It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Two brothers who say police unlawfully seized more than $190,000 from them during a traffic stop had been under surveillance and were suspected of drug-dealing, a lawyer for the city of Aurora said today during a court hearing.
Though neither Jose nor Jesus Martinez is charged with a crime, authorities are seeking forfeiture of $190,040 found in Jesus' truck when he was stopped by an Aurora police officer on Oct. 18.
A Kane County judge ordered the money returned, but the city has refused.
The Aurora residents claim the money was family savings earned from a remodeling business. But during the hearing, an attorney disclosed reports from an Illinois State Police drug task force saying police had received court permission to tap the brothers' phones on the suspicion they were involved in drug trafficking.
Chicago attorney John Murphey, who is representing Aurora, said the city had not been at liberty to discuss the case until today.
"We were constrained by a live, serious investigation," said Murphey, who said he had been informed that the phase of the investigation involving the Martinez brothers was over.
Originally posted by harrytuttle
Isn't that the definition of "theft"?
I mean, either the cops press drug trafficking charges against the 2 men to justify the confiscation of the $190k in cash, or they return the money.
These 2 men don't need to prove they were innocent, they ARE innocent until proven guilty, and the cops can't prove those 2 men are guilty unless they press charges, take them to court, and the court judges them guilty.
Until then, the cops have no legal authority to have A) taken the money in the first place or B) keep the money indefinitely.
Just as if I take $190k from you, that's a crime because I have no legal authority to do so. Same goes for these cops.edit on 9-12-2010 by harrytuttle because: (no reason given)
Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Originally posted by aliengenes
they spent the money, so now they dont have it to give back, this is why they are stonewalling