Topic: BurtW arrested (update: charges dropped!) - page 20. (Read 74668 times)

Why is that a bad idea? They obviously need fiat so they are going to convert any bitcoin they receive into fiat ASAP in order to pay their legal bills

what's wrong with using CoinBase?

I was looking to donate, but... Why they're using a Coinbase wallet to receive the bitcoins? It sounds a very bad idea for me...

I wonder how many of the newbies posting on this thread are undercover law enforcement trying to get Burt/Jean to give up information that should not be shared publicly (and of course use it against Burt).

---

I am also curious to know how much above the market price undercover law enforcement agents were allegedly willing to pay for the bitcoin from Burt. Was it significantly above the market price, prices that you would generally not expect to get from most people?

I understand what you are going through now. Would u mind just to tell us, whether he was arrested cash transaction or online transaction through LocalBitcoins ? Please correct me if my information regarding the use of LocalBitcoins is wrong.

They want their cut, whatever they decide that to be.

Lesson learned, tips for the future (USA residents only):

Execute trades below the daily threshold ($1000), keep updated with new or updated laws. (According to my interpretation of FinCEN)

Keep yourself updated with state laws as well. They are out to put people in jail as well. 

My conspiracy theory is that the government doesn't want any of us to become billionaires overnight and tries hard to limit the earnings of every business.

LOL'd hard 

Today BurtW has posted this :

Thank you for clarifying this! As i can see, there is no real case against Burt. If they are successful in getting a conviction it would mean that any one of us who trade in Bitcoin, whether through LB or not, is liable to be prosecuted and convicted. That does not bode well for any of us. 

Hmm... i see. I still cannot understand this fiasco completely, i have read a few pages of this post.
My questions / thoughts are:

1) Bitcoin cannot be branded illegal since they are being sold by the USMS service, if they brand it illegal, it means that the government itself is illegal?
2) How does trading on LB cause the transaction to be illegal? I have sold small amounts of BTC on LB and bought up a bit too... does this mean i have been doing something illegal? Is LB itself Illegal?
3) As i understand, BurtW was selling huge amounts of BTC on behalf of clients without a license. How is this illegal if the government cannot decide if BTC is indeed a Currency or Asset. If it is an asset, how is it illegal to sell an asset for cash (isn't it the same as selling some gold or real estate for cash)? His only wrong-doing was to not pay taxes on his transactions as far as i can see?

I ask these questions as any normal user like me and you could be next and i wouldn't want to be in that mans shoes!

This is exactly the situation with regard to bitcoin in the US.  Fortunately bitcoin (just like encryption) is covered by the second amendment of the US Constitution.  The US has bragged about its ability to use economic weapons, so much that citizens need something like bitcoin to protect themselves from tyranny.

we also need participation (for bitcoin's sake)  here:  https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/legitimate-uses-of-bitcoins-and-the-dark-government-1005634

Interesting to know if any or all of these other cases were people *confirmed* to be working on LocalBitcoins.com too... or if they were doing things some other way?

Is this all just some kind of big one-hit sweeping LBC roll-up attempt in Colorado?

Can anyone correlate with known LBC accounts, or (even better) get some info directly from these other parties in this whole situation?  Any Colorado area bitcoin LBC buyers here?

Also wonder if they're all working together with Burt's family and the same lawyers (?) to mount a coordinated reply/reaction to this (clearly, to me) extreme over-reach by LE and prosecutors.  If NOT, they probably SHOULD be.

KEV

Do you think you could possibly post the complains in all these cases, as well as any potentially relevant documents in the BurtW case? (in PDF format) I know that it costs $0.07 per page and I can reimburse you if you want.

Wow, that was good work. At least we now know Burt will be fine. I can't imagine he will serve hard time for unlicensed money transmitting. If he's lucky they will just take all of his money away and give him probation.

BurtW's indictment was filed on 2014 oct 07 in the US District Court for Colorado. On the same day, at least three other cryptocurrency related cases were filed in that same court, with the same special agent Arran McWhirter, with the same prosecuting attorney of Michele Korver, all offenses listed as occurring in Boulder County:

14-cr-00398 USA v Burton Wagner
18 USC 1960
Count 1: Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business

14-cr-00399 USA v Sean Swanson
18 USC 1960
Count 1: Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business

14-cr-00400 USA v Michael Seiler
18 USC 1956 (a)(3)(B) and (C)
18 USC 1960
Count 1: Money Laundering
Count 2: Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business

14-cr-00401 USA v Katherine Noland and Thomas Noland
18 USC 1956 (a)(3)(B) and (C)
18 USC 1960
18 USC 2
Count 1: Money Laundering (Katherine)
Count 2: Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business (Katherine and Thomas)

In all four of these indictments, the text of the Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business count is essentially identical, differing only in the opening sentence naming the time period of the offenses, and in where the offenses occurred.

The Money Laundering counts for the latter two cases (Seiler and Noland) specifically mention 'distribution of controlled substances'.

Source: US Courts' PACER documentation system https://www.pacer.gov

--------------------

By omission of the 'controlled substances' count in BurtW's indictment, I deduce that no drugs are involved in his case.

It seems unlikely that these other parties were involved in the Pirate PassThroughs, so BurtW's case is likely unrelated to this.

It seems BurtW truly is simply accused of buying and selling Bitcoin. Or rather, operating an unlicensed Bitcoin transmitting business. Funny - I thought transmittal required three parties. While I don't know, I didn't think BurtW did Bitcoin transmittal.

It seems that I was aware of the thread, but I forgot about it.

I think that the forum should be aware if no mixers are allowed to advertise or if it's an issue with that specific one which is totally understandable.

I don't think theymos is going to give any explanation regarding the rejection. A thread was opened shortly after the bid was rejected asking about the rejection and he never responded in the thread.

Interesting. I wonder if theymos can give us an explanation of his rejection.

Hey theymos are mixers banned from advertising on this forum or were you under pressure to reject that particular ad?