Quote from: wachtwoord on July 24, 2013, 12:04:11 AM

Quote from: gweedo on July 24, 2013, 12:02:44 AM

Quote from: wachtwoord on July 24, 2013, 12:00:22 AM

Quote from: Chaang Noi (Goat) ช้างน้อย on July 23, 2013, 11:57:45 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on July 23, 2013, 11:53:57 PM

Quote from: wachtwoord on July 23, 2013, 11:08:58 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on July 23, 2013, 11:03:57 PM

Investors BTC ---> Ponzi ---> His Exchange Account ----> USD in his checking account.

I would imagine the above connection to be hard to prove.

Really? With the exchange account in his name? To withdraw $150K would require full KYC and docs.

this.

or pirate would have to claim he got the btc some other way and it was his. like he mined it all back in 2009/2010... i don't know. seems messy.

Guys the account is in his name sure. Good luck proving the connection with the (alleged) Ponzi though Bitcoins are Bitcoins. In a criminal case Trendon is the accused, he doesn't have to explain how he got the Bitcoins. The prosecution needs to prove how he got it beyond reasonable doubt. IANAL though

But all they would have to do is link him to his pirateat40 account, the lowest charge they can throw at him is an unregistered security.

They still have to prove he received Bitcoins for the investment. (and even then convince the judge this is a value transfer)

Nope the mere offering of unlicensed security is a crime.