Let's take a look at "money laundering" for a moment. From the lawsuit filed by Attorney John Pucci on behalf of Danny Shelton:
f. Danny Shelton laundered money through 3ABN donations to Cherie Peters, in order to make payments that had been expressly prohibited by the 3ABN Board of directors.
Anywhere know where Pucci got a basis for claiming that we said this? I found this at
BlackSDA.com, from a post by Gregory Matthews purportedly written by Gailon:
Did you get your hands on any proof regarding 3ABN's payments to Cherie Peters for Brandi's income?
Thus Pucci gives the impression that "laundered" can mean the concealment of the source of money when payments are prohibited by the board. I do not know if that is an appropriate use of the term or not.
However, note this from WikiPedia:
In US law, money laundering is the practice of engaging in financial transactions to conceal the identity, source, or destination of illegally gained money. In UK law the common law definition is wider: "taking any action with property of any form which is either wholly or in part the proceeds of a crime that will disguise the fact that that property is the proceeds of a crime or obscure the beneficial ownership of said property."
In the past, the term money laundering was applied only to financial transactions related to organized crime. Today its definition is often expanded by government and international regulators such as the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to mean any financial transaction which generates an asset or a value as the result of an illegal act, which may involve actions such as tax evasion or false accounting.
I believe I can prove in a court of law that Danny Shelton engaged in "money laundering" as defined by the above definition. In fact, I think I already did so.
Snoopy, does your definition differ from WikiPedia's? How do you feel the definition does or does not apply?