Unfortunately, more recent Supreme Court decisions have reversed this position. In the last decade, the civil courts have been increasingly used to punish people for criminal acts even if they have been exonerated in a criminal proceeding. In 1991, when a criminal court found four L.A. policemen not guilty of using excessive force against Rodney King, they were tried in civil court for the same act under the new charge of violating King's civil rights. When O.J. Simpson was found not guilty of murder, the family of the victims brought suit against him in civil court. Indeed, alleged criminal behavior is more likely to be punished in civil courts than criminal ones because of differences in their procedures.
Civil court offers no right against self-incrimination and the accused can be forced to testify.
Moreover, a verdict does not require a unanimous vote of the jury and standards of evidence are much looser because civil punishments are considered far less severe than criminal ones. But he might lose his business, access to his children, his life savings, his reputation. Many people would prefer imprisonment to losing the home in which their children sleep. The property remains confiscated even if the owner is cleared of charges or never charged at all. To retrieve it, the owner must prove his innocence in a separate proceeding.