zlacker

[return to "Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds"]
1. albrol+l5[view] [source] 2022-02-08 17:12:20
>>mikeyo+(OP)
fwiw, it appears one of the named here is a YC Alum: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=il https://www.linkedin.com/in/unrealdutch/
◧◩
2. tiffan+Hn[view] [source] 2022-02-08 18:21:53
>>albrol+l5
Let's be fair to these individuals and not presume guilt.

In the US, it's "innocent until proven guilty".

Media is so quick to assume the person is guilty just because of an allegation.

◧◩◪
3. d23+nr[view] [source] 2022-02-08 18:36:41
>>tiffan+Hn
That's the standard for our criminal justice system, not for us as individuals. It sounds from the release that the justice department has a boatload of compelling evidence against them.
◧◩◪◨
4. mardif+fx[view] [source] 2022-02-08 19:01:16
>>d23+nr
There's a reason why the criminal justice system operates like that though. The system has been designed like that because it turned that it is a very good idea not to go on witch hunts or to assume guilt if you want a functional society. I'm not defending the person involved here, but it's important to remember that the presumption of innocence isn't just an abstract legal concept instead of a very important part of the social contract.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. smnrch+7I[view] [source] 2022-02-08 19:44:37
>>mardif+fx
Do you think it is wrong for a person to believe OJ was guilty of the murder he was accused of? If a person decides to keep their distance from their new neighbour OJ and not treat them with neighbourly kindness and open arms because of that murder, would you admonish them for treating OJ differently for something he was never found guilty of in the court of law?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. mardif+OL[view] [source] 2022-02-08 20:00:38
>>smnrch+7I
No, because in the case of OJ we have more than just what the prosecution (in this case, the DoJ) accused him of doing. My point isn't that you can't make your own judgment or that only court decisions are valid source sources of truth. What I'm saying here is that any opinion/analysis we can make at this stage are basically entirely based on the prosecution, since we don't have any other facts to go by.

Unless you already knew the people involved or we have some third party sources, we are basically just believing the side that only has 1 goal; showing how guilty the people they prosecute are. How could that mean anything else but assuming guilt?

(And honestly I think that personal feelings towards a person are very often good enough to make a personal judgment on guilt, but we don't even have that here! I'd bet most of us never heard of them before today)

[go to top]