3 ms·

Ok, if this guy was in Australia why would he ever be compelled to testify under oath about this?

• jacques_chester 7y ago
  The scenario given was that the defendant would argue that the coins moved due to a vulnerability in bitcoin. That's a positive statement, not a refusal to answer.
  • FDSGSG 7y ago
    Yes, and when would a defendant be making statements under oath?
    • jacques_chester 7y ago
      In the "interesting legal case" that the original scenario envisaged.
      • FDSGSG 7y ago
        testify vs argue I don't think anything in the original comment suggested that they'd be under oath, that's something you came up with.