Rick St Hilaire writes: 'Motion to Reconsider Urges Court to Resurrect Art Museum Mummy Mask Case'
This motion states that to make its case the US Government must merely establish probable cause to believe that the property is subject to forfeiture":
then "the burden then shifts to the Museum to prove the lawful importation of the Mask by a preponderance of the evidence." The prosecution describes that "one may rightfully infer the stealing of property without direct evidence of all the circumstances underlying the theft." An analogy is given: "If a homeowner were to return from a trip abroad to find that all of the electronics in his house were missing, it would certainly be reasonable for him to conclude that they had been stolen, even if he could not identify the thief or the exact time of the theft."The motion also specifies the law which the government has in mind, and its one the coineys should be thinking about as it prohibits the importation of stolen property into the United States, regardless of whether any other law has been violated in the process of importation. St Hilaire explains:
That statute, 19 USC 1595a, states: Merchandise which is introduced or attempted to be introduced into the United States contrary to law shall be treated as follows: (1) The merchandise shall be seized and forfeited if it— (A) is stolen, smuggled, or clandestinely imported or introduced . . . .Although the government insists that its original arguments are sufficient to renew the forfeiture case, they also affirm that should the court acquiesce, they could file an amended complaint containing the missing information. One wonders why it was missing in the first place.