Posted on 12/05/2021 10:40:33 AM PST by 4Runner
Or do penalties owed the state for the commission of a crime end at the grave? Google can't (or won't) respond intelligently to this query. I've also asked an attorney, he had no answer. All I know is, the penalty for conviction for money laundering in Florida is incarceration in the state penitentiary for an extended period of time, plus the requirement that the convicted party repay to the state double the amount of money originally laundered! Thanks for any insight you all may be able to provide. (Yes, I've pledged a monthly contribution today.)
However, the fact he died does not mean his estate cannot be sued. It just means that the criminal case is not binding on the civil court. The injured parties will have to sue his estate all over again.
I would think so.
The people ought to be able to get their money back.
20 years from now, when Pelosi regains her position as Speaker, she may impeach Trump again if he's dead at that point. I hope by then republicans will give her what she wants - so that she'll move on to the next (in her case much warmer) life.
The question is one of who has the highest priority claim. The arresting agency may have filed a notice of forfeiture but, if not, it may be too late. What cannot be traced back to illegal activity will be part of the defendants estate and will pass to his heir(s), whether testamentary or statutory. That portion that can be traced to unlawful activity, in the absence of a forfeiture action, may be returned to identifiable victims. But, the question arises of whether the criminal court has the jurisdiction to make the disposition of the funds without adjudication of the pending criminal charge. I don’t know. I suppose the court, if it decides it can’t make distribution, could interplead the money. That’s where a civil court holds money and permits anyone with a colorable claim to come to court and argue their claim. That might include the defendants victims, heirs, the government (escheatment issue), or even the IRS. This all assumes there’s no statute addressing this scenario. Then again, I could be wrong altogether. This sounds like a law exam question!
In other words, they won’t incarcerate his coffin?
The police can and have taken cash off of people and told them that their money is suspected of being criminal and you have to go to court to prove your money is innocent.
You generally hear about it in the news when someone carrying a large amount of cash attempts to go through air port security and, even though carrying cash is not illegal and totally outside of their mandate, the TSA will call the cops who will show up and seize the cash. Perhaps they will stop doing that in the future as they have now been forced to pay court costs and damages in one case. But I would not count on it.
These are the cases you hear of.
The ones you do not hear of are the majority and they are people who are literally doing nothing wrong but carrying cash when they get hassled by the cops. The average amount of cash taken is $600.
Most people do not bother to go to court to try to get their money back because it would cost more to reclaim it then the amount taken.
A relative?????
How is this even question?
No!
Great thread — shows why we’re here on FR. I’ve no particular interest in this question, but it’s fascinating to consider. Tks!
“ Maybe the government can exhume his body and desecrate his corpse. That might satiate their blood lust.”
It wouldn’t be the first time.
https://www.historyandheadlines.com/january-30-1661-cromwell-executed-two-years-death/
Right. Here the State of Florida has to have filed some sort of legal claim on the decedent’s assets aka the laundered money, either separately from the criminal prosecution or as part of the criminal prosecution. If Florida had only asserted criminal jurisdiction over the defendant personally prior to his death, as opposed to his property, it has no claim on any of his property after his death.
If plaintiff Peter has a claim against defendant Dan for, say libel, then P must file the claim before he dies in order for P's wife Wilma to inherit a right to P's claim.
But if P is killed negligently by D, then W does have a wrongful death claim against D. But it's her claim, not one she inherited from P.
Nope. Because its based on a conviction and you cannot convict a dead person.
No, not if the libel will hurt P's estate after his death. Then his spouse/executor/descendants have an interest in and a duty to limit that and to recover damages.
Imagine someone libeling P such that it kills his music recordings or book or movie sales/royalties, or devalues the property he/his estate owns that his estate will sell. The libel action can cause damages after the death that his estate/spouse can sue for, whether that suit was filed before his death or not. But hey, I'm not a lawyer. That's just how it seems to me from watching stuff from the outside.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.