Topic: A peculiar Response to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Read 329 times)

Like everywhere, some of those businesses are probably right and indeed into trouble, some others are hyenas who try to squeeze an extra buck.
Probably the same with the truckers too: some do need badly some financial help (and most probably those will not come to say it publicly) and some groups want to squeeze some money for their interests.
This is the "beauty" of it: the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. It all started well, but I think that it won't be pretty at the end...

--
Even Bitcoin and nunchuck got some free advertising off this, but I hoped that it will actually help actual truckers. At least some of them.

There's nothing funny about this.
The "Nunchuck team" is telling the truth.There's nothing funny about telling the truth.
I don't think that the Ontario Supreme Court is that incompetent,when it comes to cryptocurrency wallets and blockchain technology.
Basically the situation is the same as the Supreme Court ordering someone to give all his paper money,but the guy doesn't want to reveal where he buried his cash.
Or the Supreme court orders some guy to reveal where other people have buried their paper money.
This is quite an oversimplification,but it sounds kinda ridiculous.

The response even without the last paragraph is already more than enough for the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to basically understand that it is beyond the wallet's ability to freeze funds. It is most likely that the court of justice does not understand how different kinds of Bitcoin wallets work so the entire response is making it clear. However, the addition of the last paragraph is unnecessary and uncalled for. I haven't read the communication of the court to Nunchuk but it seems the last portion of the response is unreasonably inviting a little trouble. But the response is indeed fun.

well thats what the coffee shop owner is saying(plus ~30 other businesses). along with threats of violence by some protesters towards other bystanders and noise nuisance.. and.. and.. and.. how the organisers are linked to separatist groups and causing mischief.. well you can read the rest

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/convoy-class-action-claim-increased-to-306m-as-downtown-restaurateurs-join-lawsuit
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/class-action-complainant-alleges-trucker-threatened-her-by-backing-pickup-onto-sidewalk

and before certain people chime in..
the mareva injunction court order is not a criminal suit. and not filed "by government" its civil case(now class action) filed by ottowa residents/private business

separately the ottowa police did do some arrests for suspected criminal acts
which, in a separate case:
some of the organisers have already been arrested and one has already had bail denied and so will be detained
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/canada/canadian-press-newsalert-ottawa-protest-organizer-tamara-lich-denied-bail/

From the statement in the above video, it seems Nonchuk had done more than Just being a non-custodian wallet address provider, they provide extra help with a back and forth communication This is where the problem is, it seems they have been in communication with this group which means that know more than they are letting on,
Withholding vital information during an investigation is a criminal offense and Nonchuk can be hold in accountable for their action.

Yes, this is one of the reasons why Bitcoin was created in a decentralized way and I hope people that make use of custodial wallets can this Ontario Court of Justice statement so they can understand the benefit of not keeping their coin on an exchange site.

Mind you, Bitcoin is not a privacy coin and it is never an anonymous coin. Extra effort is needed to get privacy.

They may believe the wallet used was an exchange wallet or still naive about how the Bitcoin wallet operate.

Most protest will have a political group behind it, sad to see its not really going to look very geniune when suddenly they appear to support and even take over as part of the organizers. Doesnt just happen in this truckers convoy though.

Anyway, so the response of nonchuk is just a marketing gimmick because after all the email is not from the government as well. I was about to praise them for grewing balls.

Lmfao  Bitcoin was created just for this actually, isn't it?! So that governments can never control or block any user's funds or breach their privacy for their own selfish intents, well maybe as some says, the language could have been more polite but the fact that the court didn't even do some research about how the things work expose their negligence as well! The last line was really so pleasing though

Ouch. "Everything you say can be used against you."


Sadly this happens way too often: legitimate protest and their benefits (whether it's political or financial) are too easily diverted/overtaken by political groups.
So sadly that money was basically never meant to actually get to the truckers (maybe a few crumbs). Quite sad for those actually donating, very sad for those losing money and maybe their jobs too for participating to the protests.

---

What's the official justification for seizing those funds? To pay damages for the businesses that have lost money?

its not just email addresses nunchuck knows. he also had communication with the mareva group(suspects with radical separatist connections). where he provided technical support to them.. (a guy in the mareva group outted nunchuks extra involvement)
https://youtu.be/_FD9xfSI9PQ?t=275
now listen to the videos words from the suspected radicalist
"the team at nunchuk have been tremendously helpful and supportive, H and D have made themselves available around the clock for technical support, if and when issues arise and we have already used nunchuk wallet already in interim wallets leading up to this final wallet"


and so nunchuk should provide all communication records too, as requested by 2.c and 11
under threat of

that said.
those doing the fundraise.. should have not been involved. heck they should not even of been so public about outting names of different people/services involved. as that caused nunchuks involvement


and instead had some of the truckers that want to protest should have self organised their own fundraise without the political separatist radical group involved. (or nominate a non 'separatist radical' organiser..)
also the funds(via a less radical organiser) should have been paid out far sooner.. like EVERY DAY to the truckers.

then this whole event would have played out far differently.

listen to the organiser explain how they wanted to play with the funds
https://youtu.be/_FD9xfSI9PQ?t=329
"we are putting this into an interim multisig which would then go to 2 destinations, destination 1 is a hardware wallet controlled by the non profit treasurer(known separatist radical) this will be about 20% of the funds.
and then the remaining 80% will go to a multisig wallet with the directors(known separatist radicals) of the non-profit as keyholders, so the hardware wallet will be funds that will be used {A} and the multisig will serve to hold the bulk of the funds until they are needed, and when they are needed they will be migrated in batches to the hardware wallet which would then be sent to an offramp to be sent to the truckers"
{A}note future tense even after a fortnight of protests
"options that we are going to offer the truckers, we are going to offer to pay their credit card bill and we can even actually overpay their creditcard bills so that they have cash available to withdraw. we are also going to be using e-transfers, direct bank deposits and potentially giftcards"

funny part is even though the protests had been going on for 2 weeks at the point of video.. he says
note future tense even after a fortnight of protests
"we are going to start to gather information from individual truckers about their financial needs and if all goes to plan we are going to be able to begin sending funds in 48 hours, if all goes smooth".

hmm they should have been talking to truckers from the 28th of january, talking to them daily. thanking them for turning up and making sure they are well looked after each day... (thats what good protest organisers do)  and started and paying out daily.
..
yes canadian public can support other canadians in protest.
but the fatal flaw in this whole event is when known political radical/separatists/extremists got involved in organising it. as that was the mud that turned the water brown.
if it were a situation of general public donating to truckers that just wanted better working conditions, protesting only about the covid restrictions placed on truckers(what the convoy should have been about)... there would have been no issues

1. nunchuck has seized the opportunity for a marketing hit for free.

2. Since nunchuck name was already published, sooner or later questions will be asked, hence telling about the email addresses is not much of a mistake, it's not a secret and will probably be asked/required anyway - sooner or later. I just hope the e-mail addresses are not [email protected], because then the owners of those coins will - sooner or later - get into trouble.

nunchuk is not being 'incriminated' for handling coins.
he is being requested to pass any/all information he knows about the suspected group

nunchuk is not in the mareva group (suspects list)
he is in the intermediary group(witness/service provider list)

if nunchuck fails to make a full and accurate statement that contains all details of information it has on the suspects, then nunchuck could be held in contempt

its all written up in the court order

OK, there’s a gaslighting troll in here that makes the topic confusing.

I have never used Nunchuck, I don’t how it works, but I assume it’s a non-custodial wallet like Electrum. My question, and for sake of the newbies. Can the company/developers behind the wallet be incriminated if the truckers used Nunchuck?

What wallet did Ross Ulbricht use? Or what wallets did criminals use? Can the developers of those wallets be incriminated too?

Don’t terrorists use old Nokia phones as detonators for bombs? Can Nokia be implicated for the bombings?

At this point is is more about the regime's addiction to sanctions. They've been using it as the last arrow in their already empty quiver, when they can't do anything else they start sanctioning. It is not surprising that most of their sanctions are ineffective.
As for the excuse they are using, you'd have to read the statements, I don't really follow the details of it. It is sometimes the individuals they don't like rather than any crime being involved.

when MANY people get arrested, charged. go to court to be put on bail.
they are at this point 'still innocent' at the hearing stage, but at each stage have certain freedoms removed

the investigations are still going on. but the persons life is put on hold. eg they have conditions set upon them to not abscond out of jurisdiction, not have full access to their funds and other conditions. like surrender X amount(bail bond) as a security against absconding.

yep they are 'still innocent until proven'..  but handcuffed to certain conditions.
and yes infact that is how western jurisprudence does work.


..
also when courts make an order to freeze someones account. that person has yet to even stand before a court and make a plea, nor yet to stand before a court for a judge to give a verdict of guilt or innocent.
take the bitfinex theives for instance. they had many exchange accounts frozen from 2017-2022. yet only arrested on Feb 8th 2022 and not even had a judge give a verdict yet on their guilt/innocence. they are on house arrest with ankle monitors and had all bank accounts frozen too
these court orders are not verdicts of guilt. but just cease and desist order, or a demand for evidence orders whilst investigations continue.

so infact yes businesses and people do comply to such orders whilst people are being investigated, BEFORE any guilty plea/verdict. and yes infact that is how western jurisprudence does work.

if there was no freezing of assets at investigation stage. or no court demands for evidence pre-trial.. there would also be no hearings, or bail. people could be free to do as they please until a trial. but thats not how the courts work.
people are put under conditions before trial.
its laws related to 'destruction of evidence', 'risk of absconding' and 'contempt' that make it possible for courts to add in pre-trial conditions on people to avoid such risks that can hamper a later trial . so yea .. innocent vs suspect are not the same 'freedom' you presume

---

the way the coffee shop owner managed to get a judge to validate a court order is because the coffee shop owner showed some evidence that the fund organisers are politically motivated in a 'separatists' group. with quotes that the fundraiser organisers dont like the french influence of eastern canada controlling western canada. and all the political group stuff of 'wexit'.
this is seen as suspect terror/ white supremacy group which triggered a fear of not wanting to fund such radical groups.
its not about coins linked to a anti-vax convoy(truckers).. its that the coins are linked to radicalised nutjobs(organisers)

in short.. if any other fundraiser done a donation drive where the fundraiser was not as radicalised as the ones that did organise campaign. then it would have been more difficult to sway a judge into granting the order

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

Have they found anything incriminating in those wallets address under investigation or they just love to exercise their judicial rights on btc holders regardless if they actually committed a crime or not,
It is one thing to sanction any wallet address found wanting and another to go pressuring any address btc on it,
I think it was because of the way they go about with the wallet address sanctions thar the Nonchuk team gave such statement at the end of the letter, (although not very professional but deserving)

nunchuk is not one of the mareva group under investigations for suspected links to criminal activity..
nunchuk is a 'witness' to the suspects. the court just wants a witness statement about any/ALL records the witness has related to what it knows about the suspects. the court is not even asking for Nunchuk(witness) to be sat down under oath to be questioned.
nunchuk cant get in trouble if the coins move. but he can get in trouble if found that he does have information that he refused to give about the suspects

the judge(not a member of parliament thus not 'government') is not using some federal/government law as power. he is actually using common law. and the private individual(coffee shop owner not 'government') is using that common law power the judge has

Bitcoin (network/protocol) is censorship impossible, anonymous.
bitcoin (btc/ allotment of coins) is not censorship impossible nor anonymous. its censorship resistant and pseudonymous. because the flaw is in the human aspect of the actions of the key holder. EG human that is publicly known associated with address and human that is afraid of being put in prison, will get served by a court order to stop doing something or face punishment.
same goes for businesses. you cant stop the network. but you can stop businesses and their employees from getting involved by threatening them with punishment

the court has already got the mareva suspects to halt moving the funds. again this is not "the government" and its not "does not have power"
its the private citizen(coffee shop owner) gained power via the courts(a judge is not a member of parliament) to put a stop to the movement of an allotment of coins. via common law allowed threats against the human known holders of the assets in question

its not about "stopping Bitcoin"(network/protocol) its about halting movement of an allotment of coins by having power over the human keyholders and businesses that may accept coins but now shouldnt... done via threats of fines or imprisonment of the human.

Bro you've missed one of the biggest jokes of our time if you've missed this
Here is a link to U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY containing a bunch of bitcoin (and some altcoin) addresses that are under US "sanctions": https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/recent-actions/20211108
It gets even funnier if you check some of these addresses that are either empty or had a tiny amount of bitcoin in them.

I loved the statement which says - when Canadian dollar becomes worthless, we will be here to serve you, too!

However, I fear that this statement may not go well with the court. The meaning of this statement can be easily manipulated in the court of law. I am not sure the country of operation of this wallet service provider, but if they are operating from Canada, they may face the wrath of the government just for this statement.

But the court will surely note this statement to prove that the government doesn't have any power over the bitcoins owned by an individual even if he/she is a criminal in the eye of law. May create more trouble for bitcoin and its users in Canada where a banking ban is already imposed against bitcoin.

maybe. instead of filling your head with "government government government"
try reading the actual court order.
its actually limited to certain exchanges/individuals that operate in canada.. its not sanctioning whole countries

canadian government is not sanctioning addresses against american government

canadian private citizen is sanctioning bitcoin addresses against private business, via the courts

I don't think any country is going to comply with sanctions against people that are being investigated. That is not how Western jurisprudence works.

the point of this court order is not that it proves any criminal act. its that its a court order to halt any movement of funds whilst the private individual that instigated the court order gathers statements and 'examinations under oath' from different groups to find evidence as to if the funds are criminally related. (you know innocent until proven guilty, doesnt mean no court involvement unless first proven guilty. it means courts job is to hold someone to account to prevent destruction/removal/relate assets/evidence under question.., and then later, judge on innocence/guilt)

this court order is phase 1. we shall see how things develop on the 28th. if the private individual gets enough evidence from the statements/examinations to request funds be given to court, or if he extends to 'gather more evidence' (basically keep funds in limbo), or if he just lets the court order lapse at its expiry.

if funds do move while court order is active. then the fundraising group can be fined or imprisoned. so its not a silly court order with no repercussions

Responding in that way can result in the Judge looking unfavorably towards you and ruling against you in the future. Even if these rulings are overruled, this can be expensive. If they will never be subjected to the jurisdiction of the court, they don't have anything to worry about.

I am not aware of the US sanctioning any bitcoin addresses. Do you have a link to this happening?

I know that Canada has (tried) to sanction bitcoin addresses/wallets associated with people donating to the peaceful protestors, but I have serious doubts that Canada will be able to enforce any sanctions they levy. They simply don't have the moral authority to prevent the money from being spent. There is no serious evidence the money is being used for criminal activity.

im laughing at the last 4 posts..
dont they realise that it was a private individual(coffee shop owner) that requested the court to make an order.. not the "government"

in other situations where other private individuals get scammed or hoax 'hacked' by some exchange and the government does send a court order for all exchanges to freeze funds (like how the bitfinex funds got frozen) people dont scream "government shouldnt do that", they praise the government when the government got involved in grabbing the stolen bitfinex funds.

but this topic is about a private individual making the request not the government. yet the posts above have people screaming at the government.

its been a good laugh.

i see many problems with government. but i atleast see clearly when things do or dont involve the government and i pick my debates better

Exactly this. It could all be a publicity stunt to trend on social media and build traffic. I have seen businesses do far more for an increase in follower-ship.
However, whether or not this was their response to the court, it passes a bold message to the public that;
• Storing your funds on non custodian platforms are the best alternative to escape heavy handed policies, and
• The government have no control over a decentralized platform.

Nunchuck is not a company or a registered organization, it's just an open source software project. There's nothing wrong with a slight trolling of a government organization that didn't bother to train their employees with basic cryptocurrency literacy. I seriously doubt that government is going to do anything about this incident, the developers did absolutely nothing illegal, making Bitcoin wallets has not been outlawed.

Nah, you should answer dictatorship exactly this way and I don't think they face any problems because it is an open source non-custodial wallet that doesn't really leave any room for problems. In addition to that, they may not be in a jurisdiction for them to cause any problems for them anyways

Anyway, how do we even know this is a response to the court. All I see is an email to someone called Monique.

With that kind of response, the Nunchuck team proved how immature they are ^{[AFAICS, they're not even that popular and still have that kind of attitude (SMH)]}... Regardless of the last paragraph, I think the government or the court in question, would try their best to make things difficult for such providers ^{[I'm not implying they'll be successful, but still...]}.

It's the perfect moment for Nonchuk to go viral since they are a new tech firm. They have the best strategy of getting people's attention on the internet through such mail with a funny reply trying to belittle the Government regarding such a request that sounds like they know nothing about private keys and blockchain protocols. Although, Nonchuk have been of good support to the truckers' movement.

They'll do the necessary things to see that protesters continue utilizing their platform to store their funds using multi-sig. The court only needs them to do what they requested before they can go free because they won't stop disturbing them until they find a way to confiscate the funds as requested. The citizens have the right to such a movement. But, the Government is the same everywhere. They deprive citizens of their fundamental human rights all the time. It'll be genuine to say that the Government can hold Nonchuk responsible for supporting the movement.

the actual people that might have the keys (the mareva respondents list) have 7 days from being served to reply with a statement. and then within 7 days of replying need to submit to an examination(interview/questioning) under oath.

nunchuk is just an intermediary so does not need to do the second part. he just needed to make a statement and disclose all records, communication involving the mareva parties.
because the guy in video in my last post 'outed' nunchuk about lots of communications with the mareva group. nunchuk could get in trouble if he hides any info that is known to the public that nunchuk should have provided. as thats contempt of court.

EG just saying "we do not collect any information bar email addresses" aint good enough. the court would like to know not only the email addresses, but also copies of the email correspondence, and any names nunchuk may know associated with the email addresses and email correspondence.

The response was instant classic indeed! Made my day too!

Now I wonder what would be the next move of the court after receiving this response. For sure, either they would use some "force" to those wallet holders to hand over the "keys to the kingdom" to them and transfer it to a custodial wallet of the "government" or they would "insist" and instruct the "developers" of that wallet to re-program the system to enable certain accounts to be frozen. However, this isn't possible anymore especially reprogramming it. That's just my opinion of course.

But for me, I think Nunchuk would respond more politely though.

reading the whole document the court does seem to understand the difference between custodial wallets and private wallets and even multisig

EG

so the court does know that the coins can be jointly held(multisig) and that coins may be either in custodian or private holding

it doesnt appear that the court doesnt know the tech. its more of the case that they dont know WHO has the keys and what relationship they have to the keys.

so they are just classifying all intermediaries that had some communication, involvement of any kind, to provide all records, info they have about their involvement. whether just service provider or key holder, both or none. they still want answers.

its more so the fault of the convoy fundraisers mentioning nunchuk as the option they used to make the multisig. thus getting nunchuk involved

here is the guy talking about nunchuk and how nunchuk has been in many communications with them and offered them extra technical support (because the organisers dont know bitcoin technically)
https://youtu.be/_FD9xfSI9PQ?t=275

i had to laugh at the rest of the video how many times he kept being unsure of what to spend the funds on even 2 weeks after the protests began. and how they wanted to keep 80% of it long term... rather than just pay out immediately

I also think there will be consequences moving forward,  there is no way they can give such a response and enjoy some peace, the court may not have a full understanding of how the non-custodian wallet works, it is the responsibility of the Nonchuk team to provide such info, well some of their Twitter followers seem to be enjoying the response, it has gained them more users for now. 

the thing is.. trudeau didnt order this..
some coffee shop owner in ottowa did. he was pee'd off with the events affecting his business..

its not about nunchuk having access to keys. its about anyone or any business aiding the key holders in any way
things like



nunchuk foolishly admitted having their emails.. thus knowing about them. thus did aid them[probably knowing after the fact/in hindsight]. ..so now he is part of it even more then he wishes to be

luckily he is not a "Mareva Respondant" and just a "Intermediaries" because the mareva group need to make witnessed swarn statments before the end of the month. where as all the intermediaries need to do, is stop aiding the mareva group and disclose everything they know about the groups activities
so because he knows they used his service he has to provide any and all info he knows about them. even if it is just an email address and a date he obtained the email.

Though it is quite understandable why the court is not fully aware of what it means to be non-custodial, this just means that people in the judicial system needs to be educated on things related to the blockchain and cryptocurrency so they know how to respond on cases like this one. One of the points I am seeing here is that the court is categorizing this specific Nunchuk as an intermediary according to the traditionally definition we have - and we know this is not the case. Now, on the response, I agree that it would have better if they got a lawyer to make the communication a lot better and not appear to have done with some condescending attitude.

Whoops, I just saw this, had posted something in Legal. This is almost as good as the US putting Bitcoin addresses on a sanctions list.


True, I think it's somewhat arrogant on their part, but this is definitely marketing. Definitely should have got a lawyer to respond but don't think it's nasty enough to warrant contempt (and maybe they already had legal eyes pass over this).

That last part tho, certainly something that's worth praising for.

The Canadian government's authoritarian stance has been unmasked by how they are ordering anything related to crypto to divulge information of its users and freeze their assets just to prevent a group of people receiving donations to them. Trudeau is a wanker, and should be replaced by someone competent that won't do stupid things just because their ego is stepped on.

The last part sounds bizaare. While they (court) appear ignorant how non-custodial wallet works, I still think they (nunchuck) should have responded in a more polite manner. I won't be surprised if they will be in some sort of trouble in the future because of that. It's pretty cool for marketing though.

Anyway, this was part of the letter sent to them:
https://twitter.com/nunchuk_io/status/1494885897577271299

 I cant stop laughing to the response given to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice when they ask a self-custodian wallet provider to freeze the btc of users and disclose their info, this Nonchuk guys are very bold i must say  .
see response below,



Source