News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or on prepaid cards. Parent comment

Re:Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or ... by harryh on Thursday June 09, 2016 @04:00PM (#11871910)
The burden of proof in civil asset forfeiture trials (and there is a trial) is still on the plaintiff. It is not on the victim.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or ... by facetube on Thursday June 09, 2016 @08:12PM (#11873354)
False, at least in the US. The government's case is considered to be against the property, not against you. The standard of legal proof is a preponderance of evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt. "Assets [are only] returned if [the] owner proves [his/her] innocence". See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United... for details.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or ... by harryh on Friday June 10, 2016 @01:35AM (#11874498)
"preponderance of evidence" is still a burden on the plaintiff. It's just a lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or ... by facetube on Friday June 10, 2016 @02:35PM (#11878769)
In practice in the United States it's been shown to present little to no burden. These cases have been widely covered in the press. Again, see the link.
[ Parent | on HN ]