Of course -- all money laundering attempts to obscure the source of money. Usually, launderers get caught when they make mistakes, or when money is used for goods or services which are more easily observable.
I have a brilliant idea to address these privacy concerns. Make the bad thing like selling counterfeit oxy or whatever illegal, so that the bad thing is illegal rather than the money. Then we can make "money laundering" not a crime. If it's harder to catch criminals then tough shit, our privacy is worth it.
It is common and logical to criminalize both the crime and the facilitators of a crime. We don't let a getaway driver get off scot free from a bank robbery just because they weren't the ones pointing the gun inside of the bank. Money laundering is, by definition, money obtained from criminal activity.
We should also prosecute the road crew, because everyone knows when they build the road criminals absolutely will use it for crime. It's facilitating.
Road crew like many tornado cash users, they have no "mens rea" intent to aid money launderers, even though they have knowledge it can happen. By your below logic the courts find Tornado Cash user not guilty of "mens rea" money laundering.
>Edit to reply to your edit (why not post a reply?): that's exactly why they have been added to the sanctions list explicitly, rather than prosecuting users for money laundering.
Awesome, roads used by money launderers should be sanctioned as well so "legitimate" users can't use them either, everyone who built them knew they would be used by criminals and so do the people paying the fuel taxes that maintain them so criminals can drive on them. I'm replying this way because I've run out of replies (I can only reply 5 times per 3 hours).
No. Western court systems are not a dumb box of logic gates; they evaluate mens rea.
Edit to reply to your edit (why not post a reply?): that's exactly why they have been added to the sanctions list explicitly, rather than prosecuting users for money laundering.
