Civil asset forfeiture is an affront to anyone who\u2019s sincerely committed to the American justice system\u2019s cornerstone presumption of innocence<\/strong>. With law enforcement typically keeping some or all of the assets that are seized, the practice has rightly been called \u201cpolicing for profit<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n I\u2019ve previously examined\u00a0the raw tyranny of civil asset forfeiture<\/a>, spotlighting the story of a Mississippi man who took $42,300 in cash to Houston with the intent of buying a second semi truck for his fledgling trucking business, only to have it seized \u2014 or, in legal jargon, \u201cforfeited\u201d \u2014 by Harris County police, who pulled him over for allegedly following the vehicle in front of him too closely.<\/p>\n Now I\u2019m compelled to share a new example of this legalized theft \u2014 the most brazenly unjust and opportunistic one I\u2019ve encountered yet:\u00a0In an ongoing, multi-million-dollar racket in Indianapolis, police are routinely seizing cash they find in FedEx packages that happen to be routed through that company\u2019s second-largest hub.<\/strong><\/p>\n Like bears wading into a river teeming with salmon, state and local Indiana police officers routinely stride up to the conveyer belts at FedEx\u2019s sprawling Indianapolis facility, where tens of thousands of packages flow by every hour,\u00a0pouncing when they see a package with traits that meet their absurdly broad definition of \u201csuspicious.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Review the criteria and you\u2019ll quickly conclude\u00a0you\u2019ve sent and received many \u201csuspicious\u201d packages yourself<\/strong>. Supposedly damning attributes include:<\/p>\n After plucking a package from the FedEx stream, police present it to a K-9. If the dog alerts \u2014 which\u00a0dogs have been found to do unjustifiably up to 66% or more of the time<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 police obtain a warrant to open it.\u00a0While they often find no drugs, they\u2019re all too happy when they find cash,<\/strong>\u00a0which is confiscated and held as prosecutors file suit for the government to take permanent ownership.<\/p>\n In April of this year,\u00a0Henry and Minh Cheng, who run a mom-and-pop jewelry wholesaling business in Los Angeles, were caught in Indiana\u2019s unconscionable web, as police confiscated $42,825<\/strong>\u00a0in a FedEx package en route to them from a retailer in Virginia. The retailer had been slow to pay for jewelry the Chengs had shipped to them in January. When the Chengs followed up on the invoice, the retailer offered to pay immediately via cash. In a fateful move, the Chengs obtained a FedEx shipping label and transmitted it to the Virginia retailer.<\/p>\n “The next thing I know is the police and the prosecutor [are] forfeiting my money\u2026based solely on suspicions,\u201d Henry Cheng told Los Angeles station\u00a0ABC7<\/em><\/a>.\u00a0\u201cThey didn’t even name the crime that I’ve committed, because I know I have not committed any crime.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Consistent with the inherent madness of civil asset forfeiture \u2014 in which property itself is put on trial \u2014 asset forfeiture cases are given bizarre case names such as \u201cNebraska v. One 1970 2-Door Sedan Rambler (Gremlin)<\/em><\/a>.\u201d The case in which Indiana seeks ownership of the Chengs\u2019 seized cash is\u00a0\u201cState of Indiana v. $42,825.00 in US Currency.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n It\u2019s bad enough when Indiana police seize cash out of a car they pull over for speeding somewhere in the state, baselessly assuming the money played some unknown role in the violation of Indiana law. However,\u00a0in their exploitation of the FedEx facility, Indiana police are typically taking cash that\u2019s only in Indiana because FedEx\u2019s logistical algorithms routed it there<\/strong>\u00a0rather than through another FedEx hub.<\/p>\n (When asked by\u00a0Stark Realities<\/em>\u00a0if the police presence at the facility requires FedEx\u2019s consent, the company declined comment. FedEx likewise chose not to say if it was concerned about customers\u2019 property being seized by police without any specific allegation of a crime.)<\/p>\n The Marion County Prosecutor\u2019s Office has sued to confiscate currency in FedEx packages traveling to and from states other than Indiana\u00a0at least 130 times in just the past two years<\/a>, never identifying any specific violation of Indiana law that\u2019s the basis for the asset forfeiture. The prosecutor\u2019s complaint typically only alleges that \u201cthe seized currency was furnished or was intended to be furnished in exchange for a violation of a criminal statute, or is traceable as proceeds of a violation of a criminal statute, in violation of Indiana law\u201d \u2014\u00a0which is utterly implausible given the money was merely being shipped\u00a0through<\/em>\u00a0the state, and not at the direction of the shipper or receiver<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Civil asset forfeiture places a daunting burden on those are victimized by it<\/strong>, forcing them to spend time and money navigating the government\u2019s house of mirrors in an attempt to prove their money or property\u00a0wasn\u2019t<\/em>\u00a0associated with a crime.\u00a0In many cases, victims of this legalized theft find the situation hopelessly complex and expensive, and simply give up<\/strong>. That demoralizing dynamic is compounded where the Indianapolis FedEx hub is concerned, as victims often live several hundred or even thousands of miles away.<\/figure>\n Fortunately for the Chengs and hundreds of other victims of Indiana\u2019s FedEx trap, their plight is now the focus of a class action lawsuit filed on their behalf by the\u00a0Institute for Justice<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 a non-profit, public interest law firm that\u2019s represented civil asset forfeiture victims across the country. Among other wrongs, the suit asserts that\u00a0the police seizures of FedEx packages violate the US Constitution\u2019s guarantees of due process<\/strong>, and the Indiana Constitution\u2019s prohibition against prosecuting alleged crimes that occur outside Indiana.<\/p>\n “This scheme is one of the most predatory we have seen, and it’s past time to put a stop to it,”\u00a0<\/strong>said<\/a>\u00a0Institute for Justice attorney Sam Gedge when the suit was filed. “It’s illegal and unconstitutional for Indiana to forfeit in-transit money whose only connection to Indiana is the happenstance of FedEx’s shipping practices.”<\/p>\n Perhaps seeking to thwart the class action suit, the Marion County prosecutor\u2019s office last week said it would give the lead plaintiff Chengs\u00a0their money back<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 some seven months after taking it without articulating any specific violation of Indiana law. The suit will proceed, however, with Institute for Justice lawyers\u00a0asking<\/a>\u00a0the court to bar the state of Indiana and Marion County prosecutor Ryan Mears from initiating currency forfeitures like the one that targeted the Chengs.<\/p>\n Reflecting on what police have done to him and continue doing to people across the country, Henry Cheng\u2019s\u00a0sentiments<\/a>\u00a0echo those of many Americans upon first learning about civil asset forfeiture:\u00a0\u201cI am just totally stunned that this can happen in America.”<\/strong><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/assets.zerohedge.com\/s3fs-public\/inline-images\/fedex%20indianapolis%20hub.jpg?itok=wWQ9k4jD\")
\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/assets.zerohedge.com\/s3fs-public\/inline-images\/jewelry%20invoice.jpg?itok=uzzTAPJu\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/assets.zerohedge.com\/s3fs-public\/inline-images\/fedex%20civil%20asset.jpg?itok=MBjIP-oY\")