• Urist
    link
    fedilink
    281 year ago

    In the US, you are innocent until proven guilty. Civil asset forfeiture runs against this idea. The burden should be on the government to prove this stuff is ill-gotten gains, anything else is unamerican.

      • @Figureinplastic
        link
        101 year ago

        Try not to suck any cop dick on your way across the parking lot.

        • Echo Dot
          link
          fedilink
          -51 year ago

          Look its the US cops, it’s like not prodding venomous spiders, it’s basic self protection.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        You do realizing that explaining why will not cause them to let you keep the $100k. They WILL seize it, regardless of your reasons. They take note of those reasons you give so they can use that against you in a court of law, however.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        Do you like your cops freshly washed, or do you like that end of shift musk, for when you’re sucking that cop dick?

    • Echo Dot
      link
      fedilink
      -191 year ago

      It must be nice to have thousands of dollars and have no idea where it came from. But realistically it’s highly unlikely that you would walk around with it.

      Presumably you either were handed it in which case you know where you got it from, or you got it out of the bank in which case you must have a business or lottery winnings or inheritance you can point to.

      I cannot imagine any innocent scenario where you have vast of money (in currency form) of which you are unable to provide origin information on.

        • Echo Dot
          link
          fedilink
          -81 year ago

          So they can advise where the cash comes from. The problem wasn’t carrying it it was not been able to give an adequate explanation as to its origin.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            8
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The possession of the money is treated as probable cause. The police are not tasked with finding the ultimate truth of things, just acting on probable cause.

            So you’re on the road with $10,000 in cash. The police find out. You tell them the true reason. They write it down, then seize the money because it was suspicious to you to carry $10,000 in cash.

            Then, of course, you can go petition to get the money back. At which time, you have to prove by a preponderance of evidence (the same bar as if you were suing them for damages) to get the money back.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            71 year ago

            the explanation you get to give to the judge as you now get to fight for your money back. the police officer is under no obligation to even listen to you as he steals from you.