A Response to the Toledo Blade – Reform Asset Forfeiture

I write in response to the October 16, 2015 editorial entitled, “Reform Asset Forfeiture.” The editorial discussed two proposed pieces of legislation working their way through the Ohio and Michigan legislatures. The goal of the legislation is to limit asset forfeiture to instances only after the “owner” has been convicted of a crime, and even after conviction, to further raise the burden of proving forfeitability to clear and convincing from its current standard of a preponderance of the evidence.

I have worked on more than 100 asset forfeiture cases over the last several years – both as a federal agent and as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney in one of the country’s busiest districts. It is frustrating to work in a field of the law that very few understand and many others distort. Most anti-forfeiture articles point to stories of supposed abuse by police agencies in the misuse of the seized assets, or the alleged lack of due process. The former is exaggerated and the latter is just plain wrong.