Deliberate mistake: The way diplomatic immunity is depicted in the movie is extremely inaccurate. While technically a sufficiently ranking diplomat could perform the acts shown in the movie without being subject to arrest, their home government would be requested to turn the diplomats over for trial, or the diplomat would be declared persona non grata and expelled from the country. A drug smuggling ring and murdering multiple policemen is far, far more serious than actual crimes that diplomats have been expelled (or handed over for trial) for in the real world. Additionally, the consul general and his officers would not be considered diplomats. They would only have limited consular immunity with regards to "official acts" in the course of consular business.
Lethal Weapon 2 (1989)
0 reviews
Directed by: Richard Donner
Starring: Mel Gibson, Danny Glover, Joe Pesci, Patsy Kensit
Your rating
Average rating
(5 votes)
More mistakes in Lethal Weapon 2
Rudd: Now we DO have a serious diplomatic situation here, which I will be taking up with your state department first thing in the morning.
Riggs: Whoa, you got me quakin' in my boots, but I'm still gonna bring you down.
Rudd: My dear officer, you could not even give me a parking ticket!
Trivia: When Leo is cleaning Riggs' house, you can hear the song "I'm Not Scared" by the group Eighth Wonder. Patsy Kensit, who portrays Rika Van Den Haas in the movie, was the lead singer of the group.
Question: What exactly is Leo talking about with the processing of laundering money? Neither Riggs or Murtaugh get it and I don't either.
Answer: Leo is describing a money laundering scheme, with the intent of taking dirty drug money and making it legit. Money laundering is largely about confusing the source of the money, to make it look like it came from a legitimate source. Leo is saying that the dealer gives the money to a courier, who gives it to a guy to put it into a dummy company. The dummy company writes a check to the courier in the dealer's name. This puts about 5-6 steps in the chain of custody of the money already. The dealer takes out a loan using the check as collateral (let's say a $10000 loan with a $10000 check as collateral). The dealer never repays the loan, so the bank keeps the check (nobody loses because the amounts are equal). This puts even more steps in the chain of custody. If a law enforcement agency wanted to try and track the money back to the source, they would have to unwind all those steps, being able to prove each step occurred with evidence. Very hard to do.
oldbaldyone