November 24, 2005

You don't think we live in a police state?

Living up to their infamous nickname, the Rutherford County Sheriff's Department is in the news again (emphasis mine):

A Rutherford County Sheriff's deputy confiscated $9,400 from a Georgia subcontractor on suspicion of drug activity but never returned the money even though investigators found no evidence of wrongdoing, a lawsuit against the department claims.

The subcontractor, Juan Ibarra, further alleges in the civil suit that he believes he was targeted because he is Hispanic.

According to the suit filed recently in District Court, Deputy Kenneth Barrett stopped Ibarra, 37, of Smyrna, Ga., for speeding on Nov. 10, 2004, and confiscated all but $20 of his money under the Tennessee Drug Control Act. A search of the car showed no sign of illegal activity, and Ibarra was neither arrested nor cited for anything but speeding during the stop, records show.

A guy gets pulled over. There are no signs of illegal activity. He isn't arrested, he isn't cited and he only gets a ticket for speeding. Yet...YET...the deputy takes all of the guy's cash except $20, and the guy doesn't see it again.

I know of several people - especially somebody being a subcontractor - that would have large sums of cash on them for purposes that are completely legal. What business is it of any sheriff's deputy to question someone having a large sum of cash on them when there ISN'T any other sign of illegal activity?? IT ISN'T anyone's business!!

Is this where the "war" on drugs has taken us?? Anything and everything YOU do is considered suspicious? What if I were to withdraw a large sum of cash to go purchase a car? No, it may not be the smartest thing, but it's my business what I do with my money. If I'm not partaking in any provable (keyword), illegal activities then I should be able to do whatever I want to. What about a firearm? Just because I have a weapon on me or in my car (LEGALLY), does that mean I'm considered a criminal?

And you don't think we live in a police state?

Comments:

Please Note! Failure to abide by the following may result in your comments being edited or deleted: Remain on topic. Foul language and/or personal attacks are not permitted. Excessive links (more than three per thread) must be approved first. If you do include a link in your comment, make sure it is a short link (go to tinyurl.com if it is too long). Try to keep comments to 125 words or less. Thank you.

Great story. I live in east Tennessee (Calhoun).

I Had not seen this story before. You made some very good points.

Kenneth Carr

Posted by: Ken Carr at November 25, 2005 05:58 AM

This whole thing could have been avoided if they had just declared him to be an "enemy combatant".

Posted by: RandomObserver at November 25, 2005 10:06 AM

I think you are concerned at least a law-breaker if you are carrying a loaded weapon on your person in public or in your car without a handgun permit. Although I have a Tennessee State carry permit, I consider it to be in clear violation of the wording of Article I, Section 26 of the State Constitution to require it to exercise the RIGHT of armed self-defense. If I were on a jury where someone was being tried for carrying a weapon without a permit, I would vote to NOT convict on the basis that the law is unconstitutional.

"The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the fact in
controversy." - John Jay, First Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court (1789-1795)

"The jury have an undoubted right to give a general verdict, which decides
both law and fact.This distribution of power, by which the court and jury
mutually assist, and mutually check each other," Hamilton continued, "seems to be
the safest, and consequently the wisest arrangement, in respect to the trial of
crimes. ..." --Alexander Hamilton

"The jury has the right to determine both the law and the facts."
--Samuel Chase, U.S. Supreme Court
Justice, 1796
Signer of the Declaration
of Independece

"The jury has the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact."
--Oliver Wendell Holmes, U.S. Supreme Court Justice,
1902

"The jury has the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact."
--Oliver Wendell Holmes, U.S. Supreme Court Justice,
1902

"The law itself is on trial quite as much as the cause which is to be
decided."
--Harlan F. Stone, 12th Chief Justice, U.S.
Supreme Court

Posted by: Ron W at November 27, 2005 04:18 PM

Oh, I agree Ron.

Posted by: Blake at November 27, 2005 07:16 PM