Quote from: ChemicalSpillage on June 14, 2019, 07:55:37 PM

As for the circumstantial evidence link... there is some substance to it but it is marginal, in my opinion.

I'm not quite sure why the funds moved but here's something of note:

Assuming a steady income of bitcoin, Hhampuz has the ability to repay the loan.
The loan terms are unknown therefore we cannot conclude anything of the date of repayment.
We can assume but we do not know how much bitcoin Hhampuz has in any alternative wallets.
We can assume but we do not know how much bitcoin Hhampuz makes in a given period of time.
We can assume but we cannot conclude.

The repayment txid was dfa7b822da1192bde63f71d881b3141aa33c1273ea85c6c3951c2b2c43c7bf3c. I know this because Darkstar_ previously had BTC at the repayment address and sent BTC from that address to a deposit address of an exchange/website. Darkstar_ has sent other BTC from known addresses of his to the same deposit address in the past. The transaction that repaid the loan was from known addresses belonging to Hhampuz.

Based on the above, the repayment amount was 0.55BTC and was done on June 7. The blockchain evidence supports the loan amount being 0.5BTC being taken out on May 10. This means Hhampuz paid 10% interest, or 0.05BTC in interest.

The reason why someone would take out a loan is because they want (or need) to pay for something that exceeds the amount of money they have (except for margin loans). There are some exceptions to this, however none would apply when interest, and certainly not 10% interest is being paid. The high price of BTC was ~$7,280, so Hhampuz took out a loan of about $3,640, or whatever that is in Euros. The low price on June 7 was around $7,800, so he paid $390 for the loan.

Hhampuz confirmed that he makes a living off of "reading posts", so he would need to use his income from the forum to repay the loan, plus pay his bills for the last month.

It is a safe assumption that without the loan, Hhampuz would not have had any personal BTC or personal fiat money unless he were to skip paying some bill/expense, because otherwise he would not have been willing to pay the nearly $400 for the privilege of taking out the loan. This is an assumption, but it would be illogical to say otherwise.

I documented above that Hhampuz has the following income from managing signature campaigns:
*0.0225BTC/week from managing the BitcoinCasino.com campaign
*0.02BTC/week from managing the PlayBetr campaign
*What appears to be an average of 0.055BTC/week from managing the LiveCoin campaign

A review of the BitBlender signature campaign thread reveals that campaign funds were being paid out of this wallet, which reflects payments to Hhampuz's known address in the amount of approximately 0.045BTC per week.

I reviewed his thread created, and was unable to locate any other campaigns he was running as of when he took out the loan.

Based on the above, I would say, he was making approximately 0.1425BTC per week managing signature campaigns. Although one campaign ended 3 weeks after Hhampuz took out the loan, and the BitcoinCasino.com signature campaign is now closed.

Based on the above, Hhampuz only made 0.525BTC managing signature campaigns in the 4 weeks prior to repaying the loan. He may earn an additional 0.08 per month wearing his paid signature, which would raise his total earnings to 0.605BTC.

The 0.55BTC he paid Darkstar_ made up just under 91% of his documented earnings, and the interest alone made up around 8% of his earnings. The argument that he made more than enough to repay the loan does not hold water because he needs to pay his living expenses during this time.