Shrem to jail for two years!!! Holy shit!

[Unitus]

I think they did this to make an example out of him. To scare bitcoin entrepreneurs and investors. 

[1714945066]

1714945066

[1714945066]

1714945066

[1714945066]

1714945066

[1714945066]

1714945066

[QuestionAuthority]

I think they did this to make an example out of him. To scare bitcoin entrepreneurs and investors. 

No, they did it because it's against the law. Handing out one of the lightest sentences possible for this crime with 90 days off to get your affairs in order doesn't send much of a message. If they're sending any message it's: hey bitcoiners, we don't have anything against you but your bro broke the law. We have to do something about it so we're slapping him on the wrist and sending him to Club Fed for a couple of years.

[gargantuar]

@jdbtracker: I set up a wiki and will be doing my best to install neo4j on this Debian VPS.  Let me know if you would like the admin password and ssh. 

[TheButterZone]

@jdbtracker: I set up a wiki and will be doing my best to install neo4j on this Debian VPS.  Let me know if you would like the admin password and ssh. 

That's not how you private message.

[jdbtracker]

Now the whole world knows our plans to unite Bitcoin activists across the world to the Ultimate Global Legal Resource, for Businesses, Individuals and Bitcoin Bots everywhere. We may even turn it into a DAC that Data Mines on behalf of the Bitcoin community for a nominal fee; If this system had been up, Shrem may have checked it out with the UGLR DAC and weighed his options with absolute certainty and avoided this whole mess in the first place.

[Unitus]

I think they did this to make an example out of him. To scare bitcoin entrepreneurs and investors. 

No, they did it because it's against the law. Handing out one of the lightest sentences possible for this crime with 90 days off to get your affairs in order doesn't send much of a message. If they're sending any message it's: hey bitcoiners, we don't have anything against you but your bro broke the law. We have to do something about it so we're slapping him on the wrist and sending him to Club Fed for a couple of years.

Yeah but, if we must have this "Club Fed" in order to maintain a civilized society (which one could debate the need), shouldn't that place be reserved for people who harm others and our environment. Who did Charlie hurt? and was it direct or indirect?

[malaimult]

I think they did this to make an example out of him. To scare bitcoin entrepreneurs and investors. 

No, they did it because it's against the law. Handing out one of the lightest sentences possible for this crime with 90 days off to get your affairs in order doesn't send much of a message. If they're sending any message it's: hey bitcoiners, we don't have anything against you but your bro broke the law. We have to do something about it so we're slapping him on the wrist and sending him to Club Fed for a couple of years.

I would say it is something in between. IMO they were really out to get the person who was behind silk road (who is alleged to be Ross), but when they were going through the evidence on the SR servers they discovered that Charlie was breaking the law while dealing in SR and could not ignore this fact

[QuestionAuthority]

I think they did this to make an example out of him. To scare bitcoin entrepreneurs and investors. 

No, they did it because it's against the law. Handing out one of the lightest sentences possible for this crime with 90 days off to get your affairs in order doesn't send much of a message. If they're sending any message it's: hey bitcoiners, we don't have anything against you but your bro broke the law. We have to do something about it so we're slapping him on the wrist and sending him to Club Fed for a couple of years.

Yeah but, if we must have this "Club Fed" in order to maintain a civilized society (which one could debate the need), shouldn't that place be reserved for people who harm others and our environment. Who did Charlie hurt? and was it direct or indirect?

The court would argue (so would most American Moral Majority voters) that drug crimes are not victimless. Anything that makes it easier for high school children to buy drugs creates plenty of victims. I'm not debating the validity of that belief but it's a common one. The American voting public (aka retards) love news stories about busting big bad drug dealers, pedophile rings and terrorists. They eat it up with their nightly TV dinners. Politicians that want to be reelected or move up the chain know this too. If they are instrumental in "taking down" that nasty terrorist they have bragging rights that are useful during elections. This guy Preet Bharararar or whatever the fuck his terrorist sounding name is loves to toot his own horn. He's obviously looking for some election juice. And he loves to bust people that provide that nightly news juice.

http://www.fastcompany.com/3027123/bitcoin-sheriff-of-the-web-preet-bharara

[picolo]

I think they did this to make an example out of him. To scare bitcoin entrepreneurs and investors. 

No, they did it because it's against the law. Handing out one of the lightest sentences possible for this crime with 90 days off to get your affairs in order doesn't send much of a message. If they're sending any message it's: hey bitcoiners, we don't have anything against you but your bro broke the law. We have to do something about it so we're slapping him on the wrist and sending him to Club Fed for a couple of years.

Yeah but, if we must have this "Club Fed" in order to maintain a civilized society (which one could debate the need), shouldn't that place be reserved for people who harm others and our environment. Who did Charlie hurt? and was it direct or indirect?

The court would argue (so would most American Moral Majority voters) that drug crimes are not victimless. Anything that makes it easier for high school children to buy drugs creates plenty of victims. I'm not debating the validity of that belief but it's a common one. The American voting public (aka retards) love news stories about busting big bad drug dealers, pedophile rings and terrorists. They eat it up with their nightly TV dinners. Politicians that want to be reelected or move up the chain know this too. If they are instrumental in "taking down" that nasty terrorist they have bragging rights that are useful during elections. This guy Preet Bharararar or whatever the fuck his terrorist sounding name is loves to toot his own horn. He's obviously looking for some election juice. And he loves to bust people that provide that nightly news juice.

http://www.fastcompany.com/3027123/bitcoin-sheriff-of-the-web-preet-bharara

The war on drugs has some positive in the sense that it shows drugs are bad and some people won't do it because of that but the negatives are FAR bigger so drugs should be legalized

[TrailingComet]

He was originally going down for 30 years. I agree that even 2 years is too much, but seems like 2 years is a better outcome given the overall shitty circumstances

[picolo]

He was originally going down for 30 years. I agree that even 2 years is too much, but seems like 2 years is a better outcome given the overall shitty circumstances

I haven't followed his business or the trial closely and drugs should be legal but considering the law and what he did 2 years is a reasonable sentence.

[gargantuar]

@jdbtracker: I set up a wiki and will be doing my best to install neo4j on this Debian VPS.  Let me know if you would like the admin password and ssh. 

That's not how you private message.

Good point.  I think one of my kids must have been climbing on me.  Happens more when they are out of school.

[Morecoin Freeman]

If tomorrow I'm buying drugs with bitcoins I've bought today through an exchange, will the manager of that exchange company go to jail because he sold me the bitcoins I needed, providing me help in completing an illegal drug transaction?

If the exchange is compliant with all rules for financial institutions there is no problem on their part.
I guess Shrem's business was not compliant since he ended up in jail.

[TheButterZone]

Didn't bribe enough people enough to be "compliant".

[TheMage]

Sorry if this was said already (post skipped after page 1), but for those who are crying "Poor Charlie"...

http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/January14/SchremFaiellaChargesPR/Faiella,%20Robert%20M.%20and%20Charlie%20Shrem%20Complaint.pdf




Long story short, BTCking triggered AML and and email was sent to him by bitinstant (some people CC'ed on the email, Charlie included), and said they were closing his account.


Charlie went behind that email and solicited BTCking to continue using them, and told him how to avoid triggering their AML policy (keep in mind as their AML office in charge of enforcing those policies).


Silk road, drugs, government not getting a cut (taxes), and every other conspiracy here aside, what Charlie did was reckless, stupid, and illegal. Those who are cheering him on as some martyr need a reality check.

[TheButterZone]

Everyone breaking unjust laws should be executed for daring to live.

[ABitNut]

Sorry if this was said already (post skipped after page 1), but for those who are crying "Poor Charlie"...

http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/January14/SchremFaiellaChargesPR/Faiella,%20Robert%20M.%20and%20Charlie%20Shrem%20Complaint.pdf




Long story short, BTCking triggered AML and and email was sent to him by bitinstant (some people CC'ed on the email, Charlie included), and said they were closing his account.


Charlie went behind that email and solicited BTCking to continue using them, and told him how to avoid triggering their AML policy (keep in mind as their AML office in charge of enforcing those policies).


Silk road, drugs, government not getting a cut (taxes), and every other conspiracy here aside, what Charlie did was reckless, stupid, and illegal. Those who are cheering him on as some martyr need a reality check.

Just shows that he will have a promising political career ahead of him. He has shown he has no respect for rules and regulations, is experienced in back room deals and he has the charisma to make people think he's still a good guy. Just the kind of guy you want running your community!

For all you liberal, freedom minded people out there... The current system is plenty liberal. You can break the law and do anything you want without consequence. You don't get punished for that. There's only one rule: Don't get caught! You only get punished for getting caught.

And there are ways to mitigate punishment even if you do get caught. As is demonstrated by Charlie cum sui in this particular case.

[BittBurger]

If any of you have heard Charlie speak - say on Lets Talk Bitcoin podcast, or elsewhere, and you are over age .... say .... 30 ... one thing is very clear about Charlie.  He's young.  Psychologically speaking. Just listening to him talk made that very obvious. There's a certain naivety in his thinking, which no doubt played a role.  But he's probably no younger than he should be psychologically, at his age.  He said a lot of things on the podcasts that he knew he shouldn't be saying, and his attorneys advised him never to say - let alone on a podcast.  But he did anyway.  He's got an element of recklessness in him personality-wise, and of course he has political beliefs that don't exactly give a shit about government, nor rules.  So to be completely honest, what did you expect? He was just being who he is.  Although I can't agree the guy harmed anyone. He said he has learned his lesson.  I suppose my point is that you've got a hardcore libertarian / anarchist here who is also a bit young and inexperienced.   Those are relevant factors, though they don't matter when it comes to breaking the law.  He's not a martyr, but he did deserve the extremely toned-down sentence he got.  He was thankful to the judge for being lenient, and I think it was a fair move on the judge's part.  He could've gotten 20+ years.

-B-

[HELP.org]

If any of you have heard Charlie speak - say on Lets Talk Bitcoin podcast, or elsewhere, and you are over age .... say .... 30 ... one thing is very clear about Charlie.  He's young.  Psychologically speaking. Just listening to him talk made that very obvious. There's a certain naivety in his thinking, which no doubt played a role.  But he's probably no younger than he should be psychologically, at his age.  He said a lot of things on the podcasts that he knew he shouldn't be saying, and his attorneys advised him never to say - let alone on a podcast.  But he did anyway.  He's got an element of recklessness in him personality-wise, and of course he has political beliefs that don't exactly give a shit about government, nor rules.  So to be completely honest, what did you expect? He was just being who he is.  Although I can't agree the guy harmed anyone. He said he has learned his lesson.  I suppose my point is that you've got a hardcore libertarian / anarchist here who is also a bit young and inexperienced.   Those are relevant factors, though they don't matter when it comes to breaking the law.  He's not a martyr, but he did deserve the extremely toned-down sentence he got.  He was thankful to the judge for being lenient, and I think it was a fair move on the judge's part.  He could've gotten 20+ years.

-B-

If you listen to him and look at things like his court statement the thing that jumps out at me is that he doesn't learn and he doesn't listen.  Bitcoin is a great technology but it is not the biggest thing that has ever happened to the world and he is not the "messiah" that he thinks he is.  He knows something about Bitcoin and he thinks he he knows about everything and predict all kinds of things.  His success in Bitcoin has gone to his head and it has screwed up his decision-making process.

For instance, he speaks out against copyrights.  he points to abuses and says the whole system should be ended.  the guy lives with his parents and made money with Bitcoin.  He never had to work as an independent musician or artist and he does not have the slightest idea how the system works or what it means to all those people.  he goes around talking like the whole world is stupid.  He is ridiculous and he only hangs out with other mentally ill people like Roger Ver who go around talking about how Bitcoin will end war.  He lives in an echo chamber so he never listens to any other point of view.  in one interview he was practically in tears saying how nobody, including his parents, don't understand him and that only other Bitcoiners understand him.  He doesn't realize that is him who doesn't understand the rest of the world.  Theymos is the same way.  There is absolutely zero chance that Bitcoin will have mass adoption by listening to the ideas of these people and allowing them to run things.  However, I believe people will eventually see past the crazies and see Bitcoin for its true value.  See, for instance, https://blog.caseykuhlman.com/entries/2014/bitcoin-somaliland.html for an idea of how the real world sees some of the Bitcoin nonsense.

That being said, I don't like the idea of paying to house jackasses like Shrem for crimes that are not that serious.  He should have gotten probation.

[Jamesonotc]

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.

Charlie reminds me of a young gary vaynerchuk with his passion....

However charlie fell into the wrong space at the wrong time.

And trust me, i've seen it happen numerous times over and over in crypto.

Many folks think they know everything about the protocol in bitcoin but may have got themselves a bit to deep without the full understanding or maturity to realize the scale of the decisions to be made.

Charlie is the classic man wanting to scale to the moon way before he had the appropriate gear to get there. Charlie saw the liquidity of bitcoin in these darknet markets im SURE and fully embraced the movements in and out with a happy grin. Ethically wrong, nope, just ahead of the curve and in the wrong place with big googly eyes staring at a money pit. Hopefully he stashed some away for attorney/legal fees

I did enjoy his energy and passion for digital currency. In the wild west charlie would win in this scenario....