Man wants his $400K back from the FBI

Status
Not open for further replies.

LiquidTension

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
2,881
Location
SC
link

LIMA — Two robbers who broke into Luther Ricks Sr.’s house this summer may have not gotten his life savings he had in a safe, but after the FBI confiscated it he may not get it back.

Ricks has tried to get an attorney to fight for the $402,767 but he has no money. Lima Police Department officers originally took the money from his house but the FBI stepped in and took it from the Police Department. Ricks has not been charged with a crime and was cleared in a fatal shooting of one of the robbers but still the FBI has refused to return the money, he said.

“They are saying I have to prove I made it,” he said.

The 63-year-old Ricks said he and his wife, Meredith, saved the money during their lifetime in which both worked while living a modest life.

A representative of the FBI could not be reached for comment.

During the fatal shooting incident inside the house June 30, Ricks and his son were being attacked by two men and his son was stabbed. Ricks broke free, grabbed a gun and shot to death 32-year-old Jyhno Rock inside his home at 939 Greenlawn Ave.

Police originally took the money after finding marijuana inside Ricks’ home, which Ricks said he had to help manage pain.

“I smoke marijuana. I have arthritis. I have shingles, a hip replacement,” he said.

Ricks, who is retired from Ohio Steel Foundry, said he always had a safe at home and never had a bank account.

American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Legal Director Jeff Gamso said Ricks has a tough road ahead, not impossible, but tough to get back his money.

“The law of forfeiture basically says you have to prove you’re innocent. It’s terrible, terrible law,” he said.

The law is tilted in favor of the FBI in that Ricks need not be charged with a crime and the FBI stands a good chance at keeping the money, Gamso said.

“The law will presume it is the result of ill-gotten gains,” he said.

Still Ricks can pursue it and possibly convince a judge he had the money through a lifetime of savings. Asking the FBI usually doesn’t work, he said.

“The FBI, before they would give it up, would want dated receipts,” he said.

If the FBI does keep the money, it would be put toward a law enforcement use, if the city of Lima does not fight for it because the city discovered it, Gamso said.

Lima Law Director Tony Geiger said he has not been asked to stake a legal claim for the money.

=========================

I did a search for the guy's name but didn't find anything that had been posted, not even from the time the incident occurred.

Never thought about that side of a SD shooting before. What else are responding officers going to see when they come to your house?
 
IF the citizens claims are correct, it seems to me that the government should have to prove they are not, then there is a strange smell, a bad smell surrounding this business. The strange or bad smell is otherwise described as the smell of THEFT UNDER COLOR OF LAW.
 
IF the citizens claims are correct, it seems to me that the government should have to prove they are not, then there is a strange smell, a bad smell surrounding this business. The strange or bad smell is otherwise described as the smell of THEFT UNDER COLOR OF LAW.
Obviously you haven't read RICO. Its not "theft under color of law" its simple, codified, legal theft by the government.

America is clearly dead. :(
 
This is a part of the much-touted War on Drugs. The government has so many laws, or better yet, regulations, that anything can be justified by an ordinance. Much of the time, there is no enabling legislation to back it up.

If the FBI does keep the money, it would be put toward a law enforcement use, if the city of Lima does not fight for it because the city dicovered it, Gamso said.

Like buzzards fighting over a piece of :barf:carrion.
 
One Possible Moral to the Story...

... Don't leave your marijuana out when the police arrive.

Or anything else illegal for that matter. Yes, the property seizure laws do at times get an innocent; but there's more than one bad smell in this story.

Oakville, this is not a criminal action; it's an administrative action. He's not charged with anything, it is the status and origin of the money itself that is the question. An unusually large amount of cash and an illegal substance (what do you want to bet the amount was greater than 'personal use'?) is probably cause to seize the money. I'm not sure I like it either, but that's the way the laws read.
 
Last edited:
Asset forfeiture is big business for the government. Basically, its not a criminal thing as much as its a civil thing. They hold your property accountable and its up to you to prove the property isnt guilty.

I used to live in Bucks County PA, where the former DA used it liberally. They would confiscate anything they could, especially if drugs were involved, or even thought to be involved. One alleged dealer, who was supposed to be the largest dealer in the area, had his house, vehicles and boats, and bank accounts seized under the law. I say "alleged", because he himself, was never charged with any crime. Only his "goods" were.

This sort of thing has been going on for years all across the country. People traveling on the way to do legitimate business and carrying cash for that purpose, and were unlucky enough to be stopped and had it seized, and never got it back.

And some people actually believe we don't live in a police state...
If you dont believe this, you really need to wake up. Its actually getting worse every day, and we are the enablers.
 
Since the FBI is such an all-knowing magical force, they should have to prove he did not legally earn it if they want to keep it. Is it legal for police to just bust in someones house and start taking money? I dont think they should have even been allowed to look inside the safe.
 
Originally posted by Archie: ... Don't leave your marijuana out when the police arrive.

Or anything else illegal for that matter. Yes, the property seizure laws do at times get an innocent; but there's more than one bad smell in this story.

So if you have a bag of weed, its ok for the government to rob you of your life savings? What if your son hides his weed in the house, say in your garage? And LEOs find it? Should they repossess your house and savings?

This war on drugs is stupid. Punishing people for drugs is the same as punishing them for guns. Same arguments. If we really wanted to stop drugs we would ban alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine.

It just seems so petty to rob this man for weed. Of all things it seems they just wanted to rob him.

As someone else said, like vultures fighting over carrion.
 
Yeah, these seizure/forfeiture laws suck.

Legal power of the state to steal your property. Based solely on suspicion. Happens every single day. Then when they've got it, you're presumed guilty, and have to prove your innocence to get your property back. So you have to weigh the cost of what they stole versus the cost of hiring an attorney and the likelihood that you'll be able to prove your innocence.
 
Is there any info on just how much weed we're talking about here? Are we talking a dime bag or 10 lbs?
 
400K?!?!?! Is THAT all?!?!?! Chicken feed. I knew a man who was involved in a serious automobile accident (not his fault). When the corporation whose engineer caused the accident settled, the man and his wife walked into the bank and cashed the rather sizable settlement check, all in $100.00 bills.

The bank compelled the couple to sit and count the money twice before allowing them to depart to assure it was all accounted for. Of course, I guess in the case of which I am thinking, the proof would be well documented, would it not, as to whom the cash belonged. But, to see the FBI walk off with $2,000,000.00+ would still seriously urinate someone off.

Lesson to be learned...cash-in the $100.00 bills into pennies. Let the grimmy buggers carry that away, and count it back to "whomever". To make it gun-related...it sure was funny to see this character walk into Gander Mountain as ask for a big discount based on the amount of firearms he was intent to purchase. When he asked for 20% off they laughed...until be pulled out 4, $5,000.00 bundles of $100.00 bills, spun and walked out. The next day, he got the discount. :)

Life can be odd. ;)
 
One more tool in law enforcements arsenal. Course if you hate law enforcement, you hate their tools also.

I'm curious how many people that use the "police state" banner have actually lived in a police state. No it wasn't a question.

This may have started as gun related but it's quickly veering into the "hate the government" area and I'm sure there are other forums for that.

Maybe time to shut this one down........................
 
Its easily "gun related" if your high dollar gun collection is part of the seizeure.

What amazes me is, how many people will either continue to deny that this goes on or defend its use.


What if your son hides his weed in the house, say in your garage? And LEOs find it? Should they repossess your house and savings?
They can and will.
 
Interesting but how is it firearms related?

This could just as easily have been a $400K firearms collection, except that many fewer people would champion for the owner in that instance.

Proves to those who really believe we are protected from federal JBTs by the constitution that they are living a dream. Under the provisions of the war on drugs or war on terror, the feds can pretty much do anything they want to any person, except perhaps the rarest of individual who follows every law to the letter and has documented proof of his entire 100% lawful life. I can't account for every penny I've earned and spent. Can you?
 
It doesn't really suprise me at all.
We don't have a justice system, we have a "legal" system.

BTW - even if it isn't directly gun related, it is gun related.
It all comes back to our freedoms. Guns are usually the first things they go after but they aren't the goal in the end.
Eventually we will live in the most "wonderful" country on earth where our government "protects" us from every possible bad thing...
Drugs, guns, beer, red meat, harsh language, literature, religion, chocolate, salty food, you name it ...

I don't know about you guys but personally, I can't wait.:rolleyes:



We're already on our way there.
The only reason we don't feel our "chains" is because we have been wearing them since they day we were born.
 
Sounds like he needs a swiss bank account.
Anyone have info on this idea? I would assume money overseas would be untouchable by the us.gov.
This could be handy if I ever get rich.:banghead:
 
I won't get into either that law or the situation, but I did note the comment that few who talk about a police state have actually lived in one.

Some old timers might remember the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968, when "demonstrators" tried to about destroy the city. (OK, OK, maybe they should have been let do it, but that is another issue.)

My wife, one of her friends, and I were watching a speech by (then) Senator Abraham Ribicoff, a leftist, who was saying that the Chicago police were "just like the Gestapo."

My wife's friend had grown up in Nazi Germany. When the Senator said that, she shook her finger at the TV and said, "If they were, Herr Ribicoff, you would be dead. Right now!"

We need to be vigilant and use every legal means to get unjust laws repealed or thrown out by the courts, and we need to legally resist efforts to give police more power than they need. But the difference (still) between the US and a real police state is that Abraham Ribicoff died of natural causes in 1998, not gassed in a concentration camp or shot dead in the gutter in 1968.

Jim
 
Asset forfeiture is big business for the government. Basically, its not a criminal thing as much as its a civil thing. They hold your property accountable and its up to you to prove the property isnt guilty.
Yeah, that is what they do.

Someone please explain to me exactly how that isn't unconstitutional, 'cause I'm obviously too stupid to see it. Asset confiscation without a criminal conviction is, IMHO, just plain WRONG.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top