Someone answer this question for me about this Granny charged with Money Laundering

[gangreen]

Video: Jackpot! Grandma Busted With $1.5 Million Dollars Cash During Traffic Stop

Police Find $1.5 Million During Traffic Stop in Collinsville « CBS St. Louis

So the cops pull over granny for an illegal switch in lanes, they talk to her, become suspicious, She consents to have the car searched. They discover 1.5 million dollars in her trunk in vacuumed zip loc bags. They arrest her for money laundering?

Money Laundering- It is knowingly engaging in a financial transaction with the proceeds of a crime for the purpose of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the property.

So What You are Telling Me, If the Cops pull me over for some shyt like a broken tail light, and I consent to a search of my automobile and they eventually discover that I have say $100,000 or alot of money in my trunk,
I tell them that my grandfather gave it to me before he died. He didn't believe in banks. or say nothing. They can arrest me for money laundering.

. And How Do They Know That The Money Came from An Illegal Source.

To me granny by consenting to the search. that is none of their damn business. Just give me the ticket and keep it moving.

Someone enlighten me. This crime seems stupid, aren't you first supposed to prove the money came from an illegal source before a money laundering charge is given.

 

[Meta Reign]

What's worse is how CBS reports it as if there's definitely a crime here. It really just further shows how our media is ultimately subservient to the banking cartel and corrupt government.

Holding cash seen as a crime because it implies distrust of banks, while at he same time implying tax evasion. Our corrupt government and the banks that run it can't have this so they use their media to beat into your skull that only crooks keep cash.

 

[Slaimon Khan Shah]

I DON'T SEE WHY THEY WOULD ARREST HER.

 

[Strapped]

they can look at the serial numbers & see when the bills got into circulation

 

[PortCityProphet]

What's worse is how CBS reports it as if there's definitely a crime here. It really just further shows how our media is ultimately subservient to the banking cartel and corrupt government.

Holding cash seen as a crime because it implies distrust of banks, while at he same time implying tax evasion. Our corrupt government and the banks that run it can't have this so they use their media to beat into your skull that only crooks keep cash.

they reported it because muafukkas don't drive round with 1.5 in the trunk everyday.


as for the case i wanna see the arrest video. and they can't prove anything, she should win easily, then possibly sue for wrongful arrest. the law just wants that dough.

 

[Tha Snowman]

You have to show where the money came from, or you won't get it back. They don't have to prove it's from an illegal source. The burden of proof is on you, not the police.

 

[gangreen]

they can look at the serial numbers & see when the bills got into circulation

that quickly to arrest someone on the spot

 

[Strapped]

she was held until further

 

[gangreen]

You have to show where the money came from, or you won't get it back. They don't have to prove it's from an illegal source. The burden of proof is on you, not the police.

Wait, so if I do not believe in banks hypothetically, and I carry all my money on me. on the spot, they can arrest me.

And if it is a criminal charge isn't the burden of proof is on the state.

 

[Strapped]

if i was a copper and found someone with alot of cash i'll probably find a reason to detain them to verify the origin of the money

 

[gangreen]

she was held until further

You usually need some certain amount of evidence to arrest someone.

I don't know it just doesn't add up to me. The logistics of how it works.

 

[gangreen]

if i was a copper and found someone with alot of cash i'll probably find a reason to detain them to verify the origin of the money

carrying a lot of cash on you is probable cause for money laundering without finding a crucial element of it which is the source of the money (illegal money).

I hope there is more to the story... then just that

 

[killacal]

fukk 1.5 mill you cant carry more then 9,999 dollars on you legally without proof

Home of the free

 

[gangreen]

fukk 1.5 mill you cant carry more then 9,999 dollars on you legally without proof

Home of the free

thanks breh, I just found out the answer thanks to your 9,999 dollars comment. this girl explained it on yahoo answers.

Why is it illegal to carry large amounts of cash on you? - Yahoo! Answers

Why is it illegal to carry large amounts of cash on you?
i have heard you can not carry more than 9999$ on you ?


The figure you are referring to is the under 10k rule. This applies when you make a bank deposit or you purchase anything over ten thousand dollars in cash the bank or the place of purchase are then required to report that to the IRS.

No, it is not illegal to have that amount of money on you, but unless you can prove that you acquired that money from a legitimate means you can lose that money to the government. I handled many of these cases when I was a prosecutor. It is called asset forfeiture. It normally occurs during a routine traffic stop. If police discover a large amount of cash (with or without the presence of drugs) they can and often do seize the cash. This becomes a problem for you because while under our constitution a person accused of a crime is never required to prove that they are not guilty , it is always the burden of the state to prove the guilt of an accused beyond a reasonable doubt, this is not true in asset forfeiture cases.

If the police seize your money, the district attorney then gives you a notice of seizure. If you fail to respond to that within ten days you can and often do lose the money. If you respond timely then another series of legal petitions and answers are required and most people fail to file the appropriate paperwork to get the money back timely. Only a lawyer well versed in asset forfeiture alw can really help you. It is a catch 22 because in order to get the money back you have to first admit you are the owner, this often implicates people in a crime if they cannot show that it was derived from legal means.

The burden becomes yours (which appears unconstitutional) to request a hearing and to then show that the money is yours form legal sources. The police often seize money even cars even without the presence of drugs under this theory. If drugs are present and money is not the police argue that the drugs have not been exchanged for money yet. If the large amount of money is present but drugs are not the police then argue that the money is the product of an illegal transaction (the prior sale of drugs). Unless you can show through bank statements, casino winnings, or pay stubs that the money you are carrying is yours from a legal source I highly recommend you not carry large amounts of cash on your person or in your car, and do not keep large amounts of cash in your home.

as a side note that is just fukery that is like a legal form of robbery by the government.

Granny consented to the search and didnt know such fukery can occur in like you said the land of the free

now she is out of 1.5 million if she cant prove where the money came from in 10 days.



this sort of information is good to know.

1) never consent to searches

2) don't ever carry that amount of money (over 10k) on your persons or property. (because until this morning I never knew this)

3) Presumptively carrying a large amount of money (10k and over) means you are drug dealer subject to arrest and seizure of cash property without more proof. What a constitutional loophole.

 

[CouldntBeMeTho]

i personally know people who've had less than 10k on them, confiscated in a "drug seizure" when there were no drugs present. this is what america has come to, people who are poor are not even allowed to have cash on them.