Jun. 6—Call it the case of the missing $450,000. There’s plenty of finger pointing, a purported piece of evidence, and lots of questions that remained unanswered Friday.
Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen issued a blistering news release Friday, denouncing a Santa Fe newspaper’s decision to publish a story about a newly filed federal lawsuit.
The lawsuit filed May 10 alleges sheriff’s deputies stopped a Freightliner truck on Interstate 40 in September, seized $450,000 found in three backpacks, and kept the money.
Since then, the sheriff’s office has stonewalled inquiries asking for the cash to be returned and says it has no record of the seizure, states the lawsuit.
But the plot thickens.
When interviewed by the Journal, the attorney who filed the lawsuit, George Siddell of San Diego, wouldn’t say much about his client Joe Anthony Gomez. He declined to say why Gomez was carrying the cash, where his client works, what else the truck was carrying or where his client lives.
“It doesn’t matter,” said Siddell, who said Gomez was never arrested or charged in connection with the seizure in Albuquerque.
Allen in his news release linked the $450,000 to a “high level” ongoing law enforcement operation “in close collaboration with the Drug Enforcement Administration to combat the fentanyl epidemic.” “Informants, undercover agents, and civilians are now at risk because of this publication.”
The story Thursday in the Santa Fe New Mexican quoted Undersheriff Aaron Williamson as saying that there never was a seizure of $450,000, nor was there a traffic stop.
“We did this to keep two individuals from being murdered by the cartel when they got back with no money, so we staged a traffic stop to try and keep them alive,” he was quoted as saying.
Santa Fe New Mexican reporter Phaedra Haywood had no comment about the sheriff’s news release Friday.
Many questions, few answers
The lawsuit states that during Siddell and his paralegal’s attempts last fall to ask the sheriff’s office for a case number or records about the stop, they found there weren’t any.
“They never claimed a drug investigation,” Siddell told the Journal. According to the lawsuit, Gomez’s complaint about the money appears to have been investigated by BCSO Internal Affairs, with the results turned over to Allen in early May.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office typically files forfeiture proceedings in federal court when suspected drug money is confiscated during traffic stops or as part of an investigation. But that hasn’t happened in the case of the $450,000, he said.
After issuing the news release, the sheriff’s office wouldn’t respond to Journal questions about the lawsuit, the newspaper report, or the sheriff’s statement.
“As mentioned in the press release, we are not providing any further details or statements,” stated a BCSO spokeswoman in an email. “All questions regarding the investigation will have to be filtered through the appropriate agency, the DEA or (U.S. Attorney’s Office).”
A spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office told the Journal, “This office is not involved in this matter and cannot comment on the activities of the BCSO or the DEA.”
The DEA had no immediate response to a Journal inquiry about the case.
The lawsuit included as an exhibit what appears to be a blurry search warrant inventory form showing three backpacks were taken, with an undetermined amount of cash inside.
But there’s no official sheriff’s office letterhead, only the words “SEARCH WARRANT INVENTORY.” There’s a date of Sept. 6, 2024, the time of the search, and the words, “Unknown amount of U.S. currency,” and an indecipherable computer-aided dispatch number.
Two other exhibits show grainy photos of the side mirror of a semi-truck; one with a law enforcement officer walking back to a dark patrol car.
The lawsuit states that a sheriff’s deputy, Rosemarie Cordova “conducted the traffic stop, search, and seizure at issue.” When reached Friday by the Journal, Cordova said she isn’t a deputy. She is assigned to work as the BCSO’s Internal Affairs coordinator, records show. Cordova wouldn’t comment about the case.
Siddell maintained that his client’s constitutional rights have been violated by a warrantless search and seizure. The lawsuit seeks punitive and compensatory damages, including $450,000.
Asked why he would believe his client had $450,000 inside the backpacks, Siddell said, “I don’t have to believe my client. The jury has to believe, by the preponderance of the evidence, that the sheriff’s department seized the money.”