Hacker News Reader

Comment by hackercurious | Hacker News Reader

The State of New Mexico has just banned asset forfeiture.

HB 560, introduced by New Mexico Rep. Zachary Cook and passed unanimously in the legislature, replaces civil asset forfeiture with criminal forfeiture, which requires a conviction of a person as a prerequisite to losing property tied to a crime. The new law means that New Mexico now has the strongest protections against wrongful asset seizures in the country.

Link to the bill:

http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/15%20Regular/final/HB0560.pd...

View on HN

The WaPo article (the submission) mentions this bill, but finishes:

"But New Mexico's law only affects state law enforcement officials. As a result, in New Mexico — and everywhere else, for that matter — DEA agents will be able to board your train, ask you where you're going and take all your cash if they don't like your story, all without ever charging you with a crime."

It sounds like a semi-criminalization of cash in practice.

Not at all. They steal bank accounts, boats, cars, and houses as well.

Sure, but I've got about as much money in my bank account (as opposed to cash) and nobody has ever asked me to prove it wasn't gained illicitly if I wanted it back. I've got friends with boats, I've owned cars, and currently living in a house owned by my SO. None of us has been targeted just for having those things.

While I'm sure that they wouldn't hesitate to seize those assets if any of us were charged with some sort of drug offense, it doesn't come close to the way cash is treated. In this case and in others, the mere possession of a large sum of cash can be grounds for suspicion and seizure. It's like you don't really have a right to keep your money unless it's accessed via some plastic card or routing number.

> It's like you don't really have a right to keep your money unless it's accessed via some plastic card or routing number.

They have an apparatus in place to track all of your money, as long as it's in electronic form. That way they can control your spending and make sure you don't spend it on things they don't like (drugs, prostitution, insert illegal behavior/good here). When you use cash, a method they have limited control over, the very act of using it becomes subversive.

Why would you use cash unless you wanted to do something illegal with it?

That's the question ringing in their minds. The very act of using cash becomes ground for suspicion.

Doesn't this just mean that the will rob you _and_ additionally charge you with some made-up crime and let you rot in jail until you sign the plea deal?

> additionally charge you with some made-up crime and let you rot in jail until you sign the plea deal

There are supposed to be other protections for this. The sixth amendment, for instance, says: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial...", which means that they can't just "let you rot in jail."

In practice, though, sometimes you do rot in jail. :/

In the face of such tilted odds, some people consider themselves freedom fighters more than criminals. Perspective matters.

Speedy public trials, in this day and age, can take a year or more from the time of conviction.

That's a long time to spend in jail - a location where you have no real freedoms.

That's the worst part of it, this process of flagrant violation of the Constitution. In essence, the government has become a treasonous organization in direct violation and contradiction to the Constitution.

If the original authors could define a speedy trial in terms of days and a couple weeks, there is no rational justification for why in this day and age a speedy trial can't be a matter of minutes or hours, or at worst days.

The most dangerous enemy is the one within and the traitor in your midst.

Are minutes/hours/days really enough for a defense counsel? Many times not... the time it takes to get to trial isn't only a matter of the government letting you rot. Not to mention that a given backlog and limited number of judges, the formation of juries, etc.

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial..."

That varies from state to state. In my state, the District Attorney just has to get you to trial within a year of your arrest.

Not showing up to work for a year because you couldn't afford bail can have a negative impact on one's finances, to say the least.

There's a difference between being charged and convicted. If the text is correct, they can't rob you until you've been convicted of a crime in a court of law. So that means while you rot in jail under a fake charge you at least still have your stuff.

Which you will then start to sell off so you can afford the legal defense required to fight the false charges. A person can be found innocent of all charges but still be wiped out financially from defending themselves. That's called "justice".

>A person can be found innocent of all charges but still be wiped out financially from defending themselves. That's called "justice".

And say the false charge was one with a social stigma, say child molestation. Now not only are you financially wiped out, not only have you lost your job, but your name is now tied with a crime which people will often not care if you were found not guilty (or even found innocent). And the only thing you can do to stop it is to say a prayer that you aren't going to be the next one wrongly charged.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com