Originally published at: Crypto6 Day 5: Today We Learn What A Joke Computer Forensics Folk Actually Are | Free Keene
Forensics Device Used In Investigating Ian’s Computer
Day 5
~16 supporters at trial
New witness
Dustin Long
FBI agent
info technology sphere
digital forensics examiner
6-7 years
analyze digital evidence
BA degree
Cyber investigation specialized forensics
Training
12 week course covers how to use a computer, apple systems, mobile devices, and you must pass course and he did
[use computers? Ha? Maybe I misunderstood something, but you probably don’t learn much in a 12 week course anyway so maybe not if it’s just a broad overview]
Ongoing education
Q How many devices examined?
A 200 devices
Q Where do you work?
A New England Computer Forensics Lavatory
Forensically image device
I first investigate at date of search warrant
I look for devices at search location
Is called by others to look when a device is found to determine if a device should be seized
Recording studio in house photo on screen
[this is not the photo the feds used, but is a picture of what the studio looks like from one angle, from other angles you’ll find peace signs, shire society, and other church related stuff]
Agent identifies devices seized
Laptop, taken back laptop for review
Bagged it
Back at lavatory I imaged the laptops drive bit-for-bit
I removed drive from laptop, then connected to a TX1 portable imaging device
[Ever wonder what one of these devices looks like? Well guess what, now you do. The above picture is the same model the feds use and runs about $3,000… you can purchase these yourself if you got the cash for it, I’m not quite tempted enough to get an overpriced $30 card reader with a screen attached though else I might actually have picked one up just for the fun of it, but basically this is just a small computer with a card reader attached that copies the drive, with some write blocking functionality built in, ohh yea, I have a computer forensics background, feel free to ask me about slack space and all sorts of fun computer forensics terminology, and unlike these guys I’ve actually written the software to extract data from what amounts to unutilized portions of the disk which can contain remnants of what a system was used for at some point in the past, but for this reason I also am VERY skeptical of “forensics” experts who get up on the stand and talk about stuff they don’t really have a clue about, and build a case off proprietary tools that aren’t scientifically sound, and of which there is no complete set of source code for, thus you can’t even confirm with certainty that the device is working in the manor the manufacturer is claiming even if based on generally sound principles, for instance, a computer forensics examiner testifying that someone searched for “how to kill” utilizing remnants from the disk may not be able to confirm that they actually searched for how to kill even if that is what they’re testifying to because part of that might be lost, so for example someone might have searched for how to kill a mockingbird rather than how to kill and the forensics examiner can’t distinguish between one and the other, yet trials have hinged on little more than this faulty “computer forensics” evidence on many of occasions for lack of someone actually competent to argue or explain why the “experts” testimony is highly suspect and flawed]
At this point the investigator goes over the write blocker
A write blocker prevents data from getting from their system into the hard drive
[what he is trying to say is the write blocker prevents contamination of the evidence]
He finds a Linux encrypted drive
[I so want to call him out for this, it’s GNU/Linux!!!!!]
Linux is just different OS
[yea, this is pretty much how he said it]
Encryption prevents others from accessing the data
Q Did encryption stop forensics imaging?
A No
Q How did you confirm it is accurate?
A Via hashing
[this is kinda bizarre and wrong really because hashing it doesn’t have anything to do with accuracy of initially acquired data, but that initial hash can prove later that nothing on the drive has changed since it was initially hashed, but it can’t prove that someone didn’t tamper with it prior to the hashing occurring, say like while in transport, but this is suppose to be solved by the bagging and recording of the folks keeping track of the evidence, thus you can get someone on the stand if a question of authenticity comes up]
Q Hashing is mathematical algorithm that computes long string of #s, verifies bit for bit copy? If one bit changed hash changes right?
A Right
I contacted computer scientist who has experience with Linux encryption
New witness
Name: Nickiles Nathens
Cyber security corporation miner corporation
Previously worked for FBI
Work:
ID collection and analysis of devices
General specialist
Computer forensics
Computer scientist to solve more complex problems
[yea!!!!! we were successful in making the government actually do a little bit of work for once, though given the lack of real security it’s somewhat humorous they needed a specialist here to solve more “advanced” problems]
Forensic examiner follows scientific process for review of structured data
The witness got her undergraduate degree from a Florida university information systems with a concentration in security
[this is kinda funny, Florida is known for having some of the worst schools in the country, I guess that is how they ended up working for the feds though]
Certifications in CompTIA, SANS cyber digital forensics
[you come to me with a resume listing these certifications don’t expect a interview, these are the things that get you passed human resources in the corporate world, not a job]
Q How many devices?
A 300
Q Ians?
A Yes, from March 16, 2021 raid
[This is funny because in March of 2016 there was another raid with no charges brought and an attempt to ruin Free Talk Live and Ian’s reputation, that raid utterly failed to do that, exactly 5 years later they do another raid, most devices from the first raid were returned, no charges were ever brought, a lawsuit is underway to force the feds to return the remaining devices, something every lawyer is going to tell you to NOT do because this forces them to investigate something that they otherwise might not investigate ever, and to what benefit? It’s a 7+ year old set of devices stolen, maybe there is something, but is it worth spending time in a cage over? Basically the fact alone that there is a lawsuit evidence the feds corruption here, and there resistance to release the remaining devices is likely in order to try and have something to hold over his head and taint the judge, which they have already successfully done, to the point in which the judge instructed the prosecutor to go after Ian over charges that the prosecutor even stated were investigated and had no merit!!! You would think a judge instructing a prosecutor to hang a man from a tree and perform mob justice on them would get them some sort of censure … but well… not yet anyway… probably never sadly]
The government now shows a picture of a laptop on the screen and has identified it as ian’s laptop
[this is wrong, it’s the churches laptop, and the feds forced the church to hire a lawyer to get back a laptop from the 2016 raid that was stolen by them, whereas other devices could be obtained without a lawyer because they didn’t involve an entity of some kind, this double standard is quite curious]
After the seizure this examiner was asked to analyze a copy of the image
An examination workstation to examine the laptop image was used
Q What is Linux?
A Just another type of software
[I was expecting operating system, but really it’s the kernel, not an operating system, but these guys aren’t competent enough to understand any of this]
We did not know the password for the system so we contacted Quantico Virginia to do a password crack
[aww what? That’s a town in Virginia… presumably a government agency of some kind specialized to do this sort of thing, but who knows]
Several weeks later they cracked the password
[they supposedly used brute force which is possible if the password was week, which shouldn’t be too surprising, but they could have done something called ‘live forensics’, which at least back in the day was rare, but basically it involves extracting the contents of ram, and that forensics technique would have worked against a laptop that was powered on at the time of the raid and the length of the password would then not matter, so could Ian have done a better job? Sure, but if the objective was to make them work rather than actual security he did everything perfectly]
Got no errors on accessing drive
[aww trying to understand what the heck they are talking about here… why would you get an error on accessing the drive if you have the password? This might be a ‘forensics thing’ relating to ensuring that the defense can’t challenge the evidence later, but it’s weird too because they’re not accessing the drive, but an image of the drive]
We then inventoried user profile, docs, etc
There was one user account ftl_ian
[this is wrong, like really wrong, there are multiple profiles and accounts on a default GNU/Linux system]
I made a listing of all files, then copied to forensically prepared media
[ie they zero’d out the disk before copying the data over basically, it’ll be interesting to note the media used which I think I made a note of as newer flash based media doesn’t give you control over low level access to the disk which could compromise the integrity of the claim here]
Copied everything over then
Made a 2nd copy for case agent
Provided on thumb drive or USB media to case agent
[this wasn’t sufficiently clear as a thumb drive would be problematic assuming we mean some sort of flash, but USB media could be a traditional spinning drive connected via USB]
Folder, docs, pictures, would have been seen
30 years of resumes for instance
I verified hash of files to make sure nothing changed
[so this would confirm what was read from the original matches what is being read from the new media, so this makes sense]
Picture of files on screen of home folder
Text file containing an ‘audit log’: copylog_export_home_files
[that makes sense]
We now find out that there is a Seagate Backup Plus drive
[this drive appears to be utilizing a traditional platter which is probably good given the prior claims, but there may still be concerns given the proprietary nature of some components utilized within the device not to mention the operating system utilized to present that evidence]
New Witness
Name: James Rossell
Victim
Lives Rockford, Tennessee
Before that he lived in New Jersey
How long? 20 Yrs
72 years old
He’s been retired for 15 years
He was a firefighter
US navy 4 years
Widowed 3 years
Married 39 years
3 daughters
8 grand children
Retired at 55
Retired early
Q After wife passed away was there time you were seeking companionship?
A Yes
Q 3 years ago?
A Yes
Went on dating site for senior citizens and met someone on site named Maria Romeo
Q Were they a real person?
A No
[must have been a dang bot]
Q What happened?
A She constantly needed money for this and that, then flew to Asia to get her inheritance
Q How did you communicate?
A Text message
She recommended we move to site more private
Q How often did you talk?
A Daily, sometimes
Q Talk about?
A Her inheritance
Q Did you help her with that?
A Yes
To help develop our relationship
[hmm this is beginning to sound a lot like prostitution to me]
Q Was it romantic?
A No
[gee paying for sex without the sex, there use to be 900 #s for that, but maybe this is cheaper?]
Q Was there hope for a romantic relationship?
A Yes
Q What was your hope for inheritance?
A I hoped she would come to the United States
I signed paperwork to say we’d marry
Q Did you know tuegroing at the time?
A No
[hmm sounds like a Russian bride situation so stereotypical in comedies on TV]
Q After signed paperwork then what happened?
A To get inheritance you must pay taxes in Indonesia
I sent $103,000 to her from my retirement account, which was from life insurance
She setup account from bitcoin
Q Was your money in bank accounts?
A I had to move from retirement account to bank account and then have it wire transferred
Q Did you have communication with her while you were doing all this?
A Yes
Q Did you have to take photos?
A Yes, picture of self
Q Who asked you to take a photo?
A Marry
Picture of sign is shown on screen
~“I am certifying I am buying bitcoin via wire transfer from the church of the invisible hand and ftl_ian”
“I james rossel authorized and completed a wire transfer in the amount of 67,000 USD for purchase of bitcoin from ftl_ian. I understand this transaction is non-refundable
username jrosell”
[the summary of this he sent KYC or know your customer documentation to marry to authenticate his purchase was intentional!!! it should be hard to claim ignorance when you’ve signed a document clearly stating what it is you were doing and why… but the government is depending on the jury being sympathetic to the plight of these victims, but the problem here is that Ian and the Shire Free Church/Church Of The Invisible Hand are not the predators nor intentionally partaking in victimizing this man any more than the financial institution who wired the money on his behalf is… and unlike the bank this is far more information demanded than the bank, but even if, when a transaction was suspect Ian would go out of the way to find a phone # in the phone book and call the person to verify that they understand what they were buying… which is exactly the same sort of procedure a bank might do… but such a procedure doesn’t result generally in a bank stopping the transaction from going through anyway]
Q What did you tell the bank you were buying, bitcoin?
A No
[if you were concerned then why not ??? did you even question it???]
Q Do you remember sending the wire?
A Yes
Q Problem with wire?
A Yes, the wire was canceled because it was too large of amount to to charity
[this is humorous given what he does next and they let go through without issue, but chances are this isn’t what they actually told him anyway as these folks are well rehearsed by the scammers on what to say]
Q What happens after?
A I got called by Ian Fleming as to why the wire did not arrive
[this is probably a not-quite-accurate description of what happened as the church has a policy to call when a transaction looks off, not when a wire doesn’t go through, but you’ll have to confirm this with Ian after the trial is over, but do notice how the guy got Ian’s last name wrong]
Q What did you tell Marry?
A It didn’t go
Q Then what?
A She suggested I sent a personal check
A check made out to Ian Freeman is shown on screen
Q What did you do with check?
A I sent it to Ian
Q Why wasn’t it for the $67,000?
A Not enough money at that point so I sent $7,000 later once money was in account
[basically the guy had funds coming in on a regular basis from other sources, this wasn’t his life savings or anything like that, or at least financial worth]
Q Did you get bitcoin?
A No
[then why did you sign a document stating you were buying bitcoin????]
Q How did things end with Marry?
A I just ended it
Q How did it effect you?
A Taught me to be careful on internet
[hmm yea, we seem to need more of this if the world is going to change for the better… learning life lessons is somehow the only way people learn anything and it’s probably wise for us to educate people about scammers as soon as humanly possible, not wait till people are in there 70s… no matter what a government tries to do you will not stop scammers… but you can educate people and get programs setup to protect the more vulnerable via special accounts that limit spending to some percentage over an average thus ensuring control of their assets while still requiring a 2nd person like a guardian or financial advisor before a larger transaction can occur, and that might not stop all scams, but it would put a more significant damper on scammers taking advantage of vulnerable people without hindering the rest of society as currently happens]
Defense lawyer cross examines witness
Q you don’t know Freeman?
A One time, on phone
Q What was your conversation?
A It didn’t go through so I sent check
Q So Ian did not ask for check?
A Right
[wow, so it’s the victim that is proposing to send a check from Ian’s perspective!!!!]
Q You understand you were scammed, right?
A Yes
Q $67,000 right?
A Yes
Q How did you lose the other $36,000?
A Some sent to Marry
Q How long was connection?
A 6 months
Q It went in bits and pieces?
A Yes
Q So it was more than Ian?
A Yes
Q You have no idea who this man in the middle is, right?
A Right
Q The scammer had you on the hook for quite a while?
A Yes
Q Purchase were made at behest of Marry right? Not Ian?
A Yes
Q The only conversation with Ian was wire could not go through?
A Yes
Q Ian told you bitcoin could not be purchased if wire did no go through, right?
A Yes
[he admits right there he knew he was purchasing bitcoin !!! remember that these are the governments own witnesses, and the defense is only cross examining them]
Q Bank tried to straighten you out, right?
A Yes
[so, now we know both the bank tried to make sure he wasn’t getting scammed and Ian tried to as well, but neither attempt was successful at stopping the scam, and Ian had less information to go on than the bank did]
Q They tried to stop scam?
A No, they said it was not on the up and up
[hilarious, this guy is trying to make himself believe he is a victim when in reality it’s pretty apparent he knew full well what he was buying, he clearly knows what “on the up and up” means, and this is why it’s important to demand your right to face your accuser in open court, and not via some virtual video conference thing, because in court the jury, when not masked can see indicators that may indicate someone being less than truthful, and in this case we probably largely see it in the words too, but… none the less the point stands]
Q The same bank let check through even though they stopped wire to some purported charity?
A Yes
Q Same amount?
A Yes
[this is important because there is this idea that the amount itself should have set off alarm bells or a ‘red flag’, but the reality is a red flag doesn’t mean a bank has to stop the transaction from going through, nor a money transmitter, not that Ian or the church were either of these.. what this evidences is that the systems in place forced by government don’t even work and are basically utterly pointless]
Q Ian never pressured you to send check?
A No
Q Never threatened you?
A No
Q It was Marry who did it all?
A Yes
[so now we know, the bank nor Ian, nor church is the predator here, but rather a third party we can only identify because the church did know your customer and got a copy of the scammers drivers license or passport and it’s the government who is refusing to investigate the actual scammers]
Defense lawyer ends the testimony with “sorry that happened to you, thank you very much”
New witness
Name: Patrick Brown
Lives in Spicewood, Texas
18 months
Previously San Jose CA
8 years
68 years old
[notice he wasn’t 68 at time the time incident occurred just as the other ‘victims’ weren’t as old either, this trial is covering events from 2-7 years ago so the ‘victims’ were all much younger]
Employed? Yes
Lows Hardware: 2 Years
Q Working previously?
A No
Q Any prior work?
A Property management for 33 years
Q Reason you came out of retirement?
A Yes, I was scammed of 1.2 million
[note: they aren’t claiming the church/Ian scammed the guy of all that money, only some of it went through the Shire Free Church and the government isn’t claiming Ian or the church was part of any of these scams]
Q you saved for retirement?
A Yes
Q Was that all of it?
A Yes
Q Did you get an email that changed your life?
A Yes
Q Do you remember who it purported to be?
A No
Q Federal or state agency in email?
A Didn’t say
Q It said your social security was hacked?
A Yes
After talking to agent he suggested moving my money around to different accounts to keep it safe
Suggested different banks to keep money at
Q What did he ask you to do after opening accounts?
A Move money to new accounts
half a dozen accounts
Q After money was moved, then what happened?
A I’d go there and he would tell me how much to move
Q OK there wire to accounts in your name?
A No
Q You moved money when asked?
A Yes
and when money was moved I verify it was moved
Q Did you believe it was moved?
A Yes
Q What was goal?
A To make it safer
To accounts in my name but not banks I had one business with before
Q Then what? Wired money to peace church?
A Yes
Q Did you send pictures?
A Sent money to this person yes
photo of driver license on screen and passport on screen
Q Why did you?
A Because Bruce (aka bruce is the scammer) told me to
“I certify I am buying bitcoin from bombshell on localbitcoin.com”
Q Do you know what bitcoin bombshell is?
A No
[aww it’s someone or some entity, you at least must have realized that, right? If not you should be in a home where someone takes care of you, not living by yourself]
Q Do you know what localbitcoin.com is?
A No
[then why did you certify that you were buying something you did know what it was from someone you did not know??? this is just crazy]
Q Who told you to write those words?
A Bruce Williams
[effectively the government seems to think bitcoin should be banned because stupid people exist]
Q Did you write it was a donation?
A No
[Note: he did tell the bank it was a donation as that is why it shown as a donation on the bank document shown on the screen prior, this witness is unreliable]
Q Any phone calls about why you were making so many wires?
A No
[this according to the government should have been a red flag! But if the banks aren’t doing it how can a not-bank entity be expected to do it? And humorously when something was suspicious and apparent to the church phone calls WERE made to verify that people knew what they were buying based on information not from the scammers, but from the phone book, you can purchase a premium subscription and still look people in the phone book, it’s not just landlines as I’m sure many think]
Cross examination by defense
Q Town you live in?
A Spicewood in hill country
[this was kinda funny, he actually said that]
Account is in Boston
Q What did you have to do to take it [out] ?
A Bits and pieces
Q Did you have to talk to a person?
A Small amounts no, big #s yes
Q How about for $50,000
A Yes
Q What was going on?
A They would just approve it
[this is his bank]
Q The bank never asked why such a large amount?
A No
[remember that the government is claiming that a large amount is a red flag so… the transaction shouldn’t have been allowed ! Lets be real, banks aren’t actually required to stop a transaction just because it is red flagged as the government is trying to claim here as is evidenced through this and many other GOVERNMENT witnesses]
Q How much of scam came through Fidelity? How much of the 1.2 million?
A Completely (all of it)
Q Charles Swab next?
A Did not lose any from Charles swab
[this guy is an unreliable witness]
Q The transactions for Bruce came to $180,000 and the rest went somewhere else?
A Yes
Q How long did scam go on?
A ~6 months
Q Only 4 transactions to Ian over 7 days, right?
A Yes
Q So Bruce Williams is probably fake name, right?
A Yes, I mean I don’t know, probably
I wouldn’t do it again
[that’s funny cause you can’t do it again, you’re working at lows no offense to those working at lows]
Q You never checked with social security?
A Yes, never checked
Q Started with emails, right?
A Yes
Q He never said he was working an Ian Freeman, right?
A Right
[this is important because the government is claiming that while Ian is not the scammer that he worked with the scammers when this is so obviously false and every government witness confirms it]
Q Just what other transactions were taking place?
A The only reason I did was because Bruce told me to
Q Can you tell me what other scams were going on?
A I can only say they were going on at different times
Q You just don’t know where it went?
A Right
Q You did no get bank statements after six months?
A No, well, yes
Q You never talked to Ian nor got convinced to do anything by Ian or peace church?
A No
Q Did they investigate bank?
A I did not do it all at Charles Swab
Q Did you ask Fidelity why they did that?
A No, I was customer with them for years
Q Did you ever have contact with Fedelity with why transactions were occurring?
A No
Q It seems like you would do anything Bruce tell you to do?
A Pretty much
[I ask myself this- how to do you help people like this?]
New witness
Name Herald Jones
75 in January
[trying to make him sound older than he is]
Lives in Kansas City MS
Retired since 2003, but worked for 10 years before that
Family: yes, married
54 years
Separated for 2 years
Children 2
44, and 32
4 grandkids
Developer in real estate builder and inventor
Q Successful?
A Yes
Telecommunications hotel
Possibly biggest in midwest
Personally made 10 million
Pretty high risk tolerance
Some successful
Q Spring of 2020?
A Separated from wife?
Q Did you go online?
A Yes
Q Did you meet someone online?
A Yes, Natoshia
Q How long?
A Several months
Q What did she tell you?
A She told me she needed help clearing taxes and attorney fees to get 100 million inheritance
[ohh boy greed gets the best of em]
Q Did she have council?
A Yes, Rayman Miller
Q Did you meet Rayman Miller?
A No, just online
Q Who helped with financial transactions?
A Rayman Miller
Q Did you send lots of wires?
A Yes
Q Who told you?
A Rayman Miller
Q How many wires?
A 30-40
Q What banks?
A Bank Of Westin and Bank Of America
Q Did you get feedback from bank?
A Yes, they thought I was being defrauded
Q Did you eventually stop?
A Yes after Bank Of America closed my account
Q When did you get banking info to wire money?
A Rayman Miller
“I Herald Jones completed a wire in the amount of $8,000 to purchase bitcoin from…”
[note: this is more than standard operating procedure for people who sell crypto online… the church did MORE than anyone else try and stop scammers]
Q Did you ever get any bitcoin?
A No
Q Did you ever get any inheritance?
A No
Q What happened to Natosha?
A No idea
Defense cross examines witness
Q Ever meet Freeman or church?
A No
Q Total lost?
A ~$800,000
[remember that this isn’t all going through the church, this is just what these victims of scammers lost]
Q All had to do with Raymond Miller?
A Yes
Q Spoke with someone who claimed to be Raymond Miller?
A Yes
Q Phone calls?
A No, just online
Q Natosha?
A Just online
I got pictures
[now we really know what this was about!]
Q Any physical evidence she had inheritance?
A Yes
Q Ever have contact with a lawyer?
A Raymon Miller or I thought he was
Q How long?
A 6 months
Q Started?
A March 2020… actually April
Q Out of nowhere the money starts coming?
A Yes
Q Other things could have been happening before May?
A I don’t remember
[another unreliable witness?]
Q Was Ian Freeman ever mentioned?
A No
Q Any indication he was working with Ian?
A Yes, Raymond said
[aww yes, the person we have identified as the scammer]
Q Did you ever ask Ian?
A No
Q Did these banks tell you to stop?
A Yes
Q Did they tell you why they thought it was a fraud?
A No
Q Multiple transactions went through both banks before anyone stopped you?
A Yes
[red flags aren’t enough to require a bank to stop a transaction!!!]
Q Did they ask you what it was for?
A No
Q So someone was scripting you?
A Yes
Q Miller was telling you what to tell the banks?
A Yes
Q You would say what Miller would tell you?
A Yes
[this is the problem, no amount of screening is going to stop scams, and it will also hinder legitimate transactions if the sole basis is the amount of the transaction]
Q Freeman did not tell you what to say right?
A Correct
Prosecutor
Q You wealthy?
A Yes
Q Why didn’t you tell bank truth?
A None of there business
Defense lawyer
Q Do you know reformed satanic church or aria?
[he got this wrong, it’s the reformed satanic temple pretty sure, not that it really matters]
A No
[this was on the wire transfer document shown on screen in court so the person had to have told the bank that at some point]
New witness
Name: Melanie Neighbours
Age 36
Manchester
How long? 4-5 years
Before? Keene
Grow up? Louisiana
Education? Accounting JD 2013 law degree
Q Bar?
A Yes
character and fitness no
DWI between law school and bar
Q Moved to New Hampshire?
A Yes, 2015
Q Worked?
A Financial analyst
Q Met before?
A Yes, five times
Q Agreement with office you won’t be prosecuted?
A Yes
Q What brought you to NH?
A Politics [I think]
Q Political beliefs?
A Anarchist
It’s immoral to commit fraud and use violence and government does that, the non-aggression principle
Q Is that why you left?
A Yes
Most libertarians and anarchists are in NH
Q How did you find NH?
A Internet, websites
Q Where did you decide to move to?
A Keene
The more in system activism is in Manchester
The more activist or civil disobedience activists were in Keene
Q How did you decide that?
A Chatroom / Shire Society
Q Is it through that process you men Ian?
A Yes
Through forum I found a place
Q Where did you move?
A Moved in to Ian’s duplex
[this is humorous because it wasn’t Ian’s duplex and Melanie Neighbours darn well knew that, and we can come to that conclusion by answers she provides later that she is lying or at least missleading]
Q What side?
A Other side, not studio, aka Rich Paul/Nobody side
Q Who lived with Freeman?
A Renee a the time
Q Anyone else?
A Yes, different room mates at different times
Q What did Ian do?
A I know he ran radio show
Q What did you do?
A Taxes/accounting
[aww yea, barely, not sure she actually had any business and there is evidence the few inquires she had were not followed up on, though this wasn’t fully apparent until more recently]
Q Did you enjoy living in Keene?
A Yes
Q What was Ian’s show?
A Free Talk Live
Q Were you part of that?
A Yes
Q Were you paid?
A Yes, $20 / night
[this isn’t the full honest answer, there was a $20 / night stipend to cover gas/vehicle expenses for co-hosts, but this wasn’t a regular consistent payment and wasn’t even happening in 2016, it started sometime later on, this was utterly voluntary contribution by those who shared the same beliefs or at least purported to and that was advocating peace, and the way I like to phrase it is taking a stand against the use of violence to achieve social and political objectives, but it’s not really limited to that, but rather you are just shy of a pacifist with one exception, and that exception is the use of violence in self defense, even if you’re principally trying to avoid said violence or avocation thereof]
Q What was the show about?
A It was a show on philosophy / current events
[Really??? Lets check Melanie Neighbours version against what FTL’s site says the show is about rather than giving vague unclear answers:
“This show is about Liberty with a capital L. Free Talk Live is an open phones panel discussion with a variety of hosts. The hosts serve as a check on each other and bring diverse viewpoints to the table, while still all being liberty-friendly.
Our show is headed up by multiple ministers of the Shire Free Church and features various voices from New Hampshire’s liberty activist community. Most of our hosts are here in NH as part of the Shire Society or Free State Project.”
I hope it becomes apparent that we share a key underlying belief as best stated by the Shire Free Church website: “The Shire Free Church does not define a specific path beyond those parameters that must be your foundation: peace as your way, love as your guide, and liberty as your light”
It’s an interfaith church and you may have other beliefs, but peace is the foundation of the church and mission thereof. It even sates this on the website: “It is our mission, inspired by God, Allah, the Universe, and the inner light – to foster peace.” and one way the church does this is through spreading cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrency undermines the governments use of violence. How you might wonder? It does that by reducing the demand for US dollars. It’s the increased demand by peoples usage around the world of the US dollar that fuels wars waged by the government against others overseas. The more demand there is the more dollars can be printed and spent. The less demand the less dollars that can be printed and spent without causing the collapse of the US dollar.
Is Melanie Neighbour’s being willfully blind? It sure seems that way given she co-hosted FTL for years. Was she always an informant? I don’t know, but she certainly seems to have become one.
]
Q Ian a permanent host?
A Yes
Q Others?
A Yes, Mark, Aria, Renee
[curious she didn’t mention Darryl W Perry who was actually a permanent host and I don’t believe Renee or Area are or were, but Mark was, and so was/is Ian]
Q Anyone else on show?
A Rich Paul and others
[talk about being coached on what to say]
Q Besides that any other jobs?
A Yes, mostly admin work, did pay co-hosts from wallet
Q Did you do from office?
A Remote work
Q Did you leave Keene?
A Yes, when I met my husband + for other jobs
Q Other work in Manchester?
A Accounting firm, warehouse work, and at some point to work for Mark Edge
Q Ian a friend?
A “Friendly acquaintance”
[this is just unbelievably insulting, Ian is the best friend she’ll ever have and likely ever has had]
Q Helped as bookkeeper?
A Yes
[this is an exaggeration of what she did from what I understand]
Q Did you use Telegram with Freeman?
A Yes
Q Did you get subpoena for Freeman?
A Yes
Chat between Melanie Neighbours and Ian on screen
I need to hire an accountant to certify me as an accredited investor to prove net worth. I don’t own things, but have control over 2.5 million.
[Ian is the minister of the Shire Free church and has control over these assets through that position]
Q When you lived at address did you see church activities happen?
A No
[Were you blinded by government money or something? What did you think was happening 365 days a year every night from 7-10PM eastern? I guess all those people going to the studio were just a figment of my imagination. I guess all those church events that CONTINUE to occur every week are also just a figure of my imagination. I’ sorry-I’m insulted. Ian should be doubly so.]
Q When was it a church?
A When he fought property tax on building or whenever it was convenient
He connects not having assets to being a minister
[first, the defense blows her away later.. but first something I want to make clear here, this was her exact wording, not some interpretation thereof… now you can probably understand why people are saying she is an informant.. she didn’t have to say this… she only had to tell the truth to retain her immunity that we’ll find out later wasn’t even needed]
Q Are you a certified public accountant?
A No
Q Did you write letter for freeman?
A Yes, $35 maybe
I charged $35 / hr except tax forms
Letter stated $3 million in cash and assets
Q When did fallout happen?
A Bail
Q Why upset?
A He said he was broke
I didn’t agree
[wow, really??? one look at his place you’d know this guy has taken a vow of poverty… not to mention it wasn’t exactly a secret… he had room mates, *had a bedroom* and shared a bathroom, the vehicle he drove was an older used vehicle, later replaced with another older used vehicle, Ian never spent money wastefully and even donated most of his personal wealth he did hold prior to the church to the church years before any significant sales of crypto occurred or of which the government is accusing him of having sold for that matter, not to mention the government had likely seized or froze whatever assets he might have had left during the 2021 raid, so even if he had something the morning of the 2021 raid he didn’t possess those assets when questioned]
Q Did you explain why you were upset?
A Yes, the letter was an oversight on his part
Q Did you take your negative statements to the internet?
A Before, not after
[aww what? This was definitely after the 2021 raid, but I guess she meant that it was only after talking to Ian during a short window when the court accidentally removed Ian’s restriction on talking to his friends]
Q Do you still remain angry with him?
A Yes
[ohh yea, this is apparent as hell, if not just entirely made up for the benefit of the prosecutors at trial]
Q What do you know about bitcoin business?
A There were multiple kiosks, actually bitcoin vending machines is what they call them I think, he was selling and buying from localbitcoin.com
[it’s interesting at no point does she correct him about this, it’s a church, I’d understand it if someone else who knew not much of anything said this, and ~1 witnesses said as much, but you Melanie?? sorry- you have no excuses, you can’t claim ignorance on this one… this was just too well thought out and orchestrated]
Q Who is Aria?
A Moved after me, was co-host of Free Talk Live, started satanic church, did various homeless outreach
[why do they keep saying church… hmm I’m beginning to think it’s my memory now, I’m a bit under the weather as I type this, but it’s reformed satanic temple anyhow, maybe I just wrote it down wrong…. I guess we should just be glad she admitted that she knew the temple did homeless outreach without the defense having to press her on it]
Q Did she do bitcoin thing?
A Yes, she handed out bitcoin to homeless people
Q Selling of bitcoin?
A Yes
Q Distinct from church?
A Yes
[I’m not sure sure if she means the temple here or the shire free church, because one would be a true correct statement, and the other would possibly be a false statement, though I question how much she even knew of any of this, first hand anyway, maybe she was told this by Aria]
Q Did Aria ask you to write letter for her?
A Yes, an asset certification letter
Q Where did you understand the satanic reformed church assets were coming from?
A Ian
[constantly misstating the name seems to make me think it wasn’t just me in note taking]
Defense cross examines or I should say destroys backstabbing lying government agent/informant
Q Law school, but no lawyer? Bookkeeping, but no CPA?
A Yes
Q Aria right: Not Ian?
A Right
[aww ok, so that makes it an oversight you both missed, it was your job to get it right and you failed, not Ian]
Q How I choose a bank, right?
A Something like that
[I think something is lost here in transcribing unfortunately]
Q Don’t get into conversations about use even if innocuous, right?
A Right
Q That is a video about what she said, right?
A Right
[ok, I figured it out, so they are playing a video of aria explaining how to sell bitcoin and do it legally while trying to make it look like she’s committing criminal activity, and the defense is cross examining her on that video]
Q Your an anarchist?
A Yes
Q And an atheist?
A I was
[she was a big time atheist, curious the change]
Q When did you become a non-athiest?
A End of 2021
Q Same time as bail hearing?
Q Why?
A One of my daughters had died before birth
I tried preying as my partner suggested
[she claimed her daughter had died as a result of the FBI prior, curious]
Q You were bookkeeper?
A Yes
Q You didn’t do bookkeeping for Ian?
A No
Q Minister married you right?
A Yes
[gotcha! Ha she’s forced to admit the church is real, or at least it becomes apparent that the church does in fact do church things despite her fraudulent attempt to claim it was fake]
Q You did bookkeeping for Mark?
A Yes
[Mark Edge is a minister of the Shire Free Church and one of the main co-hosts of Free Talk Live, although has been absent more in recent years, he’s still good and involved in the Shire Free Church]
Q Radio station?
A Separate thing
Q You knew Mark was involved with Church right?
A He was involved with FTL
[she tries to avoid admitting knowledge of the fact Mark Edge is a minister of the Shire Free Church which is just crazy because the show is under the Shire Free Church ministries and she already admitted that Minister Mark married her and her husband]
Q Was Mark giving to charity?
A Yes
Q You are aware that Ian donated to charity right?
A Yes
Uganda orphanage, 100 nights homeless shelter, etc
[notice when questioned she admits knowing of at least these things, but there are others as well]
Q You know they gave bitcoin to homeless?
A Aria was
Q 100 nights homeless shelter isn’t fake, right?
A Right
[ ~she’s grudgingly responding to these questions]
Q Upset he claimed he had no money?
A Yes
Q April 2021
A Yes
Q You don’t know his financial situation in 2021, right?
A Right
Q Did you know that dash is a crypto, did you know dash crashed?
A I didn’t follow closely, but vaguely
Q You don’t know if church was above or below water
A Right
[gotcha, yet you are getting up on the stand and lying to the effect he wasn’t broke when you could simply have said you didn’t know, no one told you to lie, I told you to tell the truth even if it hurt Ian, yet you didn’t, you got up on the stand and fibbed your way through it with the intent to hurt Ian, that is NOT something Ian would have ever done to you]
Q You have no idea he was in control of anything in 2021, right?
A
[I think she just doesn’t answer this one, she knows she’s been caught red handed]
Q You did not see a shrine? Is that something you have to have?
A No, it’s loose in New Hampshire
Q No symbol defines has to be a church?
A Right
Q Did he register as a church?
A He said he didn’t! But I since checked and he did
[curious, so does not registering make you not a church??? as I understand it one need not register and one can still be a church or other religious entity or group and didn’t you more or less just admit to this prior with it being loosely defined in NH?]
Q The last time you had an interaction was years ago, right?
A Yea
Q Why are you under speaking with a grant of immunity?
A Something my lawyer got
Q Were going to be indited?
A No
Q Was there something I should have known, but didn’t?
A I don’t know
[I think the implication here is that she was working for the government all along as some sort of informant and getting paid to do it]
Q What are you worried about saying?
A Allot about 4-5-6 years ago… I don’t keep track of every conversation
Q Did jury know your under some sort of pressure to testify?
A I think they said they weren’t planning to prosecute for anything
Q You got immunity for nothing?
A I talked to them
Q Yea, a lot of people talk to them
A Yea, I had to comply
[this is getting super intense in the court room]
Q Were you granted immunity because of something you did?
A I’m not sure
I didn’t get immunity until after these letters were handed over
Q You don’t know why you got immunity?
A That is correct
Prosecutor
Q Was lawyer concerned about lying in letter about church source of funds?
A Yes
[talk about being coached]
Defense
Q What were they going to charge you with?
A [She can’t answer this… deafening silence… then..]
I didn’t work with federal stuff
[whatever that means, probably referencing her law degree though and not having experience with federal cases]
New Witness
Name Carla Cino
Age 74
State NJ
Since 1975
Real estate broker
Still? Yes
Married? No
Children? Yes 3
Were married? Yes
How did end? Divorce in 2003
Q At some point did you meet man online?
A Yes, online 2016
Q Name? Fredrick Drac
We spoke back and forth and online, he was in Germany
Q How long?
A 8 months
Q How often?
A Multiple times a week
Q He need money?
A He said he had to pay a lot of money to pay fines due to oil tankers stacking up he said guard wanted $5,000 fine
Q How much did you send him?
A $100,000
[some people deserved to be robbed, ok, I don’t really mean that, but dang, I work too hard for money to send $100,000 to some random guy on the internet who takes an interest in me that I’ve NEVER MET]
Q Did he say he would pay you back?
A Yes
Q Did you believe him?
A Yes
for a while
He said he had an opportunity to broke bitcoin and could pay me back more quickly if I helped
[let me get this straight, this women worked with scammers and helped launder money yet isn’t being charged yet Ian Freeman, who is a saint is being charged????]
Q What did he want you to do?
A He said people would wire me money and if I forwarded to Ian he would make money
Q Multiple communications with Ian?
A Yes
Q What would he tell you?
A Where to send money and only for bitcoin
Q Reason?
A For rare coins Ian said. They [banks] don’t like to see bitcoin.
Q Why a lot of banks?
A He traveled a lot
[what? Maybe she means the scammer? Or maybe she means Ian went to the state house and other court cases… not really clear]
Q Did you ever speak Aria or Renee?
A No, just Telegram
Q Where did your funds come from?
A All over
Q How many times?
A I don’t know, but a lot of money over time, 2019-202
[I think they are talking about how many times did she lose money from the scammer]
Q Did he ever ask why you were buying so much bitcoin?
A No
[I’m guessing this is referencing Ian, but not 100% clear]
Q Did wires every become a problem?
A Yes, but they never said why they closed account
[this is actually a very common and honest answer and basically the same thing that happened to Ian and the Shire Free Church repeatedly]
Q Why did it stop?
A I had an account at a bank I had a good relationship with give me an article about Ian’s arrest
Q Did you get your $100,000 back?
A No, I didn’t get any of it back
[Soo let me get this straight, Ian’s not the scammer, but you stopped because Ian was arrested ? Does that make any sense to anyone else? Sounds like the prosecutor is trying to convict through implication rather than actual facts]
Q How did you communicate?
A Telegram
Q How did you initiate a transaction?
A I would tell how much and they would reply with bank info
[they put up a standard shire free church disclaimer and signed receipt]
Q Did Ian ask why you were doing this?
A No
Q Did he ask if it was your money or someone else’s?
A No
I sent this one to neighbor Aria
Aria said she took out loan on house so reference construction won’t cause a problem with wire transfer
[extremely misleading given she was writing on the receipts who she was buying it for which is by implication suggesting it was her money or at least money she had the right to control, and the construction was completely true, she did have construction done on her place]
Q Did it really have to do with construction?
A Ohh I don’t know
[soo it might have then???? really… come on… you got to have a better case than this prosecution… after a decade of investigation Ian and 3 incidents later, 2012, 2016, and 2021 you can’t make for a stronger case than this??? you guys had millions of dollars to play with to secure a solid case and with that kind of money you shouldn’t just have a chance of winning here, you should have been able to create evidence through trickery to get Ian to say something incriminating even if he didn’t actually commit any crimes]
This one is for Renee and I think that is his girlfriend
[she probably was told ex-girlfriend as by this date in 2020 they had broken up already]
Cross examination by the defense attorney
Q You don’t know who your friend was do you?
A Right, don’t even know if photo was real
[ok, so she doesn’t even know if she was actually scammed? Because no one has actually investigated the scammers and for all we know these folks all just went belly up and died]
Q Never ian though?
A Right
Q The guy taking advantage of you had nothing to do with Ian right?
A That is correct
Q Why did you continue?
A I thought he was legitimate
[she makes a good case or example for arguing that those with dementia should have their assets restricted, though I’d argue by way of voluntary consent, not government violence, and not restricted entirely, but limited to a certain percentage over the average to ensure that a scammer would need a guardian or financial advisor to sign off without actually restricting or being a burden on the vast majority of normal healthy adults]
Q Did he say he was in business with Ian?
A No
Q He never said he was in business with any of them, right?
A Right
Q Did you know Ian sold bitcoin?
A Yes, I suppose I did
[how many times does one have to write it to realize that they’re buying bitcoin???]
Q None of your banks warned you of anything?
A No, it was occasionally
Q So all different ways you’d use to send Fredrick money?
A Yea
[Fredrick is the real scammer in this case]
Q Is Frerick being investigated?
A No, not that I know of
Q Did they give you any info on Fredrick?
A No
Q They want to know about Fredrick?
A No, they were focused on Ian
[notice that in coming days they realize this is a big problem and get other witnesses to make probably false allegations that they are investigating some of the scammers, but it’s also possible the “investigations” just started hmm immediately following the testimony of these witnesses YEARS later and despite never having inquired with Ian or the church about IDK KYC pictures he ACTUALLY preserved for incidents that might occur just like this that could not be avoided]
Q Ian gave you his real info?
A Yes
Q Did you tell him why you bought bitcoin?
A No
Q Did you tell him you were into trading?
A No, I didn’t chat with him allot
Q So he would not have any idea then what you were doing with bitcoin?
A Correct
Q This Fredrick guy has been in contact with you recently?
A Yes, in fact just last week he tried to involve me in some other scheme
Q Has the FBI been doing the right thing for you?
A I think so
[if this isn’t evidence this women needs to be in a home I don’t know what is]
Q Did they tell you they would go after Fredrick?
A Not at this time
New Witness
MC
FBI agent 8 years
Apparently this agent was sequestered like presumably all the others were. That means she heard everything that was said by other witnesses in the case.
She testified before and was in courtroom.
University of Virginia masters
Police City of Charlesville
Los Angeles division
The DC attorney general detail to protect attorney general
Q Then?
A NH
Q Assignment?
A National security
Q Before?
A White collar crime
Q You were involved in this case?
A Yes
Q You came after search warrant?
A Yes
Q What did you do?
A Interview people
Q Role in computers?
A I reviewed Ian’s computer and 3 cell phones: Renee, Andrew, and Arias
Q What did you do?
A I reviewed kraken crypto exchange records
Q What was the first thing you got?
A Everything when done
Q Lets go through what you were able to figure out
IRS doc defining what a church is shown on screen from Ian’s (really the churches) laptop
Church does not have to withhold income tax for ministers
Q What is itbit?
A Cryptocurrency exchange
Q Who is passport of on screen?
A Renee from crypto folder
itbit non-profit organization document shown on screen
Q What church is this for?
A Crypto Church of New Hampshire
Q Who?
A Renee
Q Ownership?
A 100%
[this question doesn’t even make sense for a church yet somehow is suppose to prove something]
Q Source of funds
A Donations
Q Purpose of account?
A Invest in bitcoin
Q Is this document too in this crypto folder?
A Yes
statement of dissolution
Q Reason
A To reform
[I’m leaving out the folks it lists for privacy reasons, but it basically has ~4 people on the board of directors for the Crypto Church Of New Hampshire and anybody who really wants to can probably look it up anyway]
Q Do you recall Renee’s reluctance to draft letterhead?
A Yes
Q Did you find letterhead on Ian’s PC?
A Yes
[it’s a laptop, but whatever, let’s not quibble over the details]
Crypto Church of NH Document Registration Shown on screen