American Express Bank appears in both the BCCI and Al Shamal records.
The BCCI forfeiture opinion records a $150 million general deposit at American Express Bank and other financial relationships. Separately, Levin’s September 26, 2001 material lists American Express among Al Shamal’s U.S. correspondent banks. It also says the three U.S. banks reported their accounts closed or largely inactive since 1997–1998.
Court record + attributed congressional bank listing
Confidence assessment: documentary support, without numerical probability.
Supporting evidence (2)
United States v. BCCI Holdings, 941 F. Supp. 180
primary-origin record1996 opinion; American Express general-deposit discussion
The court describes BCCI’s $150 million general deposit and the loan/foreign-exchange relationships involved in the third-party claim.
What this establishes: The BCCI ↔ American Express financial relationship.
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/941/180/2353792/Show source → passage → interpretation → assertion
United States v. BCCI Holdings, 941 F. Supp. 180
Open original documentThe court describes BCCI’s $150 million general deposit and the loan/foreign-exchange relationships involved in the third-party claim.
1996 opinion; American Express general-deposit discussion
reviewed summary; not a verbatim quotationThe BCCI ↔ American Express financial relationship.
Scope: The quoted or summarized proposition is limited to the entity, period and procedural context identified in this document.
Alternative reading / remaining record
Obtain account agreements and transaction ledgers for each separately documented relationship.
primary-origin documentary support — The BCCI ↔ American Express financial relationship.
Levin prepared statement and correspondent-bank chart
primary-origin recordPDF p.71 / printed p.67
Three of the listed correspondent banks were U.S. banks, including American Express; Levin reports that their Al Shamal accounts were closed or largely inactive since 1997 or 1998.
What this establishes: The separately reported Al Shamal correspondent relationship and its activity qualification.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-107shrg81577/pdf/CHRG-107shrg81577.pdfShow source → passage → interpretation → assertion
Levin prepared statement and correspondent-bank chart
Open original documentThree of the listed correspondent banks were U.S. banks, including American Express; Levin reports that their Al Shamal accounts were closed or largely inactive since 1997 or 1998.
PDF p.71 / printed p.67
reviewed summary; not a verbatim quotationThe separately reported Al Shamal correspondent relationship and its activity qualification.
Scope: The quoted or summarized proposition is limited to the entity, period and procedural context identified in this document.
Alternative reading / remaining record
Obtain account agreements and transaction ledgers for each separately documented relationship.
primary-origin documentary support — The separately reported Al Shamal correspondent relationship and its activity qualification.
Counter-evidence and qualifications (1)
The three U.S. banks told Senate investigators their Al Shamal correspondent accounts were closed or largely inactive since 1997 or 1998.
September 26, 2001 hearing, PDF p.71 / printed p.67
Scope: Activity-date qualification
How does this affect the exact assertion?
Qualifies activity dates; it does not erase the separately reported correspondent relationship.
Test source-exclusion scenarios
Temporarily exclude documents and inspect whether the remaining record establishes the exact claim.
Where this meets litigation
The BCCI ↔ American Express edge enters a named forfeiture proceeding. The separate Al Shamal listing is congressional material; its existence does not transfer liability between institutions.
What record would resolve the remaining question?
Obtain account agreements and transaction ledgers for each separately documented relationship.
Where the records meet the proceedings
Phases describe the dated documents. Proposed requests and background relationships do not establish an active lawsuit.
American Express Bank / BCCI forfeiture proceedings
Several opinions are bundled under S6. These sources do not establish the current docket status or storage of litigation files at 7 WTC.
S6S52S53S54