> you must prove the innocence of your seized assets to get them back This isn't true. The burden of evidence in civil asset forfeiture is still on the state.

> you must prove the innocence of your seized assets to get them back This isn't true. The burden of evidence in civil asset forfeiture is still on the state. The standard is preponderance of doubt, as per the norm in civil court, not the higher standard of beyond a reasonable doubt, but a civil forfeiture case still requires a judge or jury to convict your assets. From Wikipedia: > The government simply files a civil action in rem against the property itself, and then generally must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the property is forfeitable under the applicable forfeiture statute. Civil forfeiture is independent of any criminal case, and because of this, the forfeiture action may be filed before indictment, after indictment, or even if there is no indictment. Likewise, civil forfeiture may be sought in cases in which the owner is criminally acquitted of the underlying crimes ... > — Craig Gaumer, Assistant United States Attorney, 2007