Sex Crime Victim Denied $69,000 Settlement Because Cops Seized Her Abuser's Cash Through Civil Forfeiture
The outrageous case has led to calls from Congress to pass legislation curbing civil asset forfeiture.

A North Carolina teenager was hoping to get her life back on track after a state judge ordered a man who sexually abused her to pay her $69,000. Instead, she got a nasty surprise.
The local police department had already seized the cash through civil asset forfeiture, and it was already gone. Despite a judge's order, she will get nothing.
The case is a stunning example of the misplaced priorities and perverse incentives that asset forfeiture creates for police—and of how the federal government allows state and local police to evade reforms to stop forfeiture abuse.
As originally reported by local news outlet WCNC Charlotte, the Mint Hill Police Department (MHPD) investigated Mario Alberto Gomez-Saldana II for sexual abuse in 2019. Saldana pleaded guilty to multiple sex crimes years later in 2023 and is currently serving a prison sentence. The now-17-year-old teenage victim's family filed a civil suit against Gomez-Saldana shortly after and secured a consent order for $69,130 to be turned over to her.
WCNC reports:
Records show when MHPD investigated the sex abuse case in July 2019, they found suspected marijuana, drug paraphernalia and cash inside the suspect's home. The victim's family and their attorney said, at the time, an officer assured them the money would be available to one day pursue in a civil suit and in the years after, continued telling them the money remained held in property….
Unbeknownst to them, investigators seized the cash and partnered with a federal agency to apply for asset forfeiture, citing probable cause of illicit drug activity. MHPD investigators never charged the suspect with any drug crimes, only sex offenses, but that didn't prevent the department from eventually collecting more than $45,000 of the seized money in 2020 through what's called the Equitable Sharing Program, according to records. The federal government received the rest of the money.
"I've been dealing with this since I was 5 years old and I'm almost 18 and I just want to move on to the next chapter of my life," the teenager, who is unnamed in the story, told WCNC Charlotte. "That money was going to help me do it and without it, it just feels like three steps back. It's honestly so frustrating and difficult."
Under civil asset forfeiture laws, police can seize property suspected of being connected to illegal activity even if the owner isn't charged with a crime. MHPD could use the drugs in Saldana's house as a premise to take his money, even though, as WCNC reports, a simple Google search shows Saldana won the lottery in 2018, collecting $70,507 in winnings after taxes.
Law enforcement groups say civil asset forfeiture is a vital tool for disrupting organized crime like drug trafficking by targeting its illicit proceeds. However, civil liberties advocates say it lacks due process protections for property owners and creates perverse profit incentives for police.
Forfeiture abuses have led more than half of U.S. states to pass reforms over the last decade, tightening protections for property owners and creating stricter rules for seizing, tracking, and spending forfeiture revenues. North Carolina in fact passed some of the strongest forfeiture reforms in the country; it is one of four states that only allows forfeiture after a criminal conviction based on proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
But under the Justice Department's equitable sharing program, federal authorities may "adopt" state and local civil asset forfeiture cases and pursue them at the federal level. Local police departments who partner with the feds get to keep up to 80 percent of the forfeiture revenue, while the rest goes into the equitable sharing pool and is distributed among partner departments around the country.
The Institute for Justice, a libertarian-leaning public interest law firm, notes that even though police in North Carolina don't make money off of state-level forfeiture, law enforcement agencies across the state collected an estimated $293 million in forfeiture revenue from federal programs between 2000 and 2019.
"Am I at peace with it?" MHPD attorney Scott MacLatchie responded when asked by WCNC Charlotte about the outcome of the case. "I am at peace that we followed the law."'
MacLatchie is correct that the department was perfectly within its rights to seize the money and hand it over to the feds, and opponents of civil forfeiture say that's the problem.
WCNC Charlotte's excellent reporting and the sheer injustice of the case have led to calls from Congress to pass federal legislation to stop cases like this from happening in the future.
As Reason's Jacob Sullum reported, Reps. Tim Walberg (R‒Mich.) and Jamie Raskin (D‒Md.) reintroduced the FAIR Act in March. The legislation includes several major reforms to civil asset forfeiture at the federal level, including eliminating the equitable sharing fund.
"It makes me feel more resolved to get this legislation passed," Walberg told WCNC. "At least the thought can come in people's minds, they changed their approach, and they rushed it more quickly in order to get that $69,000. It really ended up hurting the victim."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
In my state all fines, forfeitures and such go into the state’s general fund.
Once I heard about ‘Equitable Sharing,’ the news started to make sense.
Whenever there is a big bust of some kind, it’s always a team effort between local cops and the federal government.
Why?
So the corrupt local cops can keep what they steal.
Police: to protect and serve themselves and the political class, not the public who they live off of like parasites.
Note the Federal incentives to seize assets. That's the fish rotting from the head, because many people in government want no limits on their power. Even Hillary just recently said Trump supporters need to be re-educated. I can't resist: that's what the Nazi's said about the Jews, and they made Nazi party membership mandatory for all teachers.
Note the "Defund the Police" and "systemic racism" were absurd responses (unless your intention is to deflect responsibility from the Mayor and Chief Of Police in big blue jurisdictions that killed a lot of blacks, like George Floyd in MN where the mayor and chief were black. The people responsible for the abuse, are the local Democrat politicians and the feds pushing civil asset forfeiture.
How are these guys different from the Sheriff of Nottingham?
The Sheriff of Nottingham was better looking.
Anyone else notice that the settlement being denied was $69,000?
Yes. Bow chika wow wow. I'd like to know how the jury came to that amount.
That’s a thousand 69’s!
GIGGITY!!!!
When I read that I thought it was my sexlexia acting up.
Only a damned fool could justify civil asset forfeiture as following due process.
Ie, judges, prosecutors, police, and legislators; in short, all government employees and their suck-up sycophants.
"Vor means 'thief'!"
As true in this world as in the universe of Lois McMaster Bujold.
"Under civil asset forfeiture laws, police can seize property suspected of being connected to illegal activity even if the owner isn't charged with a crime. "
Money for government coffers.
"nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"
No money for government coffers.
Guess which is followed?
To the barricades!!!
"Law enforcement groups say civil asset forfeiture is a vital tool for disrupting organized crime like drug trafficking by targeting its illicit proceeds."
If they'd only use it on organized crime and get convictions.
It was intended as a tool to deprive individuals of their money and thus leaving them unable to fight the charges in court. Then it became a money maker for the department where nobody wants to kill the cash cow by
doing their damn joblocking them up in jail and suddenly the present and proved police profit push was perniciously pressed on the people.Precisely!
Since the various police and DAs can not be trusted to do what is right, they have to be told what is right. So modify the legislation and let these little blue-gang bangers get back in line with the role that they merit: doing what they are told to do, with minimal judgement.
This is very simple. Eliminate civil asset forfeiture.
It was put into place to control drug dealers from using their massive fortunes before being tried. If we somehow absolutely need it for ridiculously wealthy drug dealers, limit its scope to assets cumulatively in excess of 10x the average household income (to avoid needing silly inflation adjustments), and require that these assets be adjudicated and distributed by the judiciary along with the trial, not before.
$69K seizure would never be possible.
Civil asset forfeiture is an abuse of the rule of law.
I AM Making a Good Salary from Home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing, under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone. go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart ……
Detail Here—————————————bitecoinsallar12.COM
There was a remote British royal who purchased a multimillion dollar home in Beverly Hills was it? The police got word of the cash purchase and decided to arrest the persona and seize the home, believing that they could prove something illicit by the owner even if they had no such information. The police obtained a sworn warrant (big issue with that) and attacked the house in the middle of the night. The owner, not knowing that it was police arrived on his upstairs landing with a pistol and was shot dead by police. This was determined by the department to be a “good shooting” instead of a criminal conspiracy that it was. It is time to END all civil forfeiture of any property of any kind UNLESSS the property can be PROVEN to be the illicit enhancement through criminal enterprise.
Remember the episode of 60 Minutes was it? They sent a man to purchase an airplane ticket in an airport. In his briefcase he had thousands of dollars. He opened the case and paid for the ticket. Within moments government agents there to “arrest his money”. That is until they found out they were on camera and it was going on the air.
That should have been enough information to take before ANY federal judge and have the entire law overthrown.
My father’s attorney was arrested for having bank notes in his possession. He was in his 90’s and spent nights in jail for doing nothing illegal and doing it as an attorney!
ENOUGH OF THIS CRIMINAL ACTIVITY THAT VIOLATES THE US CONSTITUTION. At the very least, no seizure should be allowed without a conviction plus proof that the funds are the actual fruit of criminal activity. Seizure of any other kind should be required to have a BOND issued by the seizing department at 3 times the amount in question, and the bond should be forfeit if being fruit of unlawful activity is not proven.
raf