[throwawaydojcmt]

I'm going to assume that most of these comments have absolutely no experience with the Federal System. I've had multiple clients encounter absurd (Federal) money laundering charges (18 US 1956). Proving application of complex laws belies the fact that the audience you must prove them before is (usually) made up of the average citizen (bench trials notwithstanding). Prosecutorial misconduct (from questionable charges to overcharging to Giglio violations to misstatements in court) is so rampant as to be an epidemic. Recently I had a client charged with money laundering, because after completing a project moved money from his (solely owned) software firm account to his personal account, paid taxes on it, and then moved (a similar amount) back a few months later to cover cashflow beginning the next project. This combination transaction absent no other fact pattern was apparently sufficient. And don't forget that in the civil system you routinely throw out facially insufficient cases [12(b)6], however, this is essentially non-existent in the Federal System. For one, judges never throw out indictments. I can count the number of I've seen one thrown out. Second, you only invite the prosecution to craft a new one. Lastly, once you move to trial you're hardly up against a rigid legal framework; certainly not in the minds of jurors. Federal Court is a theatre, and the play is 100% emotional. This is by design. During voire dire, the prosecution will not intentionally leave anyone will subject matter expertise or much legal experience in that box. Leaving you to win an emotional game if you can, or leaving you with a Rule 29 or an appeal. If they want you, they'll probably get you (99.8% Federal conviction rate). The object lesson is that you should avoid even the remotest question of impropriety or misconduct even avoiding completely innocent conduct that you could be used against you in the hands of malicious prosecution. It happens every day.