HomeNewsSportsMoreWeatherAnnouncementsClassifiedsMy Trib.ComMy CityJobsHomesCars
Advanced Search
 

Wyo Highway Patrol doesn't want any of $3.3 million


Story Tools

Print this story

E-mail this story

Rate this story

Text Size

Share This Story:
del.icio.usdiggNewsVine




trib.popular


The Wyoming Highway Patrol will not apply for any of the $3.3 million seized by now ex-trooper Ben Peech during a traffic stop in Cheyenne last April, even though the seizure played a critical role in investigating a nationwide drug ring, Col. Sam Powell said Thursday.

"The reality is, our involvement in the totality of the investigation was fairly nominal," Powell said.

Playing down his agency's and Peech's role, Powell said the investigation had been going on for months, and the application process wouldn't be worth it.

A lead prosecutor couldn't believe a government agency wouldn't want free money, said Assistant U.S. Attorney Doug Whalley of the Western District of Washington.

"That's ridiculous," Whalley said. "I've never heard of it."

While the traffic stop and follow-up work itself didn't take much time, Whalley hailed Peech's work.

Peech, working with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, pulled over a pickup truck westbound on Interstate 80 on April 7, 2007.

That stop yielded $3,322,230 found in vacuum-wrapped plastic packages in eight suitcases plus five cell phones, which authorities confiscated. The DEA infers such a large amount of cash with no good explanation about its purpose may be related to drug trafficking.

The pickup driver, Rusty Boschee, was later indicted and pleaded guilty Tuesday to conspiracy to distribute about 650 pounds of high-grade marijuana. He faces between five years to 40 years imprisonment.

The guilty plea included a criminal forfeiture of the $3.3 million to the federal government.

Despite Peech's role, the Wyoming Highway Patrol in early November fired him for alleged improper tactics during the traffic stop.

His supporters claim the WHP fired him for trying to organize troopers in a union.

Whalley lauded Peech, saying he did not give any indication to Boschee the government knew of his activities.

The federal government will distribute the $3.3 million to participating agencies, including the DEA and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, he said. "When the federal government forfeits the money, Wyoming law enforcement will receive a share thanks to Trooper Peech's assistance."

Whalley didn't know how much that would be, but it probably would have been in the thousands of dollars, he said.

However, the Wyoming Highway Patrol isn't interested, Powell said.

Peech, meanwhile, has been appealing his termination through his attorney Sean Olson of Denver.

The highway patrol, Olson said Wednesday, would be hypocritical to collect some of the $3.3 million after it fired the trooper who did most of the work. "He gets a slap in the face and Wyoming gets a share of the money."

When told the highway patrol won't apply for the money, Olson said Thursday the decision makes sense from a public relations perspective.

"If they were to accept the money, it makes them look bad," he said.

"They know they're in litigation," Olson said. "It behooves them to avoid any inference of impropriety on their end."

Reach Tom Morton at (307) 266-0592, or at Tom.Morton@trib.com.


Previous   Next
Wyoming briefs   Feds want out of sage grouse agreement

Article Rating

Current Rating: 4 of 3 votes!Rate File:

Reader Comments

There are 12 comment(s)

Comments to this story.

Jim G. wrote on Feb 15, 2008 12:32 AM:

" Looks like the Wyoming Patrol doesn't want to admit it was wrong in terminating Trooper Peech. I would rather have one Trooper like him chasing down dopers, then 100 Troopers writing traffic tickets. "

Principle wrote on Feb 15, 2008 2:18 AM:

" When was the last time that someone chose doing the right thing over money? Wyoming is indeed a unique place. "

BULL wrote on Feb 15, 2008 8:17 AM:

" I woudnt take the money either , it would be admitting guilt to running a good lawman out of a job. The rats who run him off should get the same treatment and Peech should get thier job. The druggies will try any stunt to peddle thier crap , why should the law not do the same. They do it on drunk drivers. "

oldmunchkin wrote on Feb 15, 2008 4:03 PM:

" What do you know? Wonders never cease! The WHP did the right thing here. No one should be deprived of their rights like this man was. Glad to see WPH isn't going to profit from their own illegal behavior! "

LuvYaMeanIt wrote on Feb 15, 2008 10:17 PM:

" Wow, I sure hope the WHP is not asking the Legislature for any money this session. Their leader must think tey don't need any. Thanks for keeping public safety first, Col. Powell. Sounds to me like Col. Powell needs a stripe or two removed, if not a new position in another state! "

sagebrushsniper wrote on Feb 16, 2008 4:17 PM:

" If 3.3 mill ain't worth the trouble of getting it, let me try! Sounds to me like the Col. needs alittle talk on money issues, like maybe his value of the dollar is a little behind times. Looks like someone is afarid they made and mistake in the Peech issue. What does Gov. Dave think of 3.3 mill not being worth the trouble? Lets keep ambushing the druggies, the more the better! "

Givemeabreak wrote on Feb 17, 2008 11:30 AM:

" I hope to hell that the Highway Patrol isn't going to ask the state legislature for more money this year after Col. Powell's decision not to take any of the forfeiture money...What a slap in the face to the taxpayer of Wyoming, when for the last several budget session the WHP has come crying to the legislature asking for more money..."not worth the time doing the paperwork"? Boy I bet there are a lot of good programs in State Government that would love to be able to get some of the money that Col. Powell is willing to blow off. I understand that it is a matter of pride and a possible admission of culpability for him not to accept the money. Perhaps he should at least ask for it to offset the cost of the lawsuit that the Patrol is almost assuredly going to lose in Trooper Peach's case at the rate they are going. At least the tax payer wouldn't get stuck with the bill like every other time the State screws up! "

Oos wrote on Feb 18, 2008 1:12 AM:

" Well, if the WHP don't need the money, then it should be put in a fund to pay for the legal costs ofTrooper Peech's case. He made the bust, (with assistance), but he is paying the price. "

oldmunchkin wrote on Feb 19, 2008 3:29 PM:

" Oos, maybe EX-Trooper Peech should pay for his own legal defense. Hell, the rest of us have to pay our own defense when we break the law. "

Principle wrote on Feb 20, 2008 5:43 PM:

" Just like I figured. You wave a few bucks in front of some people and they lose sight of the important things in life. The same people would probably sell out half of their freedoms and most of their neighbors to get a taste of that money. Its all dopers and law breakers until Peech has his suspicions and spotlight trained on you. "

Tuesday wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:49 PM:

" Trooper Peech should have been given that good ol' pat on the back as a job well done. This almost sounds like a personal vendetta. What were the "alleged improper tactics" used that demanded he be fired? I hope he gets his job back. "

oldmunchkin wrote on Feb 22, 2008 4:10 PM:

" Tuesday, how about the "fake" REDDI report Peech called in, so he would have "cause" to stop the car? How about Peech asking dispatch to "lose" any record of him calling that in? I call that improper tactics. Maybe you call it "good police work" I call it against the law. There is a law on the books here about "false reporting" you know. "

Submit a Comment

We encourage your feedback and dialog, all comments will be reviewed by our Web staff before appearing on the Web site.
(optional)
   
Please note: We provide our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.