Silk Road forums

Discussion => Shipping => Topic started by: wdsnk on March 31, 2013, 04:05 pm

Title: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: wdsnk on March 31, 2013, 04:05 pm
been reading conflicting info on whether it's is advisable to write said words on the package and if to put it back in mailbox.
any feedback is appreciated.

thanks
wdsnk
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: shinzon76 on March 31, 2013, 09:45 pm
I'm of the opinion that the best thing to do with a new package it throw it absently on a table with the rest of the mail, and leave it there for the remainder of the day. If the feds kick down your door, this looks natural, like you haven't even bothered to look at it yet, and adds to your claim that you have no idea what's in the package. Think about it: the average person that receives a package addressed to them in the mail will open it, even if they weren't expecting it, so, to me, writing 'return to sender' on it is the more suspicious option (seriously, who returns shit to sender? Most people toss unwanted mail in the trash.). Just tell the cop you thought it was odd as you weren't expecting any packages, and you were going to open it, but you were busy when you brought the mail in, set it down, and forgot about it. If they press, shut up/lawyer up.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: mollyfan on March 31, 2013, 10:03 pm
i agree with shinzon COMPLETELY! couldnt have said it any better myself


*EDIT*

+1 to u my friend!
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: TheSauceIsHot on March 31, 2013, 10:21 pm
FIRE!!!!!!
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: wdsnk on March 31, 2013, 10:35 pm
Thanks. seems practical / realistic.

Do the feds actually break down doors, bring in a team in for a 1/2 ozer a bud or some hash oil? Isn't there usually some sort of qualifier of high volume or too-frequent orders indicating a distribution op of some sort - are they actually goin after end-users or just throwing the small orders away and sending a "love letter"?

how much bud is considered small (personal use order size)?

Thanks to all for their feedback!

wdsnk
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: AllDayLong on March 31, 2013, 10:39 pm
I'm of the opinion that the best thing to do with a new package it throw it absently on a table with the rest of the mail, and leave it there for the remainder of the day. If the feds kick down your door, this looks natural, like you haven't even bothered to look at it yet, and adds to your claim that you have no idea what's in the package. Think about it: the average person that receives a package addressed to them in the mail will open it, even if they weren't expecting it, so, to me, writing 'return to sender' on it is the more suspicious option (seriously, who returns shit to sender? Most people toss unwanted mail in the trash.). Just tell the cop you thought it was odd as you weren't expecting any packages, and you were going to open it, but you were busy when you brought the mail in, set it down, and forgot about it. If they press, shut up/lawyer up.

I would recommend against telling stories. Exercise your rights and get a lawyer, if your fucking door just got busted in you are way past this point.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: shinzon76 on March 31, 2013, 11:19 pm

I would recommend against telling stories. Exercise your rights and get a lawyer, if your fucking door just got busted in you are way past this point.

Perhaps, but a story need not only be told through words. The circumstances LE finds the package in, and the worthless hours spent searching a clean house speak volumes.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: AllDayLong on April 01, 2013, 12:32 am

I would recommend against telling stories. Exercise your rights and get a lawyer, if your fucking door just got busted in you are way past this point.

Perhaps, but a story need not only be told through words. The circumstances LE finds the package in, and the worthless hours spent searching a clean house speak volumes.

Yes exactly.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: jentyb on April 01, 2013, 04:57 am
so i deal only with weed so what's considered a ''clean'' house i have a raw tray/rolling papers/420science weed jars and a very small (500g) scale just to make sure i haven't been jipped...

tray and papers could be used for tobacco but the weed jars for storage of my product (no more then a oz at a time) and the scale could possibly bring me trouble??
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: motek on April 01, 2013, 05:16 am
To write  "mot known at this address...return to sender"  is what many 'normal' folks would do

By leaving said envelope on the table ... IF, LE arrive, it adds significany "plausible deniability" to your case .... you didn't open it BECOZ it wasn't for you ... and being a kind/responsible citizen, just like having found a wallet you are trying to get it back to it's rightful owner.

 By doing so you establish "Reasonable doubt" in the eyes of the law,  and as long as you dont open your mouth and incriminate yourself ... YES, it IS a Good Idea (unless of course you consume it on the spot!)
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: lucyintheskywd on April 01, 2013, 12:48 pm
Has anyone actually had a package delivered and then later the feds knocking the door down? I have never actually heard of it happening apart from in advice on this forum.

As has been said, they don't give a shit about you buying an ounce of weed, they care about the guys sending it. IMO, in any western nation, they would seize the package if they suspected it and either send a letter saying something was confiscated OR if it was over a certain amount, suggesting you were going to re sell, then they would arrest you on suspicion and search your home.

Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: shinzon76 on April 01, 2013, 12:58 pm
To write  "mot known at this address...return to sender"  is what many 'normal' folks would do

By leaving said envelope on the table ... IF, LE arrive, it adds significany "plausible deniability" to your case .... you didn't open it BECOZ it wasn't for you ... and being a kind/responsible citizen, just like having found a wallet you are trying to get it back to it's rightful owner.

 By doing so you establish "Reasonable doubt" in the eyes of the law,  and as long as you dont open your mouth and incriminate yourself ... YES, it IS a Good Idea (unless of course you consume it on the spot!)

With out concrete statistics from the USPS showing the rate parcels are returned to sender, we're both basically pulling shit out of our asses here, but while I agree that the overarching goal is to present a picture that says to LE 'we fucked up and raided the wrong house,' I completely disagree with your assessment that writing RTS on an envelope is what so-called normal people would do. Perhaps thirty years ago, when my grandmother's generation was in it's prime, but many of those blue hairs have shuffled off, gen-x is in their forties, the children of the 80s are entering their 30s, and, anecdotaly, I've seen zero evidence that retuning packages is a thing the younger generations do. If one was looking for a steadfast rule with painting pictures to lead law enforcement to the conclusions one desires, then one must start from the same basic premise that most jaded LE officers do: that civilians are stupid, lazy cattle. Thus, it would always be in one's best interest to give the impression that one fits easily in that box, while making preparations to tilt the scales in one's favor in the event the fuzz shows up at one's door..

so i deal only with weed so what's considered a ''clean'' house i have a raw tray/rolling papers/420science weed jars and a very small (500g) scale just to make sure i haven't been jipped...

tray and papers could be used for tobacco but the weed jars for storage of my product (no more then a oz at a time) and the scale could possibly bring me trouble??

Anything drug related will fuck you in the ass and destroy that image of innocence you're trying to create. Would you believe that some kid wasn't trying to receive weed in the mail if they have a bong, and rolling papers in their bedroom? Clean the scale with alcohol so it doesn't smell like weed to a dog, put it in the junk drawer in your kitchen and say you use it when weighing ingredients. The rest, either remove them from your house, or hide them unbelievably well; if they get found, you're fucked.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: shinzon76 on April 01, 2013, 01:06 pm
Has anyone actually had a package delivered and then later the feds knocking the door down? I have never actually heard of it happening apart from in advice on this forum.

As has been said, they don't give a shit about you buying an ounce of weed, they care about the guys sending it. IMO, in any western nation, they would seize the package if they suspected it and either send a letter saying something was confiscated OR if it was over a certain amount, suggesting you were going to re sell, then they would arrest you on suspicion and search your home.

Oh, absolutely; if the feds don't suspect you of moving weight, they'll probably just confiscate it and won't bother with the raid. This means that the average small time buyer could probably get away with very minimal precautions 99% of the time. Still, even though five of the six chambers of the revolver are empty, even though there's only about a 17% chance the gun goes off when the trigger is pulled, it's still pretty damn dumb to play Russian roulette, as the consequence of being unlucky is just too great. With stakes so high, it's best to be as paranoid as possible in my opinion.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: davidthegnome on April 01, 2013, 04:42 pm
FIRE!!!!!!

yes having a firepit or fireplace does come in handy haha
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: 57 on April 01, 2013, 07:12 pm
I write "doesn't live here / return to sender" on mail that comes to my home for previous residents.  It is normal to do for mail that isn't addressed to someone who lives in the household. 
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: demosthenes420 on April 01, 2013, 11:47 pm
I disagree that most people DON'T write return to sender on their mail. Opening, destroying, or otherwise altering or interfering in mail that doesn't belong to you is a federal felony, and not one MOST normal sheep would do.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: wdsnk on April 02, 2013, 05:00 am
Many people mention waiting before opening the package, to support plausible denial.

If the first step in possession is reception (physically carrying in the house), then acceptance ("keeping" the package after being aware of the sender and the contents); why not just leave it in the mailbox until much later in the evening or early the next morning before even touching it. In a worse-case scenario, where you are gonna get raided (and there is no other hard evidence), are they gonna sit around waiting for somebody to get their mail....or try to trick you into signing off on something that required no signature (that you could easily refuse). Might not even be a bad idea to take a little ride around the block to check out the surroundings before picking it up.

Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: shinzon76 on April 02, 2013, 11:05 am
I disagree that most people DON'T write return to sender on their mail. Opening, destroying, or otherwise altering or interfering in mail that doesn't belong to you is a federal felony, and not one MOST normal sheep would do.

When did I say anything about mail that isn't addressed to you? In fact, I said exactly the opposite when in an earlier post I wrote that no one returns mail ADDRESSED TO THEM; even if the package is unexpected, there is a strong likelihood of the individual opening it out of curiosity. Mail addressed to another person is a completely different matter, and, regardless, it's common knowledge that you shouldn't receive packages in any other name than your own without first doing the legwork to establish that fake name at the receiving location (sending mail to yourself in that name, etc).
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: shinzon76 on April 02, 2013, 11:47 am
Many people mention waiting before opening the package, to support plausible denial.

If the first step in possession is reception (physically carrying in the house), then acceptance ("keeping" the package after being aware of the sender and the contents); why not just leave it in the mailbox until much later in the evening or early the next morning before even touching it. In a worse-case scenario, where you are gonna get raided (and there is no other hard evidence), are they gonna sit around waiting for somebody to get their mail....or try to trick you into signing off on something that required no signature (that you could easily refuse). Might not even be a bad idea to take a little ride around the block to check out the surroundings before picking it up.

While I wouldn't be comfortable leaving a package in my mail box (I'd be worried about thieves thinking it was electronics, or something similarly valuable), your post does beg an interesting question: how would the Feds handle it if one were to have a mail slot in one's front door? If the package is dropped into one's house with the rest of the mail, how would they know when one has taken possession of the package? Surely, just dropping it into one's house wouldn't be enough to kick one's door down, so it seems in this case they'd be forced to knock, or leave a slip to tempt one down to the post office to pick it up in person.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: motek on April 02, 2013, 03:49 pm
Quote
If one was looking for a steadfast rule with painting pictures to lead law enforcement to the conclusions one desires, then one must start from the same basic premise that most jaded LE officers do: that civilians are stupid, lazy cattle. Thus, it would always be in one's best interest to give the impression that one fits easily in that box, while making preparations to tilt the scales in one's favor in the event the fuzz shows up at one's door..

Maybe  :-\  BUT at the end of the day, the person/peopleone must convince ar at the courthouse, not some nimrod copper!

But hey, that's just my opinion, and without going into details ... it can work, and you've nothing to lose by doing so!


Read a book called "Snowblind" by IIRC, a dude named Zachary Swan ... even though it's old it has some neat ideas  ;)
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: zerik on April 02, 2013, 10:18 pm
I think leaving a package on the table unopened sends the message that you know what's in it. Honestly, how would most people react to an unsolicited package? They would want to know what it is and most people would open it right away.

Besides, I think they would bust you the second you signed for the package.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: motek on April 04, 2013, 09:16 pm
Quote
Besides, I think they would bust you the second you signed for the package.

who signs for packages? :o :o :o


and opening unsolicited packages IS against the LAW  :P  This is why a letter addressed to someone "else" can be left with impunity on the shelf, RTS written on it or not, however, that said, being able to show ones "intention" WAS to TRY and return the mail WILL come in handy IF it ever gets busted/goes to trial  ;)
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: donatto on April 05, 2013, 03:56 pm
SO, not sign, write Return to Sender, leave it about 24hs, then open, dunno if its the best practice, but better than nothing. I agree on not open/sign
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: flwrchlds9 on April 08, 2013, 08:46 pm
Does it actually work? What do you mean?

Will they come in and see it written then apologize and walk out? NO.

Could it help in your defense 2years later during a jury trial? YES.

Will it make the difference between guilty or not? DEPENDS.

Is there 10 other things you can do to make a much BIGGER difference BEFORE you get to that point? YES!!!
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: donatto on April 09, 2013, 12:22 am
Enlight me and keep me safe!
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: Yoda on April 09, 2013, 05:18 am
To write  "mot known at this address...return to sender"  is what many 'normal' folks would do

By leaving said envelope on the table ... IF, LE arrive, it adds significany "plausible deniability" to your case .... you didn't open it BECOZ it wasn't for you ... and being a kind/responsible citizen, just like having found a wallet you are trying to get it back to it's rightful owner.

 By doing so you establish "Reasonable doubt" in the eyes of the law,  and as long as you dont open your mouth and incriminate yourself ... YES, it IS a Good Idea (unless of course you consume it on the spot!)

With out concrete statistics from the USPS showing the rate parcels are returned to sender, we're both basically pulling shit out of our asses here, but while I agree that the overarching goal is to present a picture that says to LE 'we fucked up and raided the wrong house,' I completely disagree with your assessment that writing RTS on an envelope is what so-called normal people would do. Perhaps thirty years ago, when my grandmother's generation was in it's prime, but many of those blue hairs have shuffled off, gen-x is in their forties, the children of the 80s are entering their 30s, and, anecdotaly, I've seen zero evidence that retuning packages is a thing the younger generations do. If one was looking for a steadfast rule with painting pictures to lead law enforcement to the conclusions one desires, then one must start from the same basic premise that most jaded LE officers do: that civilians are stupid, lazy cattle. Thus, it would always be in one's best interest to give the impression that one fits easily in that box, while making preparations to tilt the scales in one's favor in the event the fuzz shows up at one's door..

I disagree with your logic.

The court of law is not about what most people do, but what the law is.  Most people "skim" on their taxes as much as possible, that doesn't make it legal... nor can you use that as a defense when the IRS takes you to court.  Most people violate some sort of traffic laws, yet telling the judge that fact isn't going to help you none.   And you're worried about what the jaded cops think???... that really means fuck all.  Under that line of thinking, the pigs might not think you keeping your mouth shut is "normal"... so does that mean you're going to talk?  Court is what matters, not the opinion of the mentally deficient piggies. 

If your credit card company/bank etc. makes a mistake and credits your account with $500K... and you go and use that, you'll be charged.  You read about such things happening every now and again... bank screwed up and gave guy $5K and dude went on a spending spree.   Next thing he knows he facing felony charges.  "Ignorantia juris non excusat" (Ignorance of the law does not excuse). 

So my point is, just because someone shipped you a box with your name on it, doesn't mean it's yours.  That company could have made a mistake, mailed it to the wrong "Yoda" somehow. (and eventually they'll figure it out and may ask for it back)  IMO Law wise, if it's not yours, & you did not expect it... you shouldn't open it.  Just as if it's not your money, you shouldn't spend it.  But when you open it... then in court that act helps whittle down your plausible deniability. (whether most people would open it or not).  Why do you think all CD's try to wait for them to open it?... sometimes even putting an electronic device in the box alerting the awaiting LE when it was opened?  Just as with the signature, it's another piece of evidence they want to reinforce their case against you.

LE wants you to sign for it, LE wants you to open it... that alone should tell you everything you need to know.    Writing RTS cannot hurt IMO.

All if this is kinda a moot point anyhow.  If the LE raiding you are saints, then this stuff matters... if the LE raiding you are typical scum LE, then they'll lie about details anyhow just to see you convicted.  LE has job performance to worry about if they want to make lieutenant, get a raise etc.... if their arrest to conviction ratio is shit, no promotion for them.  But if everyone they arrest is convicted... well, up the ladder they go.  Some PD's actually hold regular classes in "how to write a proper report"... if you know what they/I mean....  kinda like creative writing classes I guess.

so i deal only with weed so what's considered a ''clean'' house i have a raw tray/rolling papers/420science weed jars and a very small (500g) scale just to make sure i haven't been jipped...

tray and papers could be used for tobacco but the weed jars for storage of my product (no more then a oz at a time) and the scale could possibly bring me trouble??

Just because it *can* be used for something else doesn't matter; it can be used for what they are charging you with.  Zip log bags in your kitchen cabinet will be logged as evidence (even though you don't use them for your drug business)... any cash that isn't stolen by LE will be logged as evidence (even though that cash was for rent, not drugs)... anything that can possibly be related at all to drugs will be logged as evidence.  Rolling papers?... yup.  Scale?... for sure.  Lab equipment?... yup.  They may even take old utility bills just to be nosy.  The burden of proof is now on you to show that you weren't doing what they say you are.  (I know, it's supposed to be the other way around... but irl, it's not)
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: donatto on April 09, 2013, 11:58 am
To write  "mot known at this address...return to sender"  is what many 'normal' folks would do

By leaving said envelope on the table ... IF, LE arrive, it adds significany "plausible deniability" to your case .... you didn't open it BECOZ it wasn't for you ... and being a kind/responsible citizen, just like having found a wallet you are trying to get it back to it's rightful owner.

 By doing so you establish "Reasonable doubt" in the eyes of the law,  and as long as you dont open your mouth and incriminate yourself ... YES, it IS a Good Idea (unless of course you consume it on the spot!)

With out concrete statistics from the USPS showing the rate parcels are returned to sender, we're both basically pulling shit out of our asses here, but while I agree that the overarching goal is to present a picture that says to LE 'we fucked up and raided the wrong house,' I completely disagree with your assessment that writing RTS on an envelope is what so-called normal people would do. Perhaps thirty years ago, when my grandmother's generation was in it's prime, but many of those blue hairs have shuffled off, gen-x is in their forties, the children of the 80s are entering their 30s, and, anecdotaly, I've seen zero evidence that retuning packages is a thing the younger generations do. If one was looking for a steadfast rule with painting pictures to lead law enforcement to the conclusions one desires, then one must start from the same basic premise that most jaded LE officers do: that civilians are stupid, lazy cattle. Thus, it would always be in one's best interest to give the impression that one fits easily in that box, while making preparations to tilt the scales in one's favor in the event the fuzz shows up at one's door..

I disagree with your logic.

The court of law is not about what most people do, but what the law is.  Most people "skim" on their taxes as much as possible, that doesn't make it legal... nor can you use that as a defense when the IRS takes you to court.  Most people violate some sort of traffic laws, yet telling the judge that fact isn't going to help you none.   And you're worried about what the jaded cops think???... that really means fuck all.  Under that line of thinking, the pigs might not think you keeping your mouth shut is "normal"... so does that mean you're going to talk?  Court is what matters, not the opinion of the mentally deficient piggies. 

If your credit card company/bank etc. makes a mistake and credits your account with $500K... and you go and use that, you'll be charged.  You read about such things happening every now and again... bank screwed up and gave guy $5K and dude went on a spending spree.   Next thing he knows he facing felony charges.  "Ignorantia juris non excusat" (Ignorance of the law does not excuse). 

So my point is, just because someone shipped you a box with your name on it, doesn't mean it's yours.  That company could have made a mistake, mailed it to the wrong "Yoda" somehow. (and eventually they'll figure it out and may ask for it back)  IMO Law wise, if it's not yours, & you did not expect it... you shouldn't open it.  Just as if it's not your money, you shouldn't spend it.  But when you open it... then in court that act helps whittle down your plausible deniability. (whether most people would open it or not).  Why do you think all CD's try to wait for them to open it?... sometimes even putting an electronic device in the box alerting the awaiting LE when it was opened?  Just as with the signature, it's another piece of evidence they want to reinforce their case against you.

LE wants you to sign for it, LE wants you to open it... that alone should tell you everything you need to know.    Writing RTS cannot hurt IMO.

All if this is kinda a moot point anyhow.  If the LE raiding you are saints, then this stuff matters... if the LE raiding you are typical scum LE, then they'll lie about details anyhow just to see you convicted.  LE has job performance to worry about if they want to make lieutenant, get a raise etc.... if their arrest to conviction ratio is shit, no promotion for them.  But if everyone they arrest is convicted... well, up the ladder they go.  Some PD's actually hold regular classes in "how to write a proper report"... if you know what they/I mean....  kinda like creative writing classes I guess.

so i deal only with weed so what's considered a ''clean'' house i have a raw tray/rolling papers/420science weed jars and a very small (500g) scale just to make sure i haven't been jipped...

tray and papers could be used for tobacco but the weed jars for storage of my product (no more then a oz at a time) and the scale could possibly bring me trouble??

Just because it *can* be used for something else doesn't matter; it can be used for what they are charging you with.  Zip log bags in your kitchen cabinet will be logged as evidence (even though you don't use them for your drug business)... any cash that isn't stolen by LE will be logged as evidence (even though that cash was for rent, not drugs)... anything that can possibly be related at all to drugs will be logged as evidence.  Rolling papers?... yup.  Scale?... for sure.  Lab equipment?... yup.  They may even take old utility bills just to be nosy.  The burden of proof is now on you to show that you weren't doing what they say you are.  (I know, it's supposed to be the other way around... but irl, it's not)

Thats my way of think these kinda things, nice read +1
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: Duckman on April 09, 2013, 12:15 pm
If the feds kick down your door, it really dosent matter whats written on the envelope.

Feds do not go around kicking down random doors, so when they kick down your door, its because they have intelligence to suggest you have drugs on the premises.

The fact that you havent opened the package is unimportant.  They knew you had them before they kicked down your door.

The truth is that if they decide to force entry to your premises then you are already in trouble and there isnt anything you can do to change that, however most people purchasing small quantities have nothing to worry about, they dont send out the SWAT team for a couple of grams of weed.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: oldtoby on April 10, 2013, 04:21 am
Quote
If one was looking for a steadfast rule with painting pictures to lead law enforcement to the conclusions one desires, then one must start from the same basic premise that most jaded LE officers do: that civilians are stupid, lazy cattle. Thus, it would always be in one's best interest to give the impression that one fits easily in that box, while making preparations to tilt the scales in one's favor in the event the fuzz shows up at one's door..

Maybe  :-\  BUT at the end of the day, the person/peopleone must convince ar at the courthouse, not some nimrod copper!

I live in a country (not U.S.) where *reading material* (cut-out newspaper clippings about the drug trade) were successfully used in court to help prosecute someone of conspiracy to import narcotics (not the only evidence, but in part). You're right that it's the courts you have to convince at the end of the day, but at every stage, maintaining a story/cover/identity that doesn't read as suspicious is beneficial, because every step of the way someone has to decide to take things to the next level (from knocking on your door rather than sending a love letter, to raiding instead, to prosecutors deciding to pursue the case, etc.). Your best protection is doubt. Once they "know" you're guilty, there's no stopping them, because they think the only thing standing between them and your conviction is pressing a little harder, digging a little deeper - if they think it's worth it, and that can be hard to predict (maybe you buy bulk - just for you - to cut down on expenses. Just an example.).

On the specific ploy, yeah I say do what looks natural. For that reason I try to never be home for the postman. If I am and he rings I don't answer. I never want to be the person to say "Uh, I'm not expecting anything, please send it back" because that sounds suspicious as FUCK. Who says that? Leave it in the box with RTS or on the kitchen table with the other mail; either makes sense to me.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: The Advocate on April 10, 2013, 08:09 am
Many people mention waiting before opening the package, to support plausible denial.

If the first step in possession is reception (physically carrying in the house), then acceptance ("keeping" the package after being aware of the sender and the contents); why not just leave it in the mailbox until much later in the evening or early the next morning before even touching it. In a worse-case scenario, where you are gonna get raided (and there is no other hard evidence), are they gonna sit around waiting for somebody to get their mail....or try to trick you into signing off on something that required no signature (that you could easily refuse). Might not even be a bad idea to take a little ride around the block to check out the surroundings before picking it up.

While I wouldn't be comfortable leaving a package in my mail box (I'd be worried about thieves thinking it was electronics, or something similarly valuable), your post does beg an interesting question: how would the Feds handle it if one were to have a mail slot in one's front door? If the package is dropped into one's house with the rest of the mail, how would they know when one has taken possession of the package? Surely, just dropping it into one's house wouldn't be enough to kick one's door down, so it seems in this case they'd be forced to knock, or leave a slip to tempt one down to the post office to pick it up in person.

Not many times do I see such a creative answer.  I think it's kind of funny that the feds would literally put a letter through the slot into your home and bust you for it.  That would be like the cops slipping stolen merchandise in your pocket, then busting you.  Have yet to see that happen lol.  I think the door slot might be a great idea for envelopes.

They can install an electronic device that alerts them when the envelope or package is opened, as well as gps.  It's not very common for small orders, but it can be done in any CD.
Title: Re: Does the "Return to Sender" idea actually work?
Post by: burgarsenator on April 10, 2013, 01:48 pm
I'm of the opinion that the best thing to do with a new package it throw it absently on a table with the rest of the mail, and leave it there for the remainder of the day. If the feds kick down your door, this looks natural, like you haven't even bothered to look at it yet, and adds to your claim that you have no idea what's in the package. Think about it: the average person that receives a package addressed to them in the mail will open it, even if they weren't expecting it, so, to me, writing 'return to sender' on it is the more suspicious option (seriously, who returns shit to sender? Most people toss unwanted mail in the trash.). Just tell the cop you thought it was odd as you weren't expecting any packages, and you were going to open it, but you were busy when you brought the mail in, set it down, and forgot about it. If they press, shut up/lawyer up.


Nice answer very smart. But what if that's the only mail you have received ?