Slashdot Mirror
Early Bitcoin User Interviewed By Federal Officers
MrBingoBoingo (3481277) writes Recently a Bitcoin user reports being interviewed over their past use of a now defunct exchange service by agents from the FBI and Treasury Department. This encounter raises concerns that earlier Bitcoin users who entered the space inocuously and without ties to Dark Markets or The Silk Road might need to prepare for Law Enforcement questioning about their early Bitcoin related activities.
A Law Enforcement Encounter: If you ran a Bitcoin related service before the thing hit $100 you prolly ought to be somewhat concerned and/or prepared
The rest of the article suggests he was only interviewed because of that service as well. So unless every single early user of bitcoin started up an exchange service, the part we have on slashdot is almost entirely fictional.
Let's not overstate this. The account given by Bingo is a good one, and on the facts it shows two law enforcement officers just doing their job: gathering background information, and they're doing it in a way to minimise the hassle for the ordinary member of public they're interviewing. Bingo mentions no powerplays beyond them identifying themselves as LEOs.
And doing the research how Silk Road grew out of the early BitCoin scene (or if it even did) is a legitimate avenue of inquiry.
I am not a fan of the bullies that populate far too many police forces, so this is a welcome change of pace.
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Both the summary and headline (on slashdot - it's different on TFA) are a bunch of horseshit. Here's what the headline looks like on TFA:
A Law Enforcement Encounter: If you ran a Bitcoin related service before the thing hit $100 you prolly ought to be somewhat concerned and/or prepared
The rest of the article suggests he was only interviewed because of that service as well. So unless every single early user of bitcoin started up an exchange service, the part we have on slashdot is almost entirely fictional.
Yep, my take on the article was what you said, and that they have crappy records for that service, so they were on a fishing expedition to see if they could find anything good/relating to the silk road stuff. In all honesty, it sounded like due diligence to me, in other words, the Feds were doing the detective work they needed to be doing.
Be seeing you...
Let's not overstate this. The account given by Bingo is a good one, and on the facts it shows two law enforcement officers just doing their job: gathering background information, and they're doing it in a way to minimise the hassle for the ordinary member of public they're interviewing. Bingo mentions no powerplays beyond them identifying themselves as LEOs.
Yeah. And if I were just a small-time user of some bitcoin service, my "preparing" for questioning by law enforcement would be to get ready to tell them to get stuffed if they got pushy.
Every US based bitcoin user is going to be asked about their bitcoin activities ... by the IRS since the IRS has figured out how to tax bitcoins, as an asset.
Seriously, this is no joke. As an asset you will be expected to declare a gain or loss on the coins you used to purchase that cup of coffee. The gain or loss with respect to the change of value between the day you received those coins and the day you used them in the purchase.
This is why it is incredibly important whether the IRS considers bitcoins to be a currency or an asset. As an asset the reporting requirements would seem to become similar to that of buying, selling and trading stocks. Its not at all like spending dollars.
"tell them to get stuffed if they got pushy."
Yes, of course... LOL!
Yeah. And if I were just a small-time user of some bitcoin service, my "preparing" for questioning by law enforcement would be to get ready to tell them to get stuffed if they got pushy.
So says an armchair warrior on the internet. In reality at the first suggestion of an IRS audit you'll be copying every log file you have or can download from an exchange onto a memory stick for them. You know why law enforcement gets pushy, because it works.
All systems fight against change. In this case concepts concerning money and wealth are somewhat challenged and one would expect governments to push back hard. I'm not saying it is right it is simply predictable. If you sit down and figure out a way to have people email each other in such a way that the messages can not be had by spies you will find out suddenly just how deeply governments reject privacy in communications. There will be a knock at your door and they won't be kidding one bit. Anything new has to fight to stay alive. If not much like the owner of Segway one will have a mysterious accident or sudden catastrophic medical event. In the US we have some sort of shadow government in play and vital issues are no longer mentioned in government. Find one politician willing to talk about birth control and over population in the US.
Preparing for Law Enforcement questioning is no big deal:
Be unfailingly polite, and DON'T ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS! You are not required to answer any questions.
Don't be Ein Dickus Maximus about it, don't stick a camera in their snouts, just don't answer.
Freedom in action.
The right amount of preparation is probably somewhere in between having all of your records ready to hand over at a moment's notice and simply planning to tell the kind if insistent agents to stuff themselves.
This guy actually talked to the federal agents who came knocking on his door? Stupid, stupid...
Assuming these were probably FBI or Secret Service agents, my understanding is that the only record allowed of the interview consists of their handwritten notes. You are not allowed to make a recording. This means that, afterwards, they can put any spin on the interview that they want. If you disagree, they can and will throw you in jail for lying to a federal officer.
The only possible reply to these officers should be "I have nothing to say to you".
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
The right amount of preparation is probably somewhere in between having all of your records ready to hand over at a moment's notice and simply planning to tell the kind if insistent agents to stuff themselves.
Its not about preparation, that's just armchair hypothesizing. When you find yourself in a situation where you are being pressured by law enforcement your actions will probably be nothing like what you anticipated or prepared for. Again, law enforcement pressures people because it usually works. You won't have the records prepared to hand over beforehand, but you will probably go do so after contemplating the alternative.
When you participate in a pyramid scheme, expect to be questioned by law enforcement. And if you joined early you're probably more of a perpetrator than a victim, and the interesting question is how you lured other people into participating.
You are not allowed to make a recording.
You are free to do exactly as they do, take notes, if you wish. A recording involves laws and regulations that handwritten notes do not, for example the consent of both parties in some jurisdictions. Write down their names and badge numbers and transcribe each question accurately before answering, asking them to repeat the question as necessary to get it right. If concerned fax these notes to your attorney immediately after they leave to document the time frame in which they were created.
This and many other options exist, if you so choose, and if you believe they will help your situation. You are misinformed to think you have no options.
The only possible reply to these officers should be "I have nothing to say to you".
Which only makes them more interested in you.
There is no right answer. You are just as misguided as the person who says tell them everything they want to know. Each and every situation will be unique and the proper response, the optimal amount of cooperation (anything from none to full) will be unique.
America used to be a country which respects the Rule of Law
No more !
Nowadays the government of the United States of America can lie to the congress, can trample the rights of the citizens, can haul up people without any valid reason, in fact, it can do anything it likes --- and we have you, Sir, and your fellow fascists, to thank !
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
If the police catches a car thief, they will likely visit anyone buying a car from him. They can't know that you bought his car that he purchased before he started his thieving career, or the car which he purchased himself with money he made from thieving (which would then be legally yours, unlike a stolen car that you bought off the thief), until they ask you.
That's the purpose of interviewing that man - to figure out if he had anything to do with illegal activities or not. Apparently he didn't. So what's the problem?
Just don't talk to the police, ever!
If you had any sense, you'd understand that regardless of the reason(s) you've found yourself interacting with the police, the only sensible course of action would be to have all communications handled by your lawyer(s). Don't worry, you're far from alone in your lack of sense, and that is precisely why fairly rudimentary law enforcement pressure (rightly or wrongly) works as often as it does.
Write failed: Broken pipe
As somebody who works with attorneys all day long and who has been questioned by law enforcement, you're an idiot.
You do not talk to the police, be it local, state, federal.
Here's somebody who might know just a bit more than you about the subject.
If you werent aware, Slashdot is a game whereby you figure out WHICH pieces of the headline and summary are BS.
Congrats on your first win!
News at 11:00
Really have they charge them with early use of Bitcon. A capital offense.
A crime may actually have been committed. They will not tell you until the indictment.
Yeah. And if I were just a small-time user of some bitcoin service, my "preparing" for questioning by law enforcement would be to get ready to tell them to get stuffed if they got pushy.
If you were smart, your preparing would instead include hiring a lawyer.
"The onus on law enforcement" would be the first words out of my mouth.
because it's A) none of their business
B) I plead the 5th
C) I don't recall
No, as you say, it's a fishing expedition.
Sorry, officer, do you have some evidence of wrong doing on my behalf, or are you just asking around to see if you can find out anything you can use?
The answer, in both cases, is talk to my lawyer and come back with a warrant. Because when the police are on a fishing expedition, the last place you want to be is innocently answering questions they'll twist against you.
With parallel construction and every other dirty trick law enforcement is using, you have to start from the premise they're either lying to you, or hoping you'll slip up. Because, quite frankly, they probably are.
Even if there's no evidence you committed a crime or otherwise broke the law, you're still quite likely to get screwed over. Answering open ended questions is a terrible idea, because they're just as likely to use it to fabricate something about you.
Law enforcement is no longer trustworthy. Stop treating them like they are. Even if they're smiling at you, they're probably hostile to your best interests.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
And you're talking about the U.S. dollar, of course.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Certainly there are times when talking to law enforcement makes sense. I'm about to write an email to the sheriff praising the deputies who came to my house the other day. That said, when police come to you with questions, keeping your mouth shut is NORMALLY the safer course of action. DON'T lie, just say you'd rather not discuss the matter without an attorney present. They'll say they want to hear your side of the story. Repeat that you'll talk to them only with your attorney present. If you call the cops, because you're a victim, sure talk to them. When in doubt, shut your mouth.
You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say or do may be held against you.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
AND its worth noting.....should anything ever go to court....
NOTHING you said can be used to help you. While anything you say can be considered a confession and used against you, anything you say that is not used against you is hearsay.
So you have nothing to gain by speaking if it ever does go to court.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
"I exercise my right to remain silent. If I an arrested or taken to a police station, I want to speak with a lawyer ASAP."
Unfortunately, most people will cower before the cops, answer their questions, and find themselves behind bars because they answered one of their trick questions incorrectly, condemning them in the process. Like Scooter Libby and Martha Stewart, they will learn the hard way to NEVER make any statements to cops.
The Butler case is not exactly what you claim. First of all, the scientist in question called in the FBI in a panic because he couldn't account for 30 missing vials of plague vaccine and assumed they were stolen. The FBI found no evidence of a break in and then Butler officially signed a document stating that he was in error and he destroyed the vials himself and he claimed they were missing to cover it up. That got him arrested. Then he said that he doesn't know what happened, whether he destroyed the vials or not. He claims that the FBI pressured him into signing the document admitting he destroyed them and he was probably led to believe that if he signed it they would close the case when it fact it was used against him as "proof" that he caused an FBI investigation for nothing. Let's not kid ourselves here - this is not at all a case as you suggest where the FBI came fishing out of nowhere. Had Butler not contacted them to begin with in a panic, they would not have bothered him at all. He was probably tricked into "confessing" and not told he'd be prosecuted for doing so and that's a valid complaint against the FBI, but they certainly didn't come to him out of the blue and invent a reason for going after him.
You think you are free because you can say what you want but you are not free. You cannot trade with anyone, anywhere, anytime. For some reason freedom to trade was never considered a basic human right. From a functionalist perspective trade is to the modern state what speech was to the church. Both affect revenue.
That's not how it works. They will come to talk to you. They will make problems for you. And you will talk, or you will have HUGE problems.
Paranoid delusions .. spoken like a true pothead. Of course, The Man is out to get you, right?
Ever!
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Never talk to the police.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
You sir are a sad example of just how completely morally broken your society has become.
Bye!
If you had any sense, you'd understand that regardless of the reason(s) you've found yourself interacting with the police, the only sensible course of action would be to have all communications handled by your lawyer(s). Don't worry, you're far from alone in your lack of sense, and that is precisely why fairly rudimentary law enforcement pressure (rightly or wrongly) works as often as it does.
Actually you are devoid of common sense. In nearly all cases your lawyer will tell you to cooperate. That the pressure is real and the consequences are not worth it. Then the lawyer will ask where the $2,000 is for their advice.
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Anything you don't say may also be held against you. Once you become a target, all you can do is enjoy the ride.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
In this case there doesn't seem to be any problem.
More generally the problem is that the US has managed to get to a very bad place where the cops are heavily militarized and have a primary mandate of "catching bad guys". (they' mandate should be "protecting citizens")
It gets worse in that they've managed to get the judiciary and legislature to become complacent in ignoring constitutional limits on their power, and there are a lot of laws that essentially no one thinks should be laws but they somehow remain and can be used to bring charges against large portions of the population.
Both the summary and headline (on slashdot - it's different on TFA) are a bunch of horseshit. Here's what the headline looks like on TFA:
A Law Enforcement Encounter: If you ran a Bitcoin related service before the thing hit $100 you prolly ought to be somewhat concerned and/or prepared
The rest of the article suggests he was only interviewed because of that service as well. So unless every single early user of bitcoin started up an exchange service, the part we have on slashdot is almost entirely fictional.
Yep, my take on the article was what you said, and that they have crappy records for that service, so they were on a fishing expedition to see if they could find anything good/relating to the silk road stuff. In all honesty, it sounded like due diligence to me, in other words, the Feds were doing the detective work they needed to be doing.
Because the Feds have a weal case against Silk Road's founder. This is something that they do all the time to save face, when in reality you have moron juries that will falsely convict someone anyway. So it makes little to no sense to waste millions in tax payer money to go after this guy, and to keep investigating no-where leads.
Law enforcement has no say in the matter. Bitcoin exist outside their jurisdiction.
actually, if you were dealing in bitcoin in 2012, you're probably wealthy enough so that you should just bail out of the u.s. and go to a civilized country.
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
nothing like seeing 20 GB of the blockchain on my old 100 GB hard drive. I know, I should get a lite client and import the private keys. :D
I do like how bitcoin is relatively anonymous. I don't think that I have entered my email address anywhere. I haven't created an account on any bitcoin forums either.
This line of questioning is especially effective if the suspect is guilty. Oh shit, I better go in and talk to them or they'll think I did it. The thing is, they are interrogating you, often for hours on end, because they already believe you could be the guy they're looking for.
It seems likely it is better to close your mouth and let them think you're guilty, rather than open it and remove all doubt.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
While lawyers are expensive and can't necessarily help you as much as you'd like, I very much doubt that a lawyer would ever advise a client to cooperate by talking to police. Yes, cooperate as far as you are legally compelled to, but no lawyer is going to tell you that talking to the police will help you. Even if you were falsely accused, talking to the police is likely only able to harm you.
It seems likely it is better to close your mouth and let them think you're guilty, rather than open it and remove all doubt.
No, it really makes no difference one way or the other. If they want you, you are fucked ,the written law means squat.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
perhaps Federal officers wanted to actually learn how Bitcoins really work, and went to find out how things really got started, to get past the zealots and the quasi-religious supporters of alt currency.
A little field research goes a long way.
Naw, couldn't be that. this is the Federal government after all.
You won't have the records prepared to hand over beforehand, but you will probably go do so after contemplating the alternative.
Just no.
The situation under discussion was one in which there was no probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion. Sorry, but I do not roll over for police "fishing expeditions". People who do are one of the primary things that has been wrong with this country. If you don't stand up for your rights, you are likely to lose them.
Recommending that people bend over and just take it is part of the problem. YOU can get stuffed, too.
What you don't say can't be used against you in court. There's a lot of unpleasant things the criminal justice system can do to somebody without an actual conviction (and there's really no way around that). When the authorities want to question you, get a lawyer.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Under certain circumstances, cooperation in some things will be worth it. It won't help in court, but it may help in avoiding lots of other trouble. Your lawyer is likely to know which circumstances and what to cooperate in better than you.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes