The claimant's problem is that he told the officers at Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport that he had only been in the US since 2004, meaning that he could not possibly have earned the seized sum washing dishes, whilst he now claims to journalists that he arrived in 1996, and all the funds were savings. Newspaper reporters need to remember to read court files before writing about poor individuals being unfairly treated by the US justice system. He also initially denied that he was carrying money, and that the money was his. His story is inconsistent, and similar to that of cash smuggling "mules" who are paid to take cash to Latin American drug traffickers.

Whilst the case* is not relevant to any important US compliance issues, one wonders whether, in conducting a Source of Funds enquiry regarding a large cash deposit, we should have the bank customer sign a sworn affidavit that all US reporting requirements for the international transport of currency have been met, and all required reports filed upon entry into the US. This is especially true for foreign nationals seeking to deposit currency in US financial institutions.

Such an affidavit could also be of great assistance to the bank later, when US law enforcement comes knocking on the door, asking why you accepted what turned out to be drug cash. Did you not only receive information on the Source of Funds, but also obtained a statement that it was not smuggled into the United States? Think about it.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
* United States vs. $59,000 in United States Currency, Case No.: 06-cv-60573-JIC (S.D.FLA.) The claimant has filed an appeal of the final judgment.