Topic: CEO OF BITCOIN EXCHANGE ARRESTED - page 7. (Read 23786 times)

No, sorry, atheist and not living in the US..and no, sorry, no drugs addicted (as far as I know, you never know..)..but that's not the point. I just hate when people in this forum starts offending others if they don't agree with their opinion.. it seems to me a stupid way of discussing, like saying to someone that his drug addicted brother would better die... But act as you wish!

While I am no fan of that action, which personally cost me a lot of money (not lost on the sites but income I would have made), I'll note one of those sites was Full Tilt Poker, which turned out to be operating as little better than a Ponzi scam.  The fact is that he is a prosecutor, and it is his job to prosecute offenses against federal law.  I assume he's actually in favor of the laws he prosecutes, but it would be completely irrelevant.

I sometimes get annoyed when the same kind of people who would vociferously object to "judicial activism" and "judge-made law" nonetheless object to prosecutors doing their job and prosecuting violations of laws they had nothing whatsoever to do with passing into law.  Who does that?  The people we elect to Congress.

No purpose is served by pretending everyone on the other side of this is some kind of incompetent buffoon or cartoonish villain.  It is exactly that kind of short-sighted arrogance that has led DPR and now Shrem by the nose into a deep pile of shit.

Not saying you're responsible of this, but I've certainly seen a lot of it on this and other threads.

This is the same prosecutor who took down the poker sites on black friday.  His sole goal is to make the headlines in major cases involving money.

Yup.  They're pretty sure he's going to talk like a parrot.  I'll confidently predict he'll never set foot in a hodling area again.

He is a hassidic Jew. They are always a bit hairy.

I have actually endeavored to make sure that some of my transactions exceed $10k in order to trigger alerts.  This for the sole reason of trying to ensure that I am not accused of 'structuring', and at times it has been an inconvenience.

I suppose that in an ironic sort of a way, even trying to make sure I trigger alerts could be considered 'structuring.'

He was bailed out anyhow, nuff' said.

Well said, seems that many have a misconception about the allegation.

Actually it is.  It is called structuring.  An MSB has certain requirements that don't exist for other businesses.   MSB are prohibited from advising their clients how to avoid reporting thresholds, they are prohibited from aiding their clients to structure transactions.  If a client does engage in structuring to avoid AML reporting, KYC requirements, or recordkeeping and the MSB becomes aware of that the MSB is required to treat all structured transactions as if they were a single transaction for various statutory obligations.  They are liable for failing to report transactions, failing to keep accurate books, and for even notifying clients that they have filed a report with FinCEN as required by law.

Everything you described would be a criminal act by an MSB, even if there was no underlying overt act.

My best advice is don't provide advice for things you have not done legal research on.  Someone may believe you and end up in prison as a result.

There is a huge difference between a financial institution (be it bank or MSB) UNKNOWINGLY processing transactions which are related to a criminal enterprise and doing so in compliance with its own internal AML policies and in accordance with the requirements set by FinCEN.  It is a completely different thing for an entity to KNOWINGLY engage in those transactions, violate its own internal AML policies, assist the criminal client with bypassing AML procedures, and failing to report those transactions to FinCEN.

The complaint doesn't allege the former, it alleges the latter.  For the record I am not saying Charlie is guilty of anything, the complaint is only that a complaint and the allegations until proven are just allegations.  It is up to a jury to decide if the state's ALLEGED charges have merit.  However lets at least start the discussion on what was ACTUALLY alleged and not some fantasy scenario where the prosecution is merely charging him for selling some coin in full compliance with his company's AML program that someone unknown to him later used them in a crime.  That is just 100% BS.

I literally lol at this 

Kid can't even take the time to shave, and he wants to be a dirty money laundering kingpin.  What a joke.

Not just financial matters, any matters. It does map to the classic notions of imperialism. 

Naturally other countries would like to do that, too, if they could.

Bharara will go to any length in terms of aggressive and evil as long as it serves his career, from the looks of this

Let's check the facts:

-BTC is not illegal
-Silkroad per se was not illegal, it was a site where legal and illegal stuff was traded
-BTCKing sold legal bitcoins to users of a legal site. Whether BTCKing did comply with regulations when he sold a maximum of $1000 worth of BTC to anonymous counterparties, I don't know. Maybe BTCKing should have registered as a money transmitter? Maybe that part was not even clear in 2012? Hard to tell.
-Bitinstand obviously sold BTC to BTCKing, but not anonymously. This would be like bank A doing business with bank B. Bank A does not comply with regulations or has some customers that use cash withdrawn at their ATMs that are located in bad areas, for illegal purposes, and bank B is made responsible because they delivered the cash to fill these ATMs. The prosecutors would claim that bank B must have known that a lot of cash in these areas is used to buy drugs etc. Insane? Not from the viewpoint of insane minds.
-Advice from Bitinstant to BTCKing to split cash deposits is not illegal itself, in fact thousands of people get their bank accounts blocked for legal things like buying bitcoins. Advising someone to avoid certain things that are legal but also red flags, to avoid unnecessary discussions or account closures, is also not illegal.

In such a world, no bank could do business with another, since anyone could be arrested anytime for someone else's mistakes.

Funny how America complains to Russia about cases like Chodorkowski, but use the same twisted logic themselves all the time 

Now all Bharara needs to do, is attack Mtgox for trading with Bitinstant and, of course, all banks that have done business with Mtgox. Finally troops have to be sent to Japan because the Japanese central bank has "knowingly" sent funds to these banks, "making good profits along the way". Perhaps there are some intermediary banks to attack as well? What a huge pile of crap.

Let's see how this develops.

There's page after page in the criminal complaint that says exactly otherwise.  In fact, he'd bought drugs off Silk Road himself.


Legally, it is once you register as a money transmitter.


Well, good luck on that.  Tell me how it goes in a couple years.  In the meanwhile, those "scare tactics" have him behind bars for the foreseeable future.  Frankly, I'd find that kind of scary if I were he, too.  Or if I were in his contact list.  Or if I had anything to do with a "Foundation" with his name on it as Co-Chair.

1. There is no evidence that Charlie knew what the BTC he sold was being spent for.

2. Its not his responsibility anyway.

3. There are many legal things for sale on Silk Road too. Corp USA argument has no merit whatsoever - these are simply scare tactics.

Nicely stated.  +1

It's worth note that the U.S. has a somewhat expansive view of 'in the US' when it comes to financial matters, and it does not map to the classic notions of geography which we all learned in grade school.

Those who have the power to make laws get to decide what is a crime.
Unsurprisingly, laws are skewed to benefit those in power.

The commotion is who decides what is a crime. I gather you miss the point, though i will accept yours as a matter of pragmatism. He was stupid, silk road was stupid, we would all be better off if the laws were changed and a large segment of the population of the world was decriminalized.

Sure, the bankers are criminals just like your d00d.  They're simply better at what they do, and don't get pwnt.
Crime, like everything else in life, must be done right to be successful.
Your d00d was doing it wrong.
Doesn't make him innocent, simply bad at what he does.
Not sure what all the commotion is about.

+1

At the height of the Colombian drug trade before the Escobar takedown and the rise of the Mexican cartels, the Federal Reserve had an "anonymous" window at the Colombian central bank where anyone could bring US dolllars in any amount and convert them to local currency. The sole purpose was to repatriate dollars back to the US financial system, because so much drug cash was ending up down there. The Fed opened an official money laundering channel that operated for years.

Also NYSE chairman Dick Grasso personally travelled to the jungle to meet with the leaders of FARC, narco terrorists, to persuade them to make US investments with their assets.

HSBC is just the most recent example of business as usual. No banker has done a perp walk for money laundering since the 1980's when there was still some shred of true intent behind the drug war. Now it is all about profit for the monopoly that controls it. The banks and cartels and enforcement are all working together now, all you have to do is follow the $$$.

Sources

http://lexisnexis.co.nz/riskandcompliance/podcasts-interview-bob-mazur-part2a

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0202/S00069.htm

http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/17396-u-s-government-and-top-mexican-drug-cartel-exposed-as-partners


Stop the madness...