SCIRP Mobile Website
Paper Submission

Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.

 

Contact Us >>

WhatsApp  +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
   
Paper Publishing WeChat
Book Publishing WeChat
(or Email:book@scirp.org)

Article citations

More>>

Connett, D. (2015). Curse of Brink’s Mat: Death of John “Goldfinger” Palmer the Latest Killing Related to 1983 Heist. Independent.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/curse-of-brinks-mat-death-of-john-goldfinger-palmer-the-latest-killing-related-to-1983-heist-10365383.html

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Agency Cost and Uncontrollable Risks in Hiding Fortune Overseas—Offshore Companies, Ownership of the Cannes Villa and Money Laundering in the Criminal Case of Bo Xilai

    AUTHORS: Juan Fang

    KEYWORDS: Offshore Companies, Money Laundering and Bribery

    JOURNAL NAME: Chinese Studies, Vol.7 No.2, March 30, 2018

    ABSTRACT: The Jinan Intermediate People’s Court adjudicated the charges of bribery, embezzlement and abuse of power against Mr. Bo Xilai, the former Communist Party Chief of Chongqing from August 22 to 26, 2013. Bo was charged of accepting a luxury villa located in Cannes from a tycoon named Xu Ming. A conspiracy named the Montage scheme, which used offshore companies in the purpose of committing bribery and covering the beneficiary of the property abroad, emerged during the trial. With focus on the role of the offshore companies played in financing function, fake business transactions, ownership structure related to the Cannes villa, this paper is trying to answer a couple of questions: what’s the time of accepting cash bribe paralleling with money laundering through a group of offshore companies, the time when the money was firstly transferred from the bribe-giver to the bribe-taker or the time when the bribe-taker became the beneficiary or controller of the assets purchased with the money? In finding out the beneficiary of a property under the name of an offshore company, is it legally required and technically possible to prove the consistence between the owner of a property and that of an offshore company?