Hacker News Reader

Comment by DINKDINK | Hacker News Reader

My guess is that "United States vs Bitcoin wallet" could be an instance of civil forfeiture, where instead of going through the steps required to prosecute someone, US authorities are putting literally money in the defense position and effectively automatically taking it. Which yields some tragically comedic titles like: The United States Government vs $25,180 in United States Currency.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...

View on HN

Or my personal favorite, United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins.

Incidentally, the shark fins won.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Approximately...

I was just wondering to myself "How the hell does the government win judgements against sums of money?"

The money doesn't appear to defend itself, and thus, boom: Default judgement.

Does money have Miranda rights? If money cannot afford an attorney can it get a public defender?

I don't believe so. It's also guilty unless proven innocent.

John Oliver had a great segment on Civil Forfeiture a couple years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks

It's a total defecation on the 4th amendment is what it is.

edit:

What I mean is that the concept of civil asset forfeiture is a legal circumvention of the protections the 4th amendment is supposed to provide. The practice itself is probably illegal and should be challenged, and there should be a lot of uproar about the practice.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com