2014-01-30 Arrest of charlie shrem shows dangerously repressive US police

[Dusty]

Since the Bitcoin Foundation swiftly dropped any kind of support for his former vicepresident, it's up to Falkvinge to talk some sense on the Shrem arrest:

http://falkvinge.net/2014/01/30/arrest-of-charlie-shrem-shows-dangerously-repressive-u-s-police-system/

[1713538182]

1713538182

[1713538182]

1713538182

[1713538182]

1713538182

[1713538182]

1713538182

[1713538182]

1713538182

[1713538182]

1713538182

[runam0k]

It's the timing the bothers me. Right between Miami and the hearings in NY. Too much of a coinsidence.

[Dusty]

Actually for someone (Shrem) the problem it's a little worse than just "timing".

Unfortunately, the plea bargain system of the United States may cause Shrem to confess to the crime just to not risk 25 years of jail. A system where you get the choice of 15 days in jail and guilty confession, scoring career points for the prosecutor, or risk 25 years but take your chances of an acquittal, is a system that has absolutely nothing to do with justice nor with law enforcement. There is supposed to be a conceptual difference between being charged with a felony and playing “Take the money, or open the box?”.

[yatsey87]

Since the Bitcoin Foundation swiftly dropped any kind of support for his former vicepresident, it's up to Falkvinge to talk some sense on the Shrem arrest:

http://falkvinge.net/2014/01/30/arrest-of-charlie-shrem-shows-dangerously-repressive-u-s-police-system/

What allegedly happened here was that Shrem sold one million USD worth of bitcoin to one or more individuals, and these means were later used in turn to purchase contraband from Silk Road, obviously without Shrem having any say about it. That’s neither criminal nor money laundering – when you sell an asset, whether a car, a house, or bitcoin, you’re not liable in the slightest if that asset is later exchanged for contraband by its new rightful owner. Nor are you in any way, shape or form required to act even if you know it’s been later exchanged for contraband by its new owner, and in particular, you’re not guilty of money laundering.

Maybe not money laundering but it probably falls under tax evasion.

[Bobsurplus]

The problem is: He was the chief compliance officer and he went out of his way to tell shady people how to fly under the radar..

[Akka]

Actually for someone (Shrem) the problem it's a little worse than just "timing".

Unfortunately, the plea bargain system of the United States may cause Shrem to confess to the crime just to not risk 25 years of jail. A system where you get the choice of 15 days in jail and guilty confession, scoring career points for the prosecutor, or risk 25 years but take your chances of an acquittal, is a system that has absolutely nothing to do with justice nor with law enforcement. There is supposed to be a conceptual difference between being charged with a felony and playing “Take the money, or open the box?”.

Is this really how it works in the US?

What a broken system. With this almost everyone would confess. I mean even I would confess if I where charged for laundering US$, if I had to choose between 15 days and maybe 25 Years, even though I never touched a US$ in my whole live and could basically proof my innocence.

[cryptoanarchist]

The problem is: He was the chief compliance officer and he went out of his way to tell shady people how to fly under the radar..

Well, there is always going to be a profit motive there with cryptocurrencies. Kinda like SR offers amazing opportunities to Postal Inspectors.

[RodeoX]

Why are the police "dangerously repressive" for enforcing the law? Police don't choose what laws they are going to uphold. If you don't like the law you can work to change it, the police can't. Of course convincing people that money laundering should be legal will be an uphill battle.

[HeliKopterBen]

I don't know the details of the case but if what falkvinge says is true, then every CEO of every bank in the US should be charged with the same crime.

[BitCoinDream]

Since the Bitcoin Foundation swiftly dropped any kind of support for his former vicepresident, it's up to Falkvinge to talk some sense on the Shrem arrest:

http://falkvinge.net/2014/01/30/arrest-of-charlie-shrem-shows-dangerously-repressive-u-s-police-system/

While there are so many reasons to increase Bitcoin price, there should be some reasons of price drop. This is it...

[viajero]

from the comment section (3rd one):

Foxpup
 January 30, 2014 - 12:40

“accused of selling over $1 million in bitcoins to Silk Road users, who would then use them to buy drugs and other illicit items”

That’s not actually what he’s accused of. At all. (Don’t believe everything you read in the mainstream media.) He is actually accused of deliberately assisting his customer in structuring his transactions and hiding their true origin to avoid raising red flags with the exchange’s payment processor while keeping the rest of the exchange’s employees out of the loop (in fact, he allegedly told the co-founder that the customer would be banned from the exchange due to the illegal nature of his business (which he knew about), but secretly allowed the customer to continue using the exchange despite the “ban”). This is indeed money laundering. Though whether money laundering should be a crime and whether he’s actually guilty and the state can prove that is another matter altogether.

Ninja
 January 30, 2014 - 12:54

Is this what the arrest warrant and the judicial process say (providing the police gave a shit to due process and got one)?

Foxpup
 January 30, 2014 - 13:45

Yes. Specifically, he is charged with one count of operating an unlicensed money transmitting business (in connection with his customer’s Silk Road business, which he allegedly assisted in running, though he didn’t actually own it), one count of money laundering conspiracy (the conspiracy I just described), and one count of willful failure to file suspicious activity report (as the exchange’s AML compliance officer, he was legally required to report his customer’s illegal activity, instead of actively assisting in it and covering it up, which is exactly the opposite of what an AML compliance officer is supposed to do).

To be clear, I’m not saying that any or all of these things should be illegal, but it’s impossible to have a meaning debate on the subject without getting the facts straight as to what the alleged crime actually is. In particular, he was *not* arrested for merely selling bitcoins to Silk Road users, which is not money laundering and not even illegal (if it were, probably every bitcoin exchange in the country would be raided).

[Dusty]

Thanks viajero, if this is true, the thing changes considerably.

Anyway 25 years for a victimless crime is just pure madness.

[justusranvier]

Police don't choose what laws they are going to uphold.

Bullshit.

You're out of touch with reality to the extent of being a danger to yourself and others, or else a paid shill.

[yatsey87]

Thanks viajero, if this is true, the thing changes considerably.

Anyway 25 years for a victimless crime is just pure madness.

I doubt he will get 25 years. A good lawyer might even be able to get him off jail time.

[RodeoX]

Police don't choose what laws they are going to uphold.

Bullshit.

You're out of touch with reality to the extent of being a danger to yourself and others, or else a paid shill.

Half my family and friends are cops. While in practice there is always some degree of bias, many of the cops I know hate enforcing pot laws, for example. So many people agree with that sentiment that the laws are changing as we sit here. I doubt pot will be illegal anywhere in the US a decade from now.
We could all express our outrage about the tyranny of enforcing money laundering laws also. But I doubt many people want that.

[Mike Christ]

Half my family and friends are cops. While in practice there is always some degree of bias, many of the cops I know hate enforcing pot laws, for example. So many people agree with that sentiment that the laws are changing as we sit here. I doubt pot will be illegal anywhere in the US a decade from now.
We could all express our outrage about the tyranny of enforcing money laundering laws also. But I doubt many people want that.

Hopefully we'll see an end of "just orders" someday; I remember a story some time ago about a cop who quit precisely because he did not agree with the laws he was enforcing.  Then again, when a good cop quits, there's always a bad cop waiting to take his place and willing to enforce any law thrown his way, so it seems we'll see a sharp decline in quality of police before seeing an improvement once people choose the voluntary method of funding police which allows improvements through competition over the involuntary method which inevitably leads police to work against the people rather than for.

[NanoAkron]

Actually for someone (Shrem) the problem it's a little worse than just "timing".

Unfortunately, the plea bargain system of the United States may cause Shrem to confess to the crime just to not risk 25 years of jail. A system where you get the choice of 15 days in jail and guilty confession, scoring career points for the prosecutor, or risk 25 years but take your chances of an acquittal, is a system that has absolutely nothing to do with justice nor with law enforcement. There is supposed to be a conceptual difference between being charged with a felony and playing “Take the money, or open the box?”.

Is this really how it works in the US?

What a broken system. With this almost everyone would confess. I mean even I would confess if I where charged for laundering US$, if I had to choose between 15 days and maybe 25 Years, even though I never touched a US$ in my whole live and could basically proof my innocence.

The US and New Zealand are unique in the developed world in allowing plea bargaining. It's disgusting and anti-judicial.

[notthematrix]

If the laws are to strict bitcoin will move out of the US.
and yes everything on nternet can be hidden , and out side the scope of law enforecement , only dont expect to do this using standard equipment AKA windows / iphone etc ,, we all know what snowden said.

[bryant.coleman]

If the laws are to strict bitcoin will move out of the US.

And what will you do if your new host-nation also declares that the possession of BTC is illegal?

[hilariousandco]

If the laws are to strict bitcoin will move out of the US.
and yes everything on nternet can be hidden , and out side the scope of law enforecement , only dont expect to do this using standard equipment AKA windows / iphone etc ,, we all know what snowden said.

The laws are strict for money laundering regardless of currency. And Bitcoin isn't based anywhere so it'll move freely any way regardless of restrictions.