3 ms·

$60M for a few years in prison is something most people in this world would happily take. Looks like they didn't seize anything, and he controls the coins. Wi

$60M for a few years in prison is something most people in this world would happily take. Looks like they didn't seize anything, and he controls the coins. With that amount of money he can get out of their jurisdiction and live a really nice life.

mschuster91 6y ago
> Looks like they didn't seize anything, and he controls the coins. That depends where the convict has stored their private wallet key - and if it is accessible to him: - Hardware wallets can be seized by the police and thus are worthless to both - the police can't access the funds without the password, the convict can't access the funds without the wallet. - Similarly, on-disk wallets are worthless - Brain wallets can be used in theory, but the police would instantly know if the convict did anything with them In any case, the police statement that they "seized" a wallet containing the Bitcoins implies that it's either a hardware or on-disk wallet and that they are aware of the public key (otherwise, how would they know how many Bitcoin are in the wallet?).
- tluyben2 6y ago
  With 600m you would think you would have (a lot) of backups. And what can they do when the statute of limitations expires or he goes to a place where germany cannot touch him? Edit: 600m
  - midjji 6y ago
    its 600M now
  - mschuster91 6y ago
    Many people don't care about opsec. As for what the cops can do... international arrest warrants on both him and the money are one thing. I can easily think that the German government has notified the exchanges about the public keys and that any attempt to trade coins originating from them would constitute some anto money laundering guideline. Besides, there is no statute of limitations on seized assets. If anything, he'd commit a new crime (theft of government assets) by accessing them.
- GoblinSlayer 6y ago
  You can also have a second well hidden "savings" wallet and send money there from the first wallet every month.
tluyben2 6y ago
I find that an interesting question; if he does the time because he refuses/cannot give the password, can they still take him when he does use it? That seems weird as he will have done the time then? How does that work? They cannot pay that time back to him and, in a way, he exchanged it as punishment for the fraud + not paying back of the money right?
- superhuzza 6y ago
  He may have served his time for fraud, but that doesn't mean he gets to keep the spoils. So would have the 60M seized, and then possibly arrested on new charges (something like tax evasion or lying to the court etc).
  - tluyben2 6y ago
    That time should have some provisions for the amount in it or not? I mean; if he does give them the password, does he get significantly less time or the same time? If it's the same, I would feel less morally conflicted about using the money afterwards as I already did my time, in part, as payback for the amount. But yeah, he committed substantial fraud, so not sure if the word moral enters anywhere in this conversation.
- mam2 6y ago
  I would just flee to another continent
  - tluyben2 6y ago
    I would not have it in 1 wallet :) We do not know if he did either or do we? And yes, then maybe flee with one or more of the other wallets you stashed somewhere.
  - Aeronwen 6y ago
    And hope the wrong people aren't tipped off that you're a $100M piñata.

mschuster91 6y ago

> Looks like they didn't seize anything, and he controls the coins. That depends where the convict has stored their private wallet key - and if it is accessible to him: - Hardware wallets can be seized by the police and thus are worthless to both - the police can't access the funds without the password, the convict can't access the funds without the wallet. - Similarly, on-disk wallets are worthless - Brain wallets can be used in theory, but the police would instantly know if the convict did anything with them In any case, the police statement that they "seized" a wallet containing the Bitcoins implies that it's either a hardware or on-disk wallet and that they are aware of the public key (otherwise, how would they know how many Bitcoin are in the wallet?).

tluyben2 6y ago
With 600m you would think you would have (a lot) of backups. And what can they do when the statute of limitations expires or he goes to a place where germany cannot touch him? Edit: 600m
- midjji 6y ago
  its 600M now
- mschuster91 6y ago
  Many people don't care about opsec. As for what the cops can do... international arrest warrants on both him and the money are one thing. I can easily think that the German government has notified the exchanges about the public keys and that any attempt to trade coins originating from them would constitute some anto money laundering guideline. Besides, there is no statute of limitations on seized assets. If anything, he'd commit a new crime (theft of government assets) by accessing them.
GoblinSlayer 6y ago
You can also have a second well hidden "savings" wallet and send money there from the first wallet every month.

tluyben2 6y ago

I find that an interesting question; if he does the time because he refuses/cannot give the password, can they still take him when he does use it? That seems weird as he will have done the time then? How does that work? They cannot pay that time back to him and, in a way, he exchanged it as punishment for the fraud + not paying back of the money right?

superhuzza 6y ago
He may have served his time for fraud, but that doesn't mean he gets to keep the spoils. So would have the 60M seized, and then possibly arrested on new charges (something like tax evasion or lying to the court etc).
- tluyben2 6y ago
  That time should have some provisions for the amount in it or not? I mean; if he does give them the password, does he get significantly less time or the same time? If it's the same, I would feel less morally conflicted about using the money afterwards as I already did my time, in part, as payback for the amount. But yeah, he committed substantial fraud, so not sure if the word moral enters anywhere in this conversation.
mam2 6y ago
I would just flee to another continent
- tluyben2 6y ago
  I would not have it in 1 wallet :) We do not know if he did either or do we? And yes, then maybe flee with one or more of the other wallets you stashed somewhere.
- Aeronwen 6y ago
  And hope the wrong people aren't tipped off that you're a $100M piñata.