Wait a Second Here!!!. You’re a Doctor who’s a banker but not a lawyer? YOU GO BOY !!! 
Cartooniverse
It’s against the law to mutilate currency.
Besides, I can’t picture a fast-food chain
destroying money. It’s a psychological
impossibility.
Do you have a cite for that? I would think that I can do with my money what I damn well please. If I want to burn it, so be it.
Firstly, I am a lawyer, but I’m an Australian lawyer, and I don’t practice criminal law (crime doesn’t pay!).
A new angle: perhaps you can’t be charged with counterfeiting as such, but what about “aiding and abetting”? Say the money is realistic enought to fool someone (if not very good). You have no fraudulent intent, so it seems (despite what the law enforcement authorities say on their website) mere possession is not of itself a crime. Although how you’re going to convince the authorities of this when they find it on you, I will leave to you.
So the mugger takes your money. You know damn well that the mugger is going to use the money. He notices it’s fake, but being of a criminal persuasion (obviously), he uses the money and defrauds a few people before he is caught and charged. He says he got the money from you.
You made the counterfeit money and handed it over to a known criminal. Just possibly you could now be charged with aiding and abetting a counterfeiter. OK, there’s the argument that you passed over the fake money involuntarily, but you made the stuff in the first place, with the specific plan of letting it be taken if you were mugged. And once you have made counterfeits, there is a risk they will get into circulation and of innocent people being ripped off.
barbitu8 - In your last post you quote Title 18, Section 471 but you ignore my reference to Title 18, Section 474, which states in the final paragraph:
Nowhere in this section does intent play a part.
How about Title 18, Section 473? It reads, in it’s entirety:
All you have to do to be convicted is know you have counterfeit money and pass it as genuine. I think the OP’s scenario falls into this catagory.
Cartooniverse observes:
My momma is so proud!
Section 474 refers to “plates and stones” used for engraving, not money.
Section 473 refers to obligations and othe securities, not money.
I rest my case.
Currency IS an obligation of the United States Government. You will note that your bills say “Federal Reserve Note” on them. It would appear that Doctor Jackson is, indeed quoting the relevent section of the statutes.
To moderate my earlier position, I think the OP’s question rests on how good the fakes are - if they are good enough that you might reasonably expect the thief to pass them, I would guess you could get in trouble. If it’s reasonable to assume the mugger would go “oh shit” and throw them away, you’re probably in the clear. I wasn’t clear enough on that point when I answered earlier. Apologies.
Note also that counterfeiting is a federal crime, and the other crimes mentioned are handled at the state level. It’s a federal prosecutor that gets to decide whether to pursue a counterfeiting charge, and the Treasury Dept has traditionally taken a dim view of any shenanigans with reproductions of money, if there’s any chance of a mistake being made. Concerning the “George W. Bush” bill story, I’m willing to bet that federal authorities are considering whether to pursue the matter or not. They may decide not to, but I’ll bet it’s on somebody’s desk.
Last try.
“Obligations and other securities of the United States” refers to currency, coins, stamps, bonds, notes or any other instrument backed by the US Government. Your own site, Section 472, uses the same terminology. But then, you knew that.
The first few paragraphs of Section 474 refers to engraving or copying aparatus. Did you read the last paragraph? It pretty clearly deals exclusively with one who makes the copies.
Fact: It is a felony to possess material(s) with which to counterfeit money
Fact: It is a felony to manufacture conterfeit money
Fact: It is a felony to knowingly possess conterfeit money
Fact: It is a felony to knowingly pass counterfeit money as genuine
This is not my opinion. This is Federal law. I have read the codes, I have seen the Secret Service in action. I normally would not be so persistent but I have seen people get in big time hot water for seemingly innocuous violations of this code. Counterfeit currency is serious business and under no circumstance is it legal.
It seems to me that you you have to buy, sell, etc. with ** the intent that it be passed**. If you just transfer with the intent to escape a mugger…
Do the provisions of The Counterfeit Detection Act of 1992, Public Law 102-550, in Section 411 of Title 31 CFR only aplly to ** accurate ** reproductions? I.e., if I made the modifications I suggest in my second post, it wouldn’t be a printed reproduction.
*Originally posted by Doctor Jackson *
Might you be referring to James Stephen George Boggs? For those who are interested, check out Boggs: A Comedy of Values by Lawrence Weschler (1999).