Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or on prepaid cards

Re:Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or ... by tremon on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @01:01PM (#11863706)

Yet if it's not a person, it can't be convicted of a crime either. Has a dog ever been charged for biting, instead of its owner?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or ... by SixSigma on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @03:16PM (#11864804)

Lots of times, plenty also found guilty, including a swarm of crickets who were excommunicated.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or ... by jandrese on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @01:23PM (#11863877)

What makes you think money can't be put on trial?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or ... by tremon on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @01:25PM (#11863900)

Oh I'm aware of that. I was pointing out the logical inconsistency between "not a person, so no 4th amendment" and "not a person, so no case"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or ... by cmdrfred on Wednesday June 08, 2016 @01:51PM (#11864104)

There is no logic here. The 4th amendment clearly states papers are protected, cash is paper. It's protected no matter what retarded logic you use.

[ Parent | on HN ]