Under the innocent owner defense, the owner must prove which statement about knowledge of criminal activity?

• A. The owner did not know the property existed
• B. The owner did not know or should not reasonably have known the property was used in criminal activity
• C. The owner knew it was stolen
• D. The owner assumed it was not contraband

Answer: (B)

The key idea is that the innocent owner defense relies on the owner’s lack of knowledge about the property’s involvement in crime, or that they should not reasonably have known. The requirement is that the owner did not know or should not reasonably have known that the property was used in criminal activity, which covers both actual knowledge and a reasonable-ignorance standard. If the owner knew it was involved in crime, or could reasonably have known, the defense fails. Saying the owner didn’t know the property existed or that they assumed it wasn’t contraband doesn’t satisfy the knowledge standard; those facts don’t establish the required lack of knowledge about criminal activity.