Is this evidence permissible?

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? IL

Lets say an organization, A, fills out a form deliberately to help in an investigation of an organization, B. That same form causes a piece of evidence that incriminates B. Organization A, knew that the form was not suppose to be filled out.

Is the evidence still permissible in court if organization A, deliberately (planted) filled out the form that caused the evidence to incriminate organization B.

yes, the CTR is still admissible.

You must realize that if they wanted to raise a red flag, they would have filed an SAR. You have to realize how many CTR's are filled out every day simply because of the dollar amount of the transaction. They do not indicate the transaction was suspicious or unusual.

Now, if they believe the transactions were suspicious, they would have filed a SAR which would intentionally raise a red flag. The SAR is going to garner more scrutiny than a CTR simply because the bank has determined the transaction is suspicious. As such, that account will more likely be investigated.

not the CTR (form) but the evidence (pamphlet), is the evidence still permissible if the form was planted

lets say the police planted the form which causes new evidence to appear, since if the police planted the form, the form wouldn't be permissible, would it, then if not the new evidence wouldn't either, would it?

You are going to have to tell me how the police planted a CTR since it requires information they do not have available to them and requires signatures from bank personnel they surely could not provide.

I am just giving an general example, like I was doing in this first post. Try not read things between the lines.

Is the evidence still permissible in court if organization A, deliberately (planted) filled out the form that caused the evidence to incriminate organization B.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. Organization A's (the bank's) motives for filling out the CTR and handing out a pamphlet have no bearing on the fact that Organization B (your mother) got the pamphlet.

In fact, I could send your mom the pamplet right now along with a note saying that I am a bank examiner and that I am investigating her for structuring transactions.
My actions would be immoral and possibly illegal, but your mother would still have a pamphlet that explains the law to her. Since I was not contucting my illegal activity at the behest of the state, the fact that she got the pamphlet, by any means, is admissible.

Heck, even if the Feds sent her the pamphlet themselves, it could even be admissible depending on the circumstances.