NEWS
21 Октября 2025
HOW P2P DEALS IN CRYPTO REALLY WORK — Part I
Gandalf the wizard, sitting on top of the Federation Tower in Moscow-City, a business center in Moscow, the owner of a house in Miami, waves a St. Kitts passport. He is planning money-pumping schemes for Hydra; some even say his business was connected with human trafficking and distribution of child pictures. How much money? $700,000,000 — a terrifying amount.
There is not a single word of truth in this story. All of this is the fantasy of incompetent journalists and prosecutors.
How does the p2p cryptocurrency exchange scheme actually work?
Imagine you have a friend who is into crypto. You asked him to sell a little bit of bitcoin. You took his banking details, sent the money. He, in return, sent you some bitcoin at the current rate. That’s it — this is a p2p deal. Wishing you successful ownership of bitcoin! 🤝
P2P means peer-to-peer, or direct interaction between people.
The first company that decided to slightly broaden the environment for searching bitcoin holders — LocalBitcoins — appeared in 2012. It was a bulletin board where by various criteria (city, currency, bank) one could find a counterpart for a deal.
After finding a suitable counterpart for the deal, the user starts a chat right on the site. They stored the chat history on their website, as well as a lot of other information, to prevent fraud. What happens if you send money to the seller and he does not want to send you bitcoins in return? To avoid this, LocalBitcoins held (blocked) the bitcoins with themselves for the duration of the deal.
In case of any misunderstandings or fraud, the user could contact support and open a dispute.
Support held the seller’s bitcoins in escrow, verifying the buyer’s payment. The scheme of buying and selling worked especially conveniently with bank transfers and electronic payment systems, for example QIWI. In extreme cases, support asked to show the computer screen (via TeamViewer) and prove that the payment had been made.
In the case of cash payments, it is impossible to prove the fact of payment, therefore LocalBitcoins did not participate in escrow (as deal guarantor). In cash deals LB acted only as a bulletin board (billboard).
In general, trading through banks and payment systems became the killer-feature of LocalBitcoins because of the speed of deals. A deal — that is, to buy bitcoin — could be completed in 10–20 minutes with minimal fees. By finding a seller’s listing with the same bank, it is easy to avoid interbank delays — everything goes instantly. My compliments to LocalBitcoins — they were pioneers and trendsetters. Time passed, LocalBitcoins became more and more popular. Naturally, the idea was picked up by other companies.
The 1% commissions no longer satisfied many, plus they had constant outages. The absence of a mobile app and notifications via SMS/email also did not meet the requirements of modern times.
We understood that we could do better. Plus, for almost 2 years our service was free. Then — an actual commission of 0.3%, a fat referral program, fast service via Telegram, quick dispute resolution, low withdrawal commissions — people wanted to come to us in a stream.
At that time, years 15–16, people treated crypto lightly — some thought it was mathematical masturbation, a financial pyramid, or a CIA ploy (cross out the unnecessary).
For example, in the country of registration of our company initially the financial regulator said: crypto is not money. No one assumed that trading crypto would be compared with trading weapons.
In the summer of the year 18, one notable event happened: we received the first request from Russian law enforcement authorities.
We discussed many things in those days, but the key point — we are not going to cover illegal activity. All the information we had at that time we provided in response.
And we had plenty of information. Because every seller in every deal (and we had millions of deals) provides his bank account and other payment details. This data is 100% reliable. Without it the deal and money transfer is impossible!
As a result, we received many positive reviews from law enforcement — New Year greetings and even letters of appreciation.
After my arrest all the media and prosecutors hysterically cried about the anonymity of the service we represented. I still do not understand what anonymity they are talking about, if we knew the exact bank details of the seller for each (without any exceptions) deal that passed through us. It resembles Powell's test tubes — and the “Russian interference” in Trump’s 2016 elections (this fabrication is currently under investigation).
LocalBitcoins had a fat share in the Russian crypto market. They decided to cease their activity two months after my arrest. We all know — Finns never rush: the authorities caught up with the company only in July of this (2025) year, fining them €500k. What kind of curse of the Russian crypto market is this — I will discuss in a future article.
HOW P2P DEALS IN CRYPTO REALLY WORK — Part I
Gandalf the wizard, sitting on top of the Federation Tower in Moscow-City, a business center in Moscow, the owner of a house in Miami, waves a St. Kitts passport. He is planning money-pumping schemes for Hydra; some even say his business was connected with human trafficking and distribution of child pictures. How much money? $700,000,000 — a terrifying amount.
There is not a single word of truth in this story. All of this is the fantasy of incompetent journalists and prosecutors.
How does the p2p cryptocurrency exchange scheme actually work?
Imagine you have a friend who is into crypto. You asked him to sell a little bit of bitcoin. You took his banking details, sent the money. He, in return, sent you some bitcoin at the current rate. That’s it — this is a p2p deal. Wishing you successful ownership of bitcoin! 🤝
P2P means peer-to-peer, or direct interaction between people.
The first company that decided to slightly broaden the environment for searching bitcoin holders — LocalBitcoins — appeared in 2012. It was a bulletin board where by various criteria (city, currency, bank) one could find a counterpart for a deal.
After finding a suitable counterpart for the deal, the user starts a chat right on the site. They stored the chat history on their website, as well as a lot of other information, to prevent fraud. What happens if you send money to the seller and he does not want to send you bitcoins in return? To avoid this, LocalBitcoins held (blocked) the bitcoins with themselves for the duration of the deal.
In case of any misunderstandings or fraud, the user could contact support and open a dispute.
Support held the seller’s bitcoins in escrow, verifying the buyer’s payment. The scheme of buying and selling worked especially conveniently with bank transfers and electronic payment systems, for example QIWI. In extreme cases, support asked to show the computer screen (via TeamViewer) and prove that the payment had been made.
In the case of cash payments, it is impossible to prove the fact of payment, therefore LocalBitcoins did not participate in escrow (as deal guarantor). In cash deals LB acted only as a bulletin board (billboard).
In general, trading through banks and payment systems became the killer-feature of LocalBitcoins because of the speed of deals. A deal — that is, to buy bitcoin — could be completed in 10–20 minutes with minimal fees. By finding a seller’s listing with the same bank, it is easy to avoid interbank delays — everything goes instantly. My compliments to LocalBitcoins — they were pioneers and trendsetters. Time passed, LocalBitcoins became more and more popular. Naturally, the idea was picked up by other companies.
The 1% commissions no longer satisfied many, plus they had constant outages. The absence of a mobile app and notifications via SMS/email also did not meet the requirements of modern times.
We understood that we could do better. Plus, for almost 2 years our service was free. Then — an actual commission of 0.3%, a fat referral program, fast service via Telegram, quick dispute resolution, low withdrawal commissions — people wanted to come to us in a stream.
At that time, years 15–16, people treated crypto lightly — some thought it was mathematical masturbation, a financial pyramid, or a CIA ploy (cross out the unnecessary).
For example, in the country of registration of our company initially the financial regulator said: crypto is not money. No one assumed that trading crypto would be compared with trading weapons.
In the summer of the year 18, one notable event happened: we received the first request from Russian law enforcement authorities.
We discussed many things in those days, but the key point — we are not going to cover illegal activity. All the information we had at that time we provided in response.
And we had plenty of information. Because every seller in every deal (and we had millions of deals) provides his bank account and other payment details. This data is 100% reliable. Without it the deal and money transfer is impossible!
As a result, we received many positive reviews from law enforcement — New Year greetings and even letters of appreciation.
After my arrest all the media and prosecutors hysterically cried about the anonymity of the service we represented. I still do not understand what anonymity they are talking about, if we knew the exact bank details of the seller for each (without any exceptions) deal that passed through us. It resembles Powell's test tubes — and the “Russian interference” in Trump’s 2016 elections (this fabrication is currently under investigation).
LocalBitcoins had a fat share in the Russian crypto market. They decided to cease their activity two months after my arrest. We all know — Finns never rush: the authorities caught up with the company only in July of this (2025) year, fining them €500k. What kind of curse of the Russian crypto market is this — I will discuss in a future article.
19 October 2025
Should Anatoly Legkodymov Be Extradited to France? A Legal Analysis
Based on the current political situation and international legal principles, Anatoly Legkodymov should not be extradited to France. The extradition request violates fundamental principles of international criminal law, particularly the prohibition against double jeopardy (ne bis in idem), and raises serious concerns about prosecutorial overreach and the erosion of legal finality.
Background of the Case
Anatoly Legkodymov, the Russian co-founder of cryptocurrency exchange Bitzlato, has already served 18 months in U.S. custody and was sentenced to "time served" in July 2024 after pleading guilty to operating an unlicensed money transmitting business. U.S. authorities alleged that Bitzlato processed over $700 million in illicit funds, primarily connected to the Russian dark web marketplace Hydra Market.
Despite completing his U.S. sentence, Legkodymov remains in detention due to France's extradition request. In September 2025, a U.S. court certified his extradition to France on charges that are substantially similar to those he already faced in the US.
Legal Arguments Against Extradition
Violation of Ne Bis In Idem Principle
The most compelling argument against extradition lies in the fundamental principle of ne bis in idem (double jeopardy), which prohibits trying an individual twice for the same offense. This principle is recognized in international human rights law, including:legkodymov+1
Article 14(7) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Article 4 of Protocol 7 to the European Convention on Human Rights
Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Unionusip+1
The French charges against Legkodymov appear to be "essentially a copy-paste of the American ones" , involving the same underlying conduct of operating an unlicensed cryptocurrency exchange that facilitated money laundering. Legal experts have characterized this as "double jeopardy, plain and simple”
International Legal Standards
While the principle of ne bis in idem traditionally operates within single jurisdictions, there is growing recognition of its international application. The European Union's Charter of Fundamental Rights recognizes external ne bis in idem "without qualification" , and several international legal instruments support this broader interpretation.
France's own legal system recognizes the ne bis in idem principle, with French courts having previously applied it to preclude prosecutions when defendants had already been subject to proceedings elsewhere, particularly in cases involving international cooperation
Prosecutorial Cooperation and Bad Faith
The timing of France's extradition request raises questions about prosecutorial coordination and potential bad faith. French prosecutors reportedly used the delay in Legkodymov's deportation proceedings to "assemble fresh charges and file an extradition request". This suggests a coordinated effort to circumvent the finality of the U.S. proceedings rather than pursuing independent French interests
Arguments Supporting Extradition
Separate Sovereign Interests
Proponents of extradition might argue that France has independent sovereign interests in prosecuting money laundering crimes that affected French territory or citizens. The dual sovereignty doctrine, recognized in U.S. law, permits separate sovereigns to prosecute for the same conduct when each has distinct interests to vindicate.
Treaty Obligations
The U.S.-France extradition treaty may require extradition for qualifying offenses, regardless of prior prosecutions elsewhere. However, most modern extradition treaties include exceptions for cases where the person has already been tried for the same.
Political and Policy Considerations
International Cooperation vs. Individual Rights
This case highlights the tension between international law enforcement cooperation and individual rights protection.
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/13062c74-20c7-4bd9-866c-9c4604ce5a60
Should Anatoly Legkodymov Be Extradited to France? A Legal Analysis
Based on the current political situation and international legal principles, Anatoly Legkodymov should not be extradited to France. The extradition request violates fundamental principles of international criminal law, particularly the prohibition against double jeopardy (ne bis in idem), and raises serious concerns about prosecutorial overreach and the erosion of legal finality.
Background of the Case
Anatoly Legkodymov, the Russian co-founder of cryptocurrency exchange Bitzlato, has already served 18 months in U.S. custody and was sentenced to "time served" in July 2024 after pleading guilty to operating an unlicensed money transmitting business. U.S. authorities alleged that Bitzlato processed over $700 million in illicit funds, primarily connected to the Russian dark web marketplace Hydra Market.
Despite completing his U.S. sentence, Legkodymov remains in detention due to France's extradition request. In September 2025, a U.S. court certified his extradition to France on charges that are substantially similar to those he already faced in the US.
Legal Arguments Against Extradition
Violation of Ne Bis In Idem Principle
The most compelling argument against extradition lies in the fundamental principle of ne bis in idem (double jeopardy), which prohibits trying an individual twice for the same offense. This principle is recognized in international human rights law, including:legkodymov+1
Article 14(7) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Article 4 of Protocol 7 to the European Convention on Human Rights
Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Unionusip+1
The French charges against Legkodymov appear to be "essentially a copy-paste of the American ones" , involving the same underlying conduct of operating an unlicensed cryptocurrency exchange that facilitated money laundering. Legal experts have characterized this as "double jeopardy, plain and simple”
International Legal Standards
While the principle of ne bis in idem traditionally operates within single jurisdictions, there is growing recognition of its international application. The European Union's Charter of Fundamental Rights recognizes external ne bis in idem "without qualification" , and several international legal instruments support this broader interpretation.
France's own legal system recognizes the ne bis in idem principle, with French courts having previously applied it to preclude prosecutions when defendants had already been subject to proceedings elsewhere, particularly in cases involving international cooperation
Prosecutorial Cooperation and Bad Faith
The timing of France's extradition request raises questions about prosecutorial coordination and potential bad faith. French prosecutors reportedly used the delay in Legkodymov's deportation proceedings to "assemble fresh charges and file an extradition request". This suggests a coordinated effort to circumvent the finality of the U.S. proceedings rather than pursuing independent French interests
Arguments Supporting Extradition
Separate Sovereign Interests
Proponents of extradition might argue that France has independent sovereign interests in prosecuting money laundering crimes that affected French territory or citizens. The dual sovereignty doctrine, recognized in U.S. law, permits separate sovereigns to prosecute for the same conduct when each has distinct interests to vindicate.
Treaty Obligations
The U.S.-France extradition treaty may require extradition for qualifying offenses, regardless of prior prosecutions elsewhere. However, most modern extradition treaties include exceptions for cases where the person has already been tried for the same.
Political and Policy Considerations
International Cooperation vs. Individual Rights
This case highlights the tension between international law enforcement cooperation and individual rights protection.
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/13062c74-20c7-4bd9-866c-9c4604ce5a60
01 March 2025
On July 18, 2024—seven months ago—Anatoly successfully fought off all charges in a U.S. court and walked away with the lightest possible sentence: time already served.
By all accounts, he should’ve been released immediately. But under U.S. law, he was first transferred to an immigration detention center—a formality expected to last just a few days. No one anticipated that Anatoly would remain behind bars all this time. Twice, a judge signed off on his deportation to Russia, but nothing happened. Instead, the process stalled, caught up in baffling layers of bureaucratic red tape.
Turns out, that delay had a purpose. French prosecutors were using the time to assemble fresh charges and file an extradition request. With the cooperation of ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement), they dragged out his deportation for as long as they could. The kicker? The accusations are essentially a copy-paste of the American ones. France is pulling Anatoly into another drawn-out legal battle—blatantly ignoring the fact that the case has already been resolved.
This is double jeopardy, plain and simple. Punishing a man twice for the same thing violates the most basic principles of justice and law.
On July 18, 2024—seven months ago—Anatoly successfully fought off all charges in a U.S. court and walked away with the lightest possible sentence: time already served.
By all accounts, he should’ve been released immediately. But under U.S. law, he was first transferred to an immigration detention center—a formality expected to last just a few days. No one anticipated that Anatoly would remain behind bars all this time. Twice, a judge signed off on his deportation to Russia, but nothing happened. Instead, the process stalled, caught up in baffling layers of bureaucratic red tape.
Turns out, that delay had a purpose. French prosecutors were using the time to assemble fresh charges and file an extradition request. With the cooperation of ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement), they dragged out his deportation for as long as they could. The kicker? The accusations are essentially a copy-paste of the American ones. France is pulling Anatoly into another drawn-out legal battle—blatantly ignoring the fact that the case has already been resolved.
This is double jeopardy, plain and simple. Punishing a man twice for the same thing violates the most basic principles of justice and law.
19 December 2024
Never in my worst nightmare did I imagine that half of the company would spend two years behind bars, fighting off baseless charges from investigators. And as if that wasn’t enough, the executives who remain free aren’t focused on support or rebuilding the company’s reputation. Instead, they’re looting—picking Bitzlato apart piece by piece, trying to build new ventures on its wreckage.
Source
Never in my worst nightmare did I imagine that half of the company would spend two years behind bars, fighting off baseless charges from investigators. And as if that wasn’t enough, the executives who remain free aren’t focused on support or rebuilding the company’s reputation. Instead, they’re looting—picking Bitzlato apart piece by piece, trying to build new ventures on its wreckage.
Source
06 December 2024
Ethereum’s Lead Dev is Lost. Are You Any Closer to Figuring It Out?
Seems like even the top minds behind Ethereum aren’t quite sure what's going on—and are you?
News tends to trickle down to me here in my little "migration detention," so I only recently caught up on something that happened back in August. That’s when Ethereum’s development lead, Péter Szilágyi, openly voiced his frustration with the crypto space, likening it to a giant casino. No kidding.
The broader narrative around crypto keeps clouding people’s understanding—or outright makes them forget—why Bitcoin was created in the first place. Let me drop a gem from a killer piece that ran in Forbes:
"It’s precisely because governments have always devalued their currencies that cryptocurrencies can—and should—replace fiat money. Seriously, what’s more obvious than devaluation? The very money we earn through our labor—dollars, pounds, euros, yen, you name it—gets systematically debased. Governments, through devaluation, literally rob us of the fruits of our work by slashing the purchasing power of the currency we’re paid in. And no, despite what economists preach, inflation isn’t a 'hidden tax.' Inflation is loud. You can’t miss the bitter aftermath of this daylight robbery."
If you’re hungry for more sharp insights, check out the Library section on my site—plenty of solid resources there.
Ethereum’s Lead Dev is Lost. Are You Any Closer to Figuring It Out?
Seems like even the top minds behind Ethereum aren’t quite sure what's going on—and are you?
News tends to trickle down to me here in my little "migration detention," so I only recently caught up on something that happened back in August. That’s when Ethereum’s development lead, Péter Szilágyi, openly voiced his frustration with the crypto space, likening it to a giant casino. No kidding.
The broader narrative around crypto keeps clouding people’s understanding—or outright makes them forget—why Bitcoin was created in the first place. Let me drop a gem from a killer piece that ran in Forbes:
"It’s precisely because governments have always devalued their currencies that cryptocurrencies can—and should—replace fiat money. Seriously, what’s more obvious than devaluation? The very money we earn through our labor—dollars, pounds, euros, yen, you name it—gets systematically debased. Governments, through devaluation, literally rob us of the fruits of our work by slashing the purchasing power of the currency we’re paid in. And no, despite what economists preach, inflation isn’t a 'hidden tax.' Inflation is loud. You can’t miss the bitter aftermath of this daylight robbery."
If you’re hungry for more sharp insights, check out the Library section on my site—plenty of solid resources there.
27 November 2024
Pardon People Not Poultry
Dear Mr. President,
These individuals have gained valuable insight through their legal proceedings.
These proceedings occurred in the cryptocurrency industry, where clear business regulations have yet to be established. These people are ready to contribute to society right now. Please, grant them clemency!
#PardonPeopleNotPoultry
Pardon People Not Poultry
Dear Mr. President,
These individuals have gained valuable insight through their legal proceedings.
These proceedings occurred in the cryptocurrency industry, where clear business regulations have yet to be established. These people are ready to contribute to society right now. Please, grant them clemency!
- Virgil Griffith
- Roman Sterligov
- Ian Freeman
- Roman Storm
- Samuel Bankman-Fried & the FTX team (I saw him in MDC Brooklyn prison, and you could see in his eyes that he realized his mistake)
- Alexey Andryunin - GotBit
- Dmitry Vasiliev - Wex, detained in Poland
#PardonPeopleNotPoultry
21 November 2024
The Black Hole of American Justice
More than four months ago, I was released from the courtroom as a "free" man.
But that freedom didn’t last even a second.
Since July 19, I have been in immigration detention, and the FBI, as is often the case with them, “accidentally” lost my passport.
Timeline of Events:
July 19
I was transferred from federal prison to immigration detention.
I wanted to reunite with my family as soon as possible, and the quickest way for me was to request bail from the judge while awaiting my departure from the U.S.
August 8 — Bail Hearing
At the hearing, I asked the judge for release on bail. However, the judge decided that I posed a threat to society, even though the federal criminal process had only considered me a flight risk, as a foreigner with no ties in the U.S. But now, to keep me in detention, the judge claimed that my business was allegedly linked to human trafficking and the distribution of child imagery.
These accusations had no basis and were not part of the criminal case. Moreover, no one in the company could have imagined that it would ever be associated with such allegations. Yet, these were the judge's arguments for keeping me behind bars.
Since I wasn’t released on August 8, I could only appear before the judge again to request immediate departure from the U.S. at the next hearing on August 27.
August 27
At the new hearing, the same judge decided that I was "not dangerous enough to leave the U.S. voluntarily" and approved my request for voluntary departure.
“— the respondent was granted voluntary departure.”
All that remained was to wait for this decision to come into effect—usually just 30 days sitting in immigration detention.
September 20 — Motion to Reconsider
When the waiting period was nearly over, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) filed a motion to reconsider the case, citing the existence of an arrest warrant for me in France. A few days later, DHS also filed an appeal to block the previously approved voluntary departure.
The case then moved from the jurisdiction of the immigration judge to the appellate board.
September 25 — Motion to Remand
Despite the case already being in the hands of the appellate board, the judge submitted his own motion to reconsider the case, denied voluntary departure, and ordered forced deportation. However, this decision remains in limbo until the appeal is resolved.
For two months now, I’ve been waiting for the appellate board’s decision. There are no deadlines or clarity. Moreover, the question remains: if I am deported, where exactly will I be sent?
The American Justice System: A Profitable Business
Immigration and criminal prisons in the U.S. are commercial entities whose stocks are freely traded on the stock market. The inmates in these prisons are essentially livestock—a resource for generating profit. The government pays private prison companies for every inmate housed within their walls, so their interest is in keeping the "pastures" as full as possible for as long as possible.
My case is not unique. Documents here are lost very often, and on average, people wait 2-3 months, even from “prosperous” European countries. My story and my case are even profitable—shares of GEO Group (the prison network where I am currently detained) have doubled in value over the past month
The Black Hole of American Justice
More than four months ago, I was released from the courtroom as a "free" man.
But that freedom didn’t last even a second.
Since July 19, I have been in immigration detention, and the FBI, as is often the case with them, “accidentally” lost my passport.
Timeline of Events:
July 19
I was transferred from federal prison to immigration detention.
I wanted to reunite with my family as soon as possible, and the quickest way for me was to request bail from the judge while awaiting my departure from the U.S.
August 8 — Bail Hearing
At the hearing, I asked the judge for release on bail. However, the judge decided that I posed a threat to society, even though the federal criminal process had only considered me a flight risk, as a foreigner with no ties in the U.S. But now, to keep me in detention, the judge claimed that my business was allegedly linked to human trafficking and the distribution of child imagery.
These accusations had no basis and were not part of the criminal case. Moreover, no one in the company could have imagined that it would ever be associated with such allegations. Yet, these were the judge's arguments for keeping me behind bars.
Since I wasn’t released on August 8, I could only appear before the judge again to request immediate departure from the U.S. at the next hearing on August 27.
August 27
At the new hearing, the same judge decided that I was "not dangerous enough to leave the U.S. voluntarily" and approved my request for voluntary departure.
“— the respondent was granted voluntary departure.”
All that remained was to wait for this decision to come into effect—usually just 30 days sitting in immigration detention.
September 20 — Motion to Reconsider
When the waiting period was nearly over, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) filed a motion to reconsider the case, citing the existence of an arrest warrant for me in France. A few days later, DHS also filed an appeal to block the previously approved voluntary departure.
The case then moved from the jurisdiction of the immigration judge to the appellate board.
September 25 — Motion to Remand
Despite the case already being in the hands of the appellate board, the judge submitted his own motion to reconsider the case, denied voluntary departure, and ordered forced deportation. However, this decision remains in limbo until the appeal is resolved.
For two months now, I’ve been waiting for the appellate board’s decision. There are no deadlines or clarity. Moreover, the question remains: if I am deported, where exactly will I be sent?
The American Justice System: A Profitable Business
Immigration and criminal prisons in the U.S. are commercial entities whose stocks are freely traded on the stock market. The inmates in these prisons are essentially livestock—a resource for generating profit. The government pays private prison companies for every inmate housed within their walls, so their interest is in keeping the "pastures" as full as possible for as long as possible.
My case is not unique. Documents here are lost very often, and on average, people wait 2-3 months, even from “prosperous” European countries. My story and my case are even profitable—shares of GEO Group (the prison network where I am currently detained) have doubled in value over the past month
14 November 2024
They are after all of you—it’s only a matter of time.
Recently, Forbes published an article in which the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) reported 50,000 open cases involving various companies linked to money transfers, including cryptocurrency platforms. This highlights the scale of the work law enforcement agencies plan to undertake in the field of cryptocurrencies.
Four years of Trump’s presidency and his promising policies regarding cryptocurrencies will end, and the list of 50,000 companies will only grow. Against the backdrop of over 2 million incarcerated individuals in the U.S., these 50,000 cases seem negligible. There’s enough room in American prisons for everyone.
They will watch closely and “earn their stripes” by any means. There’s no need to even visit the U.S. For example, the extradition of a video game developer from Georgia for eBay orders.
They are after all of you—it’s only a matter of time.
Recently, Forbes published an article in which the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) reported 50,000 open cases involving various companies linked to money transfers, including cryptocurrency platforms. This highlights the scale of the work law enforcement agencies plan to undertake in the field of cryptocurrencies.
Four years of Trump’s presidency and his promising policies regarding cryptocurrencies will end, and the list of 50,000 companies will only grow. Against the backdrop of over 2 million incarcerated individuals in the U.S., these 50,000 cases seem negligible. There’s enough room in American prisons for everyone.
They will watch closely and “earn their stripes” by any means. There’s no need to even visit the U.S. For example, the extradition of a video game developer from Georgia for eBay orders.
01 November 2024
A multitude of media outlets have published articles containing inaccurate information about me and my case. The U.S. prosecution presented figures and phrases taken out of context, crafted for sensational headlines about “real criminals.” However, these accusations were not substantiated with documentary evidence.
Various publications picked up this narrative, but not a single journalist took the time to delve into the situation or fact-check the claims.
My legal team has done an immense amount of work, and I intend to make all case materials publicly available. Legal documents are the primary sources of information. A sentencing memorandum, including a report by an independent crypto expert who audited the company’s activities, has already been published on the website. Additional investigative documents will also be made available there.
If you are a journalist and wish to understand the situation, please reach out:
Email: legkomedia@mm.st
Telegram: @legkodymov
A multitude of media outlets have published articles containing inaccurate information about me and my case. The U.S. prosecution presented figures and phrases taken out of context, crafted for sensational headlines about “real criminals.” However, these accusations were not substantiated with documentary evidence.
Various publications picked up this narrative, but not a single journalist took the time to delve into the situation or fact-check the claims.
My legal team has done an immense amount of work, and I intend to make all case materials publicly available. Legal documents are the primary sources of information. A sentencing memorandum, including a report by an independent crypto expert who audited the company’s activities, has already been published on the website. Additional investigative documents will also be made available there.
If you are a journalist and wish to understand the situation, please reach out:
Email: legkomedia@mm.st
Telegram: @legkodymov
17 October 2024
The investigation is over, and I’m waiting to be sent home (or to France), and I’m ready to share some thoughts on everything that’s happened. I’m still limited in communication and movement, so I don’t have a complete, clear picture of what’s going on. My information on many issues is fragmented.
Living almost two years without the internet in the world of IT and cryptocurrency is a disaster, and I have a sense that once I’m home, it’ll feel like I’ve traveled in a time machine to the future. In U.S. prisons, there’s no real access to magazines or newspapers, let alone digital media or internet communication. I’ll write a separate article about daily life and conditions in American prisons, but in short, they don’t meet the standards you’d find even in places like Morocco or Romania. I’ve spoken with others in here, so this comes straight from the source.
In the American prison, I had no way to stay in touch, communicate with my company, or make any decisions. I can responsibly say I’ve had no involvement in whatever the company has done over the past two years. I also have no connection to BitPhoenix or SmartSwap, which Anton Shkurenko is promoting on Bitzlato’s channels.
Additionally, when I was arrested, all company assets went to Anton Shkurenko and the other remaining employees and company founders, except for the funds seized by French authorities. I have no remaining material assets.
I may still hold registrations for some domains and Telegram bots, but I’ll only be able to confirm this once I return home. Beware of scammers who may still control certain company resources. I also don’t know who currently owns the registered Bitzlato trademark.
Six months before my arrest, I wanted to shut down the company in its existing form. I had already left my position as a founder of Bitzlato Ltd. Hong Kong, and from that point, I no longer held any rights or responsibilities for the company. Disagreements with Anton prevented us from closing the company immediately. But fate had other plans.
I have neither the ability nor the desire to audit what’s happened within the company over the past two years. I’ll leave that to the current owners and management.
I wish the current management success in closing down the company and paying out any remaining funds to the extent possible. From what I understand, all users who reached out to the company within nine months after operations were halted received compensation. I consider that a good outcome. Nine months is a generous period for users to make claims and receive their funds. Plus, reimbursement in crypto is unusual—most companies don’t operate this way. Users’ funds multiplied many times over during those nine months. I hope everyone is satisfied.
In the near future, I’ll be posting more to shed light on key aspects of my case and other issues I’ve encountered.
The investigation is over, and I’m waiting to be sent home (or to France), and I’m ready to share some thoughts on everything that’s happened. I’m still limited in communication and movement, so I don’t have a complete, clear picture of what’s going on. My information on many issues is fragmented.
Living almost two years without the internet in the world of IT and cryptocurrency is a disaster, and I have a sense that once I’m home, it’ll feel like I’ve traveled in a time machine to the future. In U.S. prisons, there’s no real access to magazines or newspapers, let alone digital media or internet communication. I’ll write a separate article about daily life and conditions in American prisons, but in short, they don’t meet the standards you’d find even in places like Morocco or Romania. I’ve spoken with others in here, so this comes straight from the source.
In the American prison, I had no way to stay in touch, communicate with my company, or make any decisions. I can responsibly say I’ve had no involvement in whatever the company has done over the past two years. I also have no connection to BitPhoenix or SmartSwap, which Anton Shkurenko is promoting on Bitzlato’s channels.
Additionally, when I was arrested, all company assets went to Anton Shkurenko and the other remaining employees and company founders, except for the funds seized by French authorities. I have no remaining material assets.
I may still hold registrations for some domains and Telegram bots, but I’ll only be able to confirm this once I return home. Beware of scammers who may still control certain company resources. I also don’t know who currently owns the registered Bitzlato trademark.
Six months before my arrest, I wanted to shut down the company in its existing form. I had already left my position as a founder of Bitzlato Ltd. Hong Kong, and from that point, I no longer held any rights or responsibilities for the company. Disagreements with Anton prevented us from closing the company immediately. But fate had other plans.
I have neither the ability nor the desire to audit what’s happened within the company over the past two years. I’ll leave that to the current owners and management.
I wish the current management success in closing down the company and paying out any remaining funds to the extent possible. From what I understand, all users who reached out to the company within nine months after operations were halted received compensation. I consider that a good outcome. Nine months is a generous period for users to make claims and receive their funds. Plus, reimbursement in crypto is unusual—most companies don’t operate this way. Users’ funds multiplied many times over during those nine months. I hope everyone is satisfied.
In the near future, I’ll be posting more to shed light on key aspects of my case and other issues I’ve encountered.
Reproduction of this content without proper attribution is strictly prohibited.
Our telegram channel with the latest updates.