Sure, nobody (here) would disagree that people should be able to carry as much cash as they want without fear of illegal search but the whole “he plead guilty and had multiple years of probation” rightly makes people wonder what did he plead guilty to? since it clearly wasn’t civil asset forfeiture if they charged him with criminal charges and then he plead guilty to criminal charges.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- edm0nd 2y ago
  so it for was drugs, just not heroin.
- jjulius 2y ago
  >He was on his way back to Northern California to pay someone for some stuff that had been fronted + re-up. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this very much sounds like "drugs". If that's the case, your point about him never being involved in "heroin" sales is now just semantics, because he's still engaged, to some degree, in the movement of drugs between states.
  - zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
    It's not semantics because that was their justification for the search. They claimed to have been following him since Chicago even though he had only got on the train in Fargo. They also claimed that the money was from the sale of heroin, another lie. I'm not saying what he was involved in was legal, I'm saying that he was targeted and arrested on false pretenses. I'm thinking they saw a young guy on a cross country trip who had purchased a ticket on short notice and decided to go after him. Maybe he was "acting suspicious" if he was nervous, but I kind of doubt that; he used to take beta blockers for that type of thing and what he was doing wasn't really out of the ordinary for him. Maybe they saw he had a history of taking the train that route. I don't know. But I do know that they lied in their justification for making contact with him.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  >It's a free country Obviously, it isn't.
coolspot 2y ago
[flagged]
pcl 2y ago
This sort of question should not need to be answered, or raised. Carrying a lot of money around should not be grounds for suspicion.
- rwmj 2y ago
  Should the police take the money without cause? No. Can we question what he was up to? Yes. It's risky, as cash can be stolen from you with no recourse. It's also a very inconvenient way to pay someone, since it's physically large and would take a long time to count out.
  - lanthade 2y ago
    I think you are vastly over estimating the size of 80K USD in $100 bills. Each bundle of $10K is about 1/2” thick. You can easily carry 80K in 100’s without looking out of place.
    - tptacek 2y ago
      It'll fit comfortably in a shoebox.
- tptacek 2y ago
  No, I think raising the question is just fine: if you tell a story about someone carrying more money than most Americans ever have in their bank accounts in their entire lives, in cash, on their person, you're describing something extraordinarily unusual. Again: I'm not saying he's a heroin dealer, and I said that specific to avoid this pointless preening about how it's everyone's right to carry large amounts of cash on them. Sure, I'm fine with that; in fact: I think you will find it difficult to find anyone to take the other side of that argument on HN (and HN is a big, complicated place, giving you some idea of just how banal that argument is.) So let's assume that's not what I'm talking about. If it helps, though this isn't really my intent, assume my subtextual allegation is that this story is copypasta.
  - alasdair_ 2y ago

andrewinardeer 2y ago

This feels like a ragebait comment and the entire story is clearly not being told.

zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
Nah that's about all of it
- wing-_-nuts 2y ago
  Why the hell would you ever plead to something you didn't do if you had the resources to fight it? I get how they might pressure some kid into a plea, but they'd be taking my ass to trial, and yes, I'd gladly pay the legal fees if it came to it, over basically selling out my good name.
  - ssl-3 2y ago
    I have no relation to anyone here, but: Every time I've carried a large amount of money, it was essentially all of the money I had in the world. If I had lost it [for any reason, including theft by civil forfeiture], I'd have been essentially broke and have nothing to fight with. If I were additionally charged with crimes, I'd still be broke and still have nothing to fight with. The money is just...gone. --- Now, suppose a DA or prosecuter gives me a binary choice and I can select between the following options: 1. Be broke. 2. Be broke and in prison. ...then I think I'll cut my fucking losses and stick with option 1.
    - namaria 2y ago
      It's scary how people immediately side with authorities in these situations. You can lose everything in an instant by getting charged with something nefarious and it just takes a couple of bad cops.
      - wing-_-nuts 2y ago
        I'm not 'siding with the authorities', I'm advocating fighting if you're innocent. Plea'ing out when you're innocent just encourages this sort of abuse. If everyone that remotely had the resources to fight charges actually fought them, this whole system would collapse on itself. Civil rights are only upheld when they're exercised.

rwmj 2y ago

Was there a particular reason he was carrying around nearly 6 figures in cash? How was he planning to ensure it didn't get stolen by robbers of the old fashioned sort?

zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
He owed someone money. The point is he hadn't been to Chicago and he hadn't been involved with the heroin trade. The whole point of the stop was fabricated.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

gamblor956 2y ago

The asset seizure part needs no explanation as that was common practice for many law enforcement agencies, but if your brother was not dealing heroin why did he plea to dealing heroin? There is no way they'd get a conviction solely on the basis of someone carrying a large amount of cash. They'd have needed something more than that to even reach the preliminary hearing stage.

zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
He plead to attempted money laundering or something like that
- tptacek 2y ago
  What state was this in? We can look up the predicates for that charge in the state, and then be talking more coherently about what might have happened here. Thanks! I'm guessing North Dakota? That's 3 states away from Chicago on the only Amtrak route from there to Portland. Were the charges federal? Did North Dakota (or whatever) police intercept him, or a DEA TFG?
  - perihelions 2y ago
    What exactly are you trying to accomplish here? We can all see that person's HN comment history, see that fully half of it is drugs; and if this HN subthread is quiet about it, that is because we are politely avoiding confrontation.
    - tptacek 2y ago
      I have not looked at their comment history, and the guidelines ask us not to do that.
      - zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
        You can read my comment history. It's right out in the open. Why would guidelines say not to look at it when it's right on the profile? Lol He got on the train in ND. A drug task force illegally searched his bags and arrested him in Portland. I believe it was all state charges from a state agency working with the DEA. I'd have to ask because I don't remember the details. This was like a decade ago