172 sats \ 7 replies \ @Undisciplined 27 Apr \ on: Selective Prosecution Of Samourai Defendants bitcoin
With all the lawfare going on all around us, do you think selective prosecution is going to carry much water?
I know it's a legal principle on paper, but ironically it seems like it's very selectively invoked. At least that's how it looks to a lay person from the outside.
I'm glad you asked me this, because I have been running around this morning and probably should flesh out my idea more. Since it's early, we still don't know what evidence, if any, the prosecution has. I posted about selective prosecution for a few reasons:
-
Good public relations. If the defense is out talking about it early, it can be painted as a classic David Goliath, Bankster/computer nerd battle. Most people have a sense of fairness. The little guy underdog perception can be valuable. This would be even more powerful if there is no specific evidence that these guys had anything to do with specific transactions.
-
As stillstackin pointed out, selective prosecution is rarely successful. That's because it's almost 100 percent of the time used where there is evidence against the defendant of a crime. Jurors tend to think of it as when you do something wrong as a kid and you use the excuse that "my friends did it too." Nobody buys that excuse. Here, actual bank directors knew of specific instances of money laundering, and yet were only fined. Sometimes the bank has criminal charges brought against the entity, but no officers or directors. If a lawyer can argue this at trial, and there is no actual evidence against the defendants, it could be powerful. It has been many years since I tried a case in the Southern District, so I'm not sure what the exact rules are about bringing this defense.
reply
I'm thinking about how the Liberty Coin guys were treated. I know the cases aren't even remotely similar on a technical level, but they might be from a PR perspective.
Will it be David vs Goliath or the state protecting us from subversive anarchist terrorists?
reply
That's where the ETFs might actually do some good. Bitcoin is acceptable now.
reply
I think it might actually hurt in this case.
When there's an official regulated financial instrument that provides access to bitcoin, these Samurai guys look like they're specifically trying to give people a way to avoid the law.
This is about bitcoin in the same way the Liberty Coin case was about gold, which also had approved financial instruments.
reply
Possibly. In my experience these things are always case specific and defendant specific. I don't know much about the Liberty Coin guys, or what they were accused if doing. I also don't know much about these Samourai guys.
reply
From a surface level they were both selling their product on it's subversive features (saying the quiet part out loud, as it were).
Of course you're right that the cases will be different in their specifics and I hope it goes better this time. My recollection is that Liberty Coin was shut down under domestic terrorism charges.
reply
If, and I hope this never happens, there is ever brought a similar case involving a lightning product, the use case is much more palatable, ie: lower fees, immediate settlement.
reply