CoinExchanger is a scammer, stole Bitcoinica's coins, lied about contact info

[Matthew N. Wright]

I am almost sure that bitcoinica.com is out of funds and they are keeping the site open to get more deposits and ponzi those deposits on those who want to withdrawal. The 17 year old just lost 250,000 Dollars and I doubt he has an extra 250K to cover his loss.

I would encourage everyone to withdrawal your funds from bitcoinica and watch the shit hit the fan.

Visit, www.coinexchanger.com

We will lower our withdrawal fee in the next couple of days, in the meantime 9% is fair.

CoinExchanger.com is an admittedly unregistered MLB (money license business) that must be registered by FinCEN within 6 months of opening their doors and sharing their first stored value. They have not done so and are in direct violation of federal law.

The owner of CoinExchanger.com is Leo Camilo, who advertises his address as 440 9th ave, New york, New York,10001 US and personal telephone number 1 (347) 469-1040.

His private email (search google) is atqcapital@gmail.com.

He has publicly stated on multiple occasions that:

• bitcoin is fake money, "monopoly money" and has no value and should not be trusted for this reason.
• his exchange is functional with a large user base, when not a single user has ever reportedly done business with him
• he is holding coins stolen from Zhou Tong's Bitcoinica and says "fuck you Zhou, you're just a stupid 17 year old kid, these coins are mine now" basically.

He also:

• goes under the sock puppet scammer account name "Maria"
• claims to be a millionaire and restaurant owner

He is currently in possession of stolen Bitcoins from the Linode hack and any coins purchased from him will not be accepted by MtGox or anyone in the Bitcoin community.

[the joint]

Hmm...sounds like a few years of jail time oughta do the trick.  Jailhouse mining is a bit different than Bitcoin mining.

[cypherdoc]

Matthew,

are u claiming he performed the hack and stole all the coins or that he just has a few that somehow he suddenly got a hold of?

[Matthew N. Wright]

Matthew,

are u claiming he performed the hack and stole all the coins or that he just has a few that somehow he suddenly got a hold of?

He seems to be a moron (look up the posts by Maria or himself) but it could be an act.

He IS the first person to receive the stolen coins and within seconds of receiving was posting that he received them and their spot value. That's highly unlikely for an unconnected party, no?

[cypherdoc]

Matthew,

are u claiming he performed the hack and stole all the coins or that he just has a few that somehow he suddenly got a hold of?

He seems to be a moron (look up the posts by Maria or himself) but it could be an act.

He IS the first person to receive the stolen coins and within seconds of receiving was posting that he received them and their spot value. That's highly unlikely for an unconnected party, no?

well, no, i don't think so.  Extravagant seems to be the first.

[Matthew N. Wright]

UPDATE: Upon confirming with Shawn the manager at Uncle Jacks at the registered address in the Whois for CoinExchanger.com, there is no one by the name of Leo Camilo (big surprise). I'll be working with Shawn (local manager) and Anthony (corporate manager) to make absolutely sure no one receives mail at that address who shouldn't be and will have them interview their employees closely as this is now a federal crime and will be reported directly to FinCEN and the FBI.

[the joint]

UPDATE: Upon confirming with Shawn the manager at Uncle Jacks at the registered address in the Whois for CoinExchanger.com, there is no one by the name of Leo Camilo (big surprise). I'll be working with Shawn (local manager) and Anthony (corporate manager) to make absolutely sure no one receives mail at that address who shouldn't be and will have them interview their employees closely as this is now a federal crime and will be reported directly to FinCEN and the FBI.

Does Theymos have some IPs?

[coin_toss]

Matthew,

are u claiming he performed the hack and stole all the coins or that he just has a few that somehow he suddenly got a hold of?

He seems to be a moron (look up the posts by Maria or himself) but it could be an act.

He IS the first person to receive the stolen coins and within seconds of receiving was posting that he received them and their spot value. That's highly unlikely for an unconnected party, no?

well, no, i don't think so.  Extravagant seems to be the first.

I have to agree with cypherdoc, if the thief was smart enough to be able to pull off this hack surely he would be smart enough to launder them properly

[bitcoinBull]

Where's your evidence?  You need more than a large font size to support this accusation.

[kiba]

UPDATE: Upon confirming with Shawn the manager at Uncle Jacks at the registered address in the Whois for CoinExchanger.com, there is no one by the name of Leo Camilo (big surprise). I'll be working with Shawn (local manager) and Anthony (corporate manager) to make absolutely sure no one receives mail at that address who shouldn't be and will have them interview their employees closely as this is now a federal crime and will be reported directly to FinCEN and the FBI.

I hate to see you use the law that can be used against us, bitcoiners.

[Matthew N. Wright]

UPDATE: Upon confirming with Shawn the manager at Uncle Jacks at the registered address in the Whois for CoinExchanger.com, there is no one by the name of Leo Camilo (big surprise). I'll be working with Shawn (local manager) and Anthony (corporate manager) to make absolutely sure no one receives mail at that address who shouldn't be and will have them interview their employees closely as this is now a federal crime and will be reported directly to FinCEN and the FBI.

I hate to see you use the law that can be used against us, bitcoiners.

Now now, we're not advocating the monitoring and control of bitcoiners or even bitcoin, we're advocating exchanges not being anonymous scummy fucks (bitscalper anyone?) and ending the idiot tax this community seems to love dishing out.

I wish anonymous exchanges could function, but they can't, and sooner or later someone's going to pay for it.

Did CryptoXChange ever ask for anyone's ID here?

Why is it so important for an exchange to be absolutely anonymous unless you're trying to sell stolen bitcoins?

Maybe I'm going to piss a lot of libertards off by asking these very basic questions and all, but my philosophy on the issue hasn't maturely developed yet so I'm actually asking right now, not just being sarcastic.

Isn't the risk of BitScalper worth blackballing them from the society? Isn't any business or company trying to remain anonymous supposed to be shooting up red flags for everyone? When a customer's records are not even collected, why would a business need to be anonymous? Can't the customers just remain anonymous?

[proudhon]

Watching this thread (for some evidence to back up this accusation).

[0ni0ns]

UPDATE: Upon confirming with Shawn the manager at Uncle Jacks at the registered address in the Whois for CoinExchanger.com, there is no one by the name of Leo Camilo (big surprise). I'll be working with Shawn (local manager) and Anthony (corporate manager) to make absolutely sure no one receives mail at that address who shouldn't be and will have them interview their employees closely as this is now a federal crime and will be reported directly to FinCEN and the FBI.

I hate to see you use the law that can be used against us, bitcoiners.

Now now, we're not advocating the monitoring and control of bitcoiners or even bitcoin, we're advocating exchanges not being anonymous scummy fucks (bitscalper anyone?) and ending the idiot tax this community seems to love dishing out.

I wish anonymous exchanges could function, but they can't, and sooner or later someone's going to pay for it.

Did CryptoXChange ever ask for anyone's ID here?

Why is it so important for an exchange to be absolutely anonymous unless you're trying to sell stolen bitcoins?

Maybe I'm going to piss a lot of libertards off by asking these very basic questions and all, but my philosophy on the issue hasn't maturely developed yet so I'm actually asking right now, not just being sarcastic.

Isn't the risk of BitScalper worth blackballing them from the society? Isn't any business or company trying to remain anonymous supposed to be shooting up red flags for everyone? When a customer's records are not even collected, why would a business need to be anonymous? Can't the customers just remain anonymous?

I have never stolen a single bitcoin, but like remaining anonymous because of business on a certain tor site. I am sure many others agree.

[Matthew N. Wright]

I have never stolen a single bitcoin, but like remaining anonymous because of business on a certain tor site. I am sure many others agree.

I agree with customers having the right to remain anonymous. That is easily enough done through most exchanges when you know the rules they have to follow. (I'd say MtGox might be the strictest)

The problem (like with BitScalper) is that there is absolutely no accountability for businesses when they try to remain anonymous. Anyone advocating that a business be allowed to operate anonymously is advocating fraud.

[bitcoinBull]

He IS the first person to receive the stolen coins and within seconds of receiving was posting that he received them and their spot value. That's highly unlikely for an unconnected party, no?

You're claiming this with absolutely zero evidence.  Anyone can link to blockchain.info (it wasn't even CoinExchanger who posted the link, but Jonathan Ryan Owens - and is meaningless in any case).  There is no reason to believe that there is any connection whatsoever between CoinExchanger and bitcoinica's stolen bitcoins.  For you to assert that there is, is both confusing and counterproductive.

Your activism/leadership may be well-intentioned, but its beginning to look overzealous and borderline irresponsible.  It is not what one would expect from a professional (director of bitcoin magazine), and to be honest I'm growing a bit uncomfortable having trusted you with my pre-order for the magazine.

[Kluge]

Isn't the risk of BitScalper worth blackballing them from the society? Isn't any business or company trying to remain anonymous supposed to be shooting up red flags for everyone? When a customer's records are not even collected, why would a business need to be anonymous? Can't the customers just remain anonymous?

I don't think anyone wants to comply with over-bearing government regulations and audits. Getting gov't more involved with fraud is dangerous in that it makes it more difficult for legitimate people from conducting business without complying with gov't laws. FinCEN laws affect more involved with BTC than just exchanges.

I'd rather have BitScalper and CoinTumbler than coercive regulation of Bitcoin businesses. Bitcoin is information, and policing information is the fastest way to kill Bitcoin.   

[Matthew N. Wright]

You're claiming this with absolutely zero evidence.  Anyone can link to blockchain.info (it wasn't even CoinExchanger who posted the link, but Jonathan Ryan Owens - and is meaningless in any case).  There is no reason to believe that there is any connection whatsoever between CoinExchanger and bitcoinica's stolen bitcoins.  For you to assert that there is, is both confusing and counterproductive.

Your activism/leadership may be well-intentioned, but its beginning to look overzealous and borderline irresponsible.  It is not what one would expect from a professional (director of bitcoin magazine), and to be honest I'm growing a bit uncomfortable having trusted you with my pre-order for the magazine.

Don't assume that everything I post here is intended for your eyes. Apologies for any confusion. The coins were picked up by his claim moments after they were sent and there is no hard concrete proof he even has them, that is his claim. It was however necessary to state these things to incite a dialogue. Bear with me while we (not just I) get to the bottom of it.

[Matthew N. Wright]

I'd rather have BitScalper and CoinTumbler than coercive regulation of Bitcoin businesses. Bitcoin is information, and policing information is the fastest way to kill Bitcoin.    

Nice spin there buddy. Let's straighten it back out. All exchanges are already registered, except one, who calls Bitcoins monopoly money and says that he has the stolen coins. MtGox, CryptoXChange, Intersango, they've all gone through the steps necessary and required of them by their legal operating countries in order to be legal and provide a legal service. CoinExchanger ignores these responsibilities under the guise of providing anonymity (except everything they claim is always a lie or completely unprovable).

[0ni0ns]

I have never stolen a single bitcoin, but like remaining anonymous because of business on a certain tor site. I am sure many others agree.

I agree with customers having the right to remain anonymous. That is easily enough done through most exchanges when you know the rules they have to follow. (I'd say MtGox might be the strictest)

The problem (like with BitScalper) is that there is absolutely no accountability for businesses when they try to remain anonymous. Anyone advocating that a business be allowed to operate anonymously is advocating fraud.

I'm not sure what you mean by fraud. I certainly don't support theft but I do support money laundering for certain purposes. An anonymous exchange is a place where someone could sell coins without worrying about the government forcing the exchange to give them their identity.

Edit

I am not saying I would ever do business with coinexchanger. But anonymous services like silk road and bitcoin fog do have their place.

[Matthew N. Wright]

An anonymous exchange is a place where someone could sell coins without worrying about the government forcing the exchange to give them their identity.

An anonymous exchange is a place that can advertise itself as an exchange, then take off with everyone's money after a while.

MyBitcoin.com V2.0.