you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Most police would just seize the money saying they suspect it was used in a crime. Why would they let some rando have it if it could buy the office a new MRAP?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    That's why you try to do it with a lawyer, but they'll still steal it anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • The problem is that the charges are against the property itself, and it's a civil not a criminal charge. So the police only have to meet a minimal standard that there is probable cause. This could be as simple as claiming the only reason someone wouldn't be actively seeking that large amount of money through legal means would be that the money was involved with or acquired through illegal means.

    If the police did seize the money, it would at least be tied up in court for years with extended legal expenses. Personally I would rather take my chances on laundering the money or an extended period of time.

  • source
  • parent