5 ms·

This was just a silly misstake by the prosecutor, obviously the seizure should had been specified in BTC, not SEK. A similar (but opposite) thing happened in a

This was just a silly misstake by the prosecutor, obviously the seizure should had been specified in BTC, not SEK. A similar (but opposite) thing happened in a civil case during the 90's [0] where a transport company delivered oil to a refinery in Sweden. The oil producer sued the transport company, and asked the Swedish government to seize the payment for the oil (denominated in dollars). The Swedish government seized 3M USD, but immediately exchanged it for SEK. During the court case, the SEK was devalued by ≈ 17%. In the end when the case was resolved and the seizure was released, the transport company sued the government because they wanted their 3M USD back, not 17 percent less. The transport company won and the government had to pay them 3M USD back. [0]: https://lagen.nu/dom/nja/1990s137 https://lagen.nu/dom/nja/1990s137

setgree 5y ago
The prosecutor might have bet that BTC was a risky asset/fad, which would make it safer to ‘bill’ the defendant in SEK. If this had happened, I would not expect them to be forthright about it.
- TheJoeMan 5y ago
  Could you imagine having your assets seized, then 4 years later getting a bill from a Judge because those assets *depreciated*? In either case the seizure should have been denominated in BTC if BTC is what was taken.
moss2 5y ago
BTC is not recognized as a legal currency in Sweden so the prosecutor acted correctly.
- filleokus 5y ago
  Hmm. In Swedish media the prosecutor has conceded that it was a misstake and that it was done due to lack of expertise about crypto currency [0]. I'm guessing that it's fairly common that prosecutors "förverkar" regular goods (like watches/jewellery/cars) in similar ways, where they claim the physical thing and not the monetary value. BTC and other crypto should probably be treated in this way. [0]: https://www.dagensjuridik.se/nyheter/aklagartabbe-gjorde-knarklangare-till-miljonarer/ https://www.dagensjuridik.se/nyheter/aklagartabbe-gjorde-kna...
- karmakaze 5y ago
  If not a recognized currency, then there was no need to convert it to one. If a car was seized, it would identify the car by it's make, model, VIN. The same should have been done for the BTC. Even as a recognized currency, it should have been recorded as the actual and not equivalent value in another.

setgree 5y ago

The prosecutor might have bet that BTC was a risky asset/fad, which would make it safer to ‘bill’ the defendant in SEK. If this had happened, I would not expect them to be forthright about it.

TheJoeMan 5y ago
Could you imagine having your assets seized, then 4 years later getting a bill from a Judge because those assets *depreciated*? In either case the seizure should have been denominated in BTC if BTC is what was taken.

moss2 5y ago

BTC is not recognized as a legal currency in Sweden so the prosecutor acted correctly.

filleokus 5y ago
Hmm. In Swedish media the prosecutor has conceded that it was a misstake and that it was done due to lack of expertise about crypto currency [0]. I'm guessing that it's fairly common that prosecutors "förverkar" regular goods (like watches/jewellery/cars) in similar ways, where they claim the physical thing and not the monetary value. BTC and other crypto should probably be treated in this way. [0]: https://www.dagensjuridik.se/nyheter/aklagartabbe-gjorde-knarklangare-till-miljonarer/ https://www.dagensjuridik.se/nyheter/aklagartabbe-gjorde-kna...
karmakaze 5y ago
If not a recognized currency, then there was no need to convert it to one. If a car was seized, it would identify the car by it's make, model, VIN. The same should have been done for the BTC. Even as a recognized currency, it should have been recorded as the actual and not equivalent value in another.