How much of this is imaginary Serenstar ? that’s a genuine question by the way, not trying to be gratuitously controversial. I am interested in what is the truth and what is not.
Firstly, because the transactions didn’t tale place abroad. The King didn’t return from Qatar with a plastic/paper bag full of cash, and didn’t breach any Customs rules about the max cash that can be carried across borders, as Vandel said. Those are the bits that are entirely made up.
The cash was handed over in the UK, at Clarence House, as a donation to a charity established by Prince Charles, not a gift to him personally. That part was all not mentioned by Vandel.
Secondly, contrary to popular belief, there is nothing wrong or illegal with the transactions that took place here. Or cash transactions by themselves. It’s not illegal to make a donation in cash, even a large donation. Cash transactions need to be checked carefully though as people who are laundering money to conceal its criminal origins often use cash. So it is considered a red flag.
So what happens when someone wants to give a charity a donation in cash is that various levels of checks must be undertaken. Firstly by the bank from which the cash is withdrawn. Then when you give it to the charity as they’ll have to do their own checks before accepting it, and then again when the charity deposits it in their own bank account (the reason for the deposit and the source of the funds will need to be established by the receiving bank). Then, as both Charles and the Ex-Prime Minister giving the donation count as Politically-Exposed Persons, or PEPs, extra caution applies and additional checks to be done.
These checks don’t mean that there is anything inherently wrong with the transaction however. In this case, we know that the board of the charity and the bank that the donation were paid into were both happy that appropriate due diligence had been done, and the donation was fine.
Even the Guardian report you link to says clearly “There is no suggestion the payments were illegal”. And also ”there is no evidence the sheikh did not intend the monies to go to the charity” And if other donations were made in a similar way, providing the necessary checks were done, and passed, the transactions are genuinely not suspicious.
Makes a good “this must be suspicious story!” splash in the press though…