3 ms·
I think you are missing the bigger point of civil asset forfeiture. 1) there does not have to be criminal action involved 2) this isn't about seizing the proper
by Meph504 6y ago
I think you are missing the bigger point of civil asset forfeiture.
1) there does not have to be criminal action involved
2) this isn't about seizing the property of one person's possession from a criminal that has possession of them, but your assets can be seized and kept by the dept taking them, if you can not prove that those assets weren't intended for criminal purposes.
3) There is a massive conflict of interest that exist when a police department keep assets they take from people who haven't been convicted of a crime.
- LatteLazy 6y agoThe articles case isn't civil asset forfeiture. It's criminal. I agree about civil asset forfeiture. The vehicle owner tried a reverse civil asset process to get the car back, so that's interesting but a bit of an aside...