Topic: Shrem to jail for two years!!! Holy shit! - page 6. (Read 8191 times)

He may have cooperated in some capacity to get a reduced sentence. Two years doesn't seem that bad and I would've thoughr they'd try make an example out of him.

Your "ethically wrong" argument is for Internet discussion boards and it holds no weight in the real world and is obviously wrong.  While the system is abused the laws were put in place to stop things like terrorism, human trafficking, etc.  The laws were put in place for an ethical purpose and they sometime work.  People want these laws because they sometimes do work and people feel it protects their security.  You can try to point to abuses and claim the whole system should stop and claim it is "morally wrong" but they are going to point to you and say allowing terrorism and human trafficking is morally wrong.  in any case the laws are in place and it doesn't matter what you think.

As for Shrem, you can read the evidence.  It looked like some guy kept bugging him and he finally caved and did the transaction.  It was not an ongoing conspiracy and he had no record so I think he should have gotten probation.  Shrem admitted to knowing the guy was doing money transmission without a license and did the transaction anyway.

Nope - the Fed doesn't have a program for reduced sentences.  You get what you get.  You don't get out early.  That is from state prisons. 

Hilarious!!  You can sure tell you are French!!

'Never go to jail'
In France, you can nearly get away with murder.  In fact, you actually have to go to jail 'for life' (7 years).  That's right, a 'life' sentence is 7 years.  For little things like embezzling and money laundering - France doesn't do much more than say 'naughty boy' - and then set you free.  Which is why this guy expects Shrem not to go to jail.  In the US, cleaning money for major drug operations is a big crime and you've got to go to big jail.


"what Shrem did was simply not all that big a deal "
Like I said, in Europe money laundering is pretty common and not a big deal.  Everyone does it.

"if he does do any 'time' it will be one of those deals where he get's to check in on weekends or whatever."
Not even.  This is the Fed we are talking about.  They don't even have parole.  He is behind bars ALREADY.  Sometimes a judge will give you 7 days to put your affairs in order, but most times they take you 5 seconds after the sentence is read.  Think about that: Shrem spent last night is a cold small cement cell with a stainless steel toilet next to his head and a large black 'roommate'.

Life is easy in France my friend.  Get away with murder and they are serving croissants in jail with a nice view (actually Monaco has the very nice view from jail).  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5hjf4i3DY0&feature=youtu.be&a

I really like what Luke R. has to say about because it is bitcoin, instead of the dollar, a message has to be sent.  It's not like HBSC got anything other than a slap on the wrist fine...twice!

Didn't he plead guilty? I think they had him pretty much screwed anyway. The law is going to come after you if you're tied to this sort of stuff sadly.

This is impressive sentence from Thomas Jefferson; but it doesn't belong to this thread. Or do you plan any resistance about it?

in the meantime:

i understand that ulbrichts crimes are on a mega high scale in comparison to shrems. and if u read my post you will see that i have categorised btckings ventures as being more criminal than shrems and then ulbrichts as being higher again..

my point being is that if by that small 0.01% chance that ulbricht gets a light sentance or no sentance due to evidence being thrown out or some legal loop hole he tries. then shrem should get a lighter sentance than whatever btcking or ulbricht gets.. thats all im saying

The streets are now safe. Thank you government for protecting us.

 

You are stating an obvious fact, my friend. America killed a lot of innocent people and keep doing it every day (for democracy). Charlie should thank God that he got just 2 years instead of death penalty...

this is bullshit.
two years in jail for a crime with no victim.
the only criminal in this trial is the American government.

and how much jail time did those execs do who were responsible for the 2008 global financial crisis?

NONE.

mother fuckers.

The evidence presented by the government is unclear as to how much Charlie knew about BTCking's involvement in Silk road, although it seems to be pretty clear that he knew he was doing some kind of money laundering as he was telling his business partner that he was banning him from using his services while privately telling him to how circumvent his internal controls that were suppose to prevent him from being able to use his services.

By the way  .... Are you in favour of collective punishment for helping facilitate something?

be very careful what you wish for.

He was BitInstant's AML compliance officer. By taking the job, he accepted a duty to report money laundering and ensure his company was complying with all relevant laws. The moment this duty conflicted with his own sense of ethics, he should have quit. Whether money laundering is ethical is beside the point, since he voluntarily agreed to enforce the laws (and the money laundering charge was dropped anyway).

It was the latter. Not only that, he used his position in the company to prevent btcking's transactions from being flagged as suspicious, and hide those transactions from the BitInstant's founder, Gareth Nelson. He abused his power in a blatantly illegal and unethical way, that's all there is to it.

Heh ...2 years in the USA he will be out in 6 months on good behavior etc....most he will serve imho is 1 year...the rest
will be like 5 years probation or some such

They just do whatever they want, the main goal of this was to send out a signal to others. 

Doesnt make much sense putting him in prison though, they should have just given him 2 years home arrest or something if anything.

Pretty sure Charlie knew he'd be doing time while awaiting sentencing.

Doubt the weekend gig is for two year sentences. He'd be a weekender for about eight years.

That's terrible news. He didn't do anything ethically wrong.

Throughout all this, I've been wondering how much he was actually complicit in the Silk Road stuff. Apparently he knew that btcking had something to do with the Silk Road, but was it just a bit of passing knowledge, or was he actually very purposefully trying to help btcking with money laundering? I'd feel better if it was the latter, since at least he'd have known the risks ahead of time.