USA - Civil forfeiture and leasing

[bcubed]

The creepy thing about civil forfeiture law is that, as it's not considered "punsihment," legal standards are lessened for action, such that evidence that would never convict someone is sufficient to take one's property.

Obviously, what one doesn't own can't be taken from them. Suppose my pet lizard were to incorporate "Straw Holdings, inc" in the Caymans, put himself in as CEO, and lease all "his" worldly posessions through them for $1/day, would he be protected if pulled over, and his stash of gold doubloons that he keeps in the glove compt. were found? Would a US court have the pull to get intl. records for something that, admittedly, isn't even a criminal matter?

For that matter, I'm to understand that the "preponderance of evidence" burden of proof level means that seizure is OK if more evidence implicates than exonerates. So, if lizard boy were (quite innocently) tooling around with his gold, what if he were to stuff his car full with "Zionist world bank conspiracy!" drivel? Would a court be any more likely to say, "Apparently he's not a druggie--just some paranoid rascist, which is copacetic!"