Professional money launderers jailed in Jersey
Muhiddin Umurzokov, Anvarjon Eshonkulov and Batsukh Bataa [The defendants] made two trips to Jersey to launder approximately £60,000 in Jersey banknotes on behalf of another organised crime group.
On the first trip,
- Umurzokov visited Jersey on his own.
- During the weekend, he converted £7,000 into US Dollars at the Post Office and paid £2,000 into a UK account controlled by him but in the name of another person at Lloyd’s Bank (Counts 1 and 2).
On the second trip to Jersey,
- Umurzokov, Eshonkulov and Bataa made a series of visits to banks, the Post Office, car dealerships and shops, making 13 further conversions in the total sum of approximately £36,000 (Counts 3, 6-16 and 18) by purchasing
- Mobile telephones and other consumer devices, and
- Making exchanges or deposits at the counters or automated deposit machines of three bank branches and the post office.
- They also attempted unsuccessfully to convert £38,000 cash into UK currency at the post office and a bank (Counts 4 and 5); and
- Attempted unsuccessfully to convert further tens of thousands of pounds by purchasing a valuable watch and new cars (Counts 17 and 19).
As they attempted to leave the island at the end of the week, the defendants’ car was searched, and officers found
- The electronic devices and clothing that had been purchased,
- Together with cash of £13,077 in Jersey banknotes,
- £2,355 in Bank of England notes and €2,550 (Counts 20-22).
These people were Professional money launderers – the courts applied the principles in Bhojwani v AG  JCA 034,
The following principles were added:-
- No distinction is to be drawn as a matter of law between the laundering of one’s own proceeds of crime and the proceeds of crime committed by third parties.
- A professional money laundering service is not necessarily more serious than laundering the proceeds of a one-off fraud – it may be so, but each case will depend on its own facts.
- The interests of Jersey as a finance centre justified an element of deterrence in the sentence.”
Read the judgement here