Author: Mike Deny

Twins, formerly associated with a biker gang and involved in meth trafficking, had their confiscated Harley Davidson bikes returned after serving their sentences, according to court filings.

The ex-Hells Angels members opted for leniency in asset forfeiture laws, leading to a forfeiture of $75,000 each, while authorities returned their motorcycles and leftover cash from property sales.

Court documents regarding Nuno and Bruno Da Silva were disclosed by the ABC as part of an inquiry into legislation aimed at confiscating profits linked to organized crime.

This was not their first battle over asset confiscation; previously, they grabbed headlines for retrieving $129,000 that police had found in a shopping bag beneath Bruno’s car seat, claiming it was wedding gifts for Nuno.

Post-release, the twins have been spotted participating in poker tournaments at Star’s Brisbane and Gold Coast casinos in 2022.

Star did not provide comments but mentioned ongoing processes for customer monitoring.

The Da Silvas were in the locksmith business in Brisbane, having pleaded guilty in 2015 to trafficking methylamphetamine.

Nuno was sentenced to seven years in prison with possible parole beginning February 2016; Bruno received a nine-year sentence with potential release from October 2017.

A ‘comfortable’ lifestyle

Prosecutors suspected that the Hells Angels supplied drugs to the brothers, who had formally cut ties with the club, and that they sold drugs to street dealers.

In court, prosecutors claimed that the brothers threatened individuals when collecting debts.

One threatening text from Bruno allegedly said, “Junkie, I swear on my mum, I’m going to put a bullet in your leg.”

Following their arrests in October 2013, authorities seized assets including proceeds from home sales, motorcycles, and a distinctive winged skull ring.

Their way of living was described as comfortable, but not extravagant during their sentencing.

Eight years post-incident, each forfeited $75,000, as the ABC reports.

This amount accounted for over half of the remaining cash from property sales, but did not include their motorcycles.

Bruno contended that the motorcycle was to be his only transportation after his release, asserting that its purchase price of $26,495 did not come from illegitimate means.

He argued that confiscation of home sale proceeds would financially cripple him.

Nuno informed the court that he bought his Harley for $27,300 through legitimate sources, part of which came from a former locksmith employee who had also pleaded guilty to drug offenses.

Nuno emphasized that prosecutors failed to establish any financial gains from their crimes.

He insisted their locksmith business, which frequently dealt with cash for call-out work, was quite profitable, and he occasionally lent money, albeit with inconsistent record-keeping of the loans.

More than $150,000 found in shopping bags

The Crime and Corruption Commission proposed reforms to the confiscation laws last year, while new Attorney-General Deb Frecklington indicated she would consider possible amendments.

Experts have expressed concerns that such laws may overlook major criminals, assess some provisions as unfair, and questioned the regulators’ risk appetite regarding confiscation efforts.

Other instances of discrepancies between the perception and reality of confiscation laws include ABC’s investigation, featuring the case of Ivan Tesic, who was imprisoned in 2019 for possessing 3.6 kilograms of methamphetamine.

Authorities initially pursued Tesic’s assets, including three properties worth over $800,000 and a vintage 1969 Monaro.

In the end, Tesic lost $73,923 as unexplained wealth.

In a separate case, investigators executed a raid on an apartment housing a former biker and his partner, uncovering $158,000 cash in plastic bags, firearms, methamphetamine, pipes, knuckle dusters, and scales.

Five years later, the cash confiscation turned around after a friend of the man claimed that the money belonged to her from a compensation payout due to an accident at an engagement party in 2008.

The woman testified that to safeguard her payout cash from potential harm due to domestic violence, she entrusted the man with portions of her cash wrapped in envelopes.

Even though prosecutors described her account as “inherently improbable,” the court deemed her a credible witness, supported by records of her cash withdrawals.

The court also concluded that it was unlikely the cash stemmed from drug-related activities, particularly after the man testified about heavy substance use and no evidence pointed to drug sales.