Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (4090)	2/5/2001 4:03:35 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 59480

In an ideal world, which this is admittedly not, there can be different results from a civil suit and a criminal suit because the standards for prevailing are different. That's why (in part) OJ Simpson could be found not guilty of killing his ex-wife in the criminal case (which requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt) but guilty in the wrongful death case (which only required a preponderance of the evidence). So that's the innocent explanation of how someone can be found not guilty of drunk driving but still lose their car. Unfortunately, there are many cases every year of people losing their property in civil forfeiture cases where they were not guilty of any wrongdoing at all. If you let your druggie kid brother drive your car and he's arrested for buying crack in some jurisdictions (say, San Francisco, not exactly a bastion of property rights) you can kiss your car goodbye. But there are efforts to reform this abuse. civilliberty.about.com