Statement about the suspect of recent Bitcoinica hack

[Rarity]

He's not just stalking him, he is also referencing acts of violence.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=95913.msg1057307#msg1057307

I don't think she's going to use a lawyer.   Wink

And you have some nerve trying to hide behind the law after stealing from us.

Maybe you should start picking out wheelchairs?   Grin

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=95795.msg1057298#msg1057298

You better get used to invasion Zhou, cause it's going to get a lot worse.

Where I come from we don't let people steal half a million dollars and get away with it.

That's all I'm going to say about that anymore, since I'm not going to incriminate myself further.

This is not okay.

Stealing $500,000 is not okay.  

People have been killed for a lot less - stop living in your imaginary pink unicorn world.

And now has referenced murdering Zhou.

And now so have you.

Actually no, that's kind of retarded.  Quoting someone discussing violence and admitting they are stalking someone and incriminating themselves is not the same as mentioning that it happened.  We have a separate thread for this now if you want to debate the mod decision that these threats were problematic:  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=97365.40

It's a simple fact you did reference murder.

Facts can be misleading without proper context, but that's a game you started with your sentence, which only states "referencing murder", but implies condoning it. I don't see quotes of any threat or admission. Beaten at your own game, your next step is to attack ad hominem. My response was not retarded but a play on your own rhetoric.

As for actual threats, I haven't seen them here in this thread, and I can't approve of threats of violence, but if you want to keep this discussion out of here I advise to not report about it here either. Least of all in a flippant implying way provoking responses.

Once again, the moderators split off the discussion of the threats ML made and his admissions of incriminating himself and stalking ZT to another thread, please take your objections there along with any other explanations on how quoting threats is the same thing as making them:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=97365.40

[1713885953]

1713885953

[1713885953]

1713885953

[1713885953]

1713885953

[bitcoinBull]

If we can show that sgitcoin.com and sgbitcoins@yahoo.com.sg belong to the same identity.

They certainly appear very similar, coincidence would be hard to argue

[..snip..]

Statement 7: bitchen is `sgbitcoins@yahoo.com.sg`

Hi everyone,

I'm offering GoxUSD funds or BTC for International Bank Wire/ WU/ Moneygram or local bank/ COD for people in Singapore. I will take a percentage as fee for withdrawals. This is a fast way for people looking to trade on Gox without waiting for their insane wire transfer times.

You can contact me via PM on the forums or drop me an email at sgbitcoins@yahoo.com.sg

Do let me know if you have any queries.

Statement 8: bitchen = Kevin Lim

sgitcoin == sgbitcoin. And don't forget that stevejobs807 = steve_bobs. given the date that steve_bobs appeared, it was very coincidental indeed. Another one is bitchen == Chen Jianhai. perhaps Chen Jianhai == Kevin Lim == Patrick Strateman?

[bitcoinBull]

Our address is public information and has already been posted by a member on this thread.

It was only public information buried in some governmentcorporate website. I concur with some other comments, it seemed a bit unprofessional for you to tell zhou "have your lawyer contact[e-mail] us" instead of directly providing him your public address. That lack of presence only provides fuel for zhou's fire, as does this vague referral to "a member on this thread" ..

I had to go back some 10 pages to find it.. so I'll quote it again for other readers.

@Roberto: Please post your legitimate business registration/contact information in this thread for informational purposes so that Zhou's attorney can have it to address you officially and so that the community can also benefit from the knowledge that you are a rock in the community with a legitimate business interest and not just a personal vendetta.

While I don't necessarily agree with the wording, I think AurumXchange needs to publicly state their business registration information. You have referenced Dominican law but have not provided an address, Dominican or otherwise.

For prospective customers, please state your business address and registration information on this forum and on your website. With this information, you will inspire the confidence of more people who are just hearing of your business the first time. I ask you not to release your contact information for Zhou, but for prospective customers everywhere.

Answered my own question through some research

https://www.aurumxchange.com/content/AML

"Dominica law makes it illegal for AURUM CAPITAL HOLDINGS INC., its employees, agents, or customers to knowingly engage, or attempt to engage in a monetary transaction in criminally derived property"


and

http://www.icpcredit.com/Companies/Aurum_Capital_Holdings_Incorporated/398240.company

ID 398782
Company Aurum Capital Holdings Incorporated
Street 8 Copthall
PO Box 2342
Town Roseau
Country Dominica
Report Date 04 October 2011


Also
https://support.mtgox.com/entries/20298268-mt-gox-aurumxchange-partnership-european-transfers-now-available

"About AurumXchange
 
Aurum Capital Holdings, Inc. was founded on 2007 by a group of seasoned professionals in the technology and electronic payment industry. Since then, the company has been providing software and security services in the e-currency and electronic payment industry. In 2009, Aurum Capital Holdings decided to start an electronic currency business called The Aurum Exchange Company, quickly becoming one of the biggest and most trusted e-currency exchangers in the world. The AurumXchange company is a certified exchanger for GlobalDigitalPay, Solid Trust Pay, HD-Money, C-Gold, and it is also the official wholesaler for CosmicPay. We also work with Liberty Reserve and the company is currently undergoing the certification process to become a certified exchanger. The company is incorporated in the Commonwealth of Dominica, an offshore tax-free heaven with one of the strongest privacy and banking secrecy in the world"

---> http://188-165-140-240.ovh.net/

[Rarity]

   Mr. Prosser said, "You were quite entitled to make any suggestions or protests at the appropriate time, you know."
   "Appropriate time?" hooted Arthur. "Appropriate time? The first I knew about it was when a workman arrived at my home yesterday. I asked him if he'd come to clean the windows and he said no, he'd come to demolish the house. He didn't tell me straight away of course. Oh no. First he wiped a couple of windows and charged me a fiver. Then he told me."
   "But Mr. Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."
   "Oh yes, well, as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."
   "But the plans were on display..."
   "On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."
   "That's the display department."
   "With a flashlight."
   "Ah, well, the lights had probably gone."
   "So had the stairs."
   "But look, you found the notice, didn't you?"
   "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display on the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard.'"

[Vod]

I'll be setting up a different venue for this investigation, and the relevant parties will be notified by email.  To make Rarity happy, I won't post any more information here on this forum.  

Sorry I caused such a huge stir with my general comment about society.  I sincerely apologize to those I offended or annoyed.

[LoupGaroux]

My guess is Rarity is always "happy", isn't that a by-product of Clarity?

[blueberry]

Currently I'm very willing to co-operate with any investigation because this is the only way I can completely prove my innocence. However the non-reponse from Bitcoinica side is indeed worrying. I have gathered some data to estimate the amount that can be recovered from Chen Jianhai:

USD: about $140,000 + $5000 frozen at AurumXchange (under SJ account)
BTC: about 20,000 BTC

When will you return the remaining $140,000 and 5,000BTC you promised to recover from Chen Jianhai?

[defxor]

Well, first of all we can forget the alter-ego story. Tihan Seale has confirmed that Zhou indeed is who he says he is, and I see no reason why he should lie.

Does the community accept Tihan Seale as an upstanding member of the community? If so I guess we can accept that ZT is indeed who he says he is?

If the community does accept this, then do the people who believe ZT not to be who he says he is have anything to say to the matter?

Gavin has verified Tihan to be what he says he is, and if Gavin isn't an upstanding member of the community we're in a lot of trouble.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Well, first of all we can forget the alter-ego story. Tihan Seale has confirmed that Zhou indeed is who he says he is, and I see no reason why he should lie.

Does the community accept Tihan Seale as an upstanding member of the community? If so I guess we can accept that ZT is indeed who he says he is?

If the community does accept this, then do the people who believe ZT not to be who he says he is have anything to say to the matter?

Gavin has verified Tihan to be what he says he is, and if Gavin isn't an upstanding member of the community we're in a lot of trouble.

Yes, hence my thread. Dr. Kevin Lim PhD = Zhou Tong.

After you read the OP, let me know exactly which dot I didn't connect.

~Bruno~

[bitcoinBull]

Well, first of all we can forget the alter-ego story. Tihan Seale has confirmed that Zhou indeed is who he says he is, and I see no reason why he should lie.

Does the community accept Tihan Seale as an upstanding member of the community? If so I guess we can accept that ZT is indeed who he says he is?

If the community does accept this, then do the people who believe ZT not to be who he says he is have anything to say to the matter?

Gavin has verified Tihan to be what he says he is, and if Gavin isn't an upstanding member of the community we're in a lot of trouble.

Yes, hence my thread. Dr. Kevin Lim PhD = Zhou Tong.

After you read the OP, let me know exactly which dot I didn't connect.

~Bruno~

The dot that was a stretch to connect was sgitcoin = sgbitcoin. if you do that one, then stevejobs807 = steve_bobs. Connecting them all way, Dr. Kevin Lim PhD = Patrick Strateman. (which at this point, wouldn't even surprise me).

[disclaimer201]

Well, first of all we can forget the alter-ego story. Tihan Seale has confirmed that Zhou indeed is who he says he is, and I see no reason why he should lie.

Does the community accept Tihan Seale as an upstanding member of the community? If so I guess we can accept that ZT is indeed who he says he is?

If the community does accept this, then do the people who believe ZT not to be who he says he is have anything to say to the matter?

Gavin has verified Tihan to be what he says he is, and if Gavin isn't an upstanding member of the community we're in a lot of trouble.

Yes, hence my thread. Dr. Kevin Lim PhD = Zhou Tong.

After you read the OP, let me know exactly which dot I didn't connect.

~Bruno~

The dot that was a stretch to connect was sgitcoin = sgbitcoin. if you do that one, then stevejobs807 = steve_bobs. Connecting them all way, Dr. Kevin Lim PhD = Patrick Strateman. (which at this point, wouldn't even surprise me).

Wouldn't surprise me either if Patrick was somehow involved. He is the least trustable of the Intersango clan, he had a lot of necessary information and access.

[John (John K.)]

Anyone else received the email from Zhou Tong about Bitcoinica too?

[Raoul Duke]

Anyone else received the email from Zhou Tong about Bitcoinica too?

I did.

[runlinux]

Yup, same here...

Haven't had a chance to look at it though.

[zhoutong]

Anyone else received the email from Zhou Tong about Bitcoinica too?

I don't have everyone's email address. For those of you who didn't receive the email, you can view the content here:

http://nameterrific.createsend5.com/t/ViewEmail/j/7716A98B996695CD

(Sorry for the "nameterrific" subdomain. I don't have a proper Campaign Monitor account for myself. The email addresses will NOT be used for NameTerrific marketing.)

[dishwara]

We're unable to find the email you've requested. Please check your URL and try again.

[John (John K.)]

We're unable to find the email you've requested. Please check your URL and try again.

Use that link above, or read it here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=97502.msg1076020#msg1076020) and here ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=98349.0)

[OneEyed]

Bitcoinica experienced the third major hack on July 12, 2012. According to Bitcoinica's announcement, 40,000 BTC and $40,000 were stolen.

[…]

Chen Jianhai has agreed to return at least $140,000 and 20,000 BTC under the condition that Bitcoinica LP will not start a police investigation about the hack. I have made it clear to him that I will have zero tolerance on this wrong-doing and if the promised amount is not paid back, I will make his identifiable information available to the police, and possibly public.

Out of curiosity: could you offer him this guarantee? Did you receive this guarantee from Bitcoinica? According to Tihan Seale, none of the board of the directors member was moving or talking, so whose decision was it?

Does this also mean that you do not intend to collaborate with the investigators should a legal action be started, and that you will withhold the identifiable information you possess about Chen Jianhai while you know that he committed the crime and did not return the whole stolen property (especially given today Bitcoin exchange rates) belonging to Bitcoinica creditors? Wouldn't that make you an accessory of the crime?

To be convicted of an accessory charge, the accused must generally be proved to have had actual knowledge that a crime was going to be, or had been, committed. Furthermore, there must be proof that the accessory knew that his or her action, or inaction, was helping the criminals commit the crime, or evade detection, or escape.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Well, first of all we can forget the alter-ego story. Tihan Seale has confirmed that Zhou indeed is who he says he is, and I see no reason why he should lie.

Does the community accept Tihan Seale as an upstanding member of the community? If so I guess we can accept that ZT is indeed who he says he is?

If the community does accept this, then do the people who believe ZT not to be who he says he is have anything to say to the matter?

Gavin has verified Tihan to be what he says he is, and if Gavin isn't an upstanding member of the community we're in a lot of trouble.

Yes, hence my thread. Dr. Kevin Lim PhD = Zhou Tong.

After you read the OP, let me know exactly which dot I didn't connect.

~Bruno~

The dot that was a stretch to connect was sgitcoin = sgbitcoin. if you do that one, then stevejobs807 = steve_bobs. Connecting them all way, Dr. Kevin Lim PhD = Patrick Strateman. (which at this point, wouldn't even surprise me).

sgitcoin = sgbitcoin is my horse, whilst stevejobs807 = steve_bobs is some others, albeit I use BlowBobs when in an alpaca state of mind.

Granted, sgitcoin = sgbitcoin is somewhat of a stretch, but considering that changing the last two letters of a Lithuanian surname (as) to the common Polish surname ending (i), would not change the fact that the two differently named entities are related when there's mounting evidence linking the two more directly, excluding any two email addresses similarity owned by both.

Connecting Kevin to Patrick would be considered a stretch with such flimsy (neat word!) proof.

Thanks for the comment, bud.

 ~Bruno~

[zhoutong]

Bitcoinica experienced the third major hack on July 12, 2012. According to Bitcoinica's announcement, 40,000 BTC and $40,000 were stolen.

[…]

Chen Jianhai has agreed to return at least $140,000 and 20,000 BTC under the condition that Bitcoinica LP will not start a police investigation about the hack. I have made it clear to him that I will have zero tolerance on this wrong-doing and if the promised amount is not paid back, I will make his identifiable information available to the police, and possibly public.

Out of curiosity: could you offer him this guarantee? Did you receive this guarantee from Bitcoinica? According to Tihan Seale, none of the board of the directors member was moving or talking, so whose decision was it?

Does this also mean that you do not intend to collaborate with the investigators should a legal action be started, and that you will withhold the identifiable information you possess about Chen Jianhai while you know that he committed the crime and did not return the whole stolen property (especially given today Bitcoin exchange rates) belonging to Bitcoinica creditors? Wouldn't that make you an accessory of the crime?

To be convicted of an accessory charge, the accused must generally be proved to have had actual knowledge that a crime was going to be, or had been, committed. Furthermore, there must be proof that the accessory knew that his or her action, or inaction, was helping the criminals commit the crime, or evade detection, or escape.

Obviously, I can't. But I sort of made up his mind for him. Even if police investigation has to take place, the punishment will be much less if he can return majority of the funds in a reasonable timeframe.

I believe that in any case I have no liability for offering him this guarantee, regardless of the outcome. I just want the money back, more than anything else. I have never said that I would not co-operate with any investigation.

EDIT:

For me, there's no trust or whatsoever with Chen Jianhai. In my previous dealing with him, all was about his experience in credit card fraud. I acted like sort of a journalist who paid some insiders to know truths.