I worked for a commercial auction and liquidation company in the ‘90’s. We had a contract with the U.S. Marshall service to store vehicles seized in federal felony arrests—most of them were drug dealers. The defendants were given the choice of surrendering their assets or retaining them pending trial outcome. If found not guilty, seized assets were either returned to the accused or proceeds of sale were paid. It was the criminal’s choice.
Just a nit, but this is part of the problem and even your mindset when commenting; if they’re found NOT guilty they’re NOT a criminal. You make the statement at the end of your post that “it’s the criminal’s choice”. The sheriff makes the same error of presumption of guilt.
But it is not only U.S. Marshals who use civil forfeiture. It is not just those assets directly tied to drug dealing that are seized. The Institute for Justice has some very informative articles on how the lack of due process in the proceedings and the hunger for revenue has lead to many abuses by various law enforcement agencies as well as the IRS.