Blackjack: €24,500 in alleged winnings suspected of being linked to money laundering 

A man convicted of money laundering in the Netherlands claims he won €24,500 playing blackjack at a casino. However, without concrete evidence, his explanation failed to convince the courts. The Advocate General has now recommended that the Supreme Court uphold his conviction. 

Alleged blackjack winnings fail to convince the court 

A man convicted of money laundering maintains that €24,500 found in a handbag came from blackjack winnings he and his partner had earned at a Holland Casino venue. 

However, this explanation did not convince the Court of Appeal in The Hague. According to information published by CasinoNieuws on October 29, 2026, the Advocate General at the Dutch Supreme Court also considers the evidence presented by the defendant insufficient to explain the origin of the money. 

He therefore recommends upholding the money laundering conviction, while considering a reduction in the sentence due to the length of the proceedings. 

Police discover more than €855,000 in cash 

The case dates back to April 8, 2021. During an inspection, Dutch police officers discovered a substantial amount of cash in a residential houseboat and in vehicles belonging to the suspect and his partner. In total, authorities found €855,700 in cash, distributed among several bags. 

In the suspect’s car, investigators discovered a bag containing €245,000. Other bags found in his partner’s vehicle contained €586,200. One final amount particularly caught the authorities’ attention: €24,500 kept in a brown leather handbag. 

The discovery of these sums led to criminal proceedings for money laundering. The Court of Appeal in The Hague eventually convicted the man of participating, together with another person, in laundering two separate amounts of money. 

The first concerned a sum he claimed to be holding on behalf of someone else. The second specifically involved the €24,500 found in the handbag. 

The court imposed a sentence of 180 hours of community service and a four-month suspended prison sentence. 

Why the alleged €24,500 casino winnings raised suspicions 

During a later stage of the proceedings, the defendant offered a new explanation for the €24,500. He claimed that he and his partner had won the money playing blackjack at a Holland Casino venue. 

However, the suspect failed to provide sufficiently specific evidence to support his account. In particular, he submitted no dates on which the gambling allegedly took place, no supporting documents from the casino and no bank statements confirming the claimed winnings. 

The absence of corroborating testimony presented another difficulty. His partner, who was supposedly involved in the blackjack sessions, made no mention of these winnings in her statement. 

For the Court of Appeal, this explanation was therefore insufficient to seriously challenge the suspicions of money laundering. 

The Advocate General shares this assessment. In his view, the defendant’s statements were not sufficiently concrete or verifiable to require the Public Prosecution Service to conduct further investigations into the origin of the €24,500. 

Money laundering conviction could be upheld 

Following an appeal in cassation, the Dutch Supreme Court must examine the challenges brought against the conviction. 

The Advocate General recommends rejecting the ground of appeal contesting the finding that the amounts in question were laundered. His reasoning is based, in particular, on the insufficient evidence provided by the defendant to explain the origin of the cash. 

However, this recommendation is not yet a final ruling by the Supreme Court. It is a legal opinion intended to assist the court in its assessment of the case. 

Although the Advocate General recommends upholding the money laundering conviction, he also identifies a procedural irregularity. The deadline for forwarding the case file to the Supreme Court was exceeded by more than four months. 

In his opinion, this delay justifies a reduction in the sentence originally imposed on the defendant.