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
Meet the team of industry experts behind ComsureFind out more
Keep up to date with the very latest news from ComsureFind out more
View our latest imagery from our news and workFind out more
Think we can help you and your business? Chat to us todayGet In Touch
As well as owning and publishing Comsure's copyrighted works, Comsure wishes to use the copyright-protected works of others. To do so, Comsure is applying for exemptions in the UK copyright law. There are certain very specific situations where Comsure is permitted to do so without seeking permission from the owner. These exemptions are in the copyright sections of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended)[www.gov.UK/government/publications/copyright-acts-and-related-laws]. Many situations allow for Comsure to apply for exemptions. These include 1] Non-commercial research and private study, 2] Criticism, review and reporting of current events, 3] the copying of works in any medium as long as the use is to illustrate a point. 4] no posting is for commercial purposes [payment]. (for a full list of exemptions, please read here www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright]. Concerning the exceptions, Comsure will acknowledge the work of the source author by providing a link to the source material. Comsure claims no ownership of non-Comsure content. The non-Comsure articles posted on the Comsure website are deemed important, relevant, and newsworthy to a Comsure audience (e.g. regulated financial services and professional firms [DNFSBs]). Comsure does not wish to take any credit for the publication, and the publication can be read in full in its original form if you click the articles link that always accompanies the news item. Also, Comsure does not seek any payment for highlighting these important articles. If you want any article removed, Comsure will automatically do so on a reasonable request if you email email@example.com.