A Federal Crime to Obey the Law?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jeff White

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
37,925
Location
Alma Illinois
I have heard that it could cast suspicion if you repeatedly withdrew just under 10K, but now it can be a Federal Crime?

Let me get this straight. It's Limbaugh's money. He can withdraw under 10K and the transaction doesn't have to be reported to the Feds....But if you've got 10K + in the bank and you withdraw it in amounts less then that it's a crime? Is that really any different then preferring to buy a gun in a private transaction so there is no 4473?

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031223/ap_on_en_ot/limbaugh_painkillers_3

Attorney Says Limbaugh Blackmailed by Maid
AP
1 hour, 19 minutes ago


By JILL BARTON, Associated Press Writer

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Rush Limbaugh paid "substantial" blackmail to a former maid before she told law enforcement and a tabloid newspaper about his addiction to prescription painkillers, his attorney told a judge Monday.

Attorney Roy Black said Limbaugh could not complain to authorities about the maid's demand for $4 million because they would use the information against him, and that the maid and her husband "bled him dry" before going public anyway.

The claim was made during a court hearing where Black asked that medical records related to Limbaugh be kept secret. The seizure of the records from doctors in Florida and California violated the conservative radio commentator's privacy, Black argued.

Palm Beach County prosecutors insist they need to review the records, which are sealed, to determine how much Limbaugh's doctors knew about his frequent prescriptions for OxyContin, hydrocodone and other painkillers.

Assistant State Attorney James Martz said judges approved the warrants after investigators discovered Limbaugh received more than 2,000 painkillers, prescribed by four doctors, at a pharmacy near his $24 million mansion.

"Now the next question is did those doctors know about each other?" Martz said. Reviewing the records would be the only way to determine if Limbaugh violated the law by withholding information from his doctors — and went "doctor shopping" for drugs.

Limbaugh's attorneys outlined a defense against accusations that he illegally used prescription painkillers and laundered money to finance his drug habit.

Black said Limbaugh suffered from a degenerative disc disease with "pain so great at one point doctors thought he had bone cancer," and that Limbaugh chose to take addictive painkillers rather than have surgery.

Surgery would have meant doctors would have gone through Limbaugh's throat to operate on his spine, which could threaten his career as a commentator, Black said.

Limbaugh's former maid, Wilma Cline, learned of his addiction and threatened to sell the story to The National Enquirer. She and her husband, David Cline, demanded millions and were "paid substantial amounts of money," the lawyer said.

The couple "bled him dry" and then went to authorities to gain immunity from prosecutors before selling their story for $250,000 to the Enquirer, Black said. The tabloid ran a story in October, days before Limbaugh announced he would enter a drug rehabilitation program, alleging they supplied him drugs for years.

Black said Limbaugh paid money to the Clines because they were blackmailing him — not because he was laundering money.

"It's not money laundering to pay blackmail and extortion," Black said.

Ed Shohat, the attorney for the Clines, denied Black's allegation.

"Rush Limbaugh confessed and admitted that he bought the pills. ... I know of no facts that my clients demanded money from Rush Limbaugh in any way," he said.

Limbaugh allegedly withdrew cash 30 to 40 times at amounts just under the $10,000 limit that requires a bank to report the transaction to the federal government.

The action drew suspicion because it can be a federal crime to structure financial transactions below the $10,000 limit.

"This would never happen except this guy's name is Rush Limbaugh," Black said about the financial probe. "There's a double standard."

Martz declined to comment after the hearing.

Judge Jeffrey A. Winikoff did not say when he would decide whether the records should be unsealed.
 
With all of the laws on the books, in layers, some conflicting, anything you do could be a crime at any given time depending on who is looking at it. Welcome to the 21st century. :mad:
 
Jeff, it depends!:D

Just think of it in terms you are likely familiar--precursors to meth (don't know what Illinois calls it). Yes buying cold meds and drain cleaner is legal, however . . . .

Yes, it can be a federal crime (or state for that matter, depending). I've seen it structured a couple of different ways, usually conspiracy to committ mail or wire fraud or conspiracy to commit money laundering.

Under 10K (it's a reporting requirement) is not a facial violation, however if structured then you CAN have RICO or wire/mail fraud or dozen other offenses. When the USA dips under the 10K, always a matter of intent which can get sticky especially where habit of doing so, like a small business. However, if the USA links it to the hush money, bingo, bango, bongo off to the grand jury they a go-go.

I don't know what the USA is doing with Limbaugh. Most likely not a darn thing. If they wanted him, would have been done way before this I suspect.

However, Jeff, this here is a state action (Florida's prosecutors SAs just like Illinois). The SA down there wants the med recs for a potential drug prosecution of the docs, the pharms and maybe Limbaugh. The SA could give a hang about a federal statute (for now).
 
I guess I'm in big trouble! I structure all my financial transactions below $10,000!
Sometimes I even go below the speed limit to avoid breaking the law.:what:
Limbaugh's attorneys outlined a defense against accusations that he illegally used prescription painkillers and laundered money to finance his drug habit.
How can taking your own money out of your own account be construed as money laundering?
 
Jeff, the crime you refer to is sometimes called 'structuring.' It's what you get charged with if the feds think you're trying to evade the reporting requirement.

I figure that the end goal of laws like this is to insure that anyone, anywhere, can be charged with a crime at any given time. That way, if some citizen gets too uppity, the feds can come down on him without delay.

- Chris
 
Yeah money launderers used to get around the reporting requirement by "smurfing" or breaking a transaction into many smaller ones in order to get everything below the reporting threshold. So now "attempted smurfing" is a crime. :rolleyes: Perhaps it might be a better idea to come up with a law that actually works and is enforceable?
 
Thanks for the explanations.....I never thought that the precurser laws were effective anyway. All they seem to do is make things more complicated for the honest citizen. The meth heads just buy their cold tablets at several different stops in town. I suppose the legislators will make it illegal to buy cold tablets at more then one store during a 30 day period or some such nonsense....Maybe I shouldn't post this..it might give someone an idea. :uhoh:

I understand why the Florida States Attorney wants the medical records...I just didn't understand structuring. Not a crime we deal with a lot where I work.

Jeff
 
...make things more complicated for the honest citizen.
Didn't know about "smurfing" some years back, had a folks that just made payments less than 10k to alleviate the paperdrill. Honest solid folks, just happened to be blessed with money. I know a grandmother whom paid cash for two cars for twins graduating from College, Ph.D's...she just showed up at the first of the month and made a payment for a bit , each payment under 10K.

Dunno, Depression , banks, life experiences. I guess the real reason for the new money was not WoD, WoT...little old lady with a Hills Bros Coffee can buried in the garden might have $500 in small bills of the "old style printing"...little old lady must be doing something illegal.

Irks me. Whole bit sounds like "control" to me; regardless what name it is called.
 
Only applies to cash transactions. Not checks. Not other negotiable instruments.

Only looked at if other need arises. Was implemented for drug money and laundering schemes.

Then there is the "Suspicious Activity Report" that may be filed at any time by your financial institution without your knowledge.

Welcome to 1984.

Smoke
 
NO, it does not have to be cash. I think if you will check the "letter of the law" it resides entirely in the hands of your bank. Any "suspicious" withdrawal or series of withdrawals is to be reported to the feds.
Beware if you buy a car from Billy Joe Bob, the local redneck, and have a monthly payment to him from your account in any amount. When he gets busted for moonshining the book keeper at your bank that does not drink recalls your EFT to him and can report you. Do you want to try to explain to the feds that you have not been buying 500$ worth of moonshine every month?

I do not think the feds have any business in our banking activities.
 
I figure that the end goal of laws like this is to insure that anyone, anywhere, can be charged with a crime at any given time. That way, if some citizen gets too uppity, the feds can come down on him without delay.

Suspicion of being suspicious.

Pretty much sums it up. If you deal in cash a lot keep in mind that transactions not typical to the user are reported. So, if you withdraw and deposit 2-10K several times a month there is nothing reportable. Also bear in mind it is your local bank clerk that does the reporting and they are not supposed to tell you if they are reporting it. Being a regular customer and explaining to the bank manager that you do not want your legal transactions poked by the IRS everytime you bring business reciepts in can go a long way.
 
A few months ago I picked up a box of Sudafed for my wife, a friend that works at the pharmacy told me that if you buy more than two boxes they have a phone number to report you. I think the idea is that if everyone is afraid of breaking laws then they are easier to control. Jim.
 
Once there was a Chinese emperor who kept his laws secret.
When asked why, he said:
"If the people behave morally, they need not fear my laws."

In some ways that's what we have now. There are so many laws no one can keep track of them, so we can break a law without ever knowing it.

Now a secret set of laws like the Chinese emperor had or like we have can work in societies where the laws are against actions that are clearly wrong - murder, rape, robbery. (Lawyers call these actions malum in se, acts that are wrong in themselves.)

But now we have a society where you can go to a federal penitientiary for withdrawing cash from your own bank account or carrying a knife into a school, acts that are not really wrong in themselves. They are only illegal because the law says so. (Lawyers call these laws malum prohibitum.) Merely acting morally will not protect you anymore.

An excess of laws, which amounts to secret laws, is tyranny. It makes us all criminals, able to be prosecuted at any time at the discretion of the police.
 
We have several direct deposits made to our savings account each month, then transfer funds into checking or make cash withdrawals as needed. About every third month or so we get a letter from the bank telling us we have exceeded the maximum number of monthly withdrawals allowed under Federal law. I about freaked the first time I got such a letter, but a call to the bank confirmed it doesn't mean a thing - we can still transfer/withdraw to our heart's content.
 
I about freaked the first time I got such a letter, but a call to the bank confirmed it doesn't mean a thing - we can still transfer/withdraw to our heart's content.
It does mean something, it means you, Mr. law abiding citizen, are being watched by the Feds! :fire:
Who knows how many other ways we are being watched?
 
I think it would be a hoot to withdraw $10,001 every day and deposit $10,000 right back at the next window; keeping the one dollar for my effort. If enough people started doing this, the feds would be so smothered in paperwork they wouldn't be able to do anything else. That would be, in the words of Martha Stewart, "a good thing".
 
Excuse me for a bit of ignorance but would anyone mind explaining to me why they have to report a withdraw of 10k or more anyway? And why 10k? was it a number set sometime back in the 30's like the NFA tax stamp was?
 
It was the arbitrary number chosen by the authors of the anti-money laundering laws. It seems that they weren't getting their share of the cut so they made up a law to punish those who would deign to get around their tax laws.
 
There seems to be a little confusion here.

There are two seperate reports being discussed as if it were one.

Currency Transaction Report (CTR)

Any transaction, in cash, over $10,000.00 must have a CTR filed. THe CTR will have information such as who completed the transaction, and who benefitted from the transaction. i.e: If you do deposits for your place of employment it will have your personal information as well as the business info. You will generally be made aware that this is being filed as the teller will have to gather the info.

Some businesses/individuals may be exempted from filing CTRs if it is a normal part of their business.

If you are informed that a CTR must be filed when you do a transaction, and you then change the transaction to avoid filing the CTR, you are "Structuring" and a SAR must be filed. (see below)

Suspicious Activity Report (SAR)

This is filed anytime a bank employee has reason to be suspect of a particular transaction. i.e.: If your local derelict comes in with a large amount of cash. If someone suddenly makes numerous transactions, Deposits or WIthdrawals, outside their normal practices. There are others.


md2lgyk:

If your Savings Account is a Money Market Fund, these are set by law to only have three "Outside Withdrawals" per month. In house is unlimited. Most banks overlook the occasional violation. If it happens repeatedly the bank my put a stop to it as they can get in trouble with its auditors.

Seargent Bob said:
It does mean something, it means you, Mr. law abiding citizen, are being watched by the Feds!

No it means you are being legislated by the feds. You're being watched by the bank per the laws on the books. Don't like it? Change the law. I assure you the bank does not want to monitor your transactions, but they don't want to break the law either.

jimpeel said:
I think it would be a hoot to withdraw $10,001 every day and deposit $10,000 right back at the next window; keeping the one dollar for my effort. If enough people started doing this, the feds would be so smothered in paperwork they wouldn't be able to do anything else.

They already are. THe bank would be the one that suffers. Both CTRs and SARs are filed with the OCC and never looked at. They are only brought out if you have other reasons for the feds to look at you. THen they can subpeana your bank records for evidence. CTRs and SAR don't contain enough information to tell the FEDs if you're doing something wrong. Its simply a monitoring tool for the transactions.

Hope this clears things up. Don't hold it against the local bank. They're just trying to follow the law. Banking is a heavily regulated business. It would be better for all if it weren't so.

Smoke
 
From "another okie"

An excess of laws, which amounts to secret laws, is tyranny. It makes us all criminals, able to be prosecuted at any time at the discretion of the police.

From "7.62FullMetalJacket"

With all of the laws on the books, in layers, some conflicting, anything you do could be a crime at any given time depending on who is looking at it. Welcome to the 21st century.

Yup. Wake up and smell the freedom!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top