3 ms·
In other words the crime is the intent, so it's impossible to commit the crime without the intent! (Unlike the prototypical crime which is the act)
by sliverstorm 11y ago
In other words the crime is the intent, so it's impossible to commit the crime without the intent! (Unlike the prototypical crime which is the act)
- maxerickson 11y agoI'm pretty sure they only bother prosecuting cases where the act is committed. I don't think it is so far away from other crimes where intent is evaluated (like murder vs manslaughter).
- mentat 11y agoThey've certainly been doing it without evidence of intent. It's been a huge deal. http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/washingtonbureau/2015/02/irs-seizes-millions-from-law-abiding-businesses-3.html http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/washingtonbureau/2015...
- maxerickson 11y agoThe first business mentioned in that article certainly did structure their transactions with the intent of avoiding reporting regulations, under the advice of their accountant: Convenience-store distribution is a cash-intensive business, and Hirsch said his accountant advised him that he should keep the company's deposits below $10,000 because banks didn't like the paperwork involved with Currency Transaction Reports. The article states But there was no evidence of criminal activity, not that there was no evidence of intent (as the section I quoted makes clear, the intent was obvious). Please note that I'm not making statements in favor of the law in these comments, just characterizing the facts as I see them. ETA: as I keep reading, the second business was also intentionally avoiding the reporting requirements (after a teller told them how). The third one does not directly state that they were trying to avoid the reporting requirements.
- chc 11y agoNo, many other crimes have a mens rea requirement.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- solve 11y agoYou're wrong. The US courts weigh nearly always weigh intent unusually highly, compared to the rest of the world.