Bitcoin Forum

This was on coindesk...what does everyone think?

http://www.coindesk.com/localbitcoins-users-criminal-charges-florida/

http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/02/florida-targets-high-dollar-bitcoin-exchangers/


"According to court documents, the agent told Michelhack that he wanted to use the Bitcoins to purchase stolen credit cards online. After that trust-building transaction, Michelhack allegedly agreed to handle a much larger deal: Converting $30,000 in cash into Bitcoins."

there's the real story.

That makes more sense now...Didnt see your post earlier about this

We're also discussing this here How to NOT be a victim of a sting operation  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=454073.0)

WOW! My predictions are coming true much faster than even I could have imagined!

This is just from a few days ago:
and:

Scary stuff...

It looks like we're heading into a full scale currency war now.

The feds cannot win, but they're going to hurt a lot of people on their way down.

It's pretty simple really. You can use Bitcoins in the US, just don't use them for any kind of illegal or criminal activity. This is no different from someone using fiat to buy stolen credit cards, drugs, fake passport, etc etc. I'd imagine that the government loves busting people that use Bitcoins for illegal activities because it gives them proof to paint Bitcoin as an evil criminal currency.

+1

Yeah, because the police would never make false statements, plant evidence, invent probable cause, or lie to the media in pursuit of a headline-grabbing sting operation with no element of public service to it.

The evidence would come up in court. If the cop isn't recording it to say "look there, he knew!" then it would be on the cop to prove him wrong when he says "Nobody said shit about a crime..."

I guess when selling BTC, you must disclose"I can not sell these to you if you will be engaged in ANY illegal activity" just to cover yourself.

It's cute that you actually believe that.

Firstly, it is good to make clear in no uncertain terms that a transaction is business only.  At least until it is accomplished.  I'm sure the hints about avoiding entrapment cover that since it is kind of a no-brainer.

Secondly, if I was stupid enough to make a transaction after a guy blathered on about his criminal intent and found myself in hot water, my defense would be that when when the guy claimed to be a criminal I considered it most likely that he was lying/bragging (and thus not worth wasting some authorities time by reporting it) but also unsafe to back out of a transaction in case he was not lying.

Thirdly, it probably is genuinely dumb to operate an ongoing arbitrage operation using localbitcoins since there may be a credible requirement to KYC at that point.  In my personal case I am simply selling down an asset I've owned for years so I theorized that I would be safe enough selling on localbitcoins, but as it happens the market is typically not suitable for my usecase and Coinbase is working well for me so far.  And localbitcoins had some bug on my browser when I considered it.  (Note the 'I theorize' part.  IANAL.)

Nope that's not the real story at all.  That's just something they added to make the case slightly stronger.  And to confuse easily confused people.

These guys were arrested for trading bitcoins in FL.  Even $301 worth would have made it an "illegal" act and they could have been arrested.

F***ng FBI and their sting operations. I hope these lowlifes will burn in hell for ever.

The first charge i can understand altho i dont agree with most AML (its being lobbied by financial institutes)

The BULLSHIT charge is this

WTF is money transmission type ? Obviously prosecutor will throw this BS charge out there knowing public defense is a useless lawyer.

Define what is bitcoin first, you fcking piece of shit. Buying high end electronic/audio parts frequently can easily be over $20,000 in year, does that mean i will be charged?

Because of this, i doubt the evidence regarding "committing a crime with bitcoin"

Dude! Have you ever heard the term Parallel Construction (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805)?
Their only goal is to make money off of you, and they will make up any BS they can to get as much extorted out of you as they can!

And that's already happening. Sooner or later they will come after everyone holding a bitcoin for "money laundering". There are ~15-20,000 bitcoin users in the U.S. and believe me, these "law enforcers" will spend all the money and all the effort they can to get every one of us. There was silk road, and they will make up more BS "laws" to come after small-time bitcoin users as well. Watch out!


This is the reality...

When you can find me somebody who has been arrested for Bitcoin use who isn't also being arrested for something that's blatantly illegal as well then I'll get concerned, but to me if these people are committing fraud or dealing in drugs etc. then eventually they're going to end up hurting somebody here the more they think they can get away with it.

Not much sympathy I'm afraid, let me know when somebody I've actually chatted to on these forums gets arrested for no reason and looking at earlier posts it would definitely be something if it turned out that they were faking the illegal stuff and are just harassing Bitcoin users, we'll see what happens.

Another case of someone breaking the law,  and giving bitcoin a bad name as a result.  This gets in the news cause it has to do with bitcion,  but really it's a story of someone willingly and knowingly breaking the law.  If it was done with dollars and euro's it wouldn't be in the news. Add bitcoin to the mix and it's in the news  :-\

So can you not sell people anything if they tell you it's gonna be used for ilegal things? Surely you're not responsible for what they do with it.

It's the classic "All Bitcoin users are terrorists and criminals" attitude really, however hard the media tries though the hysteria over Bitcoin is going to die down the more people learn about it by themselves.

Another misleading title , people really need to spread FUD all day?
They we're arrested fro trading bitcoins for stolen credit cards.

Bring up this title when two people  will get arrested for trading a teddy bear (not live one , plush , and not stolen , and not full of drugs) for bitcoins.

Can you fcking read mate?

Also whats you're writing up there?

Start of the article :
"State authorities in Florida on Thursday announced criminal charges targeting three men who allegedly ran illegal businesses moving large amounts of cash in and out of the Bitcoin virtual currency."

I misread the part about the cc , skipped over the fact that the agent was the one telling about the cc.

Anyhow :

" Espinoza is charged with felony violations of Florida’s law against unlicensed money transmitters – which prohibits “currency or payment instruments exceeding $300 but less than $20,000 in any 12-month period” — and Florida’s anti-money laundering statutes, which prohibit the trade or business in currency of more than $10,000."

No bitcoin mentioned there. The problem lies with the amount of usd not bitcoin.

I'm not sure if that's what happened but rather the people they sold the coins to were using them or wanted to use them for this.

People need to understand that the government is not prosecuting BITCOIN use but illegal activity that just happens to be using Bitcoin.  Unfortunately bitcoin is under an intense spotlight so of course we'll see more of these type of actions.

Sounds like textbook entrapment...not that that matters to the USA Police State.

How could that be entrapment.  These guys were advertising on a public website to buy and sell bitcoins. Nothing illegal about that.  However if these guys would have said, wait, if you want to buy $30K i have to take your name and dob and ss# and address and telephone and I have to file a Currency Transaction Report with FinCEN, then there would have been no problem.  

Instead Law Enforcement threw in the fact that they were involved with illicit activity to show that these guys had no interest in obeying any existing law.

Pretty simple.

I'm not condoning or condemning the behavior.    I'm just stating facts.


 

It could be entrapment if the seller felt that by professing to criminal activity the buyer was attempting to intimidate him.

At least it seems that way to me, but I don't hold a JD...

Yea, we are all armchair lawyers!

What we need is a case in court to start setting some precedents.

The DPR case goes to trial in November.  Now that will be interesting.

I'd love to know what is going on with the BTCST case in Texas.  That may also set precedents.

Then The Shrem Case in New York.  He may plea and give up others, or go to trial and fight it.  He's young and got a life ahead of him, so it would make no sense to fight it as he would face 20 years in prison.  With a plea he may see at a fine a probation, but potentially no jail time. So I would not expect a trial in this case.

Faiella on the other hand is probably going to serve some time.

Yeah, because random people would never try to form conspiracy theories out of thin air... Oh, wait...

Yeah i have actually met with the guy before and bought Bitcoins, never thought he was doing anything illegal ...

What? That's ages away. What happens to people who get thrown in jail while they await trail and get found not guilty? Can they sue or get compensation etc?

Just because the undercover said " I want to use the BTCitcoins to purchase stolen credit cards" the seller of the BTCitcoin did not care and still sold the coins. we need more details, I met with the guy and also live in Florida but there are SOO MANY people down here selling BTCitcoin locally for cash, nearly the same volume they sold them for, if not more so not sure how they were yanked compared to everyone else still out there trading. They are basically calling it a currency but yet its a commodity?

They may get "time served" and released.

I believe that happened to Doug Jackson in the e-gold case and they guys arrested in the Liberty Dollar case.  

Makes them complicit in the illegal activity of "money laundering."

'textbook entrapment' - been reading a lot of textbooks lately?  lol.  Most people have no idea what 'entrapment' means legally.  When the police 'trap' people, that is not entrapment - that is their job.  'Trapping' people is OK.  Unfortunately, most people think that when a cop traps you, it is not fair under the legal principle 'entrapment'.  In reality, these have almost nothing to do with each other.

ouch... ive heard that bitcoins are gonna get banned here in australia too.... i guess its bad news for me who is just starting out !!

if they cant control it they dont want people having it!

If the police put you in a situation where you feel that you must break the law in order to protect your own physical safety, would that be 'entrapment'?

The problem is.... you dont know the facts idiot.

First it already states by the police that buying/selling bitcoin can be felt into "money transmission type transactions " between $300-$20000 within 12 months period

Second, you dont know how the undercover agent express his "attempt to use bitcoin for criminal act". He could have made it sound like a joke. I would personal think its a joke if some stranger dude said "yo i'm buying stolen goods with this shit man". If thats not entrapment then i dont know what is

+1


Definitely sucks because now people MUST BE CAREFUL when selling Bitcoins if someone brings something up about illegal activities, you just need to say I dont want to know what you are doing with them or create a waiver to have customers sign!

When i worked for GNC, General Nutrition, we would have undercover GNC reps come in and ask what supplements I could sell them that would help them pass a drug test! It was horrible, they would try and entrap us so many times! Sometimes i felt bad because I really wanted to help the person that claimed they received "Second hand smoke" etc

Same concept but a bit different.

I make no sense.

Don't listen to rumours. Wait for facts. A lot of FUD is being spread around and you're helping it if you don't wait for confirmations.

If they lawyer up they will get out of this one, we don't have enough details, perhaps the guy referred the agent to a black market website.

It is not even close to entrapment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_v._United_States

The part of these cases that could have the most impact is not the sale coins to someone with malicious intent, but the fact that because of their volume of sales through localbitcoins.com they were both charged with failure to register as a "money transmitter" business. So does this mean that anyone who sells coins through localbitcoins.com (or a similar service) needs these state & federal licenses?

There was a recent ruling recently by the feds that seems to me to apply, but I am not an attorney.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) today
published two administrative rulings, providing additional information on whether a person’s
conduct related to convertible virtual currency brings them within the Bank Secrecy Act’s (BSA)
definition of a money transmitter. The first ruling states that, to the extent a user creates or
“mines” a convertible virtual currency solely for a user’s own purposes, the user is not a money
transmitter under the BSA. The second states that a company purchasing and selling convertible
virtual currency as an investment exclusively for the company’s benefit is not a money
transmitter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So I ask the question - if one buys and sells bitcoins in an attempt to make a profit (regardless of volume), using localbitcoins.com (or a similar service), then that activity is not considered to be a money transmitter, subject to the federal or state laws?

Yeah that isn't entrapment.  If you honestly believed the person was joking then it is a possible defense.  However if you joke with me about illegal activity I am simply not going to do business with you.  Is it a joke? Maybe but it might not be and I don't have psychic powers so there really is no reason for me to do business with you.   If enough people on localbitcoin followed similar "policy" then people would stop joking (although honestly what % of buyers do you think joke about illegal activity with strangers, for all they know the seller is an undercover cop).  Then when someone "jokes" about illegal activity they either are a) a stupid criminal or b) an undercover cop.

In the long run it doesn't really matter if you believed someone was joking, it matters if nine people too dim witted to get out of jury duty thought the claim seemed like a joke.  If they find is to be credible and they wouldn't have gone through with the sale after that ... well you probably are going to prison.

We are having a civil conversation here.  Please avoid personal attacks. It's not very productive and basically discredits any legitimate argument you may be trying to make.

It all depends on the volume.

u should have told them "anyone using cannabis or another drug has serious depressive issues, and should seek therapy instead of trying to work!"   ;D

I am not a lawyer but it has to do with "facts and circumstances"

Also at what point does this activity become a "business"

then you are beholding to the Know Your Customer requirements, the Anti-Money Laundering requirements, the Suspicious Activity Requirements, and the Currency Transaction requirements.

Unfortunately there are no clear answers and it will take legislation or a precedent setting court case to bring more clarity.

For now consult a very smart lawyer who deals with Money Services Businesses.

Possibly and most statutes have an exemption on non-violent crimes when it comes to the suspect feeling that not engaging would result in bodily injury or death of themselves or another person.  Of course these cops weren't dumb.  That is why gave the suspects plenty of time to report the first transaction, you know the one where they felt they were in immediate bodily danger.   Then setup a SECOND deal and gave the suspects time to report that.

Pretty obvious that was a way to kill that defense before it was made.

That is correct. But what if the cop would not have asked this? Just bought 1 BTC and $30K the next day? Does anyone here seriously think that would have been it?

Even if the guy would have said, $30K is above the $10K money laundering limit, that would not have helped, these cops were looking for an easy success instead of doing some real police work, catching some real scammers.

It is easy to reject a buyer who openly says he is doing something illegal; actually that would get you in trouble in almost every country. The $10K money laundering limit is also not the problem.  

The really nasty part about this case is that, obviously, everyone who sells anything for more than $300 in Florida for cash, commits a felony? Was that law copied from North Korea? Is that not against the constitution, to prohibit private citizens from selling their personal property (such as gold, silver, foreign currency that may be left over from a vacation, or BTC) for legal tender?

If Adolf had won the war, it couldn't be worse.

Fincen is only at Federal level. However we just notice the state law of Florida that you require a license for as such high volume would fall into Money service business.

At this point in history it is basically impossible for the average person to keep up with all these random "money-laundering" laws, especially if they can be changed arbitrarily at any legislators whim. These so called "laws" are specifically designed to crush small business and individual entrepreneurs who can not afford an expensive law-team.

Also notice, how this was an entirely fabricated "crime". If it wasn't for the "law enforcement" officers, no "crime" would have ever happened. The officers apparently told those guys that they were intending to buy stolen credit cards, which was a lie - they weren't.
So who overstepped the moral boundaries here?

What I find particularly scary though is how here, in this very forum, people seem to fail to understand the crass immorality of these events, and are actually trying to justify the despicable behavior of the "law enforcement". You know, there also used to be people who tried to justify the nazis... just sayin....

.

Absolutely. So-called "money laundering" is not a real crime. There is no victim. It's just an attempt by the state to punish SOMEONE for the alleged crimes of the "guilty" who "violated" some other state edict which also probably does not have a real victim. It creates out of thin air a so-called conspiracy between provably innocent people and faceless nameless supposed criminals somewhere down the line of murky trade connections where an actual crime against person or property may or may not have occurred.

This is a perfect example of lawn enforcement creating a "crime" where none exists just to bully and intimidate people and create some sort of ridiculous justification for their existence. This is obviously not a real crime because there is no one to bring charges who can legitimately claim an injury or loss from this transaction. It's just a voluntary exchange of value. Period.

It's telling how they introduce the prospect of credit card fraud to make all of this seem like the seller willingly engaged in a conspiracy to defraud an actual person. The "money laundering" charge hangs on absolutely nothing but an edict from the state which takes away our right to freely engage in trade, so they always have to come up with some supposed real crime to insinuate into the mix even though no such crime has actually occurred. This makes the innocent seller, whose only interest is in selling bitcoins for dollars, an "accomplice" to non-existent crime against a non-existent person! The state makes it sound as if the orificer's lie establishes a real victim and a real crime. They also seem to insinuate that we are all personally responsible for the possible actions of people we trade with where there is absolutely no other connection to us, our actions, or our intentions. This is just guilt by association. It's a trick used every day in smearing and attacking people verbally. They use it in state propaganda, and now it has become entrenched in state law. The state has almost completely taken over every aspect of trade. If everything you do with your property and money is not fully controlled right now, then it is tracked and traced and noted and filed to the extent currently possible, and ready to be called up at any time to be used against you for any reason at any time. This is the real crime here - the state creating a situation where the innocent are made out of be guilty, where it's a "crime" to engage in voluntary exchange without the state's permission and without fully submitting to their demand to control your life.

It's one thing to comment on how to avoid becoming a victim of the state's absurd aggressions and their vague entrapping edicts and "regulations," but don't for one minute think you can justify the state's actions in any of these cases, or say that "these people had it coming". This and other cases such as the Bitinstant guy, the seizing of Mt. Gox's accounts in the US, and many others, are all completely bogus and have no merit whatsoever. They are clearly cases of state persecution. Anyone who doesn't make this clear in their comments is only contributing to the power of the police state.

They want us all thinking we're all guilty and that we deserve punishment. We all need to fight against this incessant and insanely creepy propaganda in our comments. Don't give these people any more power than they already have. We need to tear down their arguments and justifications for all the violence they commit, not mindlessly support it by blaming the people who get caught in their web.

Money laundering IS a crime, a serious one, it is about turning black money into white, knowingly so.

Like in the Shrem case there was no ML here - only turning one form of white money into another one. The Florida case was a sale between two private counterparties, something that has been done for millenia, since money was invented. In ancient Rome you could swap an Aureus for a bunch of silver sesterce without being arrested.  ::)

Now, the officer stated he would use that other form of white money to commit a crime, so the sale should have been cancelled. That part is clear.

However (and that is the key) Florida law is absolutely fascist since it automatically turns private citizens into ILLEGAL MONEY TRANSMITTERS.

Victimless crimes is not enough to keep all the govt. henchmen busy so now the trend is crimeless crimes.  ;D

If that is the way things went down, they ya, the seller is probably toast.  It won't be long before idiots like them are dropped from the Bitcoin gene pool, and it'll be 'good riddance' as far as I am concerned.  What comes after that phase will be interesting to watch unfold.

You have just contradicted BlueNote without making any attempt to argue the point. Turning black money into white - what you are describing is not money, as there is no fungibility if some money is black and some white. This is exactly what got the Bitcoin community up in arms about coinvalidation.

If money is paid for committing a crime, then the crime can be prosecuted. The money can be confiscated as a punishment if that's deemed appropriate. None of that is what money laundering statutes are about - they are laws specifically intended to punish intent - to punish someone who performs an otherwise entirely legal trade involving money, whose intent is to obfuscate the source of the money. It's financial thought crime. The state has no business assessing the intent behind every act of trade or exchange.

Sounds like a made-up story. What kind of criminal would be that stupid to tell you the purpose of the bitcoin purchase? And who would be that stupid to believe such a claim and still sell coin to them?  ???

If counterfeiting money legally by the central bank is not a crime (it is about turning nothing into white money), then any other crime is so trivial

I believe that AML law is an excuse to inspect everyone's financial activities legally, since the money printers would like to know where are those money went and if it will create heavy inflation and render their printed money useless

QFT.

ITT: fear mongering and propaganda for no damn reason.

Use bitcoins for 'illegal reasons', and expect the feds to be knocking at your door.  Acquire and sell your bitcoins legitimately, and enjoy early retirement.

Basic rules for life.

new world order

you can do a search on this forum and find hundreds of people talking about how they used silk road, and other nefarious websites. a few people even have drug related usernames and profile avatars too.

when people deal with drugs, the side effects are a decline in their IQ. so you will find many that like to boast about it because they stupidly think they will not get caught.

i feel no sympathy for those arrested that have blatantly not kept their illegal activities a secret. i feel no sympathy for others that break the law, but  respect them enough for being smart enough to not publicise it

This is an example of why altcoins like Darkcoin will be successful.

The feds are breaking the law (constitution) get educated before taking people freedom

I called that nothing,but robbery!

WHOOP! WHOOP! That's the sound of the po-lice!

WHOOP! WHOOP! That's the sound of the beast!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VRZq3J0uz4

So many people talking about how bad things are getting and yet so few are actually doing anything about it...

Does anybody know this person? Does anybody know somebody else who knows this person? Who is he? How strong are his morals? Does he have any prior criminal history?

Society should take an interest in these questions.

The world's not just going to correct itself.

"Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot,
Nothing is going to get better. It's not."
Dr. Seuss

The BTC community needs to look out for one-another.

Facts of Miami arrests:

1) Advertised selling BTC on localbitcoins.
2) Engaged in transaction to sell high volume.
3) Was informed of illegal intention by buyer.

They were operating as a service in an "exchanger" capacity, not a
"user". They were operating in a capacity that would probably meet the
definition of money transmission requiring licenses and registration
as a money service business ("MSB"). They were complicit in the act of
money laundering by failing to cancel the purchase transaction and
report the activity to the authorities under obligations outlined for
individuals or business acting as a MSB.

My interpretation of the Paragraph 3 below makes it pretty clear that conversion of BTC to legal tender does not by itself make a user (anyone mining or acquiring BTC) an exchanger, and subsequently a money transmitter. They were operating as a business and had obligations they failed to adhere to, notwithstanding the general common sense that one shouldn't be doing business with another party who states criminal intent.

---

FinCEN guidance:

FIN-2014-R001
Issued: January 30, 2014
Subject: Application of FinCEN's Regulations to Virtual Currency
Mining Operations

For purposes of the guidance, FinCEN refers to the participants in
generic virtual currency arrangements, using the terms "exchanger,"
"administrator," and "user." An exchanger is a person engaged as a
business in the exchange of virtual currency for real currency, funds,
or other virtual currency. An administrator is a person engaged as a
business in issuing (putting into circulation) a virtual currency, and
who has the authority to redeem (to withdraw from circulation) such
virtual currency. A user is a person that obtains virtual currency to
purchase goods or services on the user's own behalf.

FinCEN understands that Bitcoin mining imposes no obligations on a
Bitcoin user to send mined Bitcoin to any other person or place for
the benefit of another. Instead, the user is free to use the mined
virtual currency or its equivalent for the user's own purposes, such
as to purchase real or virtual goods and services for the user's own
use. To the extent that a user mines Bitcoin and uses the Bitcoin
solely for the user's own purposes and not for the benefit of another,
the user is not an MSB under FinCEN's regulations, because these
activities involve neither "acceptance" nor "transmission" of the
convertible virtual currency and are not the transmission of funds
within the meaning of the Rule. This is the case whether the user
mining and using the Bitcoin is an individual or a corporation, and
whether the user is purchasing goods or services for the user's own
use, paying debts previously incurred in the ordinary course of
business, or (in the case of a corporate user) making distributions to
shareholders. Activities that, in and of themselves, do not constitute
accepting and transmitting currency, funds or the value of funds, are
activities that do not fit within the definition of "money
transmission services" and therefore are not subject to FinCEN's
registration, reporting, and recordkeeping regulations for MSBs.8

From time to time, as your letter has indicated, it may be necessary
for a user to convert Bitcoin that it has mined into a real currency
or another convertible virtual currency, either because the seller of
the goods or services the user wishes to purchase will not accept
Bitcoin, or because the user wishes to diversify currency holdings in
anticipation of future needs or for the user's own investment
purposes. In undertaking such a conversion transaction, the user is
not acting as an exchanger, notwithstanding the fact that the user is
accepting a real currency or another convertible virtual currency and
transmitting Bitcoin, so long as the user is undertaking the
transaction solely for the user's own purposes and not as a business
service performed for the benefit of another. A user's conversion of
Bitcoin into a real currency or another convertible virtual currency,
therefore, does not in and of itself make the user a money
transmitter.9

FinCEN therefore concludes that, under the facts you have provided,
[the Company] would be a user of Bitcoin, and not an MSB, to the
extent that it uses Bitcoin it has mined: (a) to pay for the purchase
of goods or services, pay debts it has previously incurred (including
debts to its owner(s)), or make distributions to owners; or (b) to
purchase real currency or another convertible virtual currency, so
long as the real currency or other convertible virtual currency is
used solely in order to make payments (as set forth above) or for [the
Company]'s own investment purposes. Any transfers to third parties at
the behest of sellers, creditors, owners, or counterparties involved
in these transactions should be closely scrutinized, as they may
constitute money transmission.

It was a set up and that was their sting. They just got greedy.

i do not know how this is legal

Most of the crimes are committed by people getting to greedy for their own safety and forgetting about laws for some quick $$$.
And as many people already said it , criminals are not always the smartest people in the world.

Sometimes criminals are the smartest people. Just those ones don't get caught.

Those are not criminals. Cause , it's innocent before proven guilty right? And with them not being caught yet...=))))))

Maybe in the eyes of the law. Just because you haven't been caught yet that doesn't make you not a criminal.

The Criminal complaints are attached to this article.

http://www.businessinsider.com/localbitcoinscom-targeted-by-feds-2014-2

Wow that is bad.   The undercover officer provided multiple mentions of stolen credit cards, and provided enough details (even offering to trade stolen CC for Bitcoins directly) that there is no chance the seller though he was "joking".  A single statement might be a joke.  Multiple statements with details over the course of two months?  He knew.

Yes in undercover stings cops typically make sure they say things multiple times. The excuse of "i thought he was joking" never holds up in court.

I would like to point on some questionable aspects of this police action based only on known official revealings and assuming that this time they didn't lied as they recognized to have lied during the investigation:
- it seems that they consider Bitcoin as money when they like and not when they don't like, depending which is more profitable without consideration on justice
- money laundering is a relatively new concept established in a very opportunistic way to bring more money to the state, less risky instead of  pursuing real criminals better cash from those who could be eventually criminals
The justice in the society worked very well without this concept also but the police had to work instead to cash only.
- if you teach your children's not to lie should you say also that only a policeman(lawyers, politicians and bankers also) may lie ?
- nobody is born as criminal and anybody can become under certain circumstances
Using an agent provocateur to animate the suspect who could be a criminal to make a crime is very questionable. This crime would be never happened without the motivation of the agent provocateur engaged by the police.

Now imagine in a future state that provocateurs of the police animate everybody to commit a real crime(to kill somebody).
At least 10% of the population would be dead or arrested.

Representatives of the law should show good example instead of bad example then the society will be better.

yea i had the DEA call me one time asking if i ordered drugs online.  and i said "i bought some stuff off silk road" and they said WHAT
and i said "i bought some stuff off silk road" and they said what
and i said "i bought some stuff off silk road" and they siad well there's a warrant out there for your arrest.

and this was 2 years ago.  still haven't gotten arrested :/

True. The concept of legal tender is the modern equivalent of slavery. Bitcoins's best accomplishment yet, is to educate people about that.  ;D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law

1 BTC = $700 and without threats from various governments Gresham's law would have taken it to $5000 or more.

For the bankers and the politicians whom they sponsor, catching bitcoin sellers seems to be the top priority.

Stop turning this into a drama. The poor Bitcoin seller who earned only 5000$ in commission was sure the target of the BoA director .
He broke the law. That's all. Stop with the conspiracy.

Banks are making more money out of bitcoin than they are losing.