FBI aims to keep valuables, $86M cash confiscated in safe deposit store raid

[Lucius]

OK.. that's pretty cool. Why limit this to safe deposit boxes? Let FBI seize all the property owned by the Americans - cash, real estate, stocks, bullion, antiques.etc. Then they can ask the owners to submit evidence to prove that these assets were not illegally obtained. If the Feds are not satisfied with the documents, then they can just seize the assets and distribute it among themselves. Sounds like a really cool idea.

I honestly don't care what the FBI or any other agency in the US does, because even though they always try to stand out as the greatest democracy in the world, I would never like to feel that kind of democracy on my skin. In a country where people are still being killed because of the color of their skin and a country that has directly or indirectly started dozens of wars and caused millions of deaths for its own interests, is anyone surprised that one of their agencies is acting like this?

BTW, what about the allegation from one of the victims that $75,000 worth of gold coins are missing, after the feds rifled through the boxes?

Anyone who claims that something was in the box can forget about it, because such storage does not work on the principle that there is some evidence that someone really put something in the box. Storing value in this way definitely has one big risk, because when something like this happens no one can prove that something was in the box at all.

[zanezane]

We can't do much about it, they're the FBI and if what they decide to do is to keep the stuff for evidence or as a part of the illegal activity then that's their call, and we can't do a thing about that.

[so98nn]

If the FBI wanted to search the boxes, it needed to meet the standard for a warrant of probable cause that evidence of a crime would be found. But agents rifled through about 800 boxes anyway, filming their searches and bagging the property as evidence even when the holders were unknown and not suspected of crimes.

But whats the play here? If they are not able to prove it with the evidences then they simply can't keep it right? I am not sure what are the regulations in the America but those people with the boxes can actually file a reversal case in the higher court. Obviously this is about the jurisdiction and if they think it's illegal then those victims will also have to prove their side. So its screwed up situation.

Also what do they do with the seized money anyway? Because 86M is whole lot of money. Apart from the seized gold and casino chips is there any relationship of this matter with the crypto space? Just curious!

[semobo]

Safe boxes and vaults provided by banks are not actually secure, there are some banks who will keep the assets no matter who is having the warrant even those items are acquired in an illegal way but in general, they will simply give the details about the holders to the government then what is the point of calling them as safe box, it is a loot box.

[dothebeats]

This is another justification of having your own safe vaults. Entrusting it to a third-party will always come with greater risks compared to when you're keeping the things on your own. In this case, there were really no substantial evidences pointing towards the wrongdoings of the entity that was raided, and the FBI decides to keep the $86m for themselves. How about those people who doesn't know that the service they entrusted their things to were involved in this? Wouldn't it be logical for the FBI to return them to the rightful owners instead of going full ham and keeping these things to themselves? Then again, they are as corrupt as ever, and I don't think there will ever be a remedy to that.

[LoyceV]

This is another justification of having your own safe vaults. Entrusting it to a third-party will always come with greater risks compared to when you're keeping the things on your own.

One very good reason to "outsource" your valuables is to prevent a $5 wrench attack. If a burglar can't open your wall safe, he can beat you up when you get home.

[jaberwock]

I honestly don't care what the FBI or any other agency in the US does, because even though they always try to stand out as the greatest democracy in the world, I would never like to feel that kind of democracy on my skin. In a country where people are still being killed because of the color of their skin and a country that has directly or indirectly started dozens of wars and caused millions of deaths for its own interests, is anyone surprised that one of their agencies is acting like this?

You should care not because they are good, but because they are bad. Basically FBI is what USA does to increase profit for the rich people approved by the military complex and bribed politicians but can't do legally. You want someone killed? USA can't just go up to them and murder them, they have FBI do a covert op and just murder them and make it look like they had nothing to do with it.

If it is so easy for them to kill people (which has been proven a million times by now) just to make money, do you have any idea how much they care when it is about money directly? Crypto is literally finance, and when you are doing something that is powering people and destroy the power of centralized government? Well I can't imagine what they will be able to do. So every news about FBI is a greatly important news, they were capable of confiscating 86 million dollars worth of stuff here, they can't in crypto, hence the problem.

[tulusikhlas]

We can't do much about it, they're the FBI and if what they decide to do is to keep the stuff for evidence or as a part of the illegal activity then that's their call, and we can't do a thing about that.

It was true, but their actions made everyone feel that the FBI were real thieves. still, remember with the death of JOHN MCAFEE, all his belongings were also confiscated. even the Bitcoin assets that he owns have been packaged and secured by the FBI. and now we don't know what's next for the stuff.
and usually, news relating to John's possessions was gradually covered up.

[bryant.coleman]

This is another justification of having your own safe vaults. Entrusting it to a third-party will always come with greater risks compared to when you're keeping the things on your own.

One very good reason to "outsource" your valuables is to prevent a $5 wrench attack. If a burglar can't open your wall safe, he can beat you up when you get home.

It is extremely risky to store valuables (such as physical cash or bullion coins) at home irrespective of the crime rate in the area where you live. The authorities want you to store your wealth in banks (either in the form of cash in savings accounts, or in the form of stocks/mutual funds/ETFs in demat account). But at this point, there are a lot of people who don't trust these banks (and also the locker services which they provide). Such individuals go for private safe deposit boxes, and the authorities have well known reasons to discourage this practise.

[Gozie51]

We can't do much about it, they're the FBI and if what they decide to do is to keep the stuff for evidence or as a part of the illegal activity then that's their call, and we can't do a thing about that.

No not right to seize people's belongings without prove to confisticate. If the FBI suspect an illegal dealing, they have the right to investigate and at same time respect the ruling of court. Like in op quote, the judge ruled that those confisticated items are not for grabs.

even though a judge specifically said the contents of the boxes weren’t up for grabs.

The box holders and their lawyers say the FBI is trampling on the rights of people who were unaware the business, U.S. Private Vaults, was charged in a sealed indictment with conspiring to sell drugs and launder money.

The warrant that US Magistrate Steve Kim signed on March 17 giving permission for the FBI to raid the business even said, “This warrant does not authorize a criminal search or seizure of the contents of the safety deposit boxes.”

If the FBI wanted to search the boxes, it needed to meet the standard for a warrant of probable cause that evidence of a crime would be found. But agents rifled through about 800 boxes anyway, filming their searches and bagging the property as evidence even when the holders were unknown and not suspected of crimes.

Reading the above, you see is unlawful for FBI to trample on people's right. It is subject to the courts approval rather than going against the laws.

[Karartma1]

This is another justification of having your own safe vaults. Entrusting it to a third-party will always come with greater risks compared to when you're keeping the things on your own.

One very good reason to "outsource" your valuables is to prevent a $5 wrench attack. If a burglar can't open your wall safe, he can beat you up when you get home.

These are instead very good reasons not to have valuables in safe deposit boxes and safes altogether. I'll stick to bitcoin with those good old word recoveries that I can obfuscate as I want sometimes en-plain air which is the best.
Nobody would ever imagine that I have bitcoins that way.
Never trust third-parties when not necessary.

[bryant.coleman]

No not right to seize people's belongings without prove to confisticate. If the FBI suspect an illegal dealing, they have the right to investigate and at same time respect the ruling of court. Like in op quote, the judge ruled that those confisticated items are not for grabs.

A rare setback for the FBI. Normally the courts don't intervene on such situations and the FBI loot as much as they can. But this time the judge (Steve Kim) explicitly stated that they can't confiscate the assets, unless they have solid evidence to prove that these are proceedings from crime. The FBI was arguing for the reverse - they will confiscate the assets unless the owners could prove that these valuables are not related to crime. Now the situation has reversed and it is the responsibility of the FBI to present the proof.

[jaysabi]

I honestly don't care what the FBI or any other agency in the US does, because even though they always try to stand out as the greatest democracy in the world, I would never like to feel that kind of democracy on my skin. In a country where people are still being killed because of the color of their skin and a country that has directly or indirectly started dozens of wars and caused millions of deaths for its own interests, is anyone surprised that one of their agencies is acting like this?

You should care not because they are good, but because they are bad. Basically FBI is what USA does to increase profit for the rich people approved by the military complex and bribed politicians but can't do legally. You want someone killed? USA can't just go up to them and murder them, they have FBI do a covert op and just murder them and make it look like they had nothing to do with it.

If it is so easy for them to kill people (which has been proven a million times by now) just to make money, do you have any idea how much they care when it is about money directly? Crypto is literally finance, and when you are doing something that is powering people and destroy the power of centralized government? Well I can't imagine what they will be able to do. So every news about FBI is a greatly important news, they were capable of confiscating 86 million dollars worth of stuff here, they can't in crypto, hence the problem.

You're cracked mate.  Not a single thing you posted is true and it's wildly disturbing that people exist with as bizarre of beliefs as the trash you posted.  It doesn't even make sense inside the rambling post itself, as many parts of what you posted are contradictory.  You can't even stick to a consistent conspiracy theory.

[Lorence.xD]

We can't do much about it, they're the FBI and if what they decide to do is to keep the stuff for evidence or as a part of the illegal activity then that's their call, and we can't do a thing about that.

Exactly, I think that it's within their power to seize the items and as the quote above says, they're the FBI and you won't be able to do much about them because they are acting on federal level so they aren't to be messed with. It may sound unfair to us but we don't exactly know the full story behind the seizure and why they kept the valuables.

[Vishnu.Reang]

Exactly, I think that it's within their power to seize the items and as the quote above says, they're the FBI and you won't be able to do much about them because they are acting on federal level so they aren't to be messed with. It may sound unfair to us but we don't exactly know the full story behind the seizure and why they kept the valuables.

No. It is not within their power to seize these assets. And that is the reason why the judge (Steve Kim) rejected the request from the FBI to keep the valuables with themselves. The judge was very clear when he said that if the FBI want to seize these assets, then they need to present solid evidence to prove that they are proceedings from crime (FBI was arguing for the reverse scenario - the owners should first present evidence to claim that these assets are not linked to any criminal transaction). So we can say that at least in this instance, the FBI is not getting what they wanted.

[Fortify]

Interesting story here.

The FBI confiscated more than $86 million dollars worth of money, valuables, jewelry and items stashed in safety deposit boxes, in a raid. Despite a search warrant which expressly forbid them from confiscating anything contained in the boxes.

This happened in los angeles. Of course, this being america there were lawsuits filed. But it seems the FBI and the state have no intent to return much of the stolen items. Despite them not having filed lawsuits against the holders of the property or providing evidence suggesting any of the assets were involved with illegal activity.

There have been claims of the DEA (drug enforcement agency) confiscating $100,000 from the safe of legal medical marijuana retailers. Without the lost funds being returned. But this is on an entirely different level with more than $86 million confiscated. Not from fringe operations like legalized weed. But from middle class or wealthy americans, who don't seem to have been involved with anything illegal or sketchy.

It's pretty disgusting how law enforcement operate these days and this is (one of many) prime examples out there. The moment that police departments were allowed by law to seize goods and use the funds from those seize goods to fund themselves, was part of the whole system breaking down. Besides the fact that they have willfully ignored the judges orders (which should be a case for dismissal for any police officer directly involved in seizing the goods) they have a perverse incentive to take as much property as possible, if it will be eventually sold for the benefit of their city budget. It thoroughly breaks the "innocent until proven guilty" bedrock of society that America was built on and is one of many things that needs rowing back on for stability and faith in the police to return.

[Sithara007]

It's pretty disgusting how law enforcement operate these days and this is (one of many) prime examples out there. The moment that police departments were allowed by law to seize goods and use the funds from those seize goods to fund themselves, was part of the whole system breaking down. Besides the fact that they have willfully ignored the judges orders (which should be a case for dismissal for any police officer directly involved in seizing the goods) they have a perverse incentive to take as much property as possible, if it will be eventually sold for the benefit of their city budget. It thoroughly breaks the "innocent until proven guilty" bedrock of society that America was built on and is one of many things that needs rowing back on for stability and faith in the police to return.

It is not the first time that the FBI is acting in this manner. However, setbacks such as the one they received this time is rare. Normally the judges don't actively intervene with such asset seizures. That said, I would like to point out one fact. It is very unlikely that the FBI had acted on their own. Funds, if seized will be passed on to the federal authorities. The directive would have come from some of the politicians. And it makes sense, because the authorities are facing a cash crunch, given the pandemic situation.

[sana54210]

It is not within their power to seize these assets. And that is the reason why the judge (Steve Kim) rejected the request from the FBI to keep the valuables with themselves. The judge was very clear when he said that if the FBI want to seize these assets, then they need to present solid evidence to prove that they are proceedings from crime (FBI was arguing for the reverse scenario - the owners should first present evidence to claim that these assets are not linked to any criminal transaction). So we can say that at least in this instance, the FBI is not getting what they wanted.

FBI has always been the most horrible place in all of USA and they have done so many crimes under the laws protection that they literally killed people they wanted to kill without facing any consequences, hell there were citizens rooting for it.

Go check out cointelpro and you will see how dirty their hands are, and look at all the Latin America works as well and you will be disgusted. In any regular nation a place like FBI would be closed down very quickly, they are not "investigating" anything like their name suggests, they are taking action and those actions are just to make themselves more and more powerful that's it, so they are very dangerous.

I am glad that judge decided to not give them the belongings because it was obvious that they were just doing it to make more money, it wasn't about any crime or not, it literally had nothing to do with that, they were all like "hey we raided a place and found money, we gonna keep it!!" and judge ordered it to be given back, if not then FBI would keep it illegally.

[South Park]

Interesting story here.

The FBI confiscated more than $86 million dollars worth of money, valuables, jewelry and items stashed in safety deposit boxes, in a raid. Despite a search warrant which expressly forbid them from confiscating anything contained in the boxes.

This happened in los angeles. Of course, this being america there were lawsuits filed. But it seems the FBI and the state have no intent to return much of the stolen items. Despite them not having filed lawsuits against the holders of the property or providing evidence suggesting any of the assets were involved with illegal activity.

There have been claims of the DEA (drug enforcement agency) confiscating $100,000 from the safe of legal medical marijuana retailers. Without the lost funds being returned. But this is on an entirely different level with more than $86 million confiscated. Not from fringe operations like legalized weed. But from middle class or wealthy americans, who don't seem to have been involved with anything illegal or sketchy.

I am not an expert on the law or anything but even if there was an express order to not do so if the FBI uses the patriot act to justify their actions they could get away with it, so let this be a lesson for anyone reading those articles, the governments can decide what is fair or not and change the rules as it suits them, so centralization will always be a point of failure and if you have some valuables to store like gold, jewelry and other stuff never do so in safe deposit boxes.

[Sithara007]

I am not an expert on the law or anything but even if there was an express order to not do so if the FBI uses the patriot act to justify their actions they could get away with it, so let this be a lesson for anyone reading those articles, the governments can decide what is fair or not and change the rules as it suits them, so centralization will always be a point of failure and if you have some valuables to store like gold, jewelry and other stuff never do so in safe deposit boxes.

I am also not in favor of safe deposit boxes. But as mentioned in the article, many of those who kept their valuables are those who don't trust the banks. They also had the option of storing these valuables at home, but then it will make them vulnerable to armed robberies and home invasions. From what I know about this incident, the business mentioned here was operating with all the necessary permits and licenses. The issue arose when one of the promoters was arrested for involvement with drugs trade.