it does not matter if they sell it or not I don't want it collected. It could later be subpoenaed or stolen. They should just not collect it in the first place
Good point but if there is a suspicion that an unclaimed item may pose a security risk, the solution cannot be to push random strangers to take the item.
Raw possession does not always equal the legal right to dispose of something. To an extent this could be treated as a very limited scope data breach depending upon who your attorney is in the matter. Litigation outcomes should be interesting since the firm the strategist worked for is suing to regain legal custody of the materials.
Plus most importantly it's non-portable. You're dependent on their good will (hah!) for the ability to retrieve it from them in the future at whatever (partial) rate they decide they can get away with.
I thought they were criminals for going to lump sum match. This is net level stuff...
This is infeasible though as evidenced by how actual theft doesn't get handled by the legal system (police, prosecutors, and judges). Realistically the only way to get your stuff back is to take it back yourself or somehow force the police into action by doing the work for them.
I don't think it is legal to use deadly force to retrieve stolen goods, yours or anyone else's. You'd have to staff your firm with off duty cops or something to skirt that law.
IANAL but I'd have to agree. It reminds me of the time I got money deposited in to my bank account that I knew wasn't mine. I asked my girlfriend's dad - a lawyer - if I could keep it. Of course not, he said. It's like someone parking their car in your driveway, he said, and leaving the keys in the ignition. Are they trespassing on your driveway? Sure. Does that mean this car belongs to you now and you can do with it whatever you please? Of course not.
I don't think I'm missing anything. You want to be able to claim the briefcase as proceeds of a crime, without actually prosecuting a crime. That is unreasonable. If, as you say, "Bob's actions are not in themselves criminal", you've got no justification to take his stuff. You may think it's proceeds of a crime, and you can treat it as evidence of a possible crime. But if you haven't got enough evidence to convict Bob, then you also don't have enough evidence to keep his stuff. Pretending otherwise is a mockery of justice.
obviously if they call it seizing and are willing to make the case in court that they had it seized, then the 'stealing' of it is a separate crime that probably has even worse penalties given that the argument would be it was stolen from government secured storage. Which I guess would make for an interesting case.
If they don't charge for another theft then it would be obvious that they don't believe enough in that they had it 'seized' and that what happened was a 'theft'.
on edit: I guess I need to go find it on archive.org to figure out if that has happened or not though.
reply