A Maine man who was arrested Thursday for selling methadone to an undercover police officer apparently used money from the sale to buy a lottery ticket that won him $1,000.
Michael David, 46, will not be allowed to keep the winning ticket.
"I guess it will be up to a judge to decide, but it's in our possession right now as proceeds from a drug transaction," Ellsworth Police Chief John Deleo said Friday.
David, who has been staying at a motel on High Street, went into the Irving Mainway gas station Thursday and left the clerk a methadone pill and a phone number, Deleo said.
"He told the clerk that if anyone was looking to buy methadone [a prescription narcotic], they should call him," the chief said.
Instead, the gas station clerk called the police.
Deleo said one of his officers exchanged his uniform for plainclothes and asked the clerk to call David to set up a sale. The officer, Jeremy Cox, met David Thursday evening and bought four 10-milligram pills for $15 each, the chief said.
David apparently then immediately went back to the Irving Mainway and bought, among other things, lottery tickets, one of which ended up being a $1,000 winner.
When the man went back to his hotel room, police were waiting for him.
Deleo said officers seized the lottery ticket, along with several more methadone pills from the man's hotel room. David had a valid prescription for the pills, the chief said.
The man has been charged with unlawful trafficking in scheduled drugs, a Class B felony that carries fines up to $20,000 and a prison sentence not to exceed 10 years; and unlawful furnishing of scheduled drugs, a Class C felony that carries fines up to $5,000 and a prison sentence not to exceed five years.
He was taken Thursday evening to Han County Jail and remained there as of late Friday afternoon.
I don't know why this bothers me so much. Maybe I just don't like anyone else getting the winnings except the one who scratched it off and won it. I don't like the idea that it is okay for the police or anyone else to take someone else's winnings if they aren't (yet) in debt to someone or the state or the government. I fully support the back child support thing and other stuff, for instance if you filed bankruptcy within the last six months and that sort of thing. But something about this story bothers me. What are they going to do with it?
The man was caught selling drugs! I assume the money will be held in evidence, since the police can't spend it anyway. If the man is convicted of a felony, then maybe the money will be donated to charity - like a treatment center!
I don't understand the above comments. Do you realize how much it costs taxpayers to feed and shelter these people? First he commits a crime and then we're supposed to reward him with more of our money? People are never supposed to benefit from crime. If he got a legal prescription, then it's very possible the methadone was paid for by us too.
Well, it's now up to the courts. The judge will decide what to do with the winning prize.
No, I just don't think it was admissable as evidence. Or useable in any other way as pertained to the arrest and conviction of the perpetrator. I hate druglords. They have cost me some family members. In fact, I can't think of anyone who hasn't been affected by the abuse of drugs one way or another. But explain to me how this is relevant. I don't get it. It just seems to me that the government will use any old excuse they can to take your winnings from you.
Spy, it clearly says that he sold the drugs to the undercover cop and bought the lottery ticket with the money. So it is very much directly related to criminal activity.
The officer, Jeremy Cox, met David Thursday evening and bought four 10-milligram pills for $15 each, the chief said.
David apparently then immediately went back to the Irving Mainway and bought, among other things, lottery tickets, one of which ended up being a $1,000 winner.
The money belongs to the city. Cops don't use personal money to make undercover buys.
Spy, to me you are making no sense whatsoever. What if he took the money and bought a gun? This has nothing to do with the lottery except that the news article is appearing on a lottery board. Whatever money he received from a drug buy doesn't belong to him!
If he took $100 from a man to have sex with a 9 year old, went out and bought a PB ticket and won $50 million, it wouldn't be his money either. It was obtained from committing an illegal act, just like robbing a bank. He was selling drugs for God's sake to an undercover police officer. If he had purchased the ticket the week before, that would have been entirely different. In that case, they would need to prove that he used illegal funds to purchase it. That is what the judge will determine I suppose.
Anyway, I just realized that this discussion serves no purpose (for both of us) because this man is probably going to jail. Do you think he should still get the $1,000? Let's give free room & board to people and lottery tickets too. I think I'm going to begin a life of crime. Who said crime doesn't pay? LOL
You have a point, justx. Can't argue with that one at all. But chances are, he already has a gun and probably a whole bunch of friends who go with him with guns too. I'll bet when he was arrested, he had at least two buddies waiting in the wings with weapons in case anything-- other than the police coming --happened.
It just seems all the headlines I have been reading lately say if you win the lottery, you will not be able to keep it because the government -or some form of the government- will find a reason to take it from you. It has me discouraged. Do you remember the story of the old gentleman who was in a nursing home and won the lottery and they refused to let him have it, saying he wasn't sane enough to have the money? Sounds more like they are playing GOD there, doesn't it? Where does it end? He won, what does it matter to me how he spends it, as long as it doesn't harm us?
Yes, Spy. I agree that they're sticking their noses where they don't belong. Believe me, I don't trust the government either. Signs of fascism are everywhere! But I think this is different. Just my opinion.
Imagine the controversy if it was a jackpot and not $1,000!
But this, from the OP, c'mon:
"A Maine man who was arrested Thursday for selling methadone to an undercover police officer apparently used money from the sale to buy a lottery ticket that won him $1,000.
Michael David, 46, will not be allowed to keep the winning ticket.
"I guess it will be up to a judge to decide, but it's in our possession right now as proceeds from a drug transaction," Ellsworth Police Chief John Deleo said Friday.
David, who has been staying at a motel on High Street, went into the Irving Mainway gas station Thursday and left the clerk a methadone pill and a phone number, Deleo said."
Quote: Originally posted by spy153 on Jan 21, 2008
I don't know why this bothers me so much. Maybe I just don't like anyone else getting the winnings except the one who scratched it off and won it. I don't like the idea that it is okay for the police or anyone else to take someone else's winnings if they aren't (yet) in debt to someone or the state or the government. I fully support the back child support thing and other stuff, for instance if you filed bankruptcy within the last six months and that sort of thing. But something about this story bothers me. What are they going to do with it?
Its bothersome because drugs, money, weapons and other "evidence" has so often "disappeared" from evidence lockers that they don't even bother to report it, anymore. Much of it never makes it into the 'counting room'.
These pills magically become "wrong" because the person peddling them is not wearing a lab coat.
The excuse that he used 'drug money' to buy the ticket is a smokescreen for people who don't engage in much critical thinking. If the 'drug money' had been in his left pocket, while the money that bought the winner was in his right pocket or on his debit card, would that have made a difference? Of course not.
What you are seeing is the institutionalization of theft in the name of crime prevention. It won't be long before your car can be taken because you have an unpaid parking ticket.
Quote: Originally posted by time*treat on Jan 22, 2008
Its bothersome because drugs, money, weapons and other "evidence" has so often "disappeared" from evidence lockers that they don't even bother to report it, anymore. Much of it never makes it into the 'counting room'.
These pills magically become "wrong" because the person peddling them is not wearing a lab coat.
The excuse that he used 'drug money' to buy the ticket is a smokescreen for people who don't engage in much critical thinking. If the 'drug money' had been in his left pocket, while the money that bought the winner was in his right pocket or on his debit card, would that have made a difference? Of course not.
What you are seeing is the institutionalization of theft in the name of crime prevention. It won't be long before your car can be taken because you have an unpaid parking ticket.
I've seen cars taken for that already. And I agree completely. Everything. You nailed it! You said what I was getting at. Thank you!
I don't think the guy should get to keep the ticket,because it was purchased with money he made from sellling drugs.I know some people may feel this is unfare.But the is law.If he would have purchased a car or a house the police would have also taken them away from him for the same reasons.
Any excuse will do
.
I don't know why this bothers me so much. Maybe I just don't like anyone else getting the winnings except the one who scratched it off and won it. I don't like the idea that it is okay for the police or anyone else to take someone else's winnings if they aren't (yet) in debt to someone or the state or the government. I fully support the back child support thing and other stuff, for instance if you filed bankruptcy within the last six months and that sort of thing. But something about this story bothers me. What are they going to do with it?
The man was caught selling drugs! I assume the money will be held in evidence, since the police can't spend it anyway. If the man is convicted of a felony, then maybe the money will be donated to charity - like a treatment center!
I don't understand the above comments. Do you realize how much it costs taxpayers to feed and shelter these people? First he commits a crime and then we're supposed to reward him with more of our money? People are never supposed to benefit from crime. If he got a legal prescription, then it's very possible the methadone was paid for by us too.
Well, it's now up to the courts. The judge will decide what to do with the winning prize.
No, I just don't think it was admissable as evidence. Or useable in any other way as pertained to the arrest and conviction of the perpetrator. I hate druglords. They have cost me some family members. In fact, I can't think of anyone who hasn't been affected by the abuse of drugs one way or another. But explain to me how this is relevant. I don't get it. It just seems to me that the government will use any old excuse they can to take your winnings from you.
" But explain to me how this is relevant. "
Spy, it clearly says that he sold the drugs to the undercover cop and bought the lottery ticket with the money. So it is very much directly related to criminal activity.
The officer, Jeremy Cox, met David Thursday evening and bought four 10-milligram pills for $15 each, the chief said.
David apparently then immediately went back to the Irving Mainway and bought, among other things, lottery tickets, one of which ended up being a $1,000 winner.
The money belongs to the city. Cops don't use personal money to make undercover buys.
So if he would have gotten nothing from it, would they have kept the ticket? Nope. The only reason they are taking it is because it was a winner.
Spy, to me you are making no sense whatsoever. What if he took the money and bought a gun? This has nothing to do with the lottery except that the news article is appearing on a lottery board. Whatever money he received from a drug buy doesn't belong to him!
If he took $100 from a man to have sex with a 9 year old, went out and bought a PB ticket and won $50 million, it wouldn't be his money either. It was obtained from committing an illegal act, just like robbing a bank. He was selling drugs for God's sake to an undercover police officer. If he had purchased the ticket the week before, that would have been entirely different. In that case, they would need to prove that he used illegal funds to purchase it. That is what the judge will determine I suppose.
Anyway, I just realized that this discussion serves no purpose (for both of us) because this man is probably going to jail. Do you think he should still get the $1,000? Let's give free room & board to people and lottery tickets too. I think I'm going to begin a life of crime. Who said crime doesn't pay? LOL
You have a point, justx. Can't argue with that one at all. But chances are, he already has a gun and probably a whole bunch of friends who go with him with guns too. I'll bet when he was arrested, he had at least two buddies waiting in the wings with weapons in case anything-- other than the police coming --happened.
It just seems all the headlines I have been reading lately say if you win the lottery, you will not be able to keep it because the government -or some form of the government- will find a reason to take it from you. It has me discouraged. Do you remember the story of the old gentleman who was in a nursing home and won the lottery and they refused to let him have it, saying he wasn't sane enough to have the money? Sounds more like they are playing GOD there, doesn't it? Where does it end? He won, what does it matter to me how he spends it, as long as it doesn't harm us?
Yes, Spy. I agree that they're sticking their noses where they don't belong. Believe me, I don't trust the government either. Signs of fascism are everywhere! But I think this is different. Just my opinion.
Imagine the controversy if it was a jackpot and not $1,000!
But this, from the OP, c'mon:
"A Maine man who was arrested Thursday for selling methadone to an undercover police officer apparently used money from the sale to buy a lottery ticket that won him $1,000.
Michael David, 46, will not be allowed to keep the winning ticket.
"I guess it will be up to a judge to decide, but it's in our possession right now as proceeds from a drug transaction," Ellsworth Police Chief John Deleo said Friday.
David, who has been staying at a motel on High Street, went into the Irving Mainway gas station Thursday and left the clerk a methadone pill and a phone number, Deleo said."
staying at a motel on High Street,
Good catch, Coin Toss. Very observant of you! LOL
Its bothersome because drugs, money, weapons and other "evidence" has so often "disappeared" from evidence lockers that they don't even bother to report it, anymore. Much of it never makes it into the 'counting room'.
These pills magically become "wrong" because the person peddling them is not wearing a lab coat.
The excuse that he used 'drug money' to buy the ticket is a smokescreen for people who don't engage in much critical thinking. If the 'drug money' had been in his left pocket, while the money that bought the winner was in his right pocket or on his debit card, would that have made a difference? Of course not.
What you are seeing is the institutionalization of theft in the name of crime prevention. It won't be long before your car can be taken because you have an unpaid parking ticket.
I've seen cars taken for that already. And I agree completely. Everything. You nailed it! You said what I was getting at. Thank you!
I see an ugly pattern developing.
I don't think the guy should get to keep the ticket,because it was purchased with money he made from sellling drugs.I know some people may feel this is unfare.But the is law.If he would have purchased a car or a house the police would have also taken them away from him for the same reasons.