“In some cases, he said, officials obtained intelligence information about monies being sent to operatives. “We were able to track the money to the operatives,” he said, “and they were identified and apprehended before they took any actions.” “
Is anyone else disturbed by this? If they have not taken any action yet, what did they do wrong? Is just taking money from a “terrorist” illegal? Suppose they sent it to you by mistake? Why are Americans ok with having their financial habits tracked? Land of the free, home of the brave?
If you and I agree to rob a bank, and we make a plan to buy realistic-looking water pistols, Halloween masks of former presidents, large duffel bags, and some Snickers bars for a tasty treat after our getaway, and I send you $2,000 to buy this stuff, we are both guilty of the crime of conspiracy.
We are both guilty even though (a) it isn’t otherwise illegal for me to send you $2,000, and (b) it isn’t otherwise illegal for you to buy water pistols, masks of former presidents, large duffel bags, and Snickers bars.
Do you understand the application of that principle to the questions you’ve posed?
Ok Bricker, I see your point. But suppose I have an enemy living in America and I have my terrorist orginiztion wire money into his bank account to set him up? How can he defend himself against this? He recieved the money.
I seriously doubt that receiving money alone is enough for a conviction or even an arrest. If nothing else, that’s dumb because the government would be giving up an opportunity to learn what you’re up to.
In the odd instance that a terrorist organization accidently wires you money and neither you nor the organization nor the intended recipient notices I imagine that the FBI (or whoever) might start watching you and asking questions of the people you come in contact with. They would quickly learn that you’re probably not a terrorist and if it came to it they’d interview you about the money.
I suppose that if one happened to have the same name as an actual terrorist and were an electrician specializing in timing devices for security installations and had a hobby as a bridge photographer their investigation might be a little more in-depth, so read those bank notices.
No. Receiving money after agreeing to commit a crime using that money is illegal.
To convict you, the government would have to show that you got the money, and that you had agreed to commit a crime. If they had absolutely no evidence that you had agreed to commit a crime, then they could not survive a probable cause hearing, much less a trial.
I think you have to commit at least one overt act in furtherance of the proposed illegal act for conspiracy to be legally extant. Just getting the money isn’t conspiracy, buying the masks is. But if I have a collection of Halloween masks that predates the alleged conspiracy, it become significant that the act is not out of character without the conspiracy. (Nor is it illegal.) Buying a set of guns, or duffel bags is pretty convincing, and owning the masks already could be supportive of the charge, but not illegal by itself.
But, if we assemble the elements, and over a reasonable time, never commit the purported illegal act, is that conspiracy? Conspiracy to do what? Suppose I have in my closet a gun, a duffel bag, and a Halloween mask. (Which, oddly enough I do.) Does that make me a coconspirator with any bank robber with whom I am acquainted? Is a check from them to me at any time conspiracy to commit bank robbery? Nonsense.
Is the same equipment support of terrorism, if some terrorist organization sends me money, and I decide that taking money away from Al Fatah is a good idea? I am committing a crime, defrauding Al Fatah out of their dough, but that’s not what I can expect to be investigated for. If I scam the pro terror charity out of a few thousand bucks, that doesn’t make me a terrorist, it makes me a vigilante anti-terrorist.
Conspiracy is not just thinking and talking. It has to include at least one act that moves the illegal enterprise forward. Selling my gun, bag, and costume to someone else might be conspiracy. Just getting money and doing nothing is not. Now, I admit, it seems unlikely that lots of folks get paid by Al Fatah and don’t do anything for them. But we are making that a viable way for them to get us to attack non hostile Muslims in the US.
Of course, as long as we are talking about harassing Muslims, no one in power will do anything politically significant to interrupt that.
If it were, Mr. bin Laden could have great fun transferring funds to the accounts of various congresscritters, and then firing off notes to the FBI. Heck, he could turn a nice profit by charging a fee for take out service.
Why do you assume that sending the money doesn’t qualify as an overt act? (Or recieving and depositing the money, for that matter?)
And note the crime of conspiracy is complete when any member of the conspiarcy commits the act: there’s no requirement for each and every member to commit an act.
Correct. If, prior to agreeing with anyone to commit a crime, you happened to acquire masks, bags, or guns, no crime has been committed. And, even with those items in your possession, you then meet someone and form the robbery plan, no crime has been committed.
You laid out the standard yourself: an agreement to commit a crime, and an overt act in furtherance of that crime. Once the agreement is in place, any overt act in furtherance of the underlying crime completes the crime of conspiracy.
No - if the plan is that you are to use the money someone else gives you to buy equipment for your crime, then the crime of conspiracy is complete when you get the money – actually, it’s complete the moment the money is sent, since that’s the overt act.
You’re a suspected terrorist. Hasn’t the fact that you would be released at a probable cause hearing or trial because of a lack of evidence become a moot point?
