3 ms·

Anecdotes that were raised in the media don't prove anything other than that there are exceptions.

• etherealmachine 6y ago
  When you make a statement like "99 times out of 100" it's up to you to prove that with statistics. My initial belief is that you made up that 99/100 number and evidence of people not getting their money back only reinforces that belief.
  • koheripbal 6y ago
    Oh, I agree - someone should do a study like that. ...but anecdotes don't prove anything. The process for reclaiming seized assets is well documented... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States#Contested_seizures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...
    • ceejayoz 6y ago
      Nothing in that link supports your assertion that just showing up typically suffices. > Victims often have "long legal struggles to get their money back".
      • koheripbal 6y ago
        The statistic in the article that 85% of seizures that are kept are the product of people not showing up to court, does indeed suggest that.
        • ceejayoz 6y ago
          85% of people not showing up for court does not mean that 85% of people would win immediately upon showing up. As my examples demonstrate, merely showing up can be the first step in a very lengthy and expensive process. If I go see a lawyer and they tell me "it'll take years, you'll get back only some of the money, and most of it will go to paying me", I'd skip court too.
• ceejayoz 6y ago
  What do bare assertions unsupported by even anecdotes prove?