Again, your posts on the subject don’t seem to collaberate the expertise one would gain after 30 years working in the field.
Yes, I know, I show that Mexico is deeply corrupt and you attack my professional expertise. Not a surprise. :rolleyes:
ACAMS is a membership organization that provides two different certifications. Which do you have?
What’s your point here? What Professional accreditations do you have?
Look, a lot of people ask personal question here in order to find out who they are IRL. I dont play that shit. Have you demanded to see Brickers law degree and Bar membership?
I do a little anti-money laundering work myself - in fact, I should be working on an AML audit right now, and not writing this post - I can’t say that I’ve seen anything from DrDeth that in any way undercuts his credibility in this area.
Thanks. I am not sure what’s he’s getting at- harassment? I dont see any thought by him on this subject?
Anyway the only thing I posted which is 'controversial" is that Mexico is corrupt, which my recent and fairly well respected cites back up. I understand CBEscapee isnt happy with that fact, but it’s hardly something that is surprising. He doesnt even deny it.
No, actually it was an absurd statement you made about how someone can deposit funds in our banks without it being reported nor taxed. It showed a complete ignorance of the banking procedures here especially seeing the huge sums of dirty money exchanged between our two countries. And for a certified money laundering expert that seems awfully odd.
So in your response to me you posted a few cites about police and justice system corruption in Mexico which had nothing to do with banking here. You made no mention of the fairly recently passed Ley Federal para la Prevención e Identificación de Operaciones con Recursos de Procedencia Ilícita and its affect on bank deposits and other financial transactions, which I would think an expert such as yourself would have at least some basic knowledge.
But carry on. I am sure their are some on this board that appreciate your input. I will refrain from posting any further doubts I may have about your credentials.
First we were talking about depositing smurfed Money Orders. Next, certainly Mexico has laws agains this sort of thing. I never said otherwise. But with so much corruption at all levels, it’s pretty easy for the cartels to get away with stuff. Let’s be frank the cartels are still operating fairly openly in some areas of Mexico. They have corrupted Police, Judges and Politicians. Do you deny this?
Yes, that is a great new law. We will see how it operates in the real world.
I never said the USA’s hands were clean, and yes, the USA certainly had a issue with this in the past. Seems to be under control now, but we’ll see.
I have a question for the experts. Have any executives of banks in the US found guilty of money laundering ever been indicted or convicted of any violations of the law?
CBEscapee,
Can you tell us about Mexican criminals, their lifestyles/money and their operations? It seems like El Chapo was quite rich but had to focus so much on staying hidden that enjoying any of his money wasn’t much of an option.
I’m anything but an expert, but I did find this article through that magical mirror called Google:
I swear it’s a coincidence that it’s talking about laundering money from Mexico! Still, it looks like the typical situation is that a bank doesn’t do its due diligence and gets fined by regulators. Individuals involved are disciplined internally (the article calls that “stamping out bad behavior”).
The article laments the fact that people in the banking industry seem immune to prosecution for their part in money laundering schemes, and quotes a JPMorgan compliance officer as saying, “Until you start sending people to jail, the pockets are there to satisfy the penalties.”
So in my non-expert opinion I would guess the answer to your question is no.
100%. By definition anyone found guilty of a crime would first need to be indicted and then convicted in a court of law.
[QUOTE=astro ]
As long as you don’t get noticed this is possible but a lot of tax criminals who are being low key are turned by business competitors who know their numbers or procedures aren’t right, and just want them out of the way. There are lots of people ready to tattle on you if you are competing for clients with other legit business. You pay for all your goods in cash the delivery guy will probably mention this to your competition just in conversation. Then he thinks about it decides it’s hinky and eventually you’re screwed.
[/quote]
I find this statement highly dubious. I don’t think the FBI will investigate a business just because one of their competitors files a report on what they think might be illegal activity.
More often than not, it will be your own employee who blows the whistle on your money laundering or other fraudulent activity.
The way it’s proven is that they send the lawyers and forensic accountants into your books and trace where the payments go. And they are pretty sophisticated about it these days.
For example, someone just making up a bunch of payment entries might use a random distribution of numbers. The accountants might apply something like Benford’s Law and see that the distribution is way off.
There have been a number of bank executives who have been convicted of money laundering. However, most of them were executives at smaller banks or were also convicted of other serious crimes. There has been criticism that regulators and law enforcement have not sufficiently targeted executives at large banks when the banks receive punishment for wrongdoing.
The problem still is - turn piles of small, unmarked bills into seemingly legitimate income. Very few online services take most of their payments in small, unmarked bills - which is usually a feature of walk-in traffic.
The problem is, when a bank is caught money laundering, the cash is seized and accounts are scrutinized. so whether the banker goes to jail or not, the money is lost and any appearance of legitimacy is compromised.
Buy prepaid debit cards and purchase porn via burner smartphones. It wouldn’t withstand much scrutiny but nothing discussed in this thread would.
Nothing will stand up to detailed scrutiny and is not expected to. The hope and aim is that it will not raise enough red flags tp earn said scrutiny. In other words , have enough of a plausible cover story that regulators and LEA’s are satisfied and don’t decide to look deeper.
Sorry if this was addressed, but my mom was a lawyer with duties that included acting as/working with a forensic accountant, and not once, barring extreme, incompetent irregularities, did a successful government prosecution start with the money.
Proving a case with a spreadsheet is a great way to make a jury fall asleep and hate you (the prosecutor). If you want to get away with a “boring” financial crime, don’t draw attention to it by committing a more interesting one first.