James Stunt charged with Money Laundering and Forgery

[hyphen]

Charged with offences of money laundering contrary to section 327 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and forgery contrary to section one of Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981,

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10370999/...

James said:

'So what’s the headline? “A man they have arrested got charged with money laundering”? I will be tendering a defence.

‘I hope this goes to trial and you can explain how James Stunt, the biggest clueless guy ever, is not a money launderer.

‘I have to now prove my innocence, and I won’t just use my photographic memory.

‘James Stunt is prosecuted for money laundering – this is the biggest miscarriage of justice.’

[Vixpy1]

Not a massive suprise really, Does a Bear s*&t in the woods?

No, this one will be doing it in HMP Belmarsh.

[TwistingMyMelon]

There was a good thread on here - not sure if its still here, as he might have been instructing a social media cleanseing company to delete anything on him - only he might have not paid him.

Lots on Instagram giving an alleged insight to him:

He might have borrowed money off a wealthy ex relative

He might have sold fake pictures and leant fake ones to a royal

His gold company was couriering out large sums of cash on a daily basis, unusual considering it didnt really do much business

Plenty more

[hyphen]

TwistingMyMelon said:

There was a good thread on here - not sure if its still here,

I did search for it, but couldn't find it.

[pidsy]

Yeah the long running (alleged) thread.

Was a good one if it’s still here.

[TwistingMyMelon]

The past thread on here as he pretty much drew lots of attention to himself by his car convoy - hence the thread started as no one had ever heard of him!

[pquinn]

Nothing around any of what's linked to this was exactly clever or subtle. Seems to have ticked off every bad stereotype along the way.

So the question is how did it go on so long and why did the wheels eventually fall off? Guess we might be about to find out.

[mick987]

Was he not just a front / useful idiot for Gomez and Mortica?

[TwistingMyMelon]

mick987 said:

Was he not just a front / useful idiot for Gomez and Mortica?

haha!!!

I thought so , but Id imagine hes too stupid and loud.....actually hold that thought

[Gecko1978]

from what was talked about on the last thread he has family connections with some bad people who may have been involved in the Brinks Mat case back in the day. Have a gold bullion business where you make your own bars might have been useful. Then he marries a rich mans daughter an the spending really started. Then he fell out with said mans daughter and the lifestyle he created could not be sustained an he had a very public "no I am a billionair" social media persona while pissing off lots of other people. Finally its all come to an end an his skills in fine art, investment etc have perhaps been unmasked as just BS

[anonymous-user]

Stunt is a complete train wreck. Some of his peacock antics around the neigbourhood were desperate

[hyphen]

Gecko1978 said:

from what was talked about on the last thread he has family connections with some bad people
...

His godfather is the head of a crime family and they are close.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5048269/T...

Edited by hyphen on Wednesday 5th January 15:19

[pquinn]

So is this linked at all so the comical antics with Fowler Oldfield than have cost Natwest so much?

[TwistingMyMelon]

pquinn said:

So is this linked at all so the comical antics with Fowler Oldfield than have cost Natwest so much?

From memory I think so, although to be fair Nat West and their lax KYC and transaction monitoring cost them so much .....

[dudleybloke]

Did he manage to flog that fake painting?

[Gecko1978]

hyphen said:

Gecko1978 said:

from what was talked about on the last thread he has family connections with some bad people
...

His godfather is the head of a crime family and they are close.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5048269/T...

Edited by hyphen on Wednesday 5th January 15:19

re this when it went on lots of people hinted that bernie had a dodgy past yet I could find nothing when i googled anyone know

[pquinn]

Gecko1978 said:

re this when it went on lots of people hinted that bernie had a dodgy past yet I could find nothing when i googled anyone know

You can look at where he started from, when and where he operated and the types of businesses he was originally involved with and draw some conclusions for yourself.

Mostly he was just smart, ruthless and acquired something cheap that he turned into something valuable.

[Gecko1978]

pquinn said:

Gecko1978 said:

re this when it went on lots of people hinted that bernie had a dodgy past yet I could find nothing when i googled anyone know

You can look at where he started from, when and where he operated and the types of businesses he was originally involved with and draw some conclusions for yourself.

Mostly he was just smart, ruthless and acquired something cheap that he turned into something valuable.

motorcyle parts etc still seems like he was like most small business an just grew like a few do

[stongle]

Gecko1978 said:

hyphen said:

Gecko1978 said:

from what was talked about on the last thread he has family connections with some bad people
...

His godfather is the head of a crime family and they are close.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5048269/T...

Edited by hyphen on Wednesday 5th January 15:19

re this when it went on lots of people hinted that bernie had a dodgy past yet I could find nothing when i googled anyone know

There are plenty of other wealthier and less well known villains out there. Is there a romance to low level crime people fall for, or are we conditioned to ignore more complex and lucrative skullduggery?

A 200m criminal empire is peanuts compared to the likes of Sanjay Shah. Many will say "who"? But the media gravitate towards traditional villains rather than big money crime.

The largest (by pounds, dollars, pence etc), crims are always white collar; more likely to have societal connections - we are constantly looking at low hanging fruit.