The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) came under fire for allegedly seizing 800 safes in Beverly Hills. According to reports, the FBI confiscated $86 million worth of cash, jewelry and thousands of gold and silver bars. The box owner and his lawyers called on federal law enforcement agencies to lack sufficient evidence to prove that the box holds evidence related to specific crimes.
abuse one’s power?The lawyer believes that the FBI has seized people’s life savings in an unconstitutional manner.
The FBI seized more than 800 safes located in Beverly Hills and stored in private vault stores in the United States. The report pointed out that the FBI received an order from a California district judge to confiscate the store’s “commercial equipment” ostensibly related to the money laundering case. Los Angeles Times reporter Michael Finnegan explained that the order prohibits searches of the contents of the safe.
The order signed by U.S. District Judge Steve King clearly stated: “This arrest warrant does not authorize a criminal search or seizure of the contents of the safe.”
The owners of the safe and their lawyers believe the FBI has done something wrong. To date, the holder of the safe has filed 11 lawsuits with federal agencies. Attorneys representing a large number of ticket holders stated that federal law enforcement agencies did not obtain a standard warrant indicating possible reasons. Benjamin Gluck (Benjamin Gluck), an attorney representing the holders of private vault lockers in the United States, believes that the FBI violated the standard agreement.
“[The government] You can’t take things without evidence, I hope you can get it later,” Gluck told the Los Angeles Times. “The Fourth Amendment is contrary to the requirements of the confiscation law-you first have the evidence, and then you can take the property. In an interview with “Cause” magazine, Gluck pointed out that federal agents are taking people’s money as hostages. Gluck said:
It was unreasonable for the government to confiscate these properties at the beginning. It was unreasonable for the government to take these properties as hostages to force the owners to disclose private information, and they apparently treated the properties so carelessly that they seemed to have lost at least some of their properties. People are indignant. they.
The lawyer of the safe owner said: “Guilty of the Association for not complying with the Constitution”
Joseph Ruiz lost his life savings in the FBI raid and stated that federal agents took $57,000 in cash. Ruiz obtained the funds through a documented legal settlement, and the FBI did not give him any explanation. “They just stole my money,” Ruiz said. “I was destined to be a criminal and I did nothing. I am a law-abiding citizen,” he added.
“They threw people like Joseph into this upside-down world, where they did nothing wrong, but they were forced to stand up and file a lawsuit against the government just to get their property back and prove their innocence,” Robert Robert Frommer said that Joseph Ruiz explained in an interview.
Frommer works at the Institute for Justice, a liberal law firm, and wrote an editorial about the FBI on the Orange County Register. “The crime of non-compliance with the constitution of association,” Frommer argued. “What the government is doing here is completely backward. The government cannot search every apartment in the building because the landlord is involved in the crime. After all, when someone rents an apartment, that apartment is theirs,” the lawyer Added.
Despite these allegations, the FBI denied that federal agencies did anything wrong. FBI spokesperson Thom Mrozek denied that federal agencies had abused their powers and pointed out that the funds were allegedly related to misconduct. Mrozek said that holding a large amount of cash by a person without a source of income may lead to confiscation. “We have some grounds to believe that these items are related to criminal activities,” Mrozek insisted in an interview.
Federal seizures like this highlight the benefits of crypto assets such as Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), and Bitcoin Cash (BCH), which are more difficult to confiscate than boxes filled with cash and jewelry. Numerous reports in the past decade show that law enforcement officers illegally rob people of their life savings by traveling with large amounts of cash or precious metals. These legalized pirates took $46 billion from the confiscation cases (data from 2000 to 2019), and the U.S. federal government retained most of the funds.
In fact, US law enforcement agencies make billions of dollars in confiscation cases each year, many of which have never been investigated. This abuse has led to an unprecedented level of abuse, so much so that human rights organizations refer to this behavior as “policing for profit.” The large amount of cash and jewellery seized by federal agencies each year has not even accounted for the large amount of land seized by federal agencies in confiscation cases.
Jeffrey B. Isaacs, an attorney for an anonymous ticket holder, said that his unidentified client “James Poe” thought he had done nothing wrong. Isaacs insisted that the FBI’s recent raid on private vault stores was one of the most profound “illegal searches and seizures” I have ever seen. Prosecutors are trying to “extort people from revealing their identities in order to investigate them. This is unprecedented, and I think it is very dangerous,” Isaac concluded.
What do you think of the FBI confiscating 800 safes in Beverly Hills and claiming that these funds are “related to criminal activity”? Please tell us your thoughts on this topic in the comments section below.
Tags in this story
Attorney, Benjamin Gluck, Beverly Hills, Bitcoin, civil asset forfeiture, cryptocurrency, safe, FBI, FBI, illegal, illegal search and seizure, Institute of Justice, Joseph Ruiz, Law Enforcement, Robert Fromer, Safe, Seizure, Steve Kim, US Private Vault Store, US Law Enforcement, Unsecured
Image Source: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons, U.S. District Court California evidence,
Disclaimer: This article is for reference only. It is not a direct offer or invitation to buy or sell, nor is it a recommendation or endorsement of any product, service or company. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. The company or the author shall not bear direct or indirect responsibility for any damage or loss caused or claimed to be caused by using or relying on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.