Laws Are For Little People To Obey: Even If They Have No Idea They're Breaking Them
I've been a fan of Walter Olson's Overlawyered blog for years. He chronicles absurdities and abuses in the law and prosecution -- like these on "structuring."
Walter explains structuring:
...The federal criminal offense of splitting up bank deposits so as to keep them under a threshold such as $10,000 above which banks have to report transactions to the government. Structuring is unlawful whether or not it occurs in conjunction with any other legal offense, as opposed to being motivated by, say, a desire to keep a low profile in general or a sentiment that the government already keeps tabs on too many innocent activities.Nor is there any requirement that the person be aware that there is a law banning structuring; someone who gets wind that transactions over $10,000 are reportable, and decides "What's up with that? I'll just make $9,000 deposits"), has broken the Bank Secrecy Act. Indeed, the federal government instructs banks to report suspicious patterns of sub-threshold deposits, and not to warn customers that it is doing so.
It turns out some get away with structuring -- some like Elliot Spitzer -- while others don't. Others like two Maryland dairy farmers who had their hard-earned money taken from them when the Feds seized their bank account. An excerpt from Walter's post:
On February 29 Treasury officials showed up at their farm to question them about bank deposits; 45 minutes into that interview, according to the Sowerses, they learned that the federal government had just seized their bank account and the $70,000 in it. The family does a lot of business at farmer's markets and its cash receipts over a ten-month period exceeded $320,000, the feds say. The News-Post account includes no mention of the family being under suspicion of any offenses other than what U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein describes as follows: "The holding back of cash receipts in excess of $10,000 indicates a knowledge of the Currency Transaction Reporting requirement and an attempt to evade it."
"The holding back of cash receipts in excess of $10,000 indicates a knowledge of the Currency Transaction Reporting requirement and an attempt to evade it."
It couldn't be that they just regularly deposit their cash rather than letting it sit around the house. Nope, it must be that they know that high dollar amounts will be reported to the government, and so they are avoiding depositing those high dollar amounts.
They are probably lying about how much they make so that they can cheat on their taxes too, except, oh wait:
The News-Post account includes no mention of the family being under suspicion of any offenses other than [knowing about the Currency Transaction Reporting requirement]. Because knowing about laws is now illegal, and worthy of an investigation.
Jazzhands at April 20, 2012 8:58 AM
I didn't know about this law. What a crock.
Joe at April 20, 2012 11:33 AM
I got "investigated" for this offense in the not too distant past. For whatever stupid reason or another it was reported or somehow discovered that I had six deposits into my bank account ranging from $7000 to $9500 over a 6-week period (the result of a personal injury lawsuit). This was suspicious behavior on my part and I actually had my accounts frozen for a little over three months while they investigated. It should have been as easy as looking at my court documents I provided stating how much I was to be paid and from whim and that the transactions all matched (and I supplied all this before they froze my accounts). It's beyond me why they had to freeze them at all let alone for so long. In the meantime I was unable to pay bills and got my credit screwed up.
BunnyGirl at April 20, 2012 11:48 AM
Hmmm. I may or may not indulge in this activity, and if I do I'm certainly not stopping. Enough is enough. I'm ready to grab my pitchfork storm the castle, how about you?
momof4 at April 20, 2012 3:17 PM
M4, I'll bring the tar, you get the feathers.
Cousin Dave at April 20, 2012 3:38 PM
CD and M4,
Tell me when and where, and I'll bring the rail.
Seriously this has been around for a while, it is now just the newest way to get you to break three laws a day.
Jim P. at April 20, 2012 7:18 PM
Careful now, you might get the secret service questioning you for that kind of talk. After they're done stiffing the hookers anyway.
Just more of the damned if you do, damned if you don't. Pimp daddy gov needs spendin money. Get to work serfs, lest we make you full on slaves.
Sio at April 20, 2012 7:20 PM
Someone comes to my door in a suit and tie, I'm going to be carrying.
Hell, anyone coming to my door, I'm going to be carrying.
Jim P. at April 20, 2012 11:23 PM
The remedy is simple.
If you are ever charged with a crime, NEVER plead guilty, NEVER accept a deal. Force every case to trial.
If everyone does this, the system will grind to a halt.
-Jut
JutGory at April 21, 2012 3:22 AM
Sorry, Jut, but not even close.
You're giving the guys running the court system way too little credit, and there are a lot of smart lawyers who are in the system, and a lot of other smart people.
You could force a momentary bottleneck, at best, if you did that. The rest of the world doesn't stand still for you and do nothing while you act.
So everybody wants a trial? Everybody gets a trial. Oh, those mandatory court costs? Yeah, they're much more expensive now, but hey, you wanted a trial. We've had to move your trial to 2nd shift - your lawyer charges extra? Sorry, huge backup, you understand? NEXT!
That doesn't even have the faintest hope of succeeding.
What we need to get back to is a number of very basic ideas and get people to start voting for people based on them. Not handouts, but simple, basic things that are the basis for society.
But the single first concept is the one behind the Hammurabi Code of Laws.
Post the laws, and everyone - even the king! (or Senator, or Treasury Secretary, etc) are subject to them.
(But that would "unfairly" target some people. And we like it when "our side" wins, even at the expense of the law. Yeah, I know. Silly me.)
Unix-Jedi at April 21, 2012 6:29 AM
There is something much more insidious; how does the Department of the Treasure know?
Either the bank is informing on you or the federal government is gathering confidential information without a warrant--they are spying on citizens.
This isn't the sign of a free nation with respect for the rights of its citizens.
Joe at April 21, 2012 10:30 AM
Unix-Jedi,
I disagree. The system only works because of the deal-making.
I see prosecutors on trial calendar with 5 or 6 cases. They can't try them all.
Yeah, they can try to shift them to another calendar, but pretty soon the speedy trial right is going to kick in.
Then, just imagine the juries!
I have to get dragged away from my work because the government has nothing better to do than prosecute some idiot who got lost in the woods.
The weakness of my plan is that it requires the average person to rely on other average people. It only works if everybody does it.
-Jut
JutGory at April 21, 2012 3:35 PM
"This isn't the sign of a free nation with respect for the rights of its citizens."
America has slipped into a fascist state.
Lobster at April 23, 2012 6:06 AM
Leave a comment