Charged with dealing with proceeds of crime in NSW.

The legislative source.

The three offences share two elements: the property is the proceeds of crime, and the accused dealt with it. They differ on the fault element. Section 193B(1) requires both knowledge of the source and an intent to conceal; section 193B(2) requires only knowledge; section 193B(3) requires only recklessness. "Recklessness" in the Crimes Act sense means foresight of the possibility that the property was the proceeds of crime and continuing to deal with it anyway.

"Proceeds of crime" is defined in section 193A. It includes any property substantially derived or realised, directly or indirectly, by any person from the commission of a serious offence (an offence punishable by imprisonment for 12 months or more). Property includes money, goods, things in action and choses in action. "Deals with" is broadly defined and includes receiving, possessing, concealing, disposing of, lending, importing or transferring.

The conceal limb under section 193B(1) requires a specific intent. The intent to conceal can be inferred from the circumstances (the use of layered transactions, the use of front entities, the use of cash, the use of cryptocurrency, the routing through multiple accounts). It cannot be inferred from mere possession of the property.

Many section 193B prosecutions arise out of investigations into other offending (drug supply, fraud, identity crime). The proceeds-of-crime offence captures the financial side of the underlying conduct and is charged alongside, or after, the predicate offence. The Crown does not need to prove which specific offence produced the proceeds, only that the property was the proceeds of some serious offence and that the accused knew or was reckless as to that fact.

Penalties and likely outcomes.

The s 193B(3) reckless offence.

Where the brief discloses only recklessness, the realistic range is materially lower. For a first offender, a community correction order or intensive correction order is in play depending on the amount of money and the duration of the conduct. For larger amounts or sustained conduct, a sentence at the upper end of what the District Court can finalise on indictment without going to full-time custody is the realistic range.

The s 193B(2) knowing offence.

Knowledge that the property was the proceeds of crime takes the matter into the standard money-laundering range. The realistic head sentence for a first offender is two to six years, depending on the amount, the duration of the conduct and the underlying offending. A non-parole period of twelve months to three years is typical.

The s 193B(1) conceal offence.

The conceal offence is the most serious. It is usually charged where the conduct involved structured transactions, front entities or cross-border movements. The realistic head sentence for a first offender is four to ten years, with a non-parole period of two to five years. Full-time custody is the default; an intensive correction order is rare for s 193B(1) matters and is reserved for the smallest examples.

Defences and arguments worth running.

The property was not the proceeds of crime.

The Crown must prove that the property was the proceeds of some serious offence. Where the property was legitimately earned (employment, business income, inheritance, gift) or where the source cannot be traced to any criminal conduct, the central element is contestable. The defence is supported by financial records, employment material, business documentation and any tax returns showing declared income.

The accused did not know or was not reckless.

Knowledge or recklessness is the fault element. Where the accused honestly believed the property was legitimate (employer payment, family payment, a regular business transaction), and the surrounding circumstances do not contradict that belief, the fault element is contestable. The defence is much harder to run where the conduct involved unusual cash amounts, payments through unconventional channels, or instructions to keep transactions quiet.

The dealing was not with the proceeds.

"Dealing" requires conduct in relation to the property. Where the accused was a passive observer (the property was held in their name but they had no control), the dealing element is contestable. Joint accounts, family financial arrangements and shared business interests all produce situations where one person dealt with the property and another did not.

Cooperation, restitution, and the assistance route.

For matters where the Crown case on the fault element is strong, the defence work shifts to the subjective case and to the potential for assistance to authorities under section 23 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. Many s 193B matters are part of broader investigations and the assistance route can produce a substantial sentence reduction, but it is a serious decision with consequences that need to be worked through carefully.

What we do for clients facing this charge.

The first step is the brief: the financial records, the bank statements, the asset trace, the underlying investigation that produced the proceeds-of-crime allegation, and any communications recovered from devices. Section 193B prosecutions are evidence-intensive; the brief in a serious matter often runs to several lever-arch folders.

The second step is the federal-state question. Where the conduct touches a Commonwealth interest (cross-border movement, Commonwealth funds, banking institutions regulated federally), the matter may be charged under Division 400 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code instead of or in addition to section 193B. The Commonwealth scheme has slightly different elements and maxima; the election between schemes has procedural consequences.

The third step is the asset position. Most section 193B matters are accompanied by an application for restraining orders under the Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime Act 1989 (NSW) or the Commonwealth Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The restraining proceeding runs in parallel with the criminal matter and requires its own response. We engage commercial-litigation counsel on the restraining side where the asset values warrant it.

The fourth step is the subjective case. Section 193B accused persons often have strong employment and family histories and the proceeds-of-crime allegation is the only criminal exposure. The subjective case is usually the strongest part of the matter; treatment, restitution where possible, and a clear account of the financial picture set up the sentence.

What we tell clients on the first call.

The practical detail below is not legal advice for your matter. It is the version of the conversation the firm typically has with a client charged with possession of proceeds of crime in the first hour.

What evidence police usually rely on.

Documentary evidence of the transactions, victim statements, banking records, and the audit trail compiled by the investigating officer. Fraud briefs are typically the largest by volume.

What to bring to the first consultation.

• The Court Attendance Notice (or charge sheet) and any bail papers.
• Anything police gave you in writing — fact sheet, certificate of analysis, search warrant copy, property seizure record.
• A short written timeline of the day, in your own words.
• Anything you have in writing relating to the transactions (emails, ledgers, banking statements); a list of every account and entity involved.

Common mistakes in the first twenty-four hours.

• Talking to anyone other than your lawyer about the matter. Friends, family, co-accused and social media are not privileged.
• Deleting messages, photographs, posts or browser history. The trail left by deletion is often more damaging than what was there.
• Contacting the complainant or any prosecution witness, even through a third party.
• Continuing to operate the accounts under question without specific advice. Pattern evidence after the charge date is admissible.

What not to say to police without advice.

You must give your name and address. You do not have to answer anything else, and in most cases you should not. The standard answer is: “I do not wish to answer questions. I want to speak to my lawyer.” Section 89 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) protects silence; the narrow section 89A exception applies only on indictable matters and only where a special caution has been given in the presence of an Australian lawyer.

The timeline you can expect.

From charge to first court appearance is typically two to six weeks in the Local Court and longer where the matter is indictable. The brief of evidence is served by the prosecutor on a date set at the first mention. From service of the brief to first reply is typically twenty-eight days. Defended hearings and committals are then listed weeks or months out depending on the court list.

When an early plea may or may not be appropriate.

An early plea attracts a sentencing discount of up to twenty-five per cent if entered at the first available opportunity, but it locks in a conviction. The firm does not advise an early plea before the brief is served and read. The dishonesty element is contested on the brief. An early plea is rarely appropriate before forensic accounting is reviewed.

Court-specific notes.

If the matter is listed at the Downing Centre, Parramatta, Penrith, Burwood, Manly, Newtown, Waverley, Hornsby or Sutherland Local Court, the firm appears in person. Wollongong Local Court matters are run from the firm's Wollongong office. ACT Magistrates Court and ACT Supreme Court matters are run from chambers; the firm appears in person at all ACT mentions.

Recent outcomes · dealing with the proceeds of crime matters.

Anonymised outcomes from the firm's matter set. Names, dates beyond the year, and identifying details have been altered or omitted to preserve client confidentiality. Each result was determined on the particular facts and is not a guarantee of any future outcome.

Frequently asked.