---
canonical_url: "https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q742bb41827bf7dfdd203"
batch_url: "https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000143/pages/3"
content_type: discussion_message
speaker: "beg***"
date: "2026-08-07T13:47:49.076Z"
---

# beg*** 发言 (2026-08-07)

围绕郭文贵案的社区讨论与观点交锋。发言仅代表讨论者观点，不等同于法院认定。

批次：[查看所在归档批次](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000143/pages/3)
时间：2026-08-07T13:47:49.076Z
回复：[qc306877a11ff7d31fb92](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc306877a11ff7d31fb92) (查看被回复的发言（跨批次）)

被回复发言摘要：
> 最早上强制令的时候，二巡只要提过cvra的，后来为什么放开了853n？

## 发言正文

> 因为beginning 我😂， 在第一个强制令被拒后， 陈述了这个问题：
> 
> E. 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) NON-CVRA Rights and 18 U.S.C. § 3771 CVRA Rights
> Petitioner objects to the Government and the courts’ unilateral classification of the Petitioner as a 'crime victim' of the Defendant, when the Petitioner’s true legal status is that of an innocent owner with a superior interest under 21 U.S.C. § 853(n). The courts’ reliance on the 'non-CVRA' designation to dismiss this petition is a mistake of law because it ignores the independent statutory right to an ancillary proceeding under § 853(n).
>  
> Under 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) NON-CVRA Petitioner:
> 1) Has indisputable specific legal interest in the assets, every transaction is traceable.
> 2) Is a Bona Fide purchaser who has clear title to the assets and no knowledge of the alleged crimes at the time of the investments.
> 3) Has preponderance of the evidence to support Petitioner’s asset claims.
> But at the same time, Petitioner:
> 1) Clearly is the victim of the Government’s questionable seizure: The Government seizure has caused undue hardship by preventing the petitioner from realizing the time-value of the capital and the Government's delay in adjudication has resulted in a de facto reduction of the Petitioner's interest. The court-appointed trustee Luc has breached his fiduciary duty by incurring exorbitant expenditures and failing to exercise due diligence in the management and sequestration of the properties. Trust asset has suffered a significant diminish value and wastage due to trustee Luc's failure to preserve the assets.
> 2) Is not a CVRA victim of the Defendant: There was no contractual privity between the Petitioner and the Defendant; the Defendant was not a recipient or custodian of the Petitioner’s capital. The Defendant has never engaged in the conversion or misappropriation of the Petitioner’s G-series funds.