3 ms·
> if they can't That is a bit interesting for scenarios like this, the gov may not be able to reclaim even the unspent crypto; well it's not that different fro
by elwell 5y ago
> if they can't
That is a bit interesting for scenarios like this, the gov may not be able to reclaim even the unspent crypto; well it's not that different from burying cash somewhere and not divulging after being caught.
- anonporridge 5y agoIf this guy was dumb enough to think he could get away with selling submarine secrets, I doubt he was smart enough to secure his private keys in an unseizable way, especially if the arrest was a surprise.
- vkou 5y agoAfter you've been arrested, your crypto is no longer unseizable, unless you never want to leave prison again. If you're ordered to turn the money over by the courts, they can hold you as long as you remain in contempt of court. Rubber-hose decryption in general has a pretty solid track record.
- john_moscow 5y agoIn Russia we call it thermorectal crypotoanalysis. "Thermo" refers to a soldering iron.
- anonporridge 5y agoFeeling compelled to comply with a court order and voluntarily relinquish your property is still very different from being seizable without your consent. Especially with the nature of civil asset forfeiture, in which many people never recover their money or property even after proving their innocence, unseizable property has it's appeal.
- vkou 5y ago> Feeling compelled to comply with a court order and voluntarily relinquish your property is still very different from being seizable without your consent. The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there isn't one. In practice, there is.