4 ms·

> “The lesson to be learned from this is to keep the value in bitcoin, that the profit from the crime should be 36 bitcoin, regardless of what value the bitcoin

> “The lesson to be learned from this is to keep the value in bitcoin, that the profit from the crime should be 36 bitcoin, regardless of what value the bitcoin has at the time,” [the prosecutor] reportedly said. It sounds like the police tripped a loophole in law by liquidating some of the BTC. Sounds like if the police had HODL'd they'd have been fine defending it as just look, these were the assets he had, we seized them. But since they liquidated, the defense got to say, hey, you already got the full proceeds.

thisiswater 5y ago
My interpretation of the article is that the court recognized the proceeds in terms of Swedish Kroner at the time that the BTC were seized, so was unable to account for the increasing value of BTC in terms of Kroner - they had not legally seized ~$1.7m, they had legally seized $137,000, and so had to pay back the difference. From the article - "The lesson to be learned from this is to keep the value in bitcoin, that the profit from the crime should be 36 bitcoin, regardless of what value the bitcoin has at the time".
- est31 5y ago
  In fact it makes it seem the fault of the prosecutor even and not the court. Quotes from the prosecutor from the Telegraph article. > "It has led to consequences I was not able to foresee at the time." > "I think we should probably invest in an internal education in the [prosecution] authority, as cryptocurrency will be a factor we'll be dealing with to a much greater extent than we are today. The more we increase the level of knowledge within the organization, the fewer mistakes we will make." I'm not familiar with the swedish legal system (and not a lawyer), but often you can only be convicted for things the prosecution requests/accuses you of. Otherwise you can't defend yourself in court. So the prosecution ordered the bitcoin to be seized as proceeds of the crime, but not in a correct way, so the court ruling contained the same wording that a specific value in swedish Kronen shall be seized. Had the prosecution demanded the seizure in terms of Bitcoin instead, the court would probably have approved it too. However, at this point it's too late to change the ruling. Courts exist to settle things, and one can't simply re-roll a prosecution case unless there were grave mistakes.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    I think you interpretation is accurate - the prosecution can decide if it's seizing assets or cash, either choice has consequences.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
viceroyalbean 5y ago
It's not that the police liquidated the BTC, it's that the argument that was made in court was for the current cash value of the BTC. Instead of arguing that the value of the crime was 36 bitcoin the prosecutor argued that if was $137000 which was equivalent at the time. One interesting consequence is that the drug dealer would have had to pay the difference if bitcoin had dropped in value instead of rising.
- elcritch 5y ago
  As an American it's a bit surprising to me that Sweden actually follows the quaint notion of justice and rule of law. Sounds like they even require property taken to be specifically listed and related to a crime as proven in a court of law. In the US authorities would've likely been able to keep all the BTC, and also could've seized the drug dealers home and car if they had any. In Florida (and many other states) it was/is common practice that any excuse police made could be used to seize almost any of a person's property, essentially on the spot. Generally without even needing to arrest the person or charge them with a crime or get a warrant. Just based on "suspicion" on the cops behalf. Thank good Ole "rule of law" President Reagan and the war on drugs for that one. See: - https://cplaw-miami.com/police-seize-your-property-without-arrest/ https://cplaw-miami.com/police-seize-your-property-without-a... - https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/12/1/16686014/phillip-parhamovich-civil-forfeiture https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/12/1/16686014/p... - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Crime_Control_Act_of_1984 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Crime_Control_...
  - danuker 5y ago
    > Just based on "suspicion" on the cops behalf. It's fine, the dog jumped at the window of your stopped car. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detection_dog#Civil_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detection_dog#Civil_rights
- zaarn 5y ago
  I don't think the dealer would have to pay the difference in value if it lost value. Otherwise, you'd have to pay for the loss in value of a seized car if it's sold only years later or the loss in value of gold bars seized if the market on those crashed in the meantime.

thisiswater 5y ago

My interpretation of the article is that the court recognized the proceeds in terms of Swedish Kroner at the time that the BTC were seized, so was unable to account for the increasing value of BTC in terms of Kroner - they had not legally seized ~$1.7m, they had legally seized $137,000, and so had to pay back the difference. From the article - "The lesson to be learned from this is to keep the value in bitcoin, that the profit from the crime should be 36 bitcoin, regardless of what value the bitcoin has at the time".

est31 5y ago
In fact it makes it seem the fault of the prosecutor even and not the court. Quotes from the prosecutor from the Telegraph article. > "It has led to consequences I was not able to foresee at the time." > "I think we should probably invest in an internal education in the [prosecution] authority, as cryptocurrency will be a factor we'll be dealing with to a much greater extent than we are today. The more we increase the level of knowledge within the organization, the fewer mistakes we will make." I'm not familiar with the swedish legal system (and not a lawyer), but often you can only be convicted for things the prosecution requests/accuses you of. Otherwise you can't defend yourself in court. So the prosecution ordered the bitcoin to be seized as proceeds of the crime, but not in a correct way, so the court ruling contained the same wording that a specific value in swedish Kronen shall be seized. Had the prosecution demanded the seizure in terms of Bitcoin instead, the court would probably have approved it too. However, at this point it's too late to change the ruling. Courts exist to settle things, and one can't simply re-roll a prosecution case unless there were grave mistakes.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  I think you interpretation is accurate - the prosecution can decide if it's seizing assets or cash, either choice has consequences.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

viceroyalbean 5y ago

It's not that the police liquidated the BTC, it's that the argument that was made in court was for the current cash value of the BTC. Instead of arguing that the value of the crime was 36 bitcoin the prosecutor argued that if was $137000 which was equivalent at the time. One interesting consequence is that the drug dealer would have had to pay the difference if bitcoin had dropped in value instead of rising.

elcritch 5y ago
As an American it's a bit surprising to me that Sweden actually follows the quaint notion of justice and rule of law. Sounds like they even require property taken to be specifically listed and related to a crime as proven in a court of law. In the US authorities would've likely been able to keep all the BTC, and also could've seized the drug dealers home and car if they had any. In Florida (and many other states) it was/is common practice that any excuse police made could be used to seize almost any of a person's property, essentially on the spot. Generally without even needing to arrest the person or charge them with a crime or get a warrant. Just based on "suspicion" on the cops behalf. Thank good Ole "rule of law" President Reagan and the war on drugs for that one. See: - https://cplaw-miami.com/police-seize-your-property-without-arrest/ https://cplaw-miami.com/police-seize-your-property-without-a... - https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/12/1/16686014/phillip-parhamovich-civil-forfeiture https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/12/1/16686014/p... - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Crime_Control_Act_of_1984 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Crime_Control_...
- danuker 5y ago
  > Just based on "suspicion" on the cops behalf. It's fine, the dog jumped at the window of your stopped car. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detection_dog#Civil_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detection_dog#Civil_rights
zaarn 5y ago
I don't think the dealer would have to pay the difference in value if it lost value. Otherwise, you'd have to pay for the loss in value of a seized car if it's sold only years later or the loss in value of gold bars seized if the market on those crashed in the meantime.