Friday • April 19 • 2024
Vol.XVI • No.XVI
Manchester, N.H.
Protest Outside US District Court Ahead Of Trial
The first day of the Crypto6 trial (Dec 6th, 2022) went well for the Crypto6’s defense. More on that in a bit. There appeared to be about ~25 supporters in attendance although not everyone was in any one place all at once. Some were protesting outside, some were denied entry to the courthouse due to an attempt at suppressing support for the crypto6 through new ID and mask rules. 4+ people were denied access for having religious or health objections to the new mask mandate. 3+ people were explicitly denied entry for a newly created and enforced ID rule written in response to people Crypto6 supporters objecting to a not legally authorized demand for ID that existed prior to November. The paperwork was finally obtained evidencing this and is available from the Telegram and Matrix read-only update groups which can be joined via links at TheCrypto6.com
Many news organizations came out to report on the only jury trail to be held in the past 2+ years at US District Count in the District Of New Hampshire. The short list of reporting organizations that were in attendance included at least NBC, the Union Leader, the Sentinel, and an independent documentary crew.
One of the most interesting things I learned about the jury selection process at the federal level is that while it’s “open” to the public to attend the majority of the proceedings are secret. The judge started off with providing information on the process and there being juror questions. Potential jurors were then questioned, of which we learned nothing more than there name and what each potential juror looked like in ~2-3 hours of interviews. In the background all you could hear was some classical music playing over the loudspeaker.
The judge qualified 36 jurors and of those 15 were selected for jury duty with 4 alternatives selected.
The process gives the defense and prosecution an opportunity to ask the group of jurors questions. Some of these were quite interesting.
Except for at the end of the trail the prosecution generally goes first, as they have the burden of proof.
The prosecution utilized this time to ask these questions of the jurors or potential jurors:
How many don’t own a PC? Two responded that they didn’t.
How many don’t own a smart phone? One person responded that they didn’t (he did have a landline however).
How many don’t have an email address? One responded that they have no email address.
They also asked about social media to which nearly everyone had some form of social media.
A question on how many in the crowd were early adopters got a response that only 5 in the crowd would consider themselves early adopters. An early adopter is someone who seeks out the latest technology rather than waiting until it’s established and more widespread to pick it up.
Interestingly while most didn’t consider themselves early adopters about half considered themselves tech savvy and two indicated that they were uncomfortable with tech altogether.
Nearly everyone indicated that they had at least heard of crypto before, but just one indicated that they owned crypto. That juror was promptly dismissed.
Most of the crowd believed that the average age of a crypto user was under 30.
Only half of the crowd had heard of the Nigerian prince email scam and the same was true of the grandson in jail scam.
The general consensus of the jurors was that older people were more vulnerable to scams.
The defense utilized this time to ask the following questions:
What is the reason people have not bought crypto? Some of the reasons given by juror included:
– I work too hard to give my money away
– I don’t understand it
– It’s a pyramid scheme
– I prefer physical assets that have tangible value
– Scared of hackers
– Volatility
Many thought that people not understanding it made it good tool for scammers to take advantage of.
Many believed crypto to be what scammers use.
Of the juror or potential jurors 10 thought that crypto led to more scams.
One juror said in the early days of crypto it was not backed by government.
At least one juror felt he leaned toward crypto being “shady”.
I made as many statistical observations as I could. While not ideal this boiled down to the federal court utilizing a very secretive process by which to select jurors. While the jury selection process is open to the public the actual interview questions and responses are not. This leaves the public with nothing other than what might be available from statistical observations based on outwardly appearances. Thus you may get a feel for the potential juror makeup without any good idea if the process was actually fair or just.
– 22 out of 36 potential jurors had gray hair, no hair, or hair loss
– 10 or more of the 36 potential jurors had brought their own masks to court rather than utilize ones provided by the court at no charge
– 16 of the 36 potential jurors were women
– 100% of the potential jurors were white
– 12 of 36 juror wore glasses
Of the 36 potential jurors they concluded by selecting 15 with 4 being alternatives that can be utilized should people get sick or otherwise miss a day of jury duty.
At this point the judge adjourns the jury for lunch, but not before saying that the jurors will not be exiting from the front door of the building due to “a lot of activity”. This was code for Mr Bitcoin. Mr Bitcoin attended a protest outside the courthouse alongside many reporters and other peace loving activists who support Ian Freeman & the Crypto6.
Once the jurors are released for lunch a bit more back and forth occurs in the courtroom between the judge, defense lawyer, and prosecutor’s team of lawyers.
One issue that was brought up is that the prosecution wants to utilize a prior co-defendant Renee Spinella as a witness in the case. As she has taken a plea deal she could in theory be forced to testify. However there remains an issue because while she can’t be charged again at the federal level forcing her to testify could be self incriminating at the state level should one of any number of intertwining states wish to prosecute her. This is not considered an issue of double jeopardy, but what it does mean is she is likely able to take the 5th despite having taken a plea deal. The defense also revealed that she is considering withdrawing her plea. However, this is unlikely to actually be possible as the circumstances where this can be done are severely limited. If she was poorly advised there however may be grounds for withdrawal, but such withdrawal are rarely granted as the burden on the defendant of proving incompetence is high.
One of the most interesting things in the trial was that jurors were explicitly banned from tooting. Tooting is like Tweeting, but via a more decentralized or federated technology. While there is a standard protocol this generally means Mastodon. This may very well be the first time a federal court has brought up a decentralized or federated social networking platform.
Another interesting note is that the judge said that witnesses will not be wearing masks.
Prosecution
Ian ran a money transmitting business.
That business was a money laundering business.
The one goal to not know where the money came from.
He was involved in romance scams.
He would receive scam money and give Bitcoin in return.
He was intentionally disengaged to serve scammers.
It’s your business. Don’t tell me what you use the Bitcoin for.
No expert is needed to understand Bitcoin.
Selling Bitcoin is not illegal, but Ian’s selling of Bitcoin was illegal.
Bitcoin is pseudo anonymous.
There is no name or account info.
Nobody knows its yours unless you tell them.
It can’t be recalled.
These unique properties are desired by scammers.
Victims don’t know what Bitcoin is.
Ian’s business was involved in:
– Cash deposits
– Wire transfers
– Stacks of cash sent via the mail
Ian charged 10% and sometimes 20% fees!
Ian helped scammers remain anonymous.
There are laws to stop the very types of crimes Ian engaged in.
Businesses have to comply with rules to protect people. This primarily revolves around the bank secrecy act.
This includes:
– Registering with FinCIN
– Having an anti money laundering policy
– Filing suspicious activity reports with the government
He also had an obligation to stop suspicious activity.
– He did not register
– He did not do other things like file currency transaction reports
– Or file suspicious activity reports
He boasted he respected the scammers privacy.
Ian sold crypto via:
– Kiosks
– LocalBitcoins.com
– Telegram
His central basis for doing business was: what you do with your bitcoin is your business. Don’t tell me what you do with it.
Kiosk not registered
Completely anonymous
He advertised:
“You can get crypto online in various ways. The cheaper ones don’t respect your privacy.”
He’d say to employees:
– Big spenders
– Major wales
He had signs that said “Do not tell staff what you do with your coin. It’s your business to do what you want with it.”
This catered to scammers.
Ian proceeded to expand the business from kiosks to online crypto sales and hired employees.
This enabled him to reach people nationwide.
This was more complicated and he had to use banks to do it.
Banks follow rules.
They would frequently close Ian’s accounts.
At this point she admits Ian did KYC and said that to banks when he did disputes.
He directed people to tell banks deposits were:
– Church donations
– Purchases of virtual goods
– Rare coins
Then afterward he told people to write a different note on receipts about purchasing Bitcoin.
He would sometimes ask for a phone # to verify people knew what they were doing.
He would claim to be a victim to the banks when a recall occurred.
Ian said to contact him via Telegram and in PC he kept selfies of pics on his PC.
Victims never communicated with Ian.
He never asked too many questions.
We’re going to talk about one victim. A 76 year old victim. She sent 3 transactions totally $75,000 over 3 days. Ian charged a 10% fee.
Ian hired people to open banks accounts.
Ian opened bank accounts or had people open bank accounts in the name of churches. Church Of The Invisible Hand. The Shire Free Church. Crypto Church Of NH. Reformed Satanic Temple. Shire Peace Church.
Never told banks he opened accounts for Bitcoin.
He would tell banks he opened accounts for church outreach.
He never paid taxes.
– Conspiracy
– Tax evasion
– Money laundering of wire frauds
He shared 55 clients with Aria.
He made a sale of Bitcoin to an undercover FBI agent posing as a drug dealer.
In response to questions from the undercover FBI agent posing as a drug dealer asking about KYC Ian responded he disables all that.
The undercover agent went and bought crypto from one of Ian’s vending machines two weeks later and paid a 14% fee.
Ian “looked the other way”.
At this point the defense lawyer gets up and has the opportunity to make his own opening statement and responds to many of the claims of the prosecutor:
Can’t omit things.
(Ie meaning the government is lying)
Sisti says: “government made up stories”, “freemans not a scammer”
If freeman worked with scammers “place scammer on stand”
(note: there is no scammer on the prosecution’s witness list to base the argument of him working with scammers off)
[They] “investigated Ian for years”
[They] “made him out to be bad man”
Ian is most likely the least violent man in this courtroom.
Ian got money back from a scammer for a mother.
He helped a Texas investigator.
Church is real.
Church does real things.
Aided homeless in Keene.
Fed the homeless.
Helped with the courts.
Helped with community service.
“Setup orphanages in Uganda”
Lots of misconceptions going around.
Time to clear the air.
Freeman setup a mosque for the Keene’s Muslim community.
He helps local businesses accept Bitcoin.
He shows them how to do it for free!
Many businesses use his help.
Freeman is not secretive.
Photos have his name on them.
Record of transactions.
Warns people of scams.
Refuses to partake in scams.
He rejects deals.
He turns people away.
He works with law enforcement, on more than one occasion.
Money transmission came info effect post 2002.
Bitcoin did not exist in 2002.
Statute does not even mention Bitcoin.
Corrected only after arrest, and the law then only went into effect in Jan 2021.
Freeman is not in a business.
He’s not even transmitting anything.
Freeman relied on the law to protect himself.
Freeman sought a licensed attorney for legal opinion and relied upon that legal opinion:
The legal opinion said:
1. He was not operating a business
2. Church is not involved in exchange
3. Bitcoin is owned by church, not involved in moving other peoples money
No criminal intent whatsoever.
The banking commissioner of New Hampshire even testified that they are not money transmitters, but simply vending crypto.
Nefarious actors do not get:
– Drivers license photos
– Photos, selfies
All this was preserved for years.
What bank allowed $750,000 to be transferred by a 76 year old?
Freeman is not working hand in hand with scammers.
He warned people of scammers and they still would do transactions.
The undercover agent posing as a drug dealer is a sorry excuse to hang charges on Ian.
Ian refused to do business with the undercover agent.
Freeman told him no.
Why did the undercover agent need to go to the vending machine if Ian agreed to sell him crypto?
This was a “forced transaction”.
Told after the fact.
“I can not tell you you can use that”
What was he suppose to do? Post an armed guard in front of the vending machine?
Vending machines were operated for years at one location without problems. The owner at Murphy’s Taproom said there were zero complaints.
Murphy’s Taproom is open to the public, police, liquor commission, etc.
Remember what I said earlier. We are a “rule of law nation”.
It’s not a “good enough system” that we have.
You all agreed to follow the rules.
We need you now to watch and keep an open mind.
Burden of proof is on them, and it is a heavy one, “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
Sisti asks jury to vote “not guilty”- they failed
That concludes day 1 of the Crypto6 trial.
For more details, pictures, videos, etc on the days events visit TheCrypto6.com and join the Matrix or Telegram read-only Crypto6 updates group. We have links to articles written by others, pictures, videos, and more.
Need a comment for a story your writing on the Crypto6? Want to get in touch? Need copyright sign off for your paper? Contact chris at thinkpenguin com for footage, pictures, potential interviews with those involved or surrounding the Crypto6 and more.
FBI Goon Smashes Cameras During Crypto Six Raid
Christmas came early! Just days before the start of the Crypto Six trial, federal prosecutors have revealed they will be dropping the supermajority of counts in their ridiculous case against me. Gone are all twelve of the “wire fraud” charges, three “money laundering” charges, “conspiracy to commit bank fraud & wire fraud”, and most importantly the charge with the ten-year mandatory minimum sentence, the “kingpin” charge of “continuing financial crimes enterprise”. All gone!
If you’ve been paying attention to the case for the last twenty months, you may recall the big deal the prosecutors made to try to keep me in jail until trial, claiming I am a “sophisticated cyber criminal” and a “danger to the community”. Prior to the charges being dropped, my bail conditions had loosed to where I am no longer wearing a tracking anklet. Now that those charges are gone, when we recently asked to remove the government spyware from my computer and phone, the prosecutors had no objection. Apparently, I’m no longer the scary things they told the judge and press that I was.
The remaining charges that are slated for trial are:
While this is assuredly good news, as it reduces the maximum time I could spend in prison from 420+ years to 70 years, it’s really sad news for my three friends who took plea deals on the “wire fraud” charges. Had they known the charge they pled to would eventually be dropped, they surely wouldn’t have taken the raw “deal”. Now they are saddled with felony convictions for the rest of their lives for something that sounds really bad. The reality is, the accusations were simply that they’d lied to a bank, and that it was not even to try to scam the bank out of money, but only to do things like keep an account open. However no one who checks their record is going to ask them for details. They’ll just see “wire fraud” and think they are dealing with a fraudster, when in fact no one was defrauded. None of the banks lost anything and no restitution was ordered during sentencing for any of the three. None of them committed fraud, but they took the plea likely out of fear – the reason most people take a plea – because the feds know how to scare people.
Don’t Take the Plea Deal Flyer
They stack a ton of charges against you, then threaten to stack even more if you don’t tap out. A few years of probation and a felony starts looking really good compared to thirty years in prison, so it’s understandable why people will take a plea, even though they didn’t actually commit the crime of which they are accused. The prosecutors love it as they rack up conviction after conviction, ruining innocent peoples’ lives and bolstering the prosecutors’ careers. Plus, they never have to bother preparing for and going to trial. It’s super easy for them and it almost always works.
For a long time, I have been an advocate of “Don’t Take the Plea Deal“. ESPECIALLY if you didn’t actually do anything wrong. It is certainly risky and scary to go up against the federal behemoth. They have unlimited resources to throw at destroying you. However, if you take the first plea, you will never even get to see what kind of case they have against you. It might be a really crappy case and they may have made critical errors. There’s also a good chance of a better plea offer coming later on, but if you take the first plea, you’ll never find out. Of course, you have to do what you feel is right for you, and I never blame anyone for taking a plea if they feel that is best.
However, long term, people taking plea deals just empowers the state. If more people stood up and demanded their right to a trial, even on things as simple as a speeding or parking ticket, the “justice” system would not be able to handle the case load and they would likely just drop charges all together.
While I am happy to see the bulk of the charges in my case go away, I’m sad for my friends who were intimidated into wrongful convictions for vicitmless “crimes” on charges that would likely have been dropped anyway. The Crypto Six trial begins with jury selection on Tuesday, Dec 6th at Federal Court Church in Concord, NH. For more background on the case, visit TheCryptoSix.com.
Ian Freeman Gets His Freedom Back: Running GNU/Linux On His Laptop Again
Ian Freeman of the Crypto6 is once again free to utilize his choice of operating systems: GNU/Linux. Back in ~ May of 2021 the feds took away Ian’s freedom of choice in what software he could utilize despite never having been convicted of any crimes. A tactic they regularly utilize against their victims. The purported reason for the arrest this time around was over the bastardly crime of selling crypto. However, after a decade of being targeted by the feds and the feds targeting other free staters and leading liberty activists in New Hampshire it’s a bit hard to believe that it was anything other than a politically motivated attack on freedom in the free state. This is at least the 2nd raid of Free Talk Live’s studio in the past 5 years, and the third incident involving federal agents and Ian / 73-75 Leverett St since ~2012.
However this isn’t what this story is about. It’s about the federal government’s attack on all things freedom and that includes the use of free software. What is disturbing about this is that the state is utilizing bail restrictions to prevent people from utilizing free software and has been doing it since at least the 1990s. Unlike other cases I have not heard of anyone else being successful in getting this type of restriction lifted and that’s quite disturbing. It took Ian more than a year and a pricey lawyer to get a ruling to lift this unreasonable and burdensome restriction on his right to utilize the software of his choice.
The good news of course is that with the help of his lawyer he was able to get the judge to lift this bail restriction. The bad news is that it comes just a week before his trial is set to begin. Yes- that’s right. It took ~19 months not including the two months that Ian spent in a cage to get a ruling to restore his right to utilize free software. And that’s ~2 months under which he was illegally held based on a magistrates misunderstanding of the law.
You might think this story ends with an operating system, but it’s not so. Not only did this restriction exist, but he’s also been prohibited from utilizing other free software. There is also an explicit prohibition on his use of Telegram. Now there is an argument for the restriction on his use of Telegram. At least in theory the argument would go that Telegram was a tool utilized in the course of conducting some sort of criminal enterprise. The problem with this logic is of course that a phone was also utilized in the course of conducting whatever sort of criminal enterprise that the prosecution has imagined up. Yet- there is no restriction for the use of a telephone.
There are many other unreasonable restrictions and violations of justice that defendants not convicted of any crimes face when being pursued by authorities who more often than not have no real basis for the restrictions on an accused freedoms. Ian they claimed was a flight risk- yet had no basis other than unsubstantiated claims of wealth, of which the judge eventually ruled was not a basis for holding someone. In fact even mob bosses can’t be held without bail! Yet- nothing stopped the prosecutor from slandering Ian’s good name and calling him a “kingpin”. No penalty will emerge from such actions because prosecutors, judges, and law enforcement are generally immune.
What can we do to change this? Well, not much. Without moving for independence New Hampshire residents will always be under the thumb of federal agents looking to attack freedom in the state. Fortunately there has been a growing independence movement in the state. If you’ve not heard of it check out https://www.nhexit.us for more information on the independence movement.
Not yet in New Hampshire? Well, if you believe in joining with other like minded persons to achieve liberty in our lifetime you should join the migration of liberty-minded folk moving to New Hampshire. After a decade of work free staters have achieved almost ~100 liberty friendly reps. While it may be another 8-10 years at our current rate of increasing representation to achieve more significant victories your move could help increase the pace. Not to mention we do have some small victories !
In 2017 for instance free staters worked with state representatives to pass a bill protecting New Hampshire businesses dealing with cryptocurrencies from state regulators. The bill passed and the governor even signed it into into law. There have been many other small victories like this one, but as has been demonstrated by the arrest of the Crypto6~ more needs to be done to achieve real freedom in our lifetime. If you’re a liberty-minded person join us in New Hampshire and we can achieve real freedom together.
Do you know what is really happening behind NH prison bars? To find out what goes on there, you would need to talk to someone who was on the inside. Frank Staples could help you with that. He was there and is willing to share his story with us.
The post What Happens In NH Prisons? appeared first on The Liberty Block.
Every option for schooling has been overrun by the left. We are seeing more and more homeschooling from this. There are no viable options for schools. With no options out there homeschooling is the only option on the table in this day in age.
The post Public, Private, and Charter Schools, and What’s Wrong With Them All appeared first on The Liberty Block.
Thanks to the hard work of liberty superactivist Justin O’Donnell, “101 Reasons to Liberty Lives in NH” has been completely re-done and updated in written form. It’s now called “Live Free and Thrive: 101 Reasons Liberty Lives in New Hampshire, and So Should You!” You can download it here as a PDF, for free. It’s also available for Kindle and in paperback form.
The original list, created two decades ago, has long needed an update as there have been so many amazing successes since then thanks to the thousands of people who have moved here for the Free State Project and NH Freedom Migration.
The new list will also be made into a documentary film and if you’d like to contribute to its production, please click here.
NHexit.US
The NHexit.US blog has a detailed story looking at what happened to the 13 state representatives who voted for the NH Independence bill this year, CACR 32. How many of them were re-elected? Turns out, of those who ran again and made it to the general election, 100% of them were re-elected!
Despite the democrats trying to make secession an issue, and despite the fears of the state reps who were too cowardly to vote for the bill, we now know that being in favor of NH independence, or at least being in favor of letting the people vote on the question – which is all the bill would have done – is not a guaranteed end to a state rep’s career.
For a full breakdown of how the NH Independence reps fared in this year’s election, see the article here at NHexit.US.
In October 2022, Daniel Rothschild self-published a book comprised of his numerous academic essays relating to government, anarchism, capitalism, and liberty. Daniel is an SEO specialist who works primarily with businesses in the cannabis industry. He earned a Master’s Degree in Economics from San Jose State University.
The post Local Voluntaryist Publishes Academic Liberty Essays on Amazon! appeared first on The Liberty Block.
This election proves the only two solutions are nullification and secession. Most voters in the united states voted to destroy our liberty slightly faster than the alternative option would have done. Voting has rarely worked. Mob rule doesn’t produce liberty when the vote determines who gets the handouts.
The post 2022 Elections Push Flexit Closer To Reality appeared first on The Liberty Block.
In The united states, the powers to make laws reside with the State governments. The US Constitution grants a few specific powers to the federal government; the power to have a navy, a Supreme Court, the power to coin money, and a select few others. Article 1, Section 8 outlines the powers delegated to the federal government. No part of the Constitution gives the federal government the power to control education
The post Federal Tyrants Give Florida One More Reason To Secede appeared first on The Liberty Block.
11/15/22 Crypto6 Evidentiary Hearing
After almost 7 years of waiting we’ve finally got a trial date! So mark your calendar and put your employer on notice that you’ll need a few weeks off as there is finally a solid date for the trial: December 6th, 2022. Address: U.S. District Court, 55 Pleasant St, Concord, NH 03301. Time yet to be known. Bring a valid state issued ID (real ID and passport not required) to ensure entrance to court house, no cameras/phones.
Early 2013 interaction between Phil Christiana and free staters
For those who haven’t been paying attention and wondering what the Crypto6 case is all about here is a bit of the backstory. In March of 2021 56 FBI agents, half a dozen three letter agencies, and dozens of other law enforcement officials raided the Bitcoin Embassy, the Shire Free Church, Free Talk Live’s studio, a half dozen homes of so-called co-conspirators among other locations over the bastardly crime of selling crypto.
Somewhat closer to reality the story actually dates back decades and surrounds a single FBI agent with a political grudge against libertarians, free staters, and the Free State Project’s libertarian migration to New Hampshire. To shorten the backstory a bit further after a decade of attempting to take Ian Freeman out and three FBI investigations later FBI agent Phil Christiana finally thinks he has a case he can make stick against his primary political opponent Ian Freeman. You see Ian Freeman is a significant figure in libertarian circles and was responsible for many early movers partaking in the Free State Project’s migration. Some would even credit him with the success of the Free State Project itself. Ian’s activism in New Hampshire dates back about ~16 years now and has been a thorn in the side of Phil Christiana and the federal government for nearly as long. With a majorly syndicated libertarian run radio show Ian has enabled public criticism of government, government agencies, and officials with a show called Free Talk Live broadcasting on about ~200 radio stations nationwide. During this time Ian & co-hosts have promoted the Free State Project and cryptocurrency as a path to peace and freedom. Something dirty agents just don’t like.
The Hearing
The most recent hearing was significant in deciding many issues. The hearing started with a ‘daubert motion’ which is a motion discussed outside the presence of a jury to exclude the testimony of expert witnesses that do not possess the requisite level of expertise or otherwise used questionable methods to obtain data. In this case one of the defendant’s objectives was to exclude an expert that headed the blockchain forensics unit of the FBI and claimed to be an expert on blockchain analysis.
The prosecution granted Ian Freeman’s lawyer Mark Sisti a pre-hearing interview with the prosecution’s blockchain expert and key witness in the case Erin Montgomery. In that interview it came to light that Erin Montgomery has never been qualified as an expert witness before any court. Mark Sisti proceeded to argue that blockchain analysis was not a scientifically validated process sufficient to pass muster at trial. While it has been utilized in other cases to obtain search warrants and the like the standards for use at trial are far greater. In order to utilize blockchain analysis at trial the tools and processes would need to be open to peer review and the results be duplicable by outside experts.
One question that the defenses lawyer raised was whether or not the prosecutors filings constituted a community of experts. For which the prosecutor responded that she was an expert on co-spend. Co-spend is the tracing of the flow of bitcoins via clustering by co-spending which looks at addresses that create a transaction controlled by a given wallet. Effectively the testimony would attempt to prove the different Bitcoin addresses were controlled by the same person or entity.
The defense further clarified that the problem with letting the witness on the stand to testify was that it would give an aura or the appearance that the witness was an expert. To which the judge said he was also not even sure the witness was an expert witness either. As such he was inclined to allow the witness to offer an opinion, but only for story telling sake.
The prosecution proceeded to clarify that it was more about co-spend, not her being an expert.
Mark, the defense lawyer, then got concerned about qualifying her as a witness if not an expert implying that there were different standards of evidence for witnesses than expert witnesses.
Erin Montgomery was then asked to take the stand and testify about her qualifications. She stated that she worked for the FBI in a supervisory role within the virtual asset unit providing expert support. Her expertise covered crypto and decentralized virtual assets. Her qualifications included a liberal arts and history degree and 15 years of service with the FBI. She worked for the FBI’s cyber division unit which was a unit that focused on financially motivated cyber crime.
What makes her qualified to speak as an expert witness included:
– Early on she educated herself using online forums
– As books became available she read up further on Bitcoin
In 2011 Erin Montgomery was one of two people who took “ownership” in the FBI’s first big push into cryptocurrency. From the beginning she was part of a criminal investigation unit that created the virtual asset unit.
She then proceeded to specialize in doing blockchain tracing using open source tools and later commercial tools. She obtained two certificates from a company called Chainalysis which produces a commercial blockchain tracing tool.
She eventually became the supervisor of strategic and tactical groups developing the FBI’s curriculum for blockchain analysis. Despite claiming to have trained hundreds even thousands of people at the FBI she revealed that there were actually only four employees in her unit.
The defendant’s lawyer further questioned the agents credibility pointing out that she had no college education in blockchain analysis from A&M or taken any courses on blockchain analysis. In fact her education pre-dates Bitcoin’s existence. He points out that she never testified as an expert in any courtroom. The Chainalysis tool relied upon was developed by a private company and unavailable for peer review. He asks what the training requirements were for her field. To which she responded that there were no training requirements. Rather the program was developed in house and not peer reviewed by any outside agency at all. There was no scientific basis either. However her work was at points double checked by team-mates.
When her work was questioned, she said that while the evidence was originally crafted by the way of a commercial tool she re-created her work utilizing open source software blockchain.info. Humorously this is not an open source program, but rather a website. Within the context of the questioning the lawyer was not asking about “open source tools”, but the ability of outsider expertise to analyze the source code. This so-called expert didn’t even understand the question let alone that the software she was referring was not open source, but rather merely a website open to the public.
When questioned about her colleague double checking her work she responded that errors had been found, but that she couldn’t remember if any errors were found in this particular case. As the testimony continued the blockchain expert gleaned at the prosecutor gesturing for confirmation of her testimony. A regular back and forth of this continued throughout the testimony. Upon follow up questioning by the prosecutor the witness reveals that it’s very easy to make mistakes. In giving an example of a mistake shes made before she humorously even made an unintentional error confusing Bitcoin addresses and amounts thereof.
The defense asks what makes you special, to which the expert witness responds that she doesn’t know that anything makes her special. This is an embarrassing blunder given she indicates that even the defense lawyer could reproduce her work using the same websites she utilized. Obviously- if anyone can do it then one is not an expert.
She testifies that co-spend can link different Bitcoin addresses to a single individual yet fails to grasp that multiple people can control a single private key. While it may generally be correct that one controls a wallet by way of a private key there is nothing that says more than one individual or entity can’t control a private key or wallet.
During the hearing the defense lawyer questions whether or not all work has been provided to the defense team. To which the judge is very concerned. He states he does not want a repeat of the ‘Enron situation’ which was a case where not all the evidence that the defense was entitled to was provided by the prosecution which is required by law for a fair trial to occur. Particularly important is evidence favorable to the defense. He concludes that not all evidence favorable to the defense appears to have been turned over based on the expert witnesses testimony.
The defense reveals that there will be a number of witnesses thus far unknown introduced. One piece of evidence introduced to the docket thus far was a legal opinion from a lawyer advising the Shire Free Church on how to operate and vend cryptocurrency without falling afoul of the registration requirements at the federal level and state level. The prosecutor previously attempted to have this letter excluded from trial by falsely claiming the letter was referencing state law only. While that effort may have failed it is now revealed that not only will the letter be introduced at trial, but so will the attorney that drafted it. Thus removing any question of its authenticity.
The defense will also subpoena New Hampshire’s banking commissioner of whom testified at a state house hearing. The hearing was focused on removing the authority of the banking department to regulate cryptocurrency businesses in New Hampshire. It had previously been granted this authority by accident and had never actually regulated cryptocurrency businesses in the state. The witness will testify to the fact New Hampshire did not regulate the very type of vending the Shire Free Church did. In fact, her example during the state house hearing was specific to the Shire Free Church’s operations and the bill proposed was in direct response to legislators and supporters wanting to protect the Shire Free Church and similarly operated vending operations in New Hampshire.
During the hearing it was also revealed that a key piece of evidence intended to prove a ‘knowingly’ aspect of one of the charges wasn’t directed at the Shire Free Church or Ian Freeman. Nor was this letter sent by certified mail or even the postal service. The letter was sent to numerous operators via email and resembled something akin to spam or a fraud.
One of the defenses arguments appears to be that the vending machines were open and notoriously operated for many years.
Judge’s Conclusion:
There will be no jury nullification argument allowed at trial. This however was never an aspect of the defenses argument, but rather created by the imagination of a prosecutor who is aware of Ian Freeman’s jury nullification outreach. That outreach pertains largely to state courthouses and it’s well known that the federal courts will not entertain such argumentation.
The following evidence will be permitted:
1. Owned and operated vending machines
2. NH stated the church need not be registered under state law
3. Attorney Seth Hipple’s testimony on legalities of vending
4. General intent vs specific intent, intent to cause a particular result is not a defense to federal law
Crimes with general intent involve knowingly committing a criminal act. Specific intent crimes involve knowingly committing the criminal act as well as an intent to cause a particular result by committing the act.
5. The non-expert witness / FBI agent testimony will be allowed, but will not be able to give an opinion that it was Ian Freeman’s wallet, but will allow that inference
It was also revealed that the trial will likely take about two weeks to conclude, and will start on December 6th. However while the trial will start immediately it is likely that the first day of the trial will likely primarily constitute jury selection.
Liberty continues to live and grow in New Hampshire. We had 97 NHLA Endorsed Representatives and Senators elected!
We supported 158 candidates in the primary and general election and must replenish funds to be able to support liberty candidates in special elections. We are holding a PAC fundraising event at Vine 32 in Bedford on Monday, November 28th. If you can attend, we’d love to see you at the event. Please buy your ticket (which acts as a contribution to our PAC). If you can’t attend but have the means to help us prepare for what are sure to be challenging special elections in 2023, please consider donating to the PAC.
The post Running on Empty! PAC Fundraiser appeared first on NH Liberty Alliance.
Pro-Independence Rep Matt Santonastaso RE-ELECTED!
Earlier this year, the historic NH Independence constitutional amendment, CACR 32, was voted on in the state house. Thirteen brave state representatives stood in favor of allowing the people of NH to vote on declaring peaceful independence from the United States, which is all the bill would have done – simply let the people vote.
New Hampshire gets a lot of credit for having a thriving liberty activism migration here and many elected libertarians serving in the legislature as the “Freedom Caucus”. So, why did so many freedom-oriented state reps hide in the shadows on the CACR 32 vote? They privately would support independence, but these reps were too cowardly to show their true colors. A major objection from them was that secession isn’t popular, but the scientific polling done by the Foundation for NH Independence over the summer blew that fear out of the water, showing that nearly one-in-three Granite Staters and over 50% of NH republicans already support New Hampshire being an independent nation.
The other major objection from the reps who otherwise should have supported this issue was fear of not getting re-elected. Now we have the indisputable proof that this fear was also unfounded. Though it’s true that most of the NH population isn’t ready to secede, that doesn’t mean they don’t support putting it to a vote. According to the FNHI polling, 42% support putting the question of NH independence to voters, with 12% unsure. Still, most politicians aren’t known for their leadership and courage, so now they can look at the brave thirteen state reps who were willing to take the arrows from the loyalists to the Empire. Let’s take a look at what happened with those thirteen reps, and why it’s a success story for the NH Exit movement.
Of the thirteen reps who heroically voted in favor of CACR 32, several decided not to run again: Mark Warden, Raymond Howard, Dennis Green, Dustin Dodge, and Alan Bershstein. Of the eight running for re-election, three didn’t make it through the primary: The Seacoast’s Max Abramson who barely got defeated by 54 votes, or just over 1%. There’s no indication that his support of independence played a role in his narrow defeat. In the Lakes Region, longtime reps Glen Aldrich and CACR 32’s main sponsor Mike Sylvia lost handily to their republican opponents. However, Sylvia himself and other election observers attributed their losses to the Gunstock Mountain situation where they were targeted politically from the left and right for trying to de-fund and probably ultimately sell the state-owned ski area. That left five of the eight pro-independence reps who were seeking re-election, advancing to the primary.
All five were successfully re-elected! The big race to watch was Rindge state rep Matt Santonastaso. Santonastaso was a key leader with CACR 32 and was targeted heavily by the democrats for his support of NH independence. He doesn’t just want people to be able to vote on it, he’s a strong advocate for New Hampshire’s peaceful divorce from the United States. Every newspaper article I saw about him labeled him as a secessionist, even in the headlines. He won re-election, along with reps Glenn Bailey, Diane Kelley, Paul Terry, and Josh Yokela. Plus they gained at least one newly elected first-time representative, Jason Gerhard, who was endorsed by the newly-formed NH Independence PAC.
Empire Loyalist Brodie Deshaies, was DEFEATED in the primary!
The NHIPAC will surely be reaching out to the other new and returning liberty-oriented state reps – of which there were a record number elected this year, including a record 50 free staters – to see who is willing to go on the record in favor of freedom from the United States.The state reps who had excuses before will probably still have excuses the next time legislation like CACR 32 comes up, but now they can’t claim they won’t win re-election or that no one supports independence, because those are simply fear-based and not the reality on-the-ground in New Hampshire. The popularity of peaceful secession is only going to increase as the federal government continues to ratchet up the tyranny no mater which political party is running it.
What’s next for NH independence? The newly elected and re-elected state reps have a couple of weeks to file legislation for the upcoming 2023 session that kicks off this winter. What secession-related bills will be filed this time? Stay tuned here to NHexit.US for the latest, and don’t forget to sign the petition if you haven’t yet.
P.S. Goodbye to the federal government’s loyalist rep, Brodie Deshaies – the young pro-tyranny state rep from Wolfeboro who was the key spokesman against CACR 32 in the state house. Deshaies didn’t make it through the primary! Of course a new loyalist to the Empire will rise to take his place the next time the state house debates NH independence, but the loyalists never have any argument except appeals to violence and “authority”.
Despite everyone expecting a huge red wave on Tuesday, by the time the votes were counted, there was nothing more than a purple ripple. Republicans were expected to take majorities in the House and Senate.
The post GOP Loses, Liberty Advances in New Hampshire Elections appeared first on The Liberty Block.
Jeremy Kauffman is the Libertarian nominee for US Senate running against Don Bolduc (R) and Maggie Hassan (D). Many libertarians will be voting for him and many disaffected Republicans and Democrats are likely to, as well.
The post Voting For Jeremy Kauffman & Curing Wasted Vote Syndrome appeared first on The Liberty Block.
Free Keene already published the damning video showing General Don Bolduc, the republican candidate for US senate in NH, lying to police to have Joa from “Breaking the Flaw” wrongfully arrested. The story and video have gone viral yet right wing publications have largely ignored the truth of the video that proves Joa never touched Bolduc. Meanwhile, Joa has filed complaints against Bolduc with Goffstown police, as Bolduc was the one who committed assault against Joa and then made false reports to police.
Bolduc has continued to lie, even after walking back his claim that he was assaulted.
Now, you can see this longer form video showing various scenes from outside the senate debate at St. Anselm College, including libertarians protesting Jeremy Kauffman being excluded from the debate, but mostly focusing on the entire arrest and subsequent release of Joa:
Should be an interesting case when it goes to trial. Joa’s arraignment is at Goffstown District Court at 8:15am on December 1st.
UPDATE: Joa has released his first-person, unedited video of the whole arrest scene.
In light of the reported attack against General Don Bolduc, the New Hampshire Republican Senate Nominee, we would like to correct the record.
The post VIDEO FOOTAGE: Was US Senate Candidate Attacked By A Libertarian Activist? appeared first on The Liberty Block.
NH Republican US Senate candidate General Don Bolduc was caught in another lie tonight. This time, claiming a libertarian activist threw a punch at him outside a debate at St Anselm College in Manchester, NH. Multiple mainstream media sites are touting the campaign’s claim that Bolduc dodged a punch from Joa of “Breaking the Flaw“. (FOX, NYPost, Breitbart, Washington Examiner)
The campaign and Bolduc himself, are lying. Joa never threw a punch nor did he even try to touch Bolduc. He did approach him and yell at him about being a warmonger, that’s it. Bolduc on the other hand immediately pointed Joa out to police, who then took him into custody as Bolduc yelled, “He hit me!” multiple times. The video clearly shows that it was in fact Bolduc who hit Joa, then feigning that he’d been hurt in the same arm with which he hit Joa. Bolduc’s supporters then roughed up Joa even further, but police didn’t arrest any of them. Watch it for yourself:
Though Joa was arrested, he was only charged with “disorderly conduct” and “criminal trespass”. It’s noteworthy that despite Bolduc’s hollering, police did not charge Joa with assault or battery. Perhaps because they too witnessed the incident and know the truth – Bolduc lied.
There is a lot more video from this event, but I wanted to get this part out as soon as possible. Stay tuned to Free Keene for more coverage.
I fear that next Tuesday’s elections could cause a true crisis for our union. And by ‘fear’, I mean that I sort of hope it occurs. I’ll explain my rationale throughout this article.
The post The Impending Constitutional Crisis appeared first on The Liberty Block.
One of the most interesting races for the 24 seats in the NH Senate is playing out in District 16. Technically, neither of the two candidates that voters will see on the general election ballot ran in the primary. In fact, both seemingly had no intention of running for Senate until just a few weeks ago. The two candidates represent polar opposites; a liberty conservative versus a hardcore progressive socialist. The District includes Candia, Goffstown, Hooksett, Manchester Ward 1, and Raymond.
The post Unusual Election In Senate District 16, Huge Liberty Opportunity appeared first on The Liberty Block.