Listen guys. I just got an idea.
Don't you see connection between current malleability issues and Bitfunder ? Maybe Bitfunder was first victim of "malleability feature" in bitcoin protocol? I know you can't transfer any coins between wallets without confirmations of the network ... UNTIL you don't use custom made software with hot wallets in your system which allows exactly this kind of instant transfers, which are crucial for exchanges like bitfunder.
I just remembered : "The bitcoins are simply not there." - Danny
No.
Since it's Weex also.
It's really at the level on a complete moron to resend 6251BTC/2 to the same people twice and empty the wallet.
Firstly there would have to be people who requested 3125.5BTC (i.e. had that much in Weex) and then were able to change the txn and get it confirmed before the original txn every time. Then they would have to request a resend. Then Ukyo would have to have not noticed this (well known 2 year old issue) until he had done it with 3125.5BTC
He would also know who he sent twice the BTC (6251BTC) to.
The whole issue here is that the BTC for Weex is required to be kept separate from any other scam he was running.
The Weex balance was just that - the Weex balance, not some part of some wallet that he could play with.
... and since he stated he had an Accountant (as required) the balance should have had at least 2 sets of eyes keeping track of it.
Of course it sounds very much like he wasn't even doing this.
Jail is looking high on the probabilities list ...