4 ms·

Read till the end. The government seized all his money, and even though he was acquitted (or never tried), they still kept it. And the IRS is after him too. If

Read till the end. The government seized all his money, and even though he was acquitted (or never tried), they still kept it. And the IRS is after him too. If you go against the government, you almost never win, regardless of how innocent you are.

bmmayer1 12y ago
It's even worse. He went after a casino, which is in cahoots with the government.
- JetSpiegel 12y ago
  I'll stick with rewatching Ocean's Eleven.
rickdale 12y ago
John Oliver did a great job explaining the problem this week on his show. Basically, Kane and Nestor might be innocent, but their money is on trial separately, as dumb as that sounds. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks
- kefs 12y ago
  It's a great watch. Here's the WaPo article, and the local news investigation he discusses.. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-and-seize/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/st... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU_nh51FU14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU_nh51FU14
- Erwin 12y ago
  You end up with cases like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._$124,700_in_U.S._Currency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._$124,700_in_U....
  - rosser 12y ago
    My favorite such lunacy remains "State of Texas v. One Gold Crucifix". [1] [1] https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22state%20of%20texas%20vs%20one%20gold%20crucifix%22 https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22state%20of%20...
    - pyre 12y ago
      Offtopic, but from the second result, looks like TheWire is using Python (and is having issues with tuples): (u'The Booming Business of Civil Forfeitures',) - The Wire
    - Thirdegree 12y ago
      My personal favorite is "United states v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins". [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Approximately_64,695_Pounds_of_Shark_Fins http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Approximately_...
      - lifeformed 12y ago
        United States v. Article Consisting of 50,000 Cardboard Boxes More or Less, Each Containing One Pair of Clacker Balls http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Article_Consisting_of_50,000_Cardboard_Boxes_More_or_Less,_Each_Containing_One_Pair_of_Clacker_Balls http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Article_Consis...
  - Torgo 12y ago
    This reminds me of when Europe used to prosecute animals for killing people and destroying property: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_trial
grecy 12y ago
Would he have any grounds to charge the government and/or the casino of theft? He won that money in a fashion deemed not-illegal, the IRS even says he legally won it and want to tax him for it, and then they took it off him. Sounds like theft to me.
- _ak 12y ago
  If the Feds lose, they will wrap you in red tape until they win.
- justinator 12y ago
  You need to sue to get it back. Even if the trial is acquitted. It's a major source of revenue for police. It's one reason why they're becoming more and more militarized. New Yorker Article: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken
  - psychometry 12y ago
    Police departments actually get a lot of their military-grade equipment free from the federal government. After the military has given away their "obsolete" tanks to police departments, they can order new tanks from defense contractors. This makes the very rich, influential people at the top levels of the military-industrial complex even richer and more influential.
    - justinator 12y ago
      Not quite free, but purchased using grants. It works out, that if they don't take the grants, they'll be in danger of losing funding in the future. These grants aren't just, "Here's a tank". It could be, "here's a tank, and medical equipment" In essence, their hand is forced to take the gift. There's been backlash about this. http://rt.com/usa/186788-police-weapons-military-grants/ http://rt.com/usa/186788-police-weapons-military-grants/ http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2014/08/23/obama-orders-review-arming-police-with-military-grade-tools/2fdn3Vf4LpQg8NVHi7zZjM/story.html http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2014/08/23/obama-orde...
josu 12y ago
According to the article, the government gave the money back to the casino: >Meadows still has his winnings
CocaKoala 12y ago
> And the IRS is after him too. The situation as a whole is pretty crappy, but this part actually makes sense. It was income, and it's taxable. I'm definitely not condoning the fact that the government seized it and hasn't returned it after the acquittal, but the IRS still wanting to tax him for it is expected behavior. Interestingly, it appears that (according to some very crude, preliminary research), the two men could probably claim their legal fees as deductions, which would lessen the tax burden a bit.
- discardorama 12y ago
  > It was income, and it's taxable. So let's say you are at a casino, and win $20K. It's reported to the IRS. As you're driving home happily whistling away, the police pull you over for illegal "whistling while driving". They find the $20K, and under the Civil Asset Forfeiture law (mentioned above), seize the $20K. Now how are you supposed to pay the taxes? You don't even have the money anymore!
  - CocaKoala 12y ago
    I'm waiting for the part where you explain how this is something the IRS is supposed to resolve or care about.
trhway 12y ago
he should have paid taxes immediately upon getting the money. That way IRS would be forced to return money to the casino too. That would be a show to watch :)
acheron 12y ago
Government is just a word for things we do together. /s
ryanpardieck 12y ago
If the reporting is accurate, then he really got screwed. Your money is taken despite your never being convicted of anything, and then the IRS taxes you for that money that was taken. What a joke.

bmmayer1 12y ago

It's even worse. He went after a casino, which is in cahoots with the government.

JetSpiegel 12y ago
I'll stick with rewatching Ocean's Eleven.

rickdale 12y ago

John Oliver did a great job explaining the problem this week on his show. Basically, Kane and Nestor might be innocent, but their money is on trial separately, as dumb as that sounds. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks

kefs 12y ago
It's a great watch. Here's the WaPo article, and the local news investigation he discusses.. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-and-seize/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/st... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU_nh51FU14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU_nh51FU14
Erwin 12y ago
You end up with cases like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._$124,700_in_U.S._Currency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._$124,700_in_U....
- rosser 12y ago
  My favorite such lunacy remains "State of Texas v. One Gold Crucifix". [1] [1] https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22state%20of%20texas%20vs%20one%20gold%20crucifix%22 https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22state%20of%20...
  - pyre 12y ago
    Offtopic, but from the second result, looks like TheWire is using Python (and is having issues with tuples): (u'The Booming Business of Civil Forfeitures',) - The Wire
  - Thirdegree 12y ago
    My personal favorite is "United states v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins". [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Approximately_64,695_Pounds_of_Shark_Fins http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Approximately_...
    - lifeformed 12y ago
      United States v. Article Consisting of 50,000 Cardboard Boxes More or Less, Each Containing One Pair of Clacker Balls http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Article_Consisting_of_50,000_Cardboard_Boxes_More_or_Less,_Each_Containing_One_Pair_of_Clacker_Balls http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Article_Consis...
- Torgo 12y ago
  This reminds me of when Europe used to prosecute animals for killing people and destroying property: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_trial

grecy 12y ago

Would he have any grounds to charge the government and/or the casino of theft? He won that money in a fashion deemed not-illegal, the IRS even says he legally won it and want to tax him for it, and then they took it off him. Sounds like theft to me.

_ak 12y ago
If the Feds lose, they will wrap you in red tape until they win.
justinator 12y ago
You need to sue to get it back. Even if the trial is acquitted. It's a major source of revenue for police. It's one reason why they're becoming more and more militarized. New Yorker Article: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken
- psychometry 12y ago
  Police departments actually get a lot of their military-grade equipment free from the federal government. After the military has given away their "obsolete" tanks to police departments, they can order new tanks from defense contractors. This makes the very rich, influential people at the top levels of the military-industrial complex even richer and more influential.
  - justinator 12y ago
    Not quite free, but purchased using grants. It works out, that if they don't take the grants, they'll be in danger of losing funding in the future. These grants aren't just, "Here's a tank". It could be, "here's a tank, and medical equipment" In essence, their hand is forced to take the gift. There's been backlash about this. http://rt.com/usa/186788-police-weapons-military-grants/ http://rt.com/usa/186788-police-weapons-military-grants/ http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2014/08/23/obama-orders-review-arming-police-with-military-grade-tools/2fdn3Vf4LpQg8NVHi7zZjM/story.html http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2014/08/23/obama-orde...

josu 12y ago

According to the article, the government gave the money back to the casino: >Meadows still has his winnings

CocaKoala 12y ago

> And the IRS is after him too. The situation as a whole is pretty crappy, but this part actually makes sense. It was income, and it's taxable. I'm definitely not condoning the fact that the government seized it and hasn't returned it after the acquittal, but the IRS still wanting to tax him for it is expected behavior. Interestingly, it appears that (according to some very crude, preliminary research), the two men could probably claim their legal fees as deductions, which would lessen the tax burden a bit.

discardorama 12y ago
> It was income, and it's taxable. So let's say you are at a casino, and win $20K. It's reported to the IRS. As you're driving home happily whistling away, the police pull you over for illegal "whistling while driving". They find the $20K, and under the Civil Asset Forfeiture law (mentioned above), seize the $20K. Now how are you supposed to pay the taxes? You don't even have the money anymore!
- CocaKoala 12y ago
  I'm waiting for the part where you explain how this is something the IRS is supposed to resolve or care about.

trhway 12y ago

he should have paid taxes immediately upon getting the money. That way IRS would be forced to return money to the casino too. That would be a show to watch :)

acheron 12y ago

Government is just a word for things we do together. /s

ryanpardieck 12y ago

If the reporting is accurate, then he really got screwed. Your money is taken despite your never being convicted of anything, and then the IRS taxes you for that money that was taken. What a joke.