Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appeals court weighs how closely forfeitures must be traced to alleged money‑laundering proceeds
Summary
In oral argument, counsel for intervenors Robert and Andrea Petrino urged the Massachusetts Appeals Court that money‑laundering forfeitures must be capped at the value of the alleged stolen property and directly traced to a laundering transaction; prosecutors countered that circumstantial evidence and career‑long patterns can satisfy the lower civil probable‑cause standard.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court on Nov. 17 heard competing views over how narrowly the state’s money‑laundering forfeiture statute must be applied.
Appellants’ counsel Matthew Thompson told the three‑judge panel the Commonwealth never showed probable cause to forfeit property beyond the $106,000 that the petition alleged was stolen. "My argument is that a $106,000 … is the cap on what can be forfeited," Thompson said, arguing the statute requires a direct nexus tying seized assets to the proceeds of an identified money‑laundering transaction.
Assistant District Attorney Matthew…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
