4 ms·

OK, so, to the best of my knowledge, 1 kg of cocaine is worth about $20K. Assuming cocaine has roughly the density of baking soda, this amount ought to be easil

by chc 12y ago

OK, so, to the best of my knowledge, 1 kg of cocaine is worth about $20K. Assuming cocaine has roughly the density of baking soda, this amount ought to be easily disposable in a single flush. So you could flush $100K worth of coke down a toilet in under a minute.

Bootvis 12y ago
Seems optimistic to me. If you flush in rapid succession the reservoir has to fill again. I guess that a good flush requires, depending on circumstances, 20s of refilling. That would lower the throughput significantly. Also, the suspect has to move the cocaine from hiding to the toilet. Sure, $20K is a lot of money but were not talking Pablo Escobar-like quantities here. Edit: also clogging, not sure when this happens and not really willing to experiment.
- dllthomas 12y ago
  "not really willing to experiment." That would be an interesting use for all those seized drugs. I wonder if they do this.
- erroneousfunk 12y ago
  Cocaine is far more water soluble than baking soda. Extremely, extremely water soluble -- about 2 grams of cocaine can dissolve in 1 ml of water (compare to baking soda: About .1 grams per ml of water) You can't clog a toilet by flushing cocaine.
  - dllthomas 12y ago
    "You can't clog a toilet by flushing cocaine." At least, you can't afford to.
  - Bootvis 12y ago
    But you also have to get rid of the packaging. I was imagining dumping a package of cocaine, but that's stupid: at least opening the packaging would help with the clogging by letting the cocaine dissolve. Not sure what the packaging would do with the pipes and whether this only packaging holds up as evidence.
pkfrank 12y ago
@Bootvis You could also just rig an external reservoir (or have a full bucket lying around) to rapidly refill the back tank. Though that would of course be fairly incriminating.
wdmeldon 12y ago
Imagine pushing 5kg worth of cocaine down a toilet while, most likely, incredibly strung out on said cocaine, with the SWAT team beating on your door. Couple that with the fact that they likely aren't stored in easy to open bags designed for pouring and what you're looking at is a bathroom full cocaine and a seriously clogged toilet. You've got to get rid of the plastic too, remember. Maybe they bust you with less, but they'll still bust you.
- danielweber 12y ago
  If I am required to maintain documents in a civil case, and I destroy them, generally the other side is allowed to assume they were as bad as possible. Does this apply in criminal trials? If there's evidence I was flushing drugs down the toilet (and such evidence would be there), can the state be allowed to assume I had a lot more of the drug than I really did? What are the policy implications?
gertef 12y ago
Surely such a flush would leave residue on the bowl that would be easily detectable by a forensics kit.
A_COMPUTER 12y ago
No, it takes at least two flushes.

by chc 12y ago

Bootvis 12y ago

Seems optimistic to me. If you flush in rapid succession the reservoir has to fill again. I guess that a good flush requires, depending on circumstances, 20s of refilling. That would lower the throughput significantly. Also, the suspect has to move the cocaine from hiding to the toilet. Sure, $20K is a lot of money but were not talking Pablo Escobar-like quantities here. Edit: also clogging, not sure when this happens and not really willing to experiment.

dllthomas 12y ago
"not really willing to experiment." That would be an interesting use for all those seized drugs. I wonder if they do this.
erroneousfunk 12y ago
Cocaine is far more water soluble than baking soda. Extremely, extremely water soluble -- about 2 grams of cocaine can dissolve in 1 ml of water (compare to baking soda: About .1 grams per ml of water) You can't clog a toilet by flushing cocaine.
- dllthomas 12y ago
  "You can't clog a toilet by flushing cocaine." At least, you can't afford to.
- Bootvis 12y ago
  But you also have to get rid of the packaging. I was imagining dumping a package of cocaine, but that's stupid: at least opening the packaging would help with the clogging by letting the cocaine dissolve. Not sure what the packaging would do with the pipes and whether this only packaging holds up as evidence.

pkfrank 12y ago

@Bootvis You could also just rig an external reservoir (or have a full bucket lying around) to rapidly refill the back tank. Though that would of course be fairly incriminating.

wdmeldon 12y ago

Imagine pushing 5kg worth of cocaine down a toilet while, most likely, incredibly strung out on said cocaine, with the SWAT team beating on your door. Couple that with the fact that they likely aren't stored in easy to open bags designed for pouring and what you're looking at is a bathroom full cocaine and a seriously clogged toilet. You've got to get rid of the plastic too, remember. Maybe they bust you with less, but they'll still bust you.

danielweber 12y ago
If I am required to maintain documents in a civil case, and I destroy them, generally the other side is allowed to assume they were as bad as possible. Does this apply in criminal trials? If there's evidence I was flushing drugs down the toilet (and such evidence would be there), can the state be allowed to assume I had a lot more of the drug than I really did? What are the policy implications?

gertef 12y ago

Surely such a flush would leave residue on the bowl that would be easily detectable by a forensics kit.

A_COMPUTER 12y ago

No, it takes at least two flushes.