Impressive
1 Like
He is a busy guy
Maybe he’s Satoshi Nakamoto.
1 Like
It always confuses me how unspent funds (in this story Bitcoin) can be confiscated as being “used in the crime” when they are still in the possession of the accused. I can follow the logic of seizing funds someone has allegedly acquired through misdeeds, but how can it be claimed that funds Voits still had in his possession were used in the commission of this crime? He still had them, so how could he have used them? Anything funds he used would be in the possession of someone else. Good luck seizing those.
Because authoritarianism.