Flashcards Studio

OrionTech Importers, a mid-sized importer of electronics, receives PHP 2,150,000 in cash from a client known to be involved in illegal drug trafficking. The owner deposits the money in two separate bank accounts she controls over four days and, through her company, wires PHP 1,600,000 to a supplier in Japan, labeling the transfer as payment for electronic components. She knows the funds originated from illicit activity. A bank teller who processes the deposits is aware of the source but does not file a suspicious transaction report.
(a) Identify the predicate crime or unlawful activity that supplies the proceeds and name the statutory provision that constitutes the predicate offense.
(b) Apply the elements of the money laundering offense under the AMLA to OrionTech’s acts. Specifically, discuss: (i) whether the funds constitute proceeds of an unlawful activity; (ii) whether the deposits and the wire transfer are "monetary transactions" within the meaning of the law; (iii) the mental element (knowledge) of the offender and whether OrionTech’s knowledge is proven; (iv) whether the layering and integration pattern supports a finding of money laundering.
(c) If OrionTech argues she did not know the funds came from illicit activity, state the controlling rule on the requisite mens rea for money laundering under the AMLA and how knowledge may be established beyond direct evidence.