Topic: Charlie Shrem Pleads Guilty - What do you think? (Read 5931 times)
Ultimately it's still more right wing than 'Murica because you can bribe your way out of the most horrendous crimes unless you're a foreigner and they want to make an example out of you but even then it's just a question of $$.
They were exchanging dollars for Bitcoin. Dollars are considered money.
I think he will get "off" with no jail time. If this is the case then him pleading guilty will have essentially no impact on his life. He already has a job lined up (if he isn't already working for them) - I believe it is some bitcoin related project, I know that he said that he is working/going to be working for a MSB.
Charlie Sheen always gets himself in trouble somehow.
They were exchanging dollars for Bitcoin. Dollars are considered money.
But bitcoin isn't money. How can he plead guilty to running a money exchange, when the IRS has ruled it isn't money. He was only buying and selling a virtual property. Do we need to start arresting people who buy and sell high ticket items like wine or cars?
Bitcoin is only not "money" for tax purposes. Different laws have different definitions for a number of things. There are a number of things besides bitcoin that can be used for money laundering. Real estate, gold, diamonds are three examples of things that I can think of off the top of my head that can be used to launder money that are even further from money then bitcoin is
But bitcoin isn't money. How can he plead guilty to running a money exchange, when the IRS has ruled it isn't money. He was only buying and selling a virtual property. Do we need to start arresting people who buy and sell high ticket items like wine or cars?
You're confused. The IRS said it's a property, but their opinion doesn't matter when it comes to regulatory issues. The various departments of the government are under no obligation to treat bitcoin the same.
It's stupid, but that's reality.
But bitcoin isn't money. How can he plead guilty to running a money exchange, when the IRS has ruled it isn't money.
One of the perks of being a nation-state, is that you make the rules. You can interpret the rules as you wish, when you wish. Essentially you can have your cake and eat it too. The only meaningful way to understand "justice" in our society is to analyze it from a hierarchal perspective."Justice" is top-down, always. "Social justice" that radical bottom up form, is marginalized and mocked for a reason.
But bitcoin isn't money. How can he plead guilty to running a money exchange, when the IRS has ruled it isn't money. He was only buying and selling a virtual property. Do we need to start arresting people who buy and sell high ticket items like wine or cars?
I'm sure these prosecutors are really proud of their bust—pressuring yet another harmless kid into a plea deal.
And while they're doing that, countless professional launderers go to work, day in and day out. The only difference is that they have the financial backing and legal counsel from those who specialize in these things.
Most of what the pros do is technically "legal" so there's nothing to prosecute. And when it's not 100% legal, they know how to structure their arrangements to fall within certain grey areas of the law, making a successful prosecution of their practices, a legal nightmare.
Instead of facing any of these fundamental issues, or having the balls to investigate real cases, the prosecutors, as typical, go for the low hanging fruit. Regardless of the fact that what Shrem did, is for all practical purposes, harmless.
And while they're doing that, countless professional launderers go to work, day in and day out. The only difference is that they have the financial backing and legal counsel from those who specialize in these things.
Most of what the pros do is technically "legal" so there's nothing to prosecute. And when it's not 100% legal, they know how to structure their arrangements to fall within certain grey areas of the law, making a successful prosecution of their practices, a legal nightmare.
Instead of facing any of these fundamental issues, or having the balls to investigate real cases, the prosecutors, as typical, go for the low hanging fruit. Regardless of the fact that what Shrem did, is for all practical purposes, harmless.
Should he have plead guilty?
Unfortunately the entirety of the US justice system is set up in order to force you to plead guilty. They make the stakes so high for losing a non-guilty plea that you almost always come out better pleading guilty. It's total bullshit and it needs to stop. Check out this doc for more info
Of course it needs to stop. The US govt. needs to stop a lot of things that's just one of them. First I think the US govt should stop imposing its perverted sense of morality on every nation in the world and stop military murder in places like Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Bosnia, Cambodia, Pakistan, Honduras, Grenada, Libya, Korea, Sinai, Iran, El Salvador, Grenada, Haiti and Panama. The military has people in 130 countries world wide and we wonder why terrorists want to attack us. Everybody wants revenge against the schoolyard bully. I'm glad they jail us all and plead us into submission. I would feel much worse if US citizens were treated differently than the rest of the world.
Should he have plead guilty?
Unfortunately the entirety of the US justice system is set up in order to force you to plead guilty. They make the stakes so high for losing a non-guilty plea that you almost always come out better pleading guilty. It's total bullshit and it needs to stop. Check out this doc for more info
Let's say the shremster, in his view, thought he hadn't committed a crime and wanted to relocate to a different country to avoid prosecution. Besides Somalia, what are his viable options here?
The prospect of running and looking over your shoulder for the rest of your life is probably no better than jail time.
Eric Voorhees seems to think Panama is a good choice. I don't think they extradite for financial crimes.
You would also have the risk that whomever is in power of the country you are living in would change and the new person/party in power would have different views regarding extradition.
I guess. I don't really know though because I try to not steal from people so I haven't studied up on extradition.
Let's say the shremster, in his view, thought he hadn't committed a crime and wanted to relocate to a different country to avoid prosecution. Besides Somalia, what are his viable options here?
The prospect of running and looking over your shoulder for the rest of your life is probably no better than jail time.
Eric Voorhees seems to think Panama is a good choice. I don't think they extradite for financial crimes.
You would also have the risk that whomever is in power of the country you are living in would change and the new person/party in power would have different views regarding extradition.
It sometimes does make sense to attempt to reach a plea bargain, especially for "street" crimes, when you are actually guilty, there is well more then enough evidence to convict you and little/no evidence that would show your innocence. What has happened in the US is that prosecutors use very high potential sentences that a defendant would likely face as a bargaining chip.
The justice system is not so much about justice these days. Instead it's more about being on the right side of the law and using statistics as a means to sway judgments. If prosecutors how so much control over the system then how can this be considered justice? It has become a business for the police, cities, court systems and Governments. The money as a get out of jail free card these days and is used to help fueling this backwards system we've got.
[/quote]
I support everybody's right to contract with a competing service provider for justice services.
Charlie seems like a nice guy...but you must put into perspective the amount of substances pushed on that marketplace and the mandatory minimum sentences associated are equivalent to 1000s of years jail time!! 
~ the war on drugs ? hmmm
~ the war on drugs ? hmmm Let's say the shremster, in his view, thought he hadn't committed a crime and wanted to relocate to a different country to avoid prosecution. Besides Somalia, what are his viable options here?
The prospect of running and looking over your shoulder for the rest of your life is probably no better than jail time.
Eric Voorhees seems to think Panama is a good choice. I don't think they extradite for financial crimes.
Let's say the shremster, in his view, thought he hadn't committed a crime and wanted to relocate to a different country to avoid prosecution. Besides Somalia, what are his viable options here?
It sometimes does make sense to attempt to reach a plea bargain, especially for "street" crimes, when you are actually guilty, there is well more then enough evidence to convict you and little/no evidence that would show your innocence. What has happened in the US is that prosecutors use very high potential sentences that a defendant would likely face as a bargaining chip.
[/quote]
The justice system is not so much about justice these days. Instead it's more about being on the right side of the law and using statistics as a means to sway judgments. If prosecutors how so much control over the system then how can this be considered justice? It has become a business for the police, cities, court systems and Governments. The money as a get out of jail free card these days and is used to help fueling this backwards system we've got.
[/quote]
The justice system is not so much about justice these days. Instead it's more about being on the right side of the law and using statistics as a means to sway judgments. If prosecutors how so much control over the system then how can this be considered justice? It has become a business for the police, cities, court systems and Governments. The money as a get out of jail free card these days and is used to help fueling this backwards system we've got.
There's no such thing as trials in the US anymore, almost 97+% of all prisoners in the states did plea bargaining to avoid a huge sentence thus never had a trial. Meanwhile in Germany they've abolished plea bargaining and actually have due process though the state keeps trying to bring it back.
It sometimes does make sense to attempt to reach a plea bargain, especially for "street" crimes, when you are actually guilty, there is well more then enough evidence to convict you and little/no evidence that would show your innocence. What has happened in the US is that prosecutors use very high potential sentences that a defendant would likely face as a bargaining chip. We cannot permit the Federal Mafia to simply threaten everyone into submission.
Why break with precedent?
BTW, you are perfectly free to sacrifice your freedom, family, etc., to fight the Federal mafia in whatever way you choose.
Jump to: