[logician2u]

I am confident you can back up your claims with some sort of documentation, aside from the news stories we've all seen that so-and-so was busted for having x tons of hashish and "authorities also found numerous weapons and large amounts of cash."

Allegations that a person *might* have acquired money in an illegal activity don't hack it in a court of law. And if you, as others on this thread have, suspect that a person's association with known thespians is proof enough that he's into drugs, sex and rock-and-roll and therefore a likely person to be laundering somebody else's billions -- or is it millions? -- maybe we need a law to prohibit such activity.

The law would be titled, "A Prohibition on Jumping to Conclusions."

[marshmallow]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not jumping to any conclusions. Neither are the authorities. That is why they are launching an investigation first. This is a long way from a court of law. Only if the investigation turns up something does the case then proceed to the courts.

So what we are talking about is grounds for an investigation, not a conviction.

I would argue that $8 billion in a car trunk is certainly grounds for an investigation. You, I presume, consider tbis to be nothing out of the ordinary and insufficient grounds to start asking questions?