The uses of irresistible inference

Kenneth Murray

Journal of Money Laundering Control, 2011, vol. 14, issue 1, 7-15

Abstract: Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to assert that the exclusive use of predicate offence as a means of proving money laundering is an inadequate response to the level of threat presented by the crime. It aims to promote the concept of “irresistible inference” from UK case law as a basis for establishing international consensus that this provides an alternative and possibly more effective means of prosecuting the crime. Design/methodology/approach - The paper considers academic research into the incidence of money laundering and the effectiveness of anti‐money laundering measures; it considers the efficacy of current UK legislation on money laundering; assesses legal views on recent developments in UK case law relating to the concept of “irresistible inference”; identifies what “irresistible inference” looks like and asserts its practical value as an alternative basis for proving criminality of funds in money laundering prosecutions. Findings - An effective international response to the increasing threat to international institutions posed by money laundering requires development of new approaches to proving criminality of funds. The use of irresistible inference as an alternative to predicate offence, however, requires development of the international understanding of what it looks like in order that relevant policy makers and legal decision makers can deploy it with confidence so that it is able to make the significant contribution to the international effort against money laundering it is capable of. Practical implications - To facilitate the necessary international consensus, it may be necessary in some jurisdictions to amend legislation where it currently relies on predicate offence for the prosecution of money laundering cases. Social implications - A failure to effectively combat international money laundering implies acceptance of an attitude of complacency in the face of increasing exposure to levels of threat in the form of political and social corruption, organized crime and terrorism that ought to be unacceptable to the international community. Originality/value - International acceptance of “irresistible inference” as a means of proving criminality in money laundering cases would deliver a radically more hostile environment for international money launderers. This paper is designed to open up thinking along these lines across international borders.

Keywords: Money laundering; Crimes; Criminal justice (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2011
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:jmlcpp:13685201111098842

DOI: 10.1108/13685201111098842

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Money Laundering Control is currently edited by Dr Li Hong Xing and Prof Barry Rider

More articles in Journal of Money Laundering Control from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().