>>http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Civil+rights+group+questions+applications+seize+homes/5369253/story.html
>>http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/09/08/bc-street-racing-car-forfeiture-impound.html
>>
>>Acquitted...not yet tried...not even going to be criminally prosecuted. If there are significant assets involved, our government will still try to seize them.
>
>The very idea that seizure (or other medical misfortune ;) may be processed separately from the crime sounds raving insane to me. The law should have provided the criminal court with powers of seizure (and specify what exactly can be seized for what offense, to avoid any arbitrary bending of the process). The way it's set, looks like this epileptic court is set to finance itself and to operate in its own murky moat. Specially that their victims are busy defending their freedom in the other room, and may not have enough for the lawyers for both processes.
>
>There's a warm place in my heart for the guy who said “Based on the fact that they had been involved in street racing,..." - fact, what fact? Was it proven in court or not? If any regular tried to say anything bad about some big honcho who was taken to court and acquitted, he'd be taken to court for libel and skinned alive (by the skin of his purse). But this court can use anything that was mentioned as a fact, and even act on it... nice.

My feelings exactly.

Another factor here in BC (and I believe in some other Canadian provinces) is that we have a system where police cannot lay charges directly. Instead, they "recommend" charges to a Crown (government) prosecutor, who reviews the facts/evidence and decides if there is a "good enough" chance of conviction. If the prosecutor thinks the case isn't good enough, no-one gets charged or prosecuted. How they reached that conclusion with the alleged street racers escapes me, but there have been egregious examples of non-prosecutions in the past.