3 ms·
We have something similar in the UK, originating in the Proceeds of Crime Act, but the big distinction is that confiscation orders are made by the Crown or Hig
by noneeeed 6y ago
We have something similar in the UK, originating in the Proceeds of Crime Act, but the big distinction is that confiscation orders are made by the Crown or High Courts. It can be quite an involved process and is largely done against those higher up. The Crown court handles those proceeding against convicted criminals while the High Court can make orders against unconvited individuals. In the latter case I think it's noramally the high-ups who have assets with no obvious legal origin who are targetted and it is a civil case where the burden of proof is lower but generally if you are innocent it should be easy enough to show you got your weatlth from somewhere legitimate.
It's not perfect, but the checks and balances are there.
The US asset forfiture system is a straight-up affront to the basic concepts of justice in a civilised, democratic country.
- csilverman 6y agoYeah, that makes a lot more sense to me: using this primarily as a tool for targeting power players or dismantling large criminal organizations, and having the process closely supervised by a higher-level court. As opposed to Officer Clancy’s expert assessment that “well, he sure looked guilty to me and that was one real nice car he was driving, I don’t reckon he could have afforded that on his own.”