{"id":"batch-000151","number":151,"revision":3,"date_start":"2026-08-24T20:11:31.327Z","date_end":"2026-08-25T10:28:22.299Z","total_messages":230,"summary_en":"Community discussion, batch 151 (Aug 24, 2026 – Aug 25, 2026), 230 messages, on the Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok) case. Across Aug 24–25, 2026, participants debate two themes: whether HEX-Himalaya onboarding and HID consent indicate an organized referral chain, and whether forfeiture treatment in the Guo/Wang filings is coherent. They contest how far evidence supports active recruitment versus verifiable authorization, and whether claims can shift between third-party rights and victim remedies without double counting. Key references cited include ECF 212, 229, 478, 469, 488, 720, 858, 859, GXZ26, and 716-4. Community statements, not court findings.","guide_en":[{"title":"User-pool surge and authorization entry point: whether growth from 3,345 to 5,000+ to 6,000+ indicates real authorized onboarding","description":"roy*** claims the membership jump from 3,345 to 5,000+ and then to 6,000+ suggests a structured batch funnel, but contends the decisive proof is what the HID submit interface actually authorized. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["qb20d41f588506831a182","q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"qb20d41f588506831a182","summary_en":"roy*** claims the early rise from 3,345 users to over 5,000, and then over 6,000, supports a platform-driven flow sequence from HEX traffic to HID registration and Geyer verification rather than one-to-one client intake. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d","summary_en":"roy*** argues the HID click point is critical because only that page can confirm what the user actually consented to, including engagement, scope, authorization, privacy, and criminal-remedy terms. Community statements, not court findings."}]},{"title":"HID submission dispute: whether terms include scope authorization, privacy and victim labels","description":"roy*** argues that HID evidence is incomplete without the actual submission page, contending that allegations of organized direction are only reliable if the terms clearly show authorization scope and Geyer-sharing terms. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d","q24db45972af617201515","q0a391fc6c9a33db798ab"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d","summary_en":"roy*** argues the key missing document is the real terms at submit time, and disputes relying on later explanations instead of written consent text showing representation, data sharing, or victim/remission language. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q24db45972af617201515","summary_en":"roy*** claims HEX likely selected and promoted Geyer, sent repeated broadcasts, supplied HIDs and a dedicated site, and channelled members through consent and registration as part of an apparent referral chain, while conceding some specifics remain unproven. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q0a391fc6c9a33db798ab","summary_en":"roy*** argues the practical architecture was HEX-led: customer introduction, HID collection, HEX database involvement, Candey oversight, Mazars validation, and submission to the court, which he presents as more than a simple client-to-lawyer link. Community statements, not court findings."}]},{"title":"HEX role and chain allegations: active recommendation and assistance versus unresolved payment or origin proof","description":"roy*** claims HEX not only identified Geyer but also coordinated customer education and support, and contends the unresolved issue is proving who first contacted, paid, or built the legal-operational infrastructure. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["q24db45972af617201515","q0a391fc6c9a33db798ab","q6d1303eb828586dde7f5"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"q24db45972af617201515","summary_en":"roy*** contends HEX’s own actions—selection, mass messaging, HID support, and routing—looked organized, while he still disputes that public filings identify who first negotiated with Geyer or funded site and operations. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q0a391fc6c9a33db798ab","summary_en":"roy*** argues this system was linked to HEX infrastructure through a chain from customer introduction to HID collection and backend checks, suggesting the client pool did not originate from random individual outreach by Geyer alone. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q6d1303eb828586dde7f5","summary_en":"roy*** claims early filings portrayed return-of-funds as relief from government seizure with minimal identity disclosure, while later restitution/remission systems required identifying victim status and loss, creating a structural transition in approach. Community statements, not court findings."}]},{"title":"Three-layer timeline and identity overlap: independent-lawyer narrative, government skepticism, then CVRA/restitution framework","description":"roy*** argues the line of documents shifts from a 2023 independent-lawyer framing toward 2024 government suspicion and then 2024 Nov onward CVRA plus victim-related positioning, while disputing that this proves a single fixed identity narrative. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d","qa5ee87dd53f12388c0db","qbe1e40c63622b3e291fb"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d","summary_en":"roy*** argues the chronology moved from early independent-lawyer claims and seizure-return framing to later government-filed filings such as ECF 212 and ECF 229 where authorization and role boundaries remain disputed. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"qa5ee87dd53f12388c0db","summary_en":"roy*** says by Nov 25, 2024, ECF 478, Geyer’s filings started importing CVRA concepts and broader victim framing for 5,280+ HEX depositors while keeping the loss discussion tied to government seizure impacts. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"qbe1e40c63622b3e291fb","summary_en":"roy*** contends this evolution, plus later materials, shows identity overlap rather than a full replacement, with customer positions presented as owner, CVRA victim, restitution claimant, and remission claimant in tension. Community statements, not court findings."}]},{"title":"Owner-to-Victim overlap dispute: parallel claims in ancillary and remission guidance","description":"roy*** claims the circulated FAQ sequence presents a two-step pattern—owner filings first, then required victim-style remission steps—and contends this creates an explicit identity layering that remains debated. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["q967fc82a9f19b0b23c88","q3a50ee5326e902801b91","qd89875e0ef516455eca4"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"q967fc82a9f19b0b23c88","summary_en":"roy*** claims materials instruct users to file ancillary petitions selecting Owner, then also file remission and victim-identity tutorials with loss statements, creating a sequential path from property claim to criminal-offense victim framing. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q3a50ee5326e902801b91","summary_en":"roy*** argues that Geyer handled the ownership-claim stream while the alliance pushed a broader individual remission path, then merged both into a first-then-second-stage strategy presented as standard for members. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"qd89875e0ef516455eca4","summary_en":"roy*** disputes the coherence of the two-stage model because the same materials urge Owner-based ancillary steps and then victim-based remission, and he treats this contradiction as the core Owner-to-Victim conversion issue. Community statements, not court findings."}]},{"title":"Dual-track strategy and risk: templates for ancillary petitions and remission are shown as coordinated, but effects on claims remain contested","description":"roy*** and another participant claim both ancillary and remission workflows were actively promoted together; they dispute whether this was a coordinated template campaign or merely optional member guidance under changing legal strategy. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["qf4ab7915ea6855b7f8b7","q9b96104de0860964f923","qeb1c401923f6255f0c26"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"qf4ab7915ea6855b7f8b7","summary_en":"roy*** says the Mar 27, 2025 screenshot is important because it circulated both Petition for Remission and Ancillary Petition materials, while disputing whether both were intended as synchronized templates. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q9b96104de0860964f923","summary_en":"roy*** claims later filings like ECF 838 and ECF 740 show investors using standardized templates from Himalaya guidance, including victim petitions and loss statements, though some later attempted to withdraw those filings as not matching their legal self-understanding. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"qeb1c401923f6255f0c26","summary_en":"reb*** contends that if protest-orchestrating conduct were treated as judicial obstruction, it could alter the RICO conspiracy framing, which would affect whether members perceive all coordinated actors as jointly implicated. Community statements, not court findings."}]},{"title":"Evidence metric conflict: GXZ26 aggregation versus transaction-level tracing and source attribution","description":"roy*** claims GXZ26 may rely on aggregated flow summaries, while he contests whether it fully includes caveats from 716-4, and argues that Tony-table granularity is needed to avoid double-counting pooled funds. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["q60a749013c3fc560f616","q2f83c10399cd16baade0","q60a749013c3fc560f616"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"q60a749013c3fc560f616","summary_en":"roy*** says GXZ26 is used as central support though prior 716-4 already disclosed pooled accounts and traceability structure, and he disputes whether GXZ26 presented a selective simplification before Torres’s forfeiture findings. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q2f83c10399cd16baade0","summary_en":"roy*** argues 826-1 reportedly shows the $517m loss claim as gross inflow aggregation rather than deduplicated economics, while Tony Farm Ledger-style data is presented as transaction-level identity that could test whether funds were repeatedly counted. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q60a749013c3fc560f616","summary_en":"roy*** repeats that if GXZ26 omitted known context from 716-4, the evidentiary leap from pooled banking flow to universal fraud-proceeds conclusions may be overbroad and a central contested issue. Community statements, not court findings."}]},{"title":"RICO and jury-instruction controversy: multiple conspiracies, spillover, and attribution scope","description":"roy*** claims the trial record shows a dispute over whether prosecutors over-combined projects and actors into one enterprise, while contesting whether jury instructions sufficiently blocked prejudicial spillover against Guo. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["qd65c4351415e4ed892fc","q9f9abdd85f55dfe49693","qb379676f69e3355f7b50"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"qd65c4351415e4ed892fc","summary_en":"roy*** claims defense sought a multiple-conspiracies instruction and the court denied it, while also rejecting automatic coconspirator attribution, and he disputes whether the final charge protected against mixing separate schemes into one RICO finding. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q9f9abdd85f55dfe49693","summary_en":"roy*** argues the central appellate question is whether government evidence showed one unified Guo-directed conspiracy or multiple independent schemes, while noting acquittals on some GTV counts are used by each side to argue spillover risk and its limits. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"qb379676f69e3355f7b50","summary_en":"joh*** claims a broad non-indicted co-conspirator structure is vulnerable on appeal and speculates that separate entities like Farm Loan, HEX, G Club, and GTV could be disentangled, which he links to motive for retaliation claims. Community statements, not court findings."}]},{"title":"Forfeiture mechanics: 858 and 859 are different instruments, and disputes center on count-based nexus","description":"roy*** contends Dkt. 858 and Dkt. 859 are legally distinct, with 858 recalibrating the money judgment amount and 859 adding five additional specific-property groups tied to counts, which he says should be contested only through property-level nexus. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["qb5ecac4e5a5df53cabe5","q247a7ba7cee3334d8db8","q6bbed20cefd2cc5310b9"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"qb5ecac4e5a5df53cabe5","summary_en":"roy*** claims 859 is a Supplemental Preliminary Order of Forfeiture adding specific property, not a reset of Guo’s money judgment, while 858 is the document that reduced that judgment figure to about $889 million. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q247a7ba7cee3334d8db8","summary_en":"roy*** summarizes 859 as adding five account/group entries with mixed amounts and notes it relies on counts 1,2,4,7–11 and count 3 laundering property, disputing claims that it absorbs GTV counts 5/6. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q6bbed20cefd2cc5310b9","summary_en":"roy*** contends 859 preserves §853(n) rights flow, meaning claimed accounts must still be tested for defendant-only interests before final forfeiture crediting, and disputes reading the 859 additions as automatic full ownership of all account balances. Community statements, not court findings."}]},{"title":"Wang and Guo forfeiture split: overlap of 14B and 13B figures is mathematically and legally disputed","description":"roy*** and joh*** dispute the arithmetic and legal linkage between Wang’s $1.4 billion and Guo’s $1.3 then $889 million figures, with roy*** contending overlap does not permit simple addition and joh*** only speculates about potential alternative bearers. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["q8f4608739c6476b1f011","q921e353541e98d52da88","qe79eb4fa49ae63919563"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"q8f4608739c6476b1f011","summary_en":"joh*** speculates that a third party such as Kyle Bass could be brought in over GTV exposure, which roy*** elsewhere treats as conjectural and not directly evidenced in the shared filings. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q921e353541e98d52da88","summary_en":"roy*** argues the core dispute is what portion of Wang’s $1.4B includes GTV funds, and whether recovered $411M from SEC disgorgement should reduce an outstanding amount under joint forfeiture recovery rules. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"qe79eb4fa49ae63919563","summary_en":"roy*** claims ECF 691 does not support a direct arithmetic merger of Wang’s and Guo’s figures; it says joint-and-several concerns must be limited to overlapping scope, so double-collapsing both totals is a contested premise. Community statements, not court findings."}]},{"title":"Execution-stage accounting: whether specific property and substitute-asset rules require credits across proceedings","description":"roy*** claims Wang’s and Guo’s judgments likely need direct accounting, and he disputes automatic synchronization, including whether §853(p), substitute assets, and third-party disputes alter the outstanding amount. Community statements, not court findings.","message_ids":["qb2e4a47279fb2be05cc8","qdf063b1d43c2a7412c0c","q680a42e07a6989ba5237"],"quotes":[{"message_id":"qb2e4a47279fb2be05cc8","summary_en":"roy*** claims Wang’s order appears to include both her own count-one-type liability and count-two laundering exposure linked jointly to Guo, but he disputes the assumption that any Guo reduction automatically and proportionally reduces Wang’s full headline amount. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"qdf063b1d43c2a7412c0c","summary_en":"roy*** argues Guo’s 858 reduction to $889 million does not by itself force Wang’s adjustment and instead frames a credit question tied to whether the same property has already been satisfied elsewhere, including SEC proceedings. Community statements, not court findings."},{"message_id":"q680a42e07a6989ba5237","summary_en":"roy*** says checking Wang’s Dkt.329 and Dkt.488 against later final/amended orders is necessary to test whether credits or reductions were actually applied to prevent double satisfaction. Community statements, not court findings."}]}],"summary":"讨论的核心先后分为两条主线：其一是联盟体系与受害者/财产申诉的组织化程度。群内有人认为用户池快速增长、教程模板和第三方流程（推荐、注册、同意、核验、提交）构成连续链条；也有人要求严格回到授权界面、具体文书与逐案证据，尤其对HEX与Geyer角色、victim/owner身份切换未达共识。其二是郭案与王案的没收法理。围绕§853、§853(n)、specific property、858/859及金额核算出现持续分歧：程序顺序、资金与犯罪指控的nexus、RICO/洗钱共谋边界、以及是否应credit以避免重复追缴，均未定论，且伴随部分情绪化猜测和未核验的政治化叙事。","guide":[{"title":"用户池激增与授权入口：讨论聚焦3345到5000+再到6000+的增长是否对应真实授权界面，但被强调需先核验授权与条款截图","message_ids":["qb20d41f588506831a182","q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d"]},{"title":"HID提交条款争论：是否包含范围授权、隐私共享、HEX与Geyer协作及victim声明，是否足以认定组织化路径","message_ids":["q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d","q24db45972af617201515","q0a391fc6c9a33db798ab"]},{"title":"HEX角色与链路定位：有观点支持其提供主动推荐和24/7协助，也有观点否认其“首接触、付款、建站”有公开证据支撑","message_ids":["q24db45972af617201515","q0a391fc6c9a33db798ab","q6d1303eb828586dde7f5"]},{"title":"三层时间线与身份叠加：讨论逐步形成“独立律师叙事—政府质疑关系—§853(n)+CVRA+restitution”脉络，且同群体身份并存","message_ids":["q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d","qa5ee87dd53f12388c0db","qbe1e40c63622b3e291fb"]},{"title":"Owner与Victim并行争议：教材/教程一方面主张Owner先行，另一方面又指向Victim，是否属于统一指引还是身份自行替换被持续质疑","message_ids":["q967fc82a9f19b0b23c88","q3a50ee5326e902801b91","qd89875e0ef516455eca4"]},{"title":"双轨策略与风险：ancillary petition与remission并行推进，后来又出现“个人自愿、联盟不组织”的口径分歧，模板适用与逐案判断仍未清","message_ids":["qf4ab7915ea6855b7f8b7","q9b96104de0860964f923","qeb1c401923f6255f0c26"]},{"title":"证据口径冲突：关于GXZ26与逐笔追踪，部分讨论认为按账户汇总过于间接，需核对基金转入、账户来源与是否逐笔对应个案","message_ids":["q60a749013c3fc560f616","q2f83c10399cd16baade0","q60a749013c3fc560f616"]},{"title":"审判法理分歧升温：RICO/jury instruction是否成功绑定多项目为统一共谋、是否存在证据跨项目污染，成为第二轮转折点","message_ids":["qd65c4351415e4ed892fc","q9f9abdd85f55dfe49693","qb379676f69e3355f7b50"]},{"title":"没收框架逐步细化：明确858与859含义差异、specific property先行、第三方需依§853(n)证明权益，是否允许同步重算金额受争议","message_ids":["qb5ecac4e5a5df53cabe5","q247a7ba7cee3334d8db8","q6bbed20cefd2cc5310b9"]},{"title":"王与郭责任切分争议：关于8.89亿、14亿及共同连带责任的数学化处理被认为缺法定支撑，金额口径与抵扣条件分歧明显","message_ids":["q8f4608739c6476b1f011","q921e353541e98d52da88","qe79eb4fa49ae63919563"]},{"title":"执行阶段仍有核验待清：是否应对Specific Property、§853(p)及代偿资产给出credit，避免与SEC或其他程序回收形成重复追缴","message_ids":["qb2e4a47279fb2be05cc8","qdf063b1d43c2a7412c0c","q680a42e07a6989ba5237"]}],"closed":true,"is_finalized":true,"updated_at":"2026-09-06T19:36:43.093Z","notice":"围绕郭文贵案的社区讨论与观点交锋。发言仅代表讨论者观点，不等同于法院认定。","content_type":"discussion_batch","canonical_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151","base_batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151","markdown_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151/markdown","json_url":"https://mubeitech.com/api/discussion-batches/batch-000151","page":1,"page_size":200,"total_pages":2,"has_more":true,"next_url":"https://mubeitech.com/api/discussion-batches/batch-000151?page=2","prev_url":null,"messages":[{"id":"qb20d41f588506831a182","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":1,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T20:11:31.327Z","text":"然后还有一个非常值得研究的节点：\n\n为什么最初是3,345人，短短一个月左右就变成5,000多人？\n\n政府2024年1月5日已经写成 over five thousand people。\n\n这说明2023年12月6日提交第一份motion以后，HEX→HimalayaRestoration的导流还在快速继续。\n\n当时可能出现的是：\n\nHEX向整个注册用户群发送通知\n→ 客户只需HID登记\n→ Geyer再找HEX核验\n→ 名单迅速从3,345增长到5,000+。\n\n到2025年又达到6,000多人。\n\n所以这个系统从一开始就不是传统意义上的：\n\n一个客户找到一个律师，咨询，签约，律师了解案情。\n\n它明显更接近一个：\n\n平台批量导流 → 网站批量登记 → HID批量认证 → aggregated representation","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb20d41f588506831a182","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":2,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T20:12:24.895Z","text":"的结构。\n\n这种结构本身不一定非法，但它让一个问题变得特别重要：\n\n当客户点击网站提交HID时，到底同意了什么？\n\n不是宣传邮件。\n\n不是后来Geyer如何解释。\n\n而是点击Submit那一刻网页上的真实条款。\n\n有没有：\n\nEngagement Agreement\n\nScope of Representation\n\nAuthorization\n\nConsent\n\nPrivacy / Data Sharing\n\n以及有没有写：\n\nGeyer可以与HEX共享/验证HID；\n\n有没有写：\n\n可以代表客户参加United States v. Kwok；\n\n有没有写：\n\n§853(n)；\n\n有没有写：\n\nCVRA；\n\n有没有写：\n\nrestitution；\n\n有没有写：\n\nremission；\n\n有没有写：\n\n“victim”。\n\n这个页面现在是整条线最重要的缺失证据。\n\n现在我的判断已经比刚开始更明确了：\n\n“联盟/HEX是怎么把Geyer带进来的？”这一半，已经基本可以用法院卷宗证明。\n\nHEX主动识别并向自己的客户推荐Geyer；以“完全独立律师”的身份包装；核心用途是保护和追回客户资产；客户通过HimalayaRestoration网站和HID进入Geyer的代理体系。 \n\n“是谁最先找到Geyer、是否付款给他、谁出钱建网站、谁拟定客户协议”这一半，目前还没有找到可靠的公开文件证明。\n\n这个界限要守住。\n\n因为这样你以后写出来，会让别人很难说你是在编故事。\n\n现在文章真正最有力量的一组并排标题其实已经出来了：\n\n2023年：\n“完全独立律师”\n“保护和追回你的资产”\n“对司法部发起法律行动”\n\n2024年：\n政府：“不知道谁在指挥Geyer”\n“Geyer与HEX密切协作”\n\n2025年：\n§853(n) + CVRA + restitution + remission\n政府希望与Geyer“collaborative efforts”提高效率。 \n\n这三段一摆，根本不用先写“偷梁换柱”四个字，读者自己就会问：中间到底发生了什么？\n\n下一层最值得继续挖的，就是 ECF 212（2024年1月4日）。Geyer后来自己说，5,242名HEX客户就是在那一天被HEX“authenticated”的。如果把212找出来，我们就可能进一步看清：HEX究竟向Geyer提供了什么认证、谁签字、认证了身份还是只认证HID和余额、当时到底已经有多少人。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q09ba4c58ff9248e26e5d","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q24db45972af617201515","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":3,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T20:16:00.661Z","text":"所以现在有一件事情几乎可以确定：\n\nHEX不是被动地说“有人叫Geyer，你们自己去找他”。\n\n而是HEX自己：\n\n* 选择/识别了Geyer；\n* 连续多轮给客户群发；\n* 把Geyer描述成完全独立的律师；\n* 给客户提供HID；\n* 给出专门注册网站；\n* 告诉客户登记流程；\n* 之后又通过consent + HID向Geyer提供余额资料；\n* 还提供24/7客服协助客户完成注册。\n\n这已经非常接近你最开始问的：\n\n“联盟是怎么把Geyer找来的？”\n\n现在最准确的答案应该是：\n\n公开卷宗已经证明，至少从HEX层面，是交易所主动“identified” Geyer，并通过自己的客户邮件、HID系统和客服渠道大规模把投资人导向他。\n\n但目前仍没有公开证据证明：\n\n具体是哪一个联盟人物第一次联系Geyer、谁谈的条件、谁付律师费、谁建立HimalayaRestoration网站。\n\n这一条还要继续追。\n\n⸻\n\n而 ECF 229本身还有一句特别有意思。\n\n面对政府说HEX“通知所有客户去Geyer那里提交claim”，Geyer反驳说：\n\nHEX并没有命令大家去找他，只是：\n\n“let its Members know of a possibility”\n\n也就是只是告诉会员“有这么一个选择”。\n\n但你把原始邮件摆出来以后，会发现它已经不是随手提一下。\n\n邮件里有：\n\nGeyer名字\n专用邮箱\n专用电话\n专门网站\n客户自己的HID\nconsent流程\n余额认证说明\n教程视频\n24/7客服支持。 \n\n所以文章可以非常克制地问：\n\n这究竟只是向客户告知一个“可能的选择”，还是一个由HEX基础设施支持的大规模客户导流和代理登记体系？\n\n不需要替读者回答。\n\n让文件回答。\n\n⸻\n\n还有一件我觉得比“偷梁换柱”本身更有意思。\n\n2024年1月12日的ECF 229，Geyer把自己的客户定义得极其明确：\n\n“The Customers of the Himalaya Exchange are victims only of the seizure of their investments from the U.S. Government.”\n\n也就是：\n\nHEX客户“只是美国政府扣押其投资行为的受害者”。 \n\n这个时间点非常关键。\n\n因为这不是投资人群里说的话。\n\n这是Geyer本人正式写给Torres法官的话。\n\n所以你以后如果要做前后对照，完全可以用这一句作为“基准线”：\n\n2024年1月12日：\n\n我的客户only是政府扣押造成的victims。\n\n然后再往后排：\n\n2024年11月 ECF 478：\n\n“FINANCIAL VICTIMS”，开始同时援引CVRA、§853(n)、Rule 41(g)等。\n\n2025年2—4月：\n\nrestitution / remission / ancillary forfeiture 多轨并行。\n\n2025年10月 ECF 759：\n\nGeyer仍代表 6,512名“authenticated customers”，继续主张他们对HCN/HDO及相关reserve具有可追踪第三方权益。\n\n所以最后还出现一个很有意思的现象：\n\n到了2025年底，Geyer仍然没有彻底放弃最初“这些是客户自己的资产”这一条。\n\n换句话说，这条故事不是：\n\nA身份被秘密换成B身份，然后A消失。\n\n更准确的是：\n\nA身份一直存在，同时B身份、C身份、D身份不断叠加。\n\nA = 第三方产权人\nB = CVRA victim\nC = restitution claimant\nD = remission claimant\n\n而最大的未解决问题始终是：\n\n最初通过HID登记的客户，究竟授权了其中哪些身份？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q24db45972af617201515","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q0a391fc6c9a33db798ab","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":4,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T20:19:15.949Z","text":"所以最初整个客户认证架构实际上不是简单的：\n\n客户 → Geyer。\n\n而是：\n\nHEX\n↓\n向客户介绍Geyer\n↓\n客户提供HID并签consent\n↓\nGeyer收集HID\n↓\nHEX提供底层数据库\n↓\nHEX任命Candey监督\n↓\nMazars做外部核验\n↓\nGeyer把结果提交Torres法官。\n\n这个结构非常值得画成图。\n\n因为它说明Geyer最初的客户池不是自己通过广告随机开发出来的。\n\n整个客户身份验证和账户证明系统，与HEX的基础设施深度相连。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0a391fc6c9a33db798ab","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q6d1303eb828586dde7f5","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":5,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T20:21:46.714Z","text":"而且这里还有一个很值得注意的历史转折。\n\n2023年12月的Geyer不仅在说“客户不是郭的受害者”，他甚至向法官明确主张：\n\nDOJ所谓保护客户的行为，实际上因为扣押reserve反而让他的客户受害。\n\nECF 198把这种理论说得非常强烈：Geyer称政府是在把客户的钱转进美国财政，并称真正造成客户损失的是政府扣押。\n\n与此同时，Geyer还要求法院：\n\n不需要让政府知道每一个客户真实身份；\n\n因为他认为真正需要验证的只是：\n\n这些HID和账户是不是真的。\n\n他提出的是：\n\n匿名/保密的客户身份 + HID认证 + 返还HEX reserve。 \n\n这和后来政府remission的结构其实存在天然冲突。\n\n因为remission通常要知道：\n\n你是谁；\n你的损失是多少；\n损失因何产生；\n有没有得到其他赔偿；\n是否符合victim条件。\n\n所以从程序设计上看：\n\nGeyer最初建立的是“尽量不向政府披露客户身份的产权追回系统”。\n\n后来接入的却是：\n\n“必须向政府/claims administrator证明自己符合victim资格的赔偿系统”。\n\n这就是一个真正的结构性转变。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q6d1303eb828586dde7f5","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa5ee87dd53f12388c0db","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":6,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T20:36:19.798Z","text":"所以到2024年3月，整个体系都还是非常一致的：\n\n客户 → HID → HEX账户 → 被扣投资 → 要求返还。\n\n⸻\n\n但到了 2024年11月25日 ECF 478，语言明显变了。\n\n这份文件开始大篇幅援引 Crime Victims’ Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. §3771，把CVRA定义的victim标准、victim notice、被听取权、restitution等全部搬进来。文件甚至明确写：\n\nGeyer代表 5,280名且仍在增加的HEX depositors，另外还代表5名其他depositors；\n\n并开始把他们放进更广泛的 financial victims 论述里。\n\n这里最重要的不是说：\n\n“Geyer从这一天起承认HEX客户全部是郭的受害者。”\n\n不能这么写，因为ECF 478内部仍然保留了“政府扣押伤害客户”“钱应该返还”等论点。\n\n真正可以说的是：\n\n截至2024年11月，Geyer已经把原本主要建立在第三方财产/资产返还上的代理，明确扩展进入了CVRA和crime-victim程序框架。 \n\n这就是一条真正能在卷宗里看到的变化。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa5ee87dd53f12388c0db","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q636638457ad383f5708a","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":7,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-24T20:42:24.886Z","text":"喜交所发的推荐盖尔的第一封信是23年7月6号","edited":false,"reply_to":"q04eb19eb23b0e68eb2ea","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q636638457ad383f5708a","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q04eb19eb23b0e68eb2ea","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言（跨批次）","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb9468a9f4a3df3e0aef0","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":8,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T20:46:30.599Z","text":"而目前公开材料只证明HEX当时向客户宣称Geyer是完全独立律师，并表示HEX对他没有影响；政府后来则公开质疑这种关系的实际结构。两边都只是各自立场，Torres目前没有公开裁定“HEX控制Geyer”。\n\n还有一个很容易忽略的人：Jamie Scher / Myer and Scher LLP。\n\nGeyer最早2023年12月6日的Rule 41(g) Motion，并不是Geyer一个人签的。\n\nECF 186显示两家律所共同署名：\n\nMyer and Scher LLP — Jamie Scher\n\n以及\n\nFormerFedsGroup.Com LLC — Bradford Geyer。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb9468a9f4a3df3e0aef0","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q2b10a4b8ebf2188a951d","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":9,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T20:47:31.083Z","text":"因为如果你的文章要回答：\n\n“联盟到底怎么把Geyer找来的？”\n\n那么不能只盯着Geyer。\n\n还应该问：\n\nMyer and Scher是什么时候加入的？\n\n谁先接触谁？\n\n为什么最初需要纽约本地律师Jamie Scher和新泽西律师Geyer共同出现？\n\nHimalayaRestoration客户协议究竟是FormerFeds一家签，还是两家共同代理？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q2b10a4b8ebf2188a951d","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qf4ab7915ea6855b7f8b7","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":10,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T20:52:32.961Z","text":"同一天附近——你这张截图显示联盟委员会已经开始向成员同时推广“Petition for Remission”和“Ancillary Petition”。\n\n这就很有意思了。\n\n因为联盟自己已经同时在教成员走两条法律性质完全不同的路：\n\nAncillary Petition / §853(n)：\n“这是我的财产，我对被没收财产拥有第三方产权。”\n\n而：\n\nPetition for Remission：\n“财产进入政府没收体系以后，我请求DOJ依据remission制度返还损失。”\n\n这恰好就是后来Torres和政府不得不反复解释的两套制度。\n\n所以现在有一个很值得追的问题：\n\n2025年3月27日联盟发给大家的《Petition for remission 填表示范.pdf》里面，到底教大家怎么填写“victim”“loss”“fraud”“relationship to defendant”等关键栏目？\n\n这份PDF可能比截图本身更重要。\n\n因为如果里面只是客观解释：\n\n“如果你认为自己符合remission条件，可以这样申请；如果主张产权，则走ancillary petition。”\n\n那很正常。\n\n但如果它实际上在统一指导HEX/联盟成员：\n\n怎样把自己填写成郭案fraud victim；\n\n怎样描述loss；\n\n怎样填写与郭/项目的关系；\n\n那么我们就找到了一条非常重要的新证据链：\n\n政府建立remission制度\n\n→ Geyer与政府讨论claims process\n\n→ 联盟委员会制作中文填表示范\n\n→ 向整个联盟成员群体推广\n\n→ 成员按照统一模板进入remission体系。\n\n这和“政府自己独立发现并逐一确认受害者”是完全不同的形成路径。\n\n不过目前截图只能证明联盟发布了这些材料，不能证明PDF具体教了什么。这一点不能跨过去。\n\n而第二份：\n\n《Ancillary Petition 第一阶段申请案例.pdf》\n\n同样重要。\n\n因为我们现在已经知道，2025年4月政府后来收到大量所谓§853(n)第三方材料。\n\n如果这份联盟3月27日的“申请案例”实际上就是一个统一模板，那么就可能解释：\n\n为什么随后短时间内会出现大量结构相似的third-party petitions。\n\n这不意味着这些petition无效；提供法律模板本身也没有什么异常。\n\n但是它能解释这些claims的组织来源。\n\n所以现在我特别想看你截图里的这三份PDF原件。\n\n尤其第一、第二份。\n\n如果你还能从Discord下载下来，直接给我：\n\n《Petition for remission 填表示范.pdf》\n\n和\n\n《Ancillary Petition 第一阶段申请案例.pdf》\n\n我可以逐页帮你拆。\n\n因为现在真正有价值的已经不是“联盟有没有参与”——这张截图已经证明联盟委员会至少在2025年3月27日主动向成员推广并解释remission和ancillary petition。\n\n真正要查的是：\n\n联盟具体教大家怎么填？\n\n以及：\n\n模板是谁写的？\n\n有没有出现Geyer/FormerFeds？\n\n有没有要求授权Geyer？\n\n有没有把“产权人”和“victim”混在一起？\n\n有没有统一的损失表述？\n\n有没有告诉成员remission意味着什么、与§853(n)产权有什么区别？\n\n如果里面出现类似：\n\n“我们不是受害者，但为了拿回钱先这样填”\n\n或者反过来：\n\n“统一按照victim身份填写”\n\n那证据意义就完全不同了。\n\n而且这张截图最好原图保存，不要裁剪日期、频道名和发帖账号。它现在至少可以作为一条很漂亮的时间锚点：\n\n2025年3月27日——喜马拉雅农场联盟委员会已经公开向成员同时分发Remission填表示范、Ancillary Petition案例和Forfeiture FAQ。\n\n这块证据正好能插进我们刚才那条 HEX → Geyer → government remission → 联盟成员批量操作 的时间线上。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qc71303e9165dd4a09644","reply_status":"out_of_scope","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf4ab7915ea6855b7f8b7","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"被回复的附件未收录","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q9b96104de0860964f923","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":11,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:11:49.185Z","text":"对，我刚才继续按这三个文件名去搜了。目前还没有直接搜到你截图里那三份联盟PDF原件的公开下载地址，但已经找到两个非常重要的东西，足以证明“联盟模板确实被人实际拿来填了”。\n\n第一，DOJ标准版的 Petition for Remission/Mitigation Form 我找到了。它明确写着：这是给申请remission/mitigation用的标准表格，申请人提供虚假信息可能触犯 18 U.S.C. §§1001、1621；DOJ收集这些资料就是为了处理remission/mitigation申请。换句话说，这不是普通“登记表”，而是真正的政府没收行政救济申请。\n\n第二，更关键：我找到 2026年4月23日 ECF 838，里面有一名申请人后来专门向法院解释自己为什么在2025年提交过 Ancillary Petition + Petition for Remission。她的陈述直接把你这张截图里的“联盟指导”说出来了。\n\n她告诉法院，自己此前使用 “Section III – Victim Petition”模板，是因为依赖了 NFSC/Himalaya Alliance 的法律指导；她称自己被告知，刑事审判结束以后，“investor”在追回资产的意义上已经被政府事实上归类为“victim”。她还说，因为很多G系列投资人英语有限，在联盟影响下，很多投资人在2025年4月提交了Petitions for Remission。\n\n更重要的是，她还说自己采用了联盟提供的标准化模板，包括对 pecuniary loss（经济损失） 的声明，因为她理解这是取回被冻结投资所必需的步骤。\n\n这就把你截图的意义一下子提高了。\n\n因为现在不是只有：\n\n“2025年3月27日联盟发过一个叫《Petition for remission 填表示范》的PDF。”\n\n而是后来的法院文件里，真的有人告诉法院：\n\n我就是依据Himalaya Alliance提供的标准模板和指导，填写了Victim Petition和经济损失内容，并提交了remission。\n\n而且这个人后来还专门试图纠正以前的记录。\n\n这就和我们前面找到的 ECF 740 又对上了。\n\nECF 740里的另一名申请人也说，大约在2025年3月，她受到Alliance Farms和Geyer相关指导影响，提交了在线victim form / remission以及delegation form；但她后来明确告诉法院：\n\n她不认为自己被郭文贵诈骗，也不认为自己是victim；\n\n并要求此前的remission/delegation无效。\n\n所以现在至少有两份不同的法院材料指向同一个现象：\n\n联盟在2025年春季确实向投资人提供了标准化的victim/remission操作指导；至少部分投资人后来告诉法院，他们当时理解这些表格只是追回自己被冻结资产的一种必要手段，而不是在实质上承认自己属于郭文贵诈骗受害者。 \n\n这个发现相当重要。\n\n而且我还找到一份公开的 Ancillary Petition实例 ECF 737。这个申请人明确写：\n\n自己之前已经提交过petition for remission；\n\n后来又提交ancillary petition主张自己对具体被没收财产具有legal right/title/interest；\n\n同时还特别声明：\n\n自己没有授权律师、也没有授权任何人代表自己，并要求政府严格核验，防止虚假claim。\n\n这再次说明，现实中确实有人是：\n\n先remission → 后ancillary petition\n\n两条一起走。\n\n所以你截图里的联盟公告同时放这两个模板，并不是理论上的“双轨”，而是后来确实有人照着这么操作。\n\n现在最关键的新问题已经非常具体了：\n\n联盟3月27日那份《Petition for remission 填表示范》是不是就是把DOJ标准表的“Victim Petition”部分做成中文版样板，并统一教成员怎样填写pecuniary loss、犯罪损失和victim身份？\n\nECF 838的描述非常像是在回答“是”，因为申请人明确提到了：\n\nSection III – Victim Petition\nstandardized templates\npecuniary loss\nHimalaya Alliance guidance。 \n\n但我现在还不能说已经100%证明ECF 838使用的模板就是你截图里那一个PDF文件，因为我还没有拿到截图内PDF原件做逐页比对。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q9b96104de0860964f923","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qbe1e40c63622b3e291fb","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":12,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:24:27.350Z","text":"现在我认为这三份原件把你最初想写的文章核心改变了。\n\n最强的切口已经不是：\n\n“Geyer反水。”\n\n而是：\n\n“联盟在2025年3月建立了一套双轨申报体系：在Geyer/Himalaya Restoration一侧把喜交所客户作为Owner主张§853(n)产权；与此同时，又广泛指导投资人进入政府的Victim Petition/remission程序。更值得注意的是，它提供的Victim Petition示范没有写‘我是郭文贵犯罪的受害者’，而写成‘我是政府没收行为的受害者’。”\n\n这句话现在三份原件完全托得住。\n\n而且这个发现比简单骂“偷梁换柱”更厉害，因为它直接暴露了一个法律问题：\n\n他们似乎想同时保留“钱本来就是我的”和“我要进入victim remission拿钱”两种身份，同时又试图避免明确承认损失是由郭的犯罪造成。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qbe1e40c63622b3e291fb","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q1001487d30364c50784c","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":13,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:33:49.859Z","text":"这个新上传的 《Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程》 非常关键。它比前面那份“Petition for remission填表示范”更进一步——这里已经不再用“government forfeiture victim”绕开，而是直接教申请人选择 Victim，并提供一段明确把损失连接到“underlying criminal offense”的英文声明模板。\n\n这可能是目前你给我的材料里，最接近你所说“身份发生实质变化”的一份。\n\n文件前几页先告诉成员去美国政府 forfeiture.gov 填表，并解释Petition/Claim操作。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf 到第6页，事情开始变得非常明确：\n\n选择身份：受害人（Victim）\n\n而截图中的政府页面其实同时提供：\n\nOwner\nLienholder\nVictim\n\n三个身份选择。\n\n但是教程的红色箭头明确指向：\n\nVictim\n\n并在中文旁注明：\n\n“选择身份：受害人（Victim）”。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n这个和前面联盟FAQ的 Owner 指导形成了非常强烈的对照。\n\n前面FAQ针对Ancillary Petition明确要求：\n\n每一个Asset ID都请选择 Owner（资产主人）。 Forfeiture程序常见问题解答（327更新）.pdf\n\n现在这份Forfeiture Petition教程却指导：\n\nVictim（受害人）。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n所以已经可以把两套指导直接并排：\n\nAncillary / §853(n)：\n\nOwner\n\nRemission / Petition：\n\nVictim\n\n这已经不是我们的解释。\n\n是联盟材料自己的操作指令。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1001487d30364c50784c","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb1461a956cfba3c5b73d","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":14,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:34:09.256Z","text":"第9页更关键：它明确要求解释“你为什么是刑事犯罪的受害者”\n\n教程第9页把政府页面翻译得非常准确：\n\n“请说明您如何成为涉及本财产没收的刑事犯罪或相关犯罪的受害者。”\n\n还要求提供：\n\n重要日期；\n与你交易的人员；\n损失金额；\n导致损失的具体交易；\n银行记录、支票、电汇等证据。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n这就不能再简单解释成：\n\n“victim只是政府没收行为的victim。”\n\n因为这个网页本身明确问的是：\n\n你如何成为underlying criminal offense或related offense的victim？\n\n这和前面那份remission示范之间反而产生了一个很值得注意的内部差异。\n\n前一份示范写：\n\n“I am a victim of the government forfeiture…” Petition for remission  填表示范.pdf\n\n而这一份教程已经清楚展示政府真正问的是：\n\n你怎么成为导致没收的刑事犯罪的victim？ Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n也就是说，制作教程的人知道政府真正要求的victim含义是什么。\n\n这点很重要。\n\n⸻\n\n然后第10页出现了目前最关键的英文模板\n\n标题直接叫：\n\nStatement Template - 声明模板\n\n它让申请人写：\n\n“I am submitting this petition in connection with the forfeiture proceedings related to Case No. S4 23 CR. 118 (AT).”\n\n然后举例：\n\n2022年2月2日投资$100,000到Hamilton Opportunity Funds SPC；\n\n查看Yvette Wang的forfeiture notice以后，发现自己的投资在被没收资产中。\n\n到这里还是产权/资金追踪。\n\n但接下来两句话性质变了：\n\n“Based on this information, I believe my funds were misappropriated as part of the underlying criminal offense.”","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb1461a956cfba3c5b73d","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q0289e15e3535c39793b6","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":15,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:34:29.533Z","text":"然后：\n\n“As a victim, I am asserting my financial loss and requesting consideration for relief.” Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n中文意思非常明确：\n\n“根据这些信息，我认为我的资金作为相关基础刑事犯罪的一部分被挪用。”\n\n以及：\n\n“作为一名受害者，我主张自己的经济损失并请求给予救济。”\n\n这已经不是：\n\n“我是政府扣押行为的受害者。”\n\n而是直接把：\n\n我的资金损失\n\n连接到：\n\nunderlying criminal offense\n\n然后明确声明：\n\nAs a victim。\n\n这就是目前最重要的新发现。\n\n⸻\n\n而且模板下面写的是：\n\n“红字部分请根据自身情况进行替换。” Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n也就是说，这不是展示一份完全不可复制的某人个人陈述。\n\n它被明确作为：\n\nStatement Template\n\n供成员根据自己的情况替换后使用。\n\n所以现在已经可以相当有把握地说：\n\n联盟相关教程不仅教成员如何打开政府网站、如何上传材料，而且直接指导选择“Victim”身份，并提供一段可修改的标准英文声明，把投资资金描述为“misappropriated as part of the underlying criminal offense”，再以“As a victim”主张financial loss。\n\n这句话完全由原件支持。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n⸻\n\n最后一页把法律风险进一步放大\n\n第11页不是填完就结束。\n\n教程明确告诉成员：\n\n检查请愿表格 → 勾选声明条款 → 提交请愿。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n而页面截图里的第三个certification实际上就是：\n\nI declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing information contained in my petition is true and correct.\n\n也就是说，申请人最终不是在Discord里随便转发一句：\n\n“我是victim。”\n\n而是在政府系统里确认：\n\n我在伪证处罚下声明这些内容真实正确。\n\n所以这个教程的法律意义比普通宣传大得多。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0289e15e3535c39793b6","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q967fc82a9f19b0b23c88","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":16,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:34:59.161Z","text":"现在我们可以把“Owner → Victim”的转换精确定位了\n\n目前已经有原件证明的流程是：\n\n第一步：Ancillary Petition\n\n联盟FAQ告诉成员：\n\n直接汇到21个冻结账户的人做Ancillary；\n\n每一个Asset ID请选择：\n\nOwner（资产主人）。 \n\n喜交所客户甚至明确：\n\n去Himalaya Restoration登记并签Affidavit，由律师处理第一阶段。 Forfeiture程序常见问题解答（327更新）.pdf\n\n↓\n\n第二步：Remission\n\n同一FAQ明确问：\n\n已经做了Ancillary，还要不要做Remission？\n\n回答：\n\n“是的。”\n\n而且除特定排除项目外，“都应该提交第二阶段Petition for remission。” Forfeiture程序常见问题解答（327更新）.pdf\n\n↓\n\n第三步：政府Petition系统\n\n新的填写教程直接告诉申请人：\n\n选择身份：Victim。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n↓\n\n第四步：Victim Petition\n\n政府问：\n\n你怎么成为underlying criminal offense的victim？\n\n教程继续指导填写经济损失。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n↓\n\n第五步：统一Statement Template\n\n示范：\n\n我的资金被 “misappropriated as part of the underlying criminal offense”；\n\n“As a victim”，我主张financial loss。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n↓\n\n第六步：\n\n申请人最后：\n\nunder penalty of perjury\n\n确认真实性，然后提交。\n\n这条链现在已经相当完整了。\n\n⸻\n\n所以这会改变我前面对“偷梁换柱”的评价\n\n前面只有第一份Remission示范的时候，我还会比较保守，因为它刻意写：\n\n“victim of the government forfeiture”\n\n而不是：\n\nvictim of Guo’s crime。\n\n现在这份教程出现以后，证据明显向前走了一步。\n\n因为它不仅知道政府真正要求的是：\n\ncriminal-offense victim\n\n而且直接提供：\n\n“my funds were misappropriated as part of the underlying criminal offense”\n\n和：\n\n“As a victim…”\n\n这种标准模板。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n所以现在可以非常严谨地说：\n\n至少在联盟传播的这套2025年Forfeiture/Remission教程中，成员一方面被指导在Ancillary Petition里以“Owner”身份主张自己的第三方财产权；另一方面又被普遍建议继续提交Remission，并在政府系统中选择“Victim”，使用把资金损失与underlying criminal offense联系起来的标准声明模板。\n\n这就是一个真实存在的双重身份指导体系。\n\n但我仍然不会直接写：\n\n“这证明联盟诈骗投资人/伪造受害者。”\n\n因为还差两个关键问题：\n\n谁制作了这份11页教程？\n\n以及：\n\n具体申请人是不是根据自己的真实情况独立判断后采用了模板？\n\n如果一个人确实认为自己是犯罪受害者，那他这样填完全可能是真实的。\n\n真正值得调查的是：\n\n联盟为什么把“Victim”作为统一教程里的明确选择，而不是告诉成员根据自己的真实法律身份在Owner / Lienholder / Victim之间自行判断？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q967fc82a9f19b0b23c88","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qd89875e0ef516455eca4","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":17,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:35:08.309Z","text":"以及更关键：\n\n既然联盟此前明确告诉大量人“Ancillary选Owner”，为什么又普遍告诉他们“第二阶段都应该做”，而第二阶段教程又直接指向Victim？\n\n这个前后衔接，现在已经是文件本身展示出来的问题了。\n\n我认为这份新PDF，是目前你给我的所有材料里，对“Owner → Victim身份转换”证据价值最高的一份。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd89875e0ef516455eca4","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q3a50ee5326e902801b91","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":18,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:40:29.118Z","text":"Geyer负责建立大规模HEX客户代理和产权主张体系；与此同时，喜马拉雅农场联盟委员会建立了一套面向更广泛投资人的个人remission申报体系，并明确指导申请人在政府系统选择Victim、把资金损失与underlying criminal offense联系起来。随后两套体系又在联盟FAQ中被组合成‘第一阶段产权claim + 第二阶段remission’的双轨策略。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3a50ee5326e902801b91","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb890cb558c608ce3bb21","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":19,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:45:42.820Z","text":"从现有证据看，3月份联盟是明显主动推进的：它自己制作教程、FAQ、Remission示范、Ancillary案例，还明确告诉成员已经做第一阶段的人“第二阶段Remission也应该做”；新的11页教程甚至直接指导成员选择 Victim，并使用把资金损失连接到“underlying criminal offense”的声明模板。\n\n但到了10月，联盟的语言完全变了：不再鼓励“有组织的forfeiture petition/claim”，强调个人自愿，联盟不提供协助，甚至专门说“有律师代表喜联储联系战友”的行为不代表联盟。\n\n如果当时已经出现越来越多成员开始脱离联盟统一路线，自己去法院提交第三方petition、§853(n)、remission纠正、撤销授权，甚至公开否认自己是victim，那联盟面临的风险会很现实：\n\n一方面，它不能直接公开说“不要自己去法院”，因为此前它自己已经大量教过大家怎么提交，而且个人本来就有权依法主张自己的权益。\n\n另一方面，如果越来越多人开始独立提交，内容不再由联盟统一控制，就可能出现很多对联盟不利的材料进入正式卷宗，比如：\n\n我当初为什么被指导填Victim；\n我并不认为自己是郭的受害者；\n谁让我签Geyer授权；\n谁提供统一模板；\n谁告诉我Owner和Victim两条都走；\n联盟此前如何收集汇款信息。\n\n这类东西一旦进入法院，就不再只是Discord内部讨论，而会形成可引用的司法记录。\n\n所以你说“联盟害怕自诉又不好明确反对”，我会把它修正成更准确的表述：\n\n联盟可能开始担心成员的大规模独立诉讼/第三方申报，使原先由联盟统一组织和解释的forfeiture/remission叙事失去控制；但由于成员本身拥有独立主张权，联盟又不适合公开禁止，因此10月的口径转成了‘个人自愿、联盟不组织、不协助、与律师/喜联储行动切割’。\n\n这个解释和10月两份公告的文字非常吻合。\n\n尤其那句：\n\n“联盟不支持战友参与任何有组织的forfeiture petition/claim。”\n\n它没有说：\n\n“不要提交petition。”\n\n而是特别强调：\n\n“不要有组织地参与。”\n\n这几个字非常值得注意。\n\n因为如果真正担心的是法律程序本身，它完全可以说“我们认为不应参与forfeiture petition”。\n\n但它选择的是：\n\n个人可以自行决定；只是联盟不组织。\n\n这更像是在做组织责任切割。\n\n而第二张又进一步说：\n\n联盟不允许任何农场负责人参与其中。\n\n这就更像是在防止以后有人说：\n\n“这是联盟组织的。”\n\n所以从证据语言看，我觉得“10月开始做责任隔离/组织切割”这个判断相当合理。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb890cb558c608ce3bb21","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qc1a0c6891957d1447288","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":20,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:46:21.367Z","text":"这一转向发生在越来越多第三方开始独立进入法院、授权争议和victim身份争议不断公开化的背景下，因此合理怀疑联盟是在降低自身与后续诉讼活动之间的组织关联和责任风险。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc1a0c6891957d1447288","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qe9daf8bbc792650d8741","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":21,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:48:53.265Z","text":"联盟的操作客观上帮助形成了一批经过统一指导、选择“Victim”、陈述criminal-offense loss并提交remission的申请人。这些材料随后可能成为政府识别潜在victims、建立claims administration体系和说明案件存在大量受害者的重要信息来源。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qe9daf8bbc792650d8741","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb8ee1ab9197e0c92fdae","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":22,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:49:55.095Z","text":"所以现在最准确的结论是：\n\n联盟的材料确实客观上帮政府形成、组织和标准化了一个潜在victim/remission claimant pool；政府后来也确实依赖“大量victims”作为不用传统restitution、改走remission的重要理由。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb8ee1ab9197e0c92fdae","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q9d47c83adf302f5b2d3a","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":23,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:50:16.576Z","text":"真正最值得继续查的是两件事：\n\n第一，政府在sentencing memorandum里到底用了多少“victim人数”“Geyer客户人数”“remission申请人数”，有没有把这些数字放进Guidelines loss / §3553(a)分析。\n\n第二，联盟/Geyer与政府2025年2—3月的邮件里，有没有出现“sentencing”“victim count”“loss calculation”“impact statements”这类直接连接。\n\n如果这两条能对上，你这个怀疑就能从“客观上帮助政府建立受害者池”，进一步升级到“这些材料有没有真的被用于量刑论证”。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q9d47c83adf302f5b2d3a","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q5072e19cc9904a3acee2","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":24,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:58:39.499Z","text":"所以从制度上说：\n\nRemission申请 = 为了从没收财产中获得行政返还；\n\nVictim Impact Statement = 为了让法官在量刑时看到犯罪造成的具体伤害。\n\n它们不是同一张表，但两者都以“我是crime victim”为前提。\n\n这就是为什么联盟3月份教成员在remission系统里选择 Victim、填写“underlying criminal offense”损失，会有潜在的后续意义。你上传的教程不是只让成员登记钱在哪里，而是明确指导选择Victim，并提供“资金作为基础刑事犯罪的一部分被挪用”“As a victim…”的模板。\n\n而到了 2025年4月8日，DOJ官方郭案页面已经公开告诉所有所谓victims：\n\n可以把victim impact statement发给政府；\n\n法院会在郭的sentencing中考虑这些陈述。\n\n注意时间：\n\n3月7日左右：联盟开始教Victim/Remission。\n\n3月11—27日：联盟收集投资信息、做模板、FAQ、答疑。\n\n4月8日：政府公开招募victim impact statements用于郭的量刑。 \n\n所以两个体系在时间上确实是连续的。\n\n但这里有一个非常重要的证据缺口\n\n政府官方页面让victim impact statement直接发到：\n\nValeen Defendre / USAO\n\n而不是说：\n\n“凡是填过remission的人，我们自动把你的材料变成sentencing victim statement。”\n\nDOJ自己的制度说明也表明，victim impact statement是一套单独的材料。\n\n所以目前最合理的推断是：\n\n联盟先帮助建立了一大批已经接受/采用“Victim”身份的潜在claimants；当政府随后招募量刑victim statements时，这批人客观上更容易继续进入量刑受害者渠道。\n\n但要证明：\n\n“联盟直接替政府提供了ECF 832里的225名量刑受害者”\n\n还必须拿到提交来源或者名单交叉证据。\n\n⸻\n\n而现在还有一个非常有意思的后续。\n\n公开docket显示，2026年4月7日 ECF 832 政府又给Torres提交了 第152—225号额外victim statements；同一天ECF 833政府量刑备忘录明确要求至少30年，并把“数千受害者”和“数百份额外受害者陈述”作为量刑论证的一部分。\n\n也就是说，最终量刑前政府已经至少编号到：\n\n225份victim statements。\n\n而到2026年8月，甚至已经有人在第三方mandamus材料里要求对政府的：\n\n“225-name victim list”\n\n进行evidentiary hearing。公开案卷目录明确记录了这个争议。\n\n这一点非常值得注意。\n\n因为现在“225名受害者名单/陈述到底怎么形成”本身已经变成正式争议，而不是只有我们在外面问。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5072e19cc9904a3acee2","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qe918ca120bd08069eed6","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":25,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T21:59:42.652Z","text":"如果联盟只是为了帮成员拿钱，为什么它的教程不是始终坚持“根据自己的真实身份选择Owner / Victim”，而是直接明确指导“选择Victim”？\n\n因为政府页面本身提供 Owner、Lienholder、Victim 三个选择；联盟教程却直接用箭头告诉成员：\n\n受害人（Victim）。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n然后再给一份标准criminal-offense loss陈述。 Forfeiture-Petition-填写教程.pdf\n\n这是比“联盟只是翻译政府网站”更强的事实。\n\n它在做实质选择指导。\n\n而这正好会使成员后来更容易在政府体系中被视为潜在crime-victim claimant。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qe918ca120bd08069eed6","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q7e14dcb3104568ac1389","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":26,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T22:02:51.489Z","text":"最重要的发现是：政府自己在833里明确承认，225份 victim impact statements 被它实际拿来支持量刑，而且逐份引用其中的内容。 但与此同时，848里关于“联盟组织remission → Ryan Finkel → 政府victim体系”的指控，目前仍然主要是第三方申请人的指控，需要继续核验其附件证据，不能直接当法院已经认定的事实。\n\n先看833：受害者陈述确实进入了量刑论证\n\n政府在833专门设了 “IV. VICTIM STATEMENTS” 一节，而且把来源拆得非常清楚：\n\n2024/11/22：约126份（Dkt.477）\n2024/12/11：7份（Dkt.482）\n2025/1/2–1/3：16份（Dkts.486、487）\n2026/4/7：再提交74份（Dkt.832）\n\n合计政府称约 225份 victim impact statements，而且明确说这些材料已经提供给法院，还要把全部纸质副本送到法官 chambers。 833.pdf\n\n更重要的是，政府不是把225份材料“放在那里不用”。\n\n在要求法院判处至少30年的部分，政府专门以“Guo Caused Immense Pain and Suffering to Thousands of Victims”为论点，然后直接引用这些statement。例如833引用Dkt.832的 Statement 158、200、152，以及Dkt.477的1、11、113、42、27、37等statement，描述失去住房、退休金、家庭破裂和精神伤害。 833.pdf\n\n后面政府甚至明确写：\n\n“Hundreds of additional victim statements corroborate that trial testimony.”\n\n所以我们前面说“victim statements可能影响量刑”，现在已经不需要用“可能”了。\n\n在这个案件里，它们事实上被政府作为量刑材料使用了。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q7e14dcb3104568ac1389","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qd21354fbec1afa3ce2f9","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":27,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T22:12:12.063Z","text":"我们原来都被联盟骗了，如果早几年有AI，我不会上当，过去和联盟签过的合同，基本都是荒唐至极的，那时就是相信他们信任他们，代价太大了","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd21354fbec1afa3ce2f9","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qf33d581f6b74d8498235","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":28,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T22:14:18.070Z","text":"谁可以提供长岛时期联盟让大家找盖儿代理的文件啥的","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf33d581f6b74d8498235","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q6f3017d3e9b0cec30567","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":29,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-24T23:31:32.242Z","text":"本案中，政府在保释环节的司法欺诈，让法院认定被告指挥其支持者（就是那些灭共演员）骚扰受托人及其家人，在被下了临时禁制令后，依然鼓动其支持者登记债权人虚假索赔，妨碍破产程序，妨碍司法。法官带着这个认定和这个认知状态，肯定会影响到接下来的证据证人证词和共谋者陈述的排除与采纳，对陪审团的法律指导，以及在庭审对抗中对反对意见的实时裁量。但这个地方，人工的去找司法路径，需要消耗大量的精力，却是ai agent 发挥作用的重要地方，您能否帮我搜索卷宗，把这些路径找出来？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q6f3017d3e9b0cec30567","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q2fda3ab574976a95dfe7","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":30,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-24T23:53:43.208Z","text":"有一项新的实质性动向，值得你现在就看，但它不是26-1853主案的新docket，而是与26-1853资产/没收问题直接相关的破产案 22-50073。\n\n2026年8月24日，破产案 Dkt. 5769： Trustee Luc Despins 通过 Nicholas Bassett 提交了 “Reply (Omnibus) in Support of Trustee’s Motion … for Approval of Settlement with United States of America”，也就是对 Dkt.5739 政府—Trustee全球和解的综合回复。公开docket明确显示它是8月24日新提交，而且直接关联5739。\n\n这很重要，因为5739的正式听证已经被康州破产法院官方日历确认在 2026年8月25日下午2:00（ET）。 换句话说，5769就是听证前最后一轮核心书面立场之一。它很可能决定Trustee如何回应第三方、ownership、forfeiture与estate asset划分方面的异议。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q2fda3ab574976a95dfe7","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q13e76bf363919ea4a621","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":31,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-24T23:59:29.407Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 早就研究过了 这个对定罪影响不大","edited":true,"reply_to":"q6f3017d3e9b0cec30567","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q13e76bf363919ea4a621","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q6f3017d3e9b0cec30567","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q0dd37173569ece871d71","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":32,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T00:02:41.407Z","text":"已经足以过无害错误。是否能过无害错误，这个是我一直在想的问题，我昨天确定，正常的法官不会当无害错误。就是把路径找出来的问题，没找出来，才是无害错误。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q13e76bf363919ea4a621","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0dd37173569ece871d71","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q13e76bf363919ea4a621","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q7262ddeb8a5c5f78e118","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":33,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:03:01.046Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 对定罪 有简介影响","edited":true,"reply_to":"q0dd37173569ece871d71","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q7262ddeb8a5c5f78e118","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0dd37173569ece871d71","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qd4c7543cd5ba0d885948","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":34,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:03:23.606Z","text":"1: 如果不是用这个把老郭关起来 就不会有文件700的律师是[屏蔽词] 律师沟通不会出现问题","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd4c7543cd5ba0d885948","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa137c25148cac1a153fc","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":35,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:03:41.065Z","text":"2: 检方 luc 本案的司法诚信从一开始就没了","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa137c25148cac1a153fc","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qc75972ca036311f10df6","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":36,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T00:08:18.785Z","text":"实际上，我是想您帮忙从整个南区法院的卷宗里，搜出一下内容：如果托雷斯不认为被告在被抓之前，一直在妨碍司法，那么很多order就的内容就会发生变化，这些变化，将影响到陪审团能看到什么，不能看到什么？我认为这必然是实质性的，实际上，当法官被严重误导，从那开始的程序，本身就可以推翻后重来，只需找到一两个这样的order 即可。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q2fda3ab574976a95dfe7","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc75972ca036311f10df6","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q2fda3ab574976a95dfe7","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q66d9bd55d1f5e879d6ff","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":37,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T00:09:05.542Z","text":"它的实质性，更多的是影响到了法官。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q7262ddeb8a5c5f78e118","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q66d9bd55d1f5e879d6ff","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q7262ddeb8a5c5f78e118","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qdd9add2a3c75977c148b","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":38,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:09:56.497Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 瑞恩有一份记录保存写了","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdd9add2a3c75977c148b","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q4c656b0cb9508d57cfa2","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":39,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:10:50.642Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 检方833的量刑文件 丝毫不提债权人登记妨碍司法 但是检方前期文件大量描写","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q4c656b0cb9508d57cfa2","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qdeee2480f3246eb2676b","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":40,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:11:23.903Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 瑞恩733指出司法欺诈后 检相当于在前期的王牌 雪藏了","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdeee2480f3246eb2676b","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qd0a177a01fff005b5a0b","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":41,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T00:13:20.950Z","text":"我关注的重点是，对法官的误导，到底在多大程度上影响了陪审团的判断。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qdeee2480f3246eb2676b","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd0a177a01fff005b5a0b","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdeee2480f3246eb2676b","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q765365f560bafa433471","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":42,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:17:57.631Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 这个只能当做背景 如果要翻案 都是非常直接的问题","edited":true,"reply_to":"qd0a177a01fff005b5a0b","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q765365f560bafa433471","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd0a177a01fff005b5a0b","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q3962af7d6ff413f5f347","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":43,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T00:18:52.135Z","text":"所以去找司法记录，翻出来再整理出来,就是非常直接的问题。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qd0a177a01fff005b5a0b","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3962af7d6ff413f5f347","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd0a177a01fff005b5a0b","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa1b429485e7f16225415","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":44,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:19:30.660Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 我都研究过了 定罪 量刑 和保释那些 关系不大","edited":true,"reply_to":"q3962af7d6ff413f5f347","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa1b429485e7f16225415","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3962af7d6ff413f5f347","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb3cd454eec2b5e574650","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":45,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:19:55.314Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 如果有直接关系那瑞恩早就推翻了  可惜不是直接的","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb3cd454eec2b5e574650","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qe43fb2eaa279747defab","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":46,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:20:32.831Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 司法欺诈 什么情况可以翻案 必须是隐瞒了的陪审团的关键证据 比如： 716-4的资金来源","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qe43fb2eaa279747defab","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q1afd37df3899f127a5d1","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":47,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T00:24:23.995Z","text":"不是关系不大，是没有找到证明关系大的记录冲突和证据。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qe43fb2eaa279747defab","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1afd37df3899f127a5d1","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qe43fb2eaa279747defab","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qeb1c401923f6255f0c26","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":48,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T00:27:29.548Z","text":"比如，那些抗议活动，如果托雷斯不认为是被告在妨碍司法，是诈骗联盟在妨碍司法，后面庭审中关于那部分内容就不会被允许呈现，这将实质影响到陪审团是否会裁定被告参与rico共谋。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qeb1c401923f6255f0c26","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q05933b8c6f2fb09ca4bf","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":49,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:30:06.997Z","text":"这些都是间接的","edited":false,"reply_to":"qeb1c401923f6255f0c26","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q05933b8c6f2fb09ca4bf","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qeb1c401923f6255f0c26","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa8983d1bc15836673ad1","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":50,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T00:34:26.992Z","text":"最直接的是tony指出的716-4","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa8983d1bc15836673ad1","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q33677076eecebe30583c","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":51,"speaker":"him***","date":"2026-08-25T00:41:42.903Z","text":"[删节：隐私信息]","edited":true,"reply_to":"q8ae0e1781fdf5aa19051","reply_status":"not_public","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q33677076eecebe30583c","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"被回复内容暂不可用","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q31cccad479a45b8a8f4e","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":52,"speaker":"beg***","date":"2026-08-25T00:44:13.881Z","text":"上了二巡的的Vacate all ， 几个点：\n\nMoney laundering and wire fraud - 716-4 反击\n\n律师无效辩护\n\n\nRICO - 与被告无关，是那些联盟的演员们\n\n\n司法 主权冲突\n\n程序问题 - 32.2， 455， 抢跑 ….\n\n未能传换有效证人/共谋干扰司法\n\n\n共产党参与司法程序： 威胁/迫害投资人。报假案\n\n\n受害者人数/金额 不准确，持疑\n\n\n还有啥？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q31cccad479a45b8a8f4e","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q60a749013c3fc560f616","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":53,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T00:51:06.511Z","text":"但是这里反而出现了一个更直接、更危险的问题：\n\nGXZ26到底给Torres和陪审团呈现了什么？\n\n716-4告诉我们，政府在2022年已经知道：\n\n* 有pooled accounts；\n* 有FV Bank其他客户资金；\n* 有correspondent banking结构；\n* MBI可以逐笔trace G Club客户资金；\n* 多层账户并不自动等于concealment；\n* 某些“fraud proceeds”结论是Alecci从银行事实进一步推断出来的。\n\n但858却把 GXZ26作为非常核心的证明：\n\ncash从G Enterprise账户流入POF账户\n→ 因而这些账户包含fraud proceeds / laundering property。 gov.uscourts.nysd.595325.858.0(1).pdf\n\n所以现在真正应该问：\n\nGXZ26有没有把716-4里政府自己知道的pooled account、第三方客户资金、correspondent structure、可追踪性这些限定一起呈现？\n\n如果没有，这个问题就比“716-4证据等级不够”严重得多。\n\n因为那会变成：\n\n政府掌握完整银行结构\n\n↓\n\ntrial summary chart GXZ26选择性呈现资金流\n\n↓\n\nTorres在858明确依赖GXZ26作preponderance finding\n\n↓\n\nspecific property全部被认定可没收。\n\n这条已经非常直接。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q60a749013c3fc560f616","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qf1920ed1c92340edc20d","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":54,"speaker":"sar***","date":"2026-08-25T01:05:46.889Z","text":"https://x.com/sarahzh67248600/status/2092055664134967504?s=12&t=eXMPp66CZUFD_7vvMedcSA","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":true,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf1920ed1c92340edc20d","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q439958b494e5c531004e","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":55,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T01:31:05.597Z","text":"他爸说拘留十天","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q439958b494e5c531004e","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qdbb1f8ee085438c073e6","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":56,"speaker":"sar***","date":"2026-08-25T01:31:22.672Z","text":"为什么？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdbb1f8ee085438c073e6","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q832ce5d21d56c15ff19f","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":57,"speaker":"sar***","date":"2026-08-25T01:31:40.185Z","text":"才十天？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q832ce5d21d56c15ff19f","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q0522788b7226e88d8e3f","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":58,"speaker":"mia***","date":"2026-08-25T01:32:13.617Z","text":"是星辰狗日举报的吧","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0522788b7226e88d8e3f","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q04eeb8ccae2d41e69be3","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":59,"speaker":"sar***","date":"2026-08-25T01:33:40.785Z","text":"拘留十天算什么罪呢？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q04eeb8ccae2d41e69be3","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q3821a099526e9a474b85","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":60,"speaker":"sar***","date":"2026-08-25T01:34:39.857Z","text":"平安就好。以后该说什么还是继续说。言论自由。😂","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3821a099526e9a474b85","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa7c0f2464137e5921035","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":61,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T01:41:29.935Z","text":"并不间接，我实际上认为这些是陪审团认为郭参与敲诈勒索共谋的主要原因，庭审中对应的就是luc的女婿和律师的证词。没有这些证词，一个敲诈勒索犯罪集团的主导者的形象就建立不起来。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q05933b8c6f2fb09ca4bf","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa7c0f2464137e5921035","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q05933b8c6f2fb09ca4bf","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q1fefe419f5c6c8b4e3e3","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":62,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T01:44:00.034Z","text":"就这个细节上，难点是没法证明被告与诈骗联盟骚扰受托人与被告无关。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa7c0f2464137e5921035","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1fefe419f5c6c8b4e3e3","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa7c0f2464137e5921035","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qbd0b57133751a183270b","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":63,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T01:45:48.352Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 这个还是比较间接","edited":true,"reply_to":"qa7c0f2464137e5921035","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qbd0b57133751a183270b","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa7c0f2464137e5921035","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q747aff1d3436e0fea4cd","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":64,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T01:45:48.828Z","text":"所以需要找到更多记录和证据，来证明法官带着这一偏见，对后续程序的污染是实质性的，陪审团的裁决从而变得不可靠，所以需要重审。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q747aff1d3436e0fea4cd","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q1b77aca80792880da176","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":65,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T01:45:59.491Z","text":"不间接。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qbd0b57133751a183270b","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1b77aca80792880da176","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qbd0b57133751a183270b","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q29eb5b8f4c0bd6dfbc90","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":66,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T01:46:12.532Z","text":"最直接的就是716-4","edited":false,"reply_to":"q1b77aca80792880da176","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q29eb5b8f4c0bd6dfbc90","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1b77aca80792880da176","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qd7f6c1f6b79d9a5cc434","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":67,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T01:46:26.989Z","text":"检方直接误导陪审团在关键证据","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd7f6c1f6b79d9a5cc434","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qaddc424d63ba5ca1b946","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":68,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T01:48:21.381Z","text":"每个人重点研究方向不一样。716-4我目前看到的，并没有解决资金混同在被推翻前，可以被认为在定罪上属于无害错误，只能在推翻刑期产生实质作用。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q29eb5b8f4c0bd6dfbc90","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qaddc424d63ba5ca1b946","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q29eb5b8f4c0bd6dfbc90","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qdcbb552138302b0183f4","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":69,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T01:49:04.061Z","text":"定罪也可以 716-4可以打掉两项罪名 洗钱 和电汇欺诈","edited":false,"reply_to":"qaddc424d63ba5ca1b946","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdcbb552138302b0183f4","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qaddc424d63ba5ca1b946","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q81c08e41013568e08060","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":70,"speaker":"nev***","date":"2026-08-25T01:49:30.243Z","text":"看来国内这些个是真不想管也不敢管了，估计给领导说，领导也嫌他们多事","edited":false,"reply_to":"q3821a099526e9a474b85","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q81c08e41013568e08060","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3821a099526e9a474b85","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q2b8f8a5112e127495b44","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":71,"speaker":"nev***","date":"2026-08-25T01:50:01.786Z","text":"上头领导估计都怕哪天把自己查了","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q2b8f8a5112e127495b44","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qaff1c661a64cea2aa02c","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":72,"speaker":"nev***","date":"2026-08-25T01:50:36.878Z","text":"这个说话法感觉真的有点过分了","edited":false,"reply_to":"qd5e825cbacb9b6f4adf0","reply_status":"not_public","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qaff1c661a64cea2aa02c","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"被回复内容暂不可用","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa23329570a3f21b7246a","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":73,"speaker":"beg***","date":"2026-08-25T01:53:20.332Z","text":"这个是不是所有女战友的老公的通病？ 他们不理解郭文贵有啥能让这些女人这么坚定的支持他。他们不理解 这些女战友心里的那杆秤 - 真假善恶","edited":false,"reply_to":"qaff1c661a64cea2aa02c","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa23329570a3f21b7246a","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qaff1c661a64cea2aa02c","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa9b8affce1f83acdd0cc","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":74,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T01:54:06.738Z","text":"难点和重点是被告参与了rico共谋。它们的操作就是程序上能做到就会那么做，不管那么做是否会违反宪法，是否违背常理。实际上我们看到的敲诈勒索证据更多的是犯罪集团针对受托人实施的，对投资者的还比较少，然后它们用对受托人的敲诈勒索行为，用来证明敲诈勒索共谋，然后再用王的认罪，嫁接成了郭是犯罪集团的boss。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qdcbb552138302b0183f4","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa9b8affce1f83acdd0cc","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdcbb552138302b0183f4","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qeb256f3764458e35f168","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":75,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T02:00:53.298Z","text":"也就是按照庭审中的证据，郭参与敲诈勒索共谋的证据，与郭参与这个犯罪集团对受害者的敲诈勒索不具有实质性，就算陪审团定罪没有问题，托雷斯应该像对王的资产没收一样，只能把郭实际占有的那部分作为郭的权益或者个人资产进行没收。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qeb256f3764458e35f168","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qaf59d563b7660eab5e8f","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":76,"speaker":"spr***","date":"2026-08-25T02:13:49.722Z","text":"喜交所的资金被没收问题，为啥特务发现了某些自诩最正确的人都没发现呢                                                         没收的资产如果检方没有证明被告所得了也没有证明被告曾经控制过，法院就纳入了没收范围内，属于非法没收吗？\n\n是的，如果政府对于某项特定财产既没有证明它是被告取得的犯罪所得，也没有证明它曾经处于被告足以构成 forfeiture 的控制之下，同时法院却把它列入刑事没收范围，那么这个没收决定存在非常严重的法律错误。                                                                                                  即使按照法院858的理论，被告曾经控制过资产就可以没收，喜交所也不满足这个没收条件，汉密尔顿的756也阐述得很清楚，只可惜他们最后还是落到了853n上而已                                                                               因此，如果南区根本没有完成 §32.2(b)(1)(A) 要求的 nexus determination，问题就不是“等 §853(n)”\nThis proceeding does not involve relitigation of the forfeitability of the property\n而是：Preliminary Order 本身是否是在缺少法定前提的情况下发布的？\n尤其你现在描述的事实是：\n政府说喜交所是所谓犯罪工具；\n但客户美元在客户自己名下；\n客户可以要求提取；\n政府并没有证明这些美元属于郭；\n政府也没有证明这些特定美元是郭本人取得的 proceeds；\n南区却把这些资金纳入郭的 Preliminary Order；\n而法院没有作出你所说的 property-to-offense requisite nexus 的具体审查。\n如果案卷能够支持这些事实，那么你的核心不是：\n“第三方请求 §853(n)。”\n而是：\n“The Court entered the preliminary forfeiture order without first making the forfeiture determination required by Rule 32.2(b)(1)(A).”\n所以你现在的理论可以非常明确地说：\n我不是在要求法院认定“我的财产权优先于被告”。\n而是：我要求审查法院是否错误地把根本不满足 forfeiture statute 要求的财产纳入 Preliminary Order。\n这属于 forfeitability / forfeiture determination。\n§853(n) 属于另外一个问题：","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qaf59d563b7660eab5e8f","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q86ac751f516e406fabd1","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":77,"speaker":"spr***","date":"2026-08-25T02:17:08.415Z","text":"情况 1：郭从来没有控制过客户的钱\n那么你首先攻击：\nGovernment failed to establish that this specific customer money ever came under Guo's control.\n如果政府连这一点都证明不了，那么这是一个threshold forfeiture issue。\n这不是 §853(n) 的“谁优先”问题，而是：                            ［用户 hel***］ ［用户 ntp***］ \n喜交所的用户有权力直接要求资金返还，而不是等853n, 同时控诉检方和法院非法没收，汉密尔顿2770也是","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q86ac751f516e406fabd1","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qc7a88d12c5d9a484728b","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":78,"speaker":"spr***","date":"2026-08-25T02:19:53.321Z","text":"即使以被告控制了资金，也要提供每一类资金的完整追踪链条，而不是一个GXZ26就笼统地把所有资金全部没收","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc7a88d12c5d9a484728b","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q4acc68a502d2b5201fdc","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":79,"speaker":"beg***","date":"2026-08-25T02:21:56.460Z","text":"这个二巡的文件中有过论证。托雷斯 检方违法","edited":false,"reply_to":"qc7a88d12c5d9a484728b","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q4acc68a502d2b5201fdc","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc7a88d12c5d9a484728b","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qfe95d740798738f56ef2","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":80,"speaker":"spr***","date":"2026-08-25T02:24:20.331Z","text":"没有了证券欺诈和电汇欺诈，自然也就没有了rico，rico和洗钱都是建立在欺诈的基础上的","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa9b8affce1f83acdd0cc","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qfe95d740798738f56ef2","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa9b8affce1f83acdd0cc","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa29e760d3dad6911f4f0","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":81,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T02:26:23.287Z","text":"［用户 spr***］ 律师反复说资金没有trace 你看有谁理 你觉得你比郭律师厉害？","edited":true,"reply_to":"qc7a88d12c5d9a484728b","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa29e760d3dad6911f4f0","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc7a88d12c5d9a484728b","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q3ff0ba4092431a3e0a50","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":82,"speaker":"spr***","date":"2026-08-25T02:26:50.691Z","text":"论证引用的法条不对，就支持不了，况且托雷斯的858没出来前，你根本就不知道他们的没收建立在什么理论上，你怎么反驳？","edited":false,"reply_to":"q4acc68a502d2b5201fdc","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3ff0ba4092431a3e0a50","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q4acc68a502d2b5201fdc","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qce011add8023abc84bad","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":83,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T02:28:53.257Z","text":"［用户 spr***］ 从司法欺诈衍生的所有程序都要打废 没收程序和瑞恩733息息相关 用司法欺诈要求托雷斯作废量刑","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qce011add8023abc84bad","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q5b50c31f494c44428075","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":84,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T02:29:24.800Z","text":"［用户 reb***］  733打定罪可能不直接 但是打没收分分钟 有733就别想好好没收","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5b50c31f494c44428075","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa6bc73336301ea8bc507","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":85,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T02:31:29.263Z","text":"有一个犯罪集团，其中一个重要共谋认罪并被其指任为boss，在程序上它们就是可以对郭这么做，它们执意这么操作，去扯没有诈骗用处不大。重点应该是王的认罪不合法，敲诈勒索共谋不成立。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qfe95d740798738f56ef2","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa6bc73336301ea8bc507","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qfe95d740798738f56ef2","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q0bdef61dd2bbb3534857","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":86,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T02:39:12.000Z","text":"去证明灭共演员独立诈骗通过配合受托人所谓的追回欺诈转移把欺诈责任转移给郭，也很不错。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0bdef61dd2bbb3534857","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q6370880b364c8c120fc1","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":87,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T02:39:26.034Z","text":"［用户 him***］ 因为没收被搅黄，破产案债权人拿不到钱，所以你们几帮人，包括长岛，青，屁酱第三梯队，都恨螺丝哥，对不对","edited":true,"reply_to":"q5b50c31f494c44428075","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q6370880b364c8c120fc1","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5b50c31f494c44428075","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa59998602face259e267","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":88,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T02:41:06.536Z","text":"［用户 reb***］ 基本不可能 律师都没证明出来","edited":true,"reply_to":"q0bdef61dd2bbb3534857","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa59998602face259e267","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0bdef61dd2bbb3534857","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q3c391d0131b6d5d6acc5","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":89,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T02:41:53.576Z","text":"现在能推翻郭案只有靠瑞恩+螺丝哥+tony三个主输出 加beginning带几个辅助","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3c391d0131b6d5d6acc5","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa819354b9f105119fe4d","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":90,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T02:41:58.274Z","text":"那是它们本来就在表演，郭也不可能主动这么出击。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa59998602face259e267","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa819354b9f105119fe4d","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa59998602face259e267","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q86b5e2617ef74f3104b1","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":91,"speaker":"hel***","date":"2026-08-25T02:49:27.589Z","text":"不知道什麼原因，郭到現在都還沒有正式出手呢！二巡不知道他本人會不會有有利的證據拿出來。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q86b5e2617ef74f3104b1","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q66296a47d4449f6fdc7c","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":92,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T03:10:41.940Z","text":"［用户 spr***］ 别演了，你从青联盟那边拿钱，帮他们掩护盖尔，不然没法解释，你为什么一直说，我讲的关于盖尔的，大部分都是错误","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q66296a47d4449f6fdc7c","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qc8c204b7517f0e9889b1","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":93,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T03:26:18.540Z","text":"我一直都只是说盖尔合同欺诈，肯定是进来干坏事，但具体干了哪些坏事，我没有去捋，今天应该是全部捋清楚了。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc8c204b7517f0e9889b1","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q4fab17ef62e794596155","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":94,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T03:32:11.712Z","text":"这种奇案里，各方都表现得精神分裂。法官也不例外，想把判词写圆，结果也显得精神分裂。一会儿依赖psr来作决定，一会又说psr不是按照最新的量刑指导写的，说了一半天，就是用自己的违背了最新量刑指导的损失认定，取代了psr里的违背最新量刑指南的损失认定。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q4fab17ef62e794596155","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q27400c19aabe7ab291bd","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":95,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T03:34:06.720Z","text":"本来就用意图损失就可以判二十年，但可能组织上要求必须三十年以上然后还要没收，所以就强行把意图损失判为实际损失，然后判三十年，没收郭8.89亿。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q27400c19aabe7ab291bd","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q3493049b7b9dce0b196b","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":96,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T03:53:32.798Z","text":"GTV在刑事案郭这里，实在是没法弄到手，不过还有破产案luc，可以留后手","edited":false,"reply_to":"q27400c19aabe7ab291bd","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3493049b7b9dce0b196b","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q27400c19aabe7ab291bd","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q02fa68fb5173b496b0c2","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":97,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T03:56:04.309Z","text":"委屈的是300骨干，Qmay直播说好的，破产案债权人从刑事案拿钱","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q02fa68fb5173b496b0c2","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q814505b6253efcf1ec9f","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":98,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T03:57:01.064Z","text":"现在luc表面退了一步，不帮那些人在刑事案争取14亿，眼看到嘴的鸭子，要飞了","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q814505b6253efcf1ec9f","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q959534439b3afdf8a97e","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":99,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T03:58:48.109Z","text":"盖尔这事儿，掀开了就是长岛，青联盟，喜交所，一起谋划，谁都跑不掉","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q959534439b3afdf8a97e","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qaed339c7bdba9fc9b2c4","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":100,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T04:01:39.155Z","text":"喜交所的5亿，在8.89亿里，又是大头，这部分通过rico被按在boss郭头上。本来是余，要出来担责的。\n也说明，两届联盟，和喜交所，深度绑定","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qaed339c7bdba9fc9b2c4","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q898bf2311a8f7625892d","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":101,"speaker":"hel***","date":"2026-08-25T04:04:03.206Z","text":"蓋爾就是長島、青聯盟推給韭菜的，目的是控制、維穩、帶偏方向的工具人。\n\n更重要的是要把郭定罪詐騙，\n之後把郭弄死在獄中，永遠翻不了案！\n讓所有的投資人到最後一分錢也拿不回來。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q959534439b3afdf8a97e","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q898bf2311a8f7625892d","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q959534439b3afdf8a97e","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q482c3ca809e0eb3ec831","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":102,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T04:06:02.460Z","text":"这一轮我挖到一个非常值得马上标红的新点，而且它会修正我们前面对ACA Capital的理解。\n\n2026年3月26日，郭方自己提交了 Dkt.826/826-1 corrected sentencing memorandum，专门更正此前把ACA Capital写成“郭家族实体”的错误。更正后的脚注明确写：\n\nACA Capital provides investment services and is not owned by Mr. Guo, his family, or any Guo family entities.\n\n也就是说，ACA Capital不是郭或郭家族拥有的公司；它与郭家族自己的ACA Family Fund Investment Company不是同一个实体。\n\n这很重要，因为政府在2024年7月11日rebuttal closing里对陪审团说得非常强：\n\nmoney went from the Farm Loan Program into William Je’s “slush fund at the ACA Capital account in Abu Dhabi”，然后再从ACA Capital流向郭家族办公室。\n\n注意，这里政府没有直接说“ACA Capital是郭家公司的账户”，它说的是William Je’s slush fund at the ACA Capital account。所以不能把826的更正直接说成“政府撒谎”。\n\n但826把问题变得更精确了：\n\nACA Capital本身是独立投资服务商；\n\n那么政府究竟凭什么把它在陪审团面前定性成Je的“slush fund”？\n证明的是Je对该具体账户有签字/控制权，还是证明ACA Capital整个实体是其私人犯罪工具？\n这两个事实不是一回事。\n\n政府早期材料确实称Je是该UAE ACA Capital账户的sole signatory，并说他从该账户向自己、妻子、Hamilton以及郭家族成员持有的公司转款。 所以政府并非毫无证据。\n\n但真正的突破在另一个地方：资金来源。\n\n郭方更正后的826-1继续明确说：\n\nHinton没有做tracing；\n\n没有详细flow-of-funds分析；\n\n无法说明具体账户到底有多少资金流过；\n\n对ACA Capital First Abu Dhabi Bank账户中的“other inflows”来源，没有trial evidence；\n\n因此trial record不足以可靠认定所谓 $77m或$110m Farm Loan proceeds 从该账户流出。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q482c3ca809e0eb3ec831","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qcf1de6786005238ea91a","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":103,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T04:06:34.544Z","text":"而政府closing却直接告诉jury：\n\nFarm Loan Program的钱进入ACA Capital，再从ACA Capital回到Guo family offices。\n\n这就形成我们一直在寻找的那种非常具体的撞点：\n\ntrial evidentiary limitation：\n\nACA账户是混同账户；\n有other inflows来源未证明；\nHinton没有trace具体outflow来源。\n\n对上：\n\ngovernment summation characterization：\n\nFarm money → ACA → Guo family offices。\n\n这个现在比“GXZ26没有trace”四个字强得多。\n\n更重要的是，辩方在closing当时其实已经精准打过这个问题。\n\n7月10日Kamaraju告诉陪审团：\n\n郭并不自己操作银行账户，Je处理金融事务；Je确实从ACA First Abu Dhabi账户向郭家族办公室转账，但辩方问jury：\n\n你怎么知道具体这些转出去的钱就是Farm Loan money？\n政府没有给你足够证据。\n\n辩方甚至说：\n\n“at best you can’t tell.”\n\n第二天政府rebuttal就直接回应：\n\n这不是巧合；Farm Loan money进了ACA，然后又去了Guo family offices。\n\n这太重要了。\n\n因为这不是我们2026年事后发明的问题。\n\n它在双方closing里正面交锋过：\n\nDefense：账户混同，不能证明特定outflow来源。\n\nGovernment：Farm money→ACA→Guo family offices，不是巧合。\n\n所以这是一个完全trial-centered、jury真正听到过的争议。\n\n这条为什么可能比733更直接打定罪？\n\n因为它直接碰到Farm Loan fraud和money laundering。\n\n郭被判：\n\nCount 3：money-laundering conspiracy；\nCount 7：Farm Loan wire fraud；\nCount 8：Farm Loan securities fraud。\n\n如果政府利用“Farm victim money最后进了郭家”证明：\n\nfraud intent；\nmisappropriation；\nlaundering；\npersonal benefit，\n\n那么资金来源不确定就不是边缘问题。\n\n它并不会自动推翻这些counts，因为政府还有其他证人、视频、合同和资金证据。但它现在明确进入harmless-error/materiality分析。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qcf1de6786005238ea91a","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa3a28669699238a193d6","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":104,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T04:07:20.774Z","text":"我还发现一个很有意思的“acquittal vs later use”问题\n\n陪审团最终：\n\nGTV wire fraud Count 5无罪；\nGTV securities fraud Count 6无罪。\n\n但郭在Counts 1–4以及Farm/G Club/HEX counts被判有罪。\n\n后来政府在716没收申请中明确说：\n\n虽然jury在GTV fraud counts acquitted Guo，但法院在sentencing/forfeiture阶段仍可依据preponderance考虑GTV相关事实，并把GTV纳入RICO/fraud/money-laundering整体框架。\n\n这个对定罪本身不一定产生直接错误——陪审团可以在具体GTV substantive counts无罪，同时仍对更广泛conspiracy/RICO作有罪判断。\n\n但它提醒我们一个很重要的审查点：\n\nCount 1–4 verdict究竟有多少依赖GTV行为？\n\n如果jury明确对GTV实体欺诈罪无罪，那么RICO/Conspiracy里还剩哪些独立predicate和agreement证据？\n\n这正是你们前面群里争“没了证券欺诈是不是RICO也没了”真正应该怎么问。\n\n不是自动没。\n\n而是必须做：\n\nGTV evidence剔除/降权以后 → Count 1、2、3、4剩余证据还能不能独立维持。\n\n这个现在我认为值得进入逐Count矩阵。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa3a28669699238a193d6","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q2f83c10399cd16baade0","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":105,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T04:08:14.666Z","text":"还有一个会增强Tony资金表价值的新连接\n\n826-1同时指出：\n\nHimalaya Exchange所谓 $517m loss 也是通过账户gross inflows加总出来的，没有区分：\n\ninvestor deposits；\nsecondary-market trading；\n转去G Club等其他类别的资金。\n\n也就是说，郭方已经正式告诉Torres：\n\ngross transaction volume ≠ economic loss。\n\n这和Tony Farm Ledger的价值完全一样：\n\nTony表提供的是economic transaction identity：\n\n谁、什么时候、多少钱、合同号、loan application number。\n\nGXZ26/Hinton提供的是：\n\nbank-account inflow aggregation。\n\n因此Tony表真正可能提供的，不只是“我看到有中国人投资”，而是：\n\n底层经济交易的去重单位。\n\n如果未来能拿Tony表里的US12xx逐笔对应后续banking flow，就可以真正测试：\n\n一个economic investment有没有因为跨Crane/Farm/GClub/Hamilton/ACA多层账户而被多次出现在aggregate figures里。\n\n这一点还没证明，但现在已经有明确方法论。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q2f83c10399cd16baade0","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qd65c4351415e4ed892fc","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":106,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T04:11:58.363Z","text":"现在我认为“RICO/Jury Instruction”这条线已经升级成一个很完整的问题：\n\nGovernment presented multiple projects and numerous peripheral actors as one integrated criminal enterprise; defense specifically sought a multiple-conspiracies instruction and objected to expansive agency/coconspirator attribution; the Court rejected the multiple-conspiracies instruction while also rejecting the Government's proposed automatic agent attribution. The appellate question is whether the charge as actually given sufficiently protected against jury spillover from separate schemes, actors, and organizational relationships into a finding that Guo personally joined the charged criminal agreements.\n\n中文简单说：\n\n政府把很多项目、很多联盟/Farm/HEX人员打成一个大犯罪集团；辩方明确要求法院提醒jury别把不同共谋混起来；法院没给这个multiple-conspiracies指示。现在二巡真正要看的是：最终charge有没有别的足够保护，避免jury把“组织关联+别人犯罪”直接变成“郭本人参加同一个犯罪协议”。\n\n这条我现在给 ★★★★★。\n\n因为它已经具备：\n\ntrial objection → judge ruling → government closing → RICO attribution → jury verdict\n\n完整链条。\n\n而且它和Tony农场表、383/388、Alliance人员独立行为全部能接起来。\n\n下一轮最值得继续撞的就是：7月12日或15日Torres最终实际对jury读出的RICO/conspiracy charge全文。我要确认最终有没有保留“mere association/knowledge不够”“郭本人必须knowingly participate”这些保护，以及co-conspirator acts到底被怎么解释。如果那部分保护弱，multiple-conspiracies拒绝的重要性会进一步上升；如果保护很强，我们也要承认政府会用它主张任何错误都被charge治愈。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd65c4351415e4ed892fc","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qcd1081ffe2c93ac6f1a4","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":107,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T04:16:37.412Z","text":"这个之前讲过，ACA capital，也就是阿中基金，可能之前账户就有很多old money，它只是个中转站，或者叫资金池，money有inflow和outflow，检方只trace得到flow，但不知道这个原始pool里，有多少钱。\n不能简单就把in out划等号。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q482c3ca809e0eb3ec831","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qcd1081ffe2c93ac6f1a4","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q482c3ca809e0eb3ec831","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb2d88bd6472adf9ec982","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":108,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T04:24:17.609Z","text":"这一段的意思，政府重点更多是想说明，AcA capital涉及洗钱，电诈。但是重要操作者是Je，因为他缺席，而在这之前，S3起诉书已经明确说郭是boss，Ye是副手。那么这个罪名，郭替Je顶罪。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qcf1de6786005238ea91a","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb2d88bd6472adf9ec982","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qcf1de6786005238ea91a","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q5ae3dc5069115a249c28","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":109,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T04:32:06.660Z","text":"这段的意思，不知道是不是AI弄错了，对郭的jury里，GTV实体没有wire fraud，不过王案里，她对GTV违规转账，是plea guilty，而这个是跳过了陪审团程序的","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa3a28669699238a193d6","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5ae3dc5069115a249c28","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa3a28669699238a193d6","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q3bdae1850dac4b6711e1","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":110,"speaker":"beg***","date":"2026-08-25T04:33:16.461Z","text":"这个很有价值； 二巡的文件中提出了ACA capital 建于2016年， 早于投资项目，检方没有提供流水，只说农场借款转给了郭家","edited":false,"reply_to":"q2f83c10399cd16baade0","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3bdae1850dac4b6711e1","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q2f83c10399cd16baade0","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q8ebec6bf365a517ddf47","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":111,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T04:34:18.318Z","text":"对，群友这个纠正基本是对的。我前面那句把 Guo本人GTV Counts 5/6的无罪 和 Yvette Wang自己的plea 放得太近，容易让人误解成“GTV这个scheme已经被陪审团认定不存在fraud”。这需要纠正。\n\n郭本人2024年7月16日的verdict确实是：\n\nCount 5 — GTV wire fraud：Not Guilty\nCount 6 — GTV securities fraud：Not Guilty\n\n同时郭在Counts 1、2、3、4、7、8、9、10、11被判有罪。这个结果在后来的政府二巡材料里也明确列出来了。\n\n但 Yvette Wang（王雁平） 是另一回事。她在郭开庭以前已经plead guilty，而且她认的是：\n\nconspiracy to commit wire fraud + conspiracy to commit money laundering\n\n并不是陪审团对她作出的GTV实体wire-fraud verdict。后来文件也明确记录她是根据plea agreement认了这两个conspiracy counts。\n\n所以这里一定要分开三个命题：\n\n郭的GTV实体罪无罪，不等于陪审团裁定“GTV完全没有fraud”。\n\nWang认罪，也不等于陪审团已经裁定“郭实施了GTV wire fraud”。\n\n郭Counts 1–4有罪，意味着jury仍然可能把部分GTV相关行为放进更大的conspiracy/RICO框架里考虑——具体允许考虑到什么程度，要看final charge和verdict form。\n\n这反而把我刚才说的 “acquittal vs later use” 问题变得更精确、更值得研究：\n\n陪审团明确拒绝认定郭本人犯Count 5 GTV wire fraud和Count 6 GTV securities fraud以后，政府和法院后来究竟在多大程度上继续把GTV资金整体当作郭的fraud proceeds、racketeering proceeds或laundering property？\n\n这里不能简单说“因为Counts 5/6无罪，所以以后GTV一分钱都不能考虑”。尤其在当时联邦量刑/没收框架下，acquitted conduct的法律处理本身比较复杂。\n\n但是有一个更尖锐的问题：\n\n如果后来政府说“jury verdict已经证明GXZ26里的这些资金是fraud proceeds”，这种概括能不能覆盖GXZ26里的GTV部分？\n\n这就必须非常小心。\n\n因为jury恰恰在郭本人两个GTV substantive counts上说Not Guilty。\n\n所以以后凡是看到政府或Torres写类似：\n\n“the jury determined these funds were proceeds of fraud”\n\n我们都应该马上拆：\n\n哪些funds？哪个scheme？哪个count？\n\n不能允许把：\n\nFarm/G Club/HEX有罪\n＋ Counts 1–4 conspiracy有罪\n\n笼统转换成：\n\nGXZ26里所有GTV + Farm + G Club + HEX gross inflows全部已经被jury逐项认定为fraud proceeds。\n\n这可能就是一个新的verdict-overbreadth / characterization审查点。\n\n所以群友这次提醒得很好。我把前面的表述正式修正为：\n\n郭本人GTV Counts 5、6被陪审团判无罪；Wang此前另行认了wire-fraud conspiracy和money-laundering conspiracy。二者不能混同。真正需要深挖的是，政府后来有没有利用Wang的plea、Counts 1–4的general conspiracy verdict或GXZ26，把陪审团没有在郭GTV实体罪上作出的认定重新扩大成“GTV资金已经被jury认定为fraud proceeds”。\n\n这个我会继续往下查。 如果真找到政府/858用了这种跨越，我认为会比单纯说“GTV无罪”有价值得多。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q5ae3dc5069115a249c28","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q8ebec6bf365a517ddf47","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5ae3dc5069115a249c28","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q168f5da4d219846f2c51","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":112,"speaker":"beg***","date":"2026-08-25T04:39:39.155Z","text":"郭GTV 无罪 - 投资人这以后对美国政府的索赔有积极影响？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q168f5da4d219846f2c51","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qe1c5474d6b46536a18d1","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":113,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T04:41:23.246Z","text":"我现在反而认为，GTV无罪最值得深挖的是这三件事：\n\n1. 政府后来有没有在716、833、858等文件里，把GTV资金继续统称为“fraud proceeds”，并声称是“jury verdict”证明的。\n2. 858最终8.89亿美元没收计算里，GTV到底占多少；如果包含GTV，法院依据的是RICO/共谋、独立preponderance finding，还是错误地依赖了实体GTV fraud verdict。\n3. GTV投资人自己的钱如果被扣押，能不能利用GTV acquittal + 独立产权 + tracing不足，主张政府对具体财产缺乏法定nexus。\n\n如果这三条里能找到政府把“GTV Counts 5/6无罪”在后续程序里重新包装成“已经证明的GTV诈骗所得”，那就不只是对26-1853有帮助，对未来要求返还财产、挑战没收，甚至某些条件下研究针对政府的赔偿理论都会更有价值。\n\n所以答案是：有积极影响，而且值得深挖；但最现实的第一步不是直接索赔美国政府，而是先用GTV无罪攻击后续“fraud proceeds / forfeiture nexus”的扩大化。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q168f5da4d219846f2c51","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qe1c5474d6b46536a18d1","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q168f5da4d219846f2c51","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q88f2e0f93136514e52f0","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":114,"speaker":"beg***","date":"2026-08-25T04:43:02.610Z","text":"托雷斯不是说了吗 1.3亿 去掉GTV 剩8.9亿。用这个8.9亿 （不包括GTV） 给郭定罪","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q88f2e0f93136514e52f0","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q563fee3e16b8e821b8f8","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":115,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T04:43:23.804Z","text":"如果中共死保诈骗联盟那些贱畜，把这个案给撤了，就可以索赔。但如果不撤销rico案，郭定罪被撤销后，美国政府把该抓的抓进去，投资者可能就不能索赔，只有郭可以。因为每个项目，郭没有参与犯罪，但其它人有参与。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q168f5da4d219846f2c51","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q563fee3e16b8e821b8f8","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q168f5da4d219846f2c51","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb379676f69e3355f7b50","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":116,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T04:44:23.424Z","text":"这个里面就好玩儿了，300骨干，其实都在检方的未起诉共谋里面\n郭上诉，他们坐不住了，因为配合二巡的record，这个集团犯罪，很可能被拆分开，各个实体比如farm loan /HEX/Gclub/GTV，都会有人被独立起诉，里面money laundering的部分，300骨干是具体实施者，逃不掉的\n难怪他们想去assassinate 郭\n［用户 kir***］","edited":true,"reply_to":"qd65c4351415e4ed892fc","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb379676f69e3355f7b50","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd65c4351415e4ed892fc","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q9f9abdd85f55dfe49693","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":117,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T04:48:10.030Z","text":"这个法律思路里有一个真正值得研究的核心：multiple conspiracies / variance。\n\n我们刚刚已经发现，郭方明确要求Torres给multiple-conspiracies instruction，Torres拒绝；与此同时政府closing又把GTV、Farm、G Club、HEX等描述成“at their core all the same”。\n\n那么二巡真正可以问：\n\n政府证明的是一个郭本人knowingly joined的统一RICO/conspiracy，还是若干不同人员、不同公司、不同时间、不同项目的独立违法行为，最后被一个enterprise/control理论捆在了一起？\n\n这跟383特别吻合。\n\n因为383里的反证包括：\n\n* 有Farm leader会不听郭；\n* 有人自己处理资金；\n* 有人后来跟郭闹翻；\n* 一些G Club员工认为自己在合法企业工作；\n* HEX内部证人指向Je管理；\n* 一些外围人员没有证据证明自己知道criminal scheme。\n\n这些不能自动证明“多个独立共谋”，但足够构成multiple-conspiracies instruction为什么重要的事实基础候选。\n\n而且如果最后证明：\n\nGTV一套人；\nFarm一套人；\nG Club一套人；\nHEX又一套人；\n某些资金操作由Je/Wang/其他人实施；\n郭与每一套criminal agreement之间的连接强弱不同，\n\n那么问题就不仅是hearsay。\n\n它会变成：\n\nsingle conspiracy vs multiple conspiracies + prejudicial spillover。\n\n这条非常适合二巡，因为二巡真正会问的是：\n\n即使政府证明A项目存在犯罪，jury有没有因为所有项目被捆在一个巨大“G Enterprise”故事里，而把A项目证据错误spill over到B/C/D项目以及郭本人？\n\n这比说“其他人犯罪，所以郭无罪”强得多。\n\n还有一点非常关键：郭在GTV实体Counts 5/6无罪，本身就是陪审团有能力区分不同scheme/count的证据。 这对政府会是一个反驳——政府会说：“看，jury没有被spillover污染，因为他们确实在两个counts acquit了郭。”\n\n所以如果我们要打multiple-conspiracies/spillover，必须正面回答这个问题，而不能回避。\n\n反过来，这两个acquittals也给郭方一个不同角度：\n\n既然jury明确拒绝GTV两个实体罪，后来的政府/法院就更不能笼统地把整个13亿美元GXZ26资金池说成“jury已经认定的fraud proceeds”。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qb379676f69e3355f7b50","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q9f9abdd85f55dfe49693","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb379676f69e3355f7b50","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q0bf779f9e7cb79d290ab","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":118,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T04:53:33.841Z","text":"［用户 roy***］\n第二张图片，是不是说明，政府已经用了王在GTV的plea guity","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0bf779f9e7cb79d290ab","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qcd92b690be49af780f74","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":119,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:01:26.950Z","text":"意思就是，858里是8.9亿金钱判决\n但是在没收清单，还是按照GXZ26追缴，并没有剔除掉GTV相关账户\n反而在量刑后，还多增加了几个追回的账户","edited":false,"reply_to":"qe5d9609bd1113a65fb35","reply_status":"not_public","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qcd92b690be49af780f74","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"被回复内容暂不可用","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa953a136df7233811f6d","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":120,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T05:02:01.894Z","text":"所以GTV一直不退钱","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa953a136df7233811f6d","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q5fd1954964483998a081","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":121,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:02:46.198Z","text":"毕竟4亿的大肥肉，不能没收，政府不甘心啊","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa953a136df7233811f6d","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5fd1954964483998a081","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa953a136df7233811f6d","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q20348f77cb5dc297dbe2","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":122,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:04:38.926Z","text":"300骨干和检方背后的团队，盯着\n天降横财，不要白不要\n干了这票，名利双收，立功拿钱，这辈子后半生，稳了","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q20348f77cb5dc297dbe2","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q7ca19458392dd363eceb","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":123,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T05:30:09.592Z","text":"https://x.com/testurheart/status/2092122212631294159?s=46","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":true,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q7ca19458392dd363eceb","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qaefaf0882b48ac29d73e","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":124,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T05:39:37.497Z","text":"https://x.com/ruienxiaoge3/status/2092124611559432593?s=46","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":true,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qaefaf0882b48ac29d73e","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb4c7f4b6ac026faa8527","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":125,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T05:40:41.317Z","text":"看到第三方可以把案件打废 他们慌了","edited":false,"reply_to":"qb379676f69e3355f7b50","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb4c7f4b6ac026faa8527","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb379676f69e3355f7b50","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q48374ea7e39fce89a4eb","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":126,"speaker":"hel***","date":"2026-08-25T05:41:23.668Z","text":"公平基金GTV的款項，有一部份人已經收回了投資款。拿回92% （已經非常好）。國內的很多投資者委托張勇兵收款的，聽說到現在還沒有收到錢。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa953a136df7233811f6d","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q48374ea7e39fce89a4eb","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa953a136df7233811f6d","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q08e71b70dd521fb8b1eb","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":127,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:43:21.338Z","text":"这之前讨论过，钱被张闷了，再以账户被冻结的理由，敷衍韭菜","edited":false,"reply_to":"q48374ea7e39fce89a4eb","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q08e71b70dd521fb8b1eb","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q48374ea7e39fce89a4eb","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qec66cc563ba91aa7d5ef","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":128,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:43:49.514Z","text":"和长岛代理，诉魏丽红，和解后闷钱，骗投资者说账户冻结，一个道理","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qec66cc563ba91aa7d5ef","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q5350582fc74d8e75c7f3","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":129,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T05:43:52.135Z","text":"拘留这几天估计是在做思想工作","edited":false,"reply_to":"qaefaf0882b48ac29d73e","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5350582fc74d8e75c7f3","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qaefaf0882b48ac29d73e","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb8279fa7c40df79e80c0","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":130,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T05:43:52.711Z","text":"［用户 roy***］ 问问机器人有没有这个可能","edited":true,"reply_to":"q08e71b70dd521fb8b1eb","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb8279fa7c40df79e80c0","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q08e71b70dd521fb8b1eb","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q8e127d8377796603aed5","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":131,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T05:44:04.508Z","text":"问题是他有啥思想工作可做？","edited":false,"reply_to":"q5350582fc74d8e75c7f3","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q8e127d8377796603aed5","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5350582fc74d8e75c7f3","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q811b578f36c242dc1ef2","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":132,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T05:44:22.786Z","text":"他支持习主席 反海外民运 揭露反共都是骗子","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q811b578f36c242dc1ef2","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q63532dbd9b0d4790ae31","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":133,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T05:44:35.910Z","text":"这是上面安排的，走个形式也得做","edited":false,"reply_to":"q8e127d8377796603aed5","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q63532dbd9b0d4790ae31","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q8e127d8377796603aed5","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qf5eb09a2cdf6cd411bd9","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":134,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T05:44:59.069Z","text":"又不能抓又不能不管，这咋办？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf5eb09a2cdf6cd411bd9","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q0043ad8f54bca94d29f5","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":135,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:46:03.103Z","text":"指不定，现在国宝，正在用他的手机，看这个群消息","edited":false,"reply_to":"qf5eb09a2cdf6cd411bd9","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0043ad8f54bca94d29f5","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf5eb09a2cdf6cd411bd9","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa67cc1229b661bc4acc9","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":136,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:49:11.004Z","text":"我是感觉，这几帮人，看到破产案luc，开始和政府和解，不再来刑事案，之后开始慌了","edited":false,"reply_to":"qb4c7f4b6ac026faa8527","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa67cc1229b661bc4acc9","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb4c7f4b6ac026faa8527","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q4677c587ce89093c91ff","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":137,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:49:55.776Z","text":"Qmay直播说了，破产案要从刑事案拿钱，这是预先计划","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q4677c587ce89093c91ff","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q75c5c8151b0803ee1b19","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":138,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:51:01.963Z","text":"Luc先溜了，接下来刑事案的没收，被第三方打废，然后检方要保自己，只能是卖人","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q75c5c8151b0803ee1b19","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qf6772a5d606d473ea089","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":139,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:51:59.560Z","text":"luc的和解，应该是和南区检方妥协，用钱换自己没事","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf6772a5d606d473ea089","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q90e6f5e16b00a476b5d6","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":140,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:52:52.710Z","text":"留下来的，只有300骨干，又是破产案被luc追钱，又是刑事案未起诉共谋","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q90e6f5e16b00a476b5d6","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q22474456428d9dd7c66e","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":141,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T05:52:54.714Z","text":"那些[屏蔽词]除了表演，很多基本知识都没有，投资者站出来直接到法庭说话后，还认为luc敢到刑事案民事附属程序要钱。","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q22474456428d9dd7c66e","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q79a81e2409ebe9249e1a","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":142,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T05:53:09.513Z","text":"老郭为了规避pax的债务申请破产，结果却导致更大的债务追偿，这事儿是被忽悠了还是另有所图","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q79a81e2409ebe9249e1a","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q4953f047bc129c0977d2","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":143,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:53:37.964Z","text":"故意的 不然就没有破产案债权人登记","edited":false,"reply_to":"q79a81e2409ebe9249e1a","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q4953f047bc129c0977d2","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q79a81e2409ebe9249e1a","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qcbc15cb426e51dabd732","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":144,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:53:59.577Z","text":"300骨干，挤破头去，毕竟最后是分14亿","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qcbc15cb426e51dabd732","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb6307c8ec4d489d2a861","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":145,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T05:54:04.853Z","text":"这就是那张渔网？","edited":false,"reply_to":"q4953f047bc129c0977d2","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb6307c8ec4d489d2a861","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q4953f047bc129c0977d2","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qf3db1e3e2d1f3774f3e7","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":146,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:54:52.837Z","text":"瞎弄农场，拿法治基金钱的，也是一个网","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf3db1e3e2d1f3774f3e7","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qc846e11a2ebe7a24143f","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":147,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T05:56:24.884Z","text":"检方也不敢让他露头，毕竟它们共谋在先","edited":false,"reply_to":"q22474456428d9dd7c66e","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc846e11a2ebe7a24143f","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q22474456428d9dd7c66e","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qbf8f7287ac616bee1bcd","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":148,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T05:56:57.316Z","text":"检方会把Luc灭口吗？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qbf8f7287ac616bee1bcd","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qce1fa214001a393aa2c6","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":149,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:57:54.954Z","text":"这是人心的贪\n300骨干拿法治基金的钱，感觉很轻松\n接着盯上更大的喜交所，GTV，farm loan，共14亿，同时又可以利用这个，造案，把郭送进去","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qce1fa214001a393aa2c6","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q6ebbc1431c55c75b2ca6","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":150,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T05:58:29.190Z","text":"既可以拿钱，又可以立功升职，双赢\n同时还能继续打着郭的旗号，割韭菜，三赢","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q6ebbc1431c55c75b2ca6","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q9688f137d05d0bd64a66","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":151,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:01:18.156Z","text":"人心散了\n海外几帮不同派系的，为了权力利益，互相骂互相演，墙头草背叛出卖，分分钟\n海外的民运，都是骗子，再没人信了","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa2014d1d5b1bc3cd2595","reply_status":"not_public","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q9688f137d05d0bd64a66","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"被回复内容暂不可用","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q004a4da0af1a897f981a","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":152,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T06:02:20.143Z","text":"垃圾分布在世界各地，为何行动如此统一，这不得cico(没打错字母）一下，不知道那个专为中共准备的cico法案，是不是列明了某些情形下，中共的主权豁免无效。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa2014d1d5b1bc3cd2595","reply_status":"not_public","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q004a4da0af1a897f981a","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"被回复内容暂不可用","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q8de821b38a4d10ce707a","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":153,"speaker":"hel***","date":"2026-08-25T06:03:01.147Z","text":"這幫垃圾背後的指使者是誰？中共呀！到時又以不起訴作誘餌，讓他們供出背後的主子⋯⋯","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa2014d1d5b1bc3cd2595","reply_status":"not_public","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q8de821b38a4d10ce707a","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"被回复内容暂不可用","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qd6e418f7399b9748dbf5","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":154,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:04:13.853Z","text":"不用豁免，背后的主子，为了自身干净，肯定会清理门户\n卖了这些人，一省工资，二免了自己手脏，三用省下的钱，再培养一批小狗崽，长远看，又可以玩儿30年。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q004a4da0af1a897f981a","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd6e418f7399b9748dbf5","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q004a4da0af1a897f981a","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qf496b0b7c3beeb4d64c4","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":155,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T06:09:41.544Z","text":"中共真这么干，对于郭来说，是仅此于把那些鬼变成人那样的胜利。中共不死保，海外的代理人网络的信用就会归零，也就是中共的海外影响力被干掉，那比物理上的中共灭亡更好。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qd6e418f7399b9748dbf5","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf496b0b7c3beeb4d64c4","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd6e418f7399b9748dbf5","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q005601472c4081329114","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":156,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:11:02.983Z","text":"所以到现在这个局面，那几帮人，确实有开始assassinate的动机","edited":false,"reply_to":"qf496b0b7c3beeb4d64c4","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q005601472c4081329114","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf496b0b7c3beeb4d64c4","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q78766403f8d046f04ade","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":157,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:11:27.268Z","text":"不止是对郭，对里面的关键知情人，比如老顽童，下死手，已经算是开始处理尾巴","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q78766403f8d046f04ade","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qd7fd882b672d0e1334c7","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":158,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T06:14:08.657Z","text":"对于那些[屏蔽词]，它们都是想别人上自己来享受胜利果实，结果就是谁都不上。中共各家族对郭对习，也是这样，都想别人上，然后是大家都不上，然后习就一步一步拿到权力，郭也一直安然无恙。","edited":true,"reply_to":"q005601472c4081329114","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd7fd882b672d0e1334c7","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q005601472c4081329114","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q7d659848dbf21864433a","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":159,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T06:14:19.006Z","text":"该死的不是那些农场主吗？🐦，如水，ava，张永兵，他们才知道核心的东西，干掉老顽童一个手艺人有啥用","edited":false,"reply_to":"q78766403f8d046f04ade","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q7d659848dbf21864433a","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q78766403f8d046f04ade","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qdecfec0246a67e642c0b","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":160,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:15:08.419Z","text":"灭luc，检方没有动机，两方互有把柄，对两方最好的，是一起卖300骨干","edited":false,"reply_to":"qbf8f7287ac616bee1bcd","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdecfec0246a67e642c0b","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qbf8f7287ac616bee1bcd","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q310fd1900d0f38ab28f7","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":161,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T06:16:03.312Z","text":"但还没有苗头","edited":false,"reply_to":"qdecfec0246a67e642c0b","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q310fd1900d0f38ab28f7","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdecfec0246a67e642c0b","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q2fc2bea74cea54a6f100","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":162,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:16:42.886Z","text":"300骨干明白，所以才让 ［用户 spr***］ 来这里，怂恿二巡去反luc","edited":true,"reply_to":"q310fd1900d0f38ab28f7","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q2fc2bea74cea54a6f100","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q310fd1900d0f38ab28f7","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q08aecd16d74efac65644","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":163,"speaker":"sar***","date":"2026-08-25T06:21:12.617Z","text":"我在读Roy 发给群里关于盖尓的合同欺诈过程，读到了螺丝哥率先取消与盖尔的合同。螺丝哥真是天才呀。一般的人忙忙碌碌，一辈子被人安排、领导贯了，哪里会想到去挑战一个远在美国的律师呀！\n请问螺丝哥的这份取消合同的文件号是什么？[删节：成员身份]","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":true,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q08aecd16d74efac65644","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q5ca0c392760965c1e5fb","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":164,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T06:31:06.682Z","text":"[删节：隐私信息]","edited":true,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5ca0c392760965c1e5fb","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa72c0e06f369415b1468","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":165,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:37:54.890Z","text":"估计一开始，也不是这样设计的","edited":false,"reply_to":"qf0e18f65542bf34b28fa","reply_status":"not_public","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa72c0e06f369415b1468","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"被回复内容暂不可用","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q86b8ec2f3746657b6b9d","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":166,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:38:11.172Z","text":"CIPA是他自己的救命稻草","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q86b8ec2f3746657b6b9d","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qf96a9c91fef181d2cdfc","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":167,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:38:37.339Z","text":"现在自诉把这个案子，快打崩了","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf96a9c91fef181d2cdfc","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q7852678d978b2e1bde7e","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":168,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:39:02.219Z","text":"他也就落得个清闲，表演一下也行","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q7852678d978b2e1bde7e","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q3ac612ad691f80832527","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":169,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:40:08.616Z","text":"重点是，他明确了要上诉","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3ac612ad691f80832527","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q5e292aaa27b7510a93fc","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":170,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T06:42:40.790Z","text":"对，找到了。你截图里说的“螺丝哥率先取消与Geyer的合同”，对应的就是：\n\nSDNY 23-cr-118，ECF / Dkt. 508，2025年3月24日进入案卷。文件标题是：\n\nMotion to Revoke the Representation Agreement with Attorney Geyer and [Thousands of] Himalaya Exchange Clients Agreement is Invalid\n\n公开docket也明确把 Doc. 508 列为Chunk Chyi提交的撤销Geyer代理协议动议。\n\n而且你截图里的总结基本准确。508里螺丝哥自己说，他是HEX客户，HID为AV84EIY；他称自己在2023年12月23日因第三方的misrepresentation/deception签署授权，后来认为签约没有反映真实意思，因此请求法院：①撤销他本人与Geyer的representation agreement；②宣布Geyer代表数千HEX客户的协议无效。 \n\n不过还有一个细节很有意思：508不是他第一次提出这个要求。 他在508末尾告诉Torres，508其实已经是他在此前类似动议基础上再次提交的版本；他说在Dkt.505以前已经向法院发送过三份内容类似的motion，核心都是要求取消/认定数千HEX客户的代理协议无效。\n\n所以群里如果问“取消合同的文件号是什么”，你可以直接回答：\n\n就是SDNY 23-cr-118的Dkt.508，2025年3月24日入卷。螺丝哥要求撤销自己与Geyer的代理协议，而且进一步要求法院认定Geyer代表数千名HEX客户的协议无效。\n\n后面还有 Dkt.517，他把自己和Geyer之间的邮件往来进一步提交进案卷；517明确解释，因为508时附件没有正确上传，所以这一次把邮件合并后重新提交。\n\n再后面甚至还有 Dkt.519——Motion to Expel Geyer。所以这不是一次随手写信，而是形成了 508撤销合同 → 517公开双方沟通记录 → 519要求排除Geyer 的连续动作。\n\n但也要补一句程序结果：Torres后来在4月3日的命令中把508视为超出该刑事案适当非当事人提交范围的私人事项之一，并否决了508等动议；因此不能说法院最终判定Geyer合同无效。\n\n你说螺丝哥当时敢自己去挑战一个美国律师，这一点从案卷时间线看确实很突出——至少在2025年3月，他已经非常明确地把“我到底有没有授权Geyer、这个集体代理协议到底是否有效”直接送到了Torres面前。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q08aecd16d74efac65644","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5e292aaa27b7510a93fc","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q08aecd16d74efac65644","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q143935cb34b6f7fe8bd4","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":171,"speaker":"wan***","date":"2026-08-25T06:43:59.221Z","text":"他不上訴我們這幫死心塌地相信他的人就成[屏蔽词]了","edited":true,"reply_to":"q3ac612ad691f80832527","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q143935cb34b6f7fe8bd4","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3ac612ad691f80832527","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q1d76bef04688f3007450","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":172,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T06:46:56.449Z","text":"[删节：隐私信息] 螺丝哥当年的文件都是遥遥领先的预言","edited":true,"reply_to":"q08aecd16d74efac65644","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1d76bef04688f3007450","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q08aecd16d74efac65644","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q70d77fafe1dffe170eae","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":173,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:47:32.753Z","text":"不上诉，那他量刑就不必延期那么多次了，学王，直接plea guilty，然后等赦免","edited":false,"reply_to":"q143935cb34b6f7fe8bd4","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q70d77fafe1dffe170eae","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q143935cb34b6f7fe8bd4","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q38b9e0d2a09dd1951ad9","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":174,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:47:49.077Z","text":"这不就是联盟一直以为的剧本嘛","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q38b9e0d2a09dd1951ad9","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q43c61b097e64520cb3f1","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":175,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:48:30.665Z","text":"几帮人，不信一个打螺丝的，有这能力","edited":false,"reply_to":"q1d76bef04688f3007450","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q43c61b097e64520cb3f1","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1d76bef04688f3007450","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q80ae0670f3258e213edd","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":176,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:49:30.606Z","text":"搞不懂他，路子野","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q80ae0670f3258e213edd","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q74e3f882db1fd80d4d6a","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":177,"speaker":"kir***","date":"2026-08-25T06:50:22.843Z","text":"我现在相信 90%的人是搞不懂 才骂的","edited":false,"reply_to":"q43c61b097e64520cb3f1","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q74e3f882db1fd80d4d6a","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q43c61b097e64520cb3f1","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q15cf3e14f251b369b80c","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":178,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:52:19.087Z","text":"姜虾头，关注螺丝哥，不是搞懂，而是多年玩儿期货，锻炼出来的市场敏锐感","edited":false,"reply_to":"q74e3f882db1fd80d4d6a","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q15cf3e14f251b369b80c","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q74e3f882db1fd80d4d6a","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb25e4693e791ed1b9688","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":179,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:53:00.329Z","text":"类比泰山，案子一延期，立马从canada跑路，头也不回","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb25e4693e791ed1b9688","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qc255cb800c35ebb53a59","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":180,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T06:54:27.635Z","text":"Percy可能现在才懂一点，所以果断注销了推号","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc255cb800c35ebb53a59","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q903cba2844a65ef3b437","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":181,"speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-25T06:57:54.254Z","text":"多留点证据给自己争取一张进去的门票","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa5e56762ada35505bcec","reply_status":"not_public","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q903cba2844a65ef3b437","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"被回复内容暂不可用","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q97dacbeaba02dac857ac","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":182,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T08:34:49.841Z","text":"［用户 roy***］ 能不能问下AI\n这部分，我之前可能没有表达清楚\n858认定了郭的8.9亿涉案金额，剔除掉GTV\n但是在没收清单GXZ26里，并没有剔除GTV的部分，反而是随后公告，增加了几个没收账户\n是不是可以说，政府已经利用王的plea guilty，认定GTV仍然涉及 fraud proceeds\n也就是说，虽然郭案GTV无罪，郭个人涉案8.9亿。但是因为王案plea guilty在先，于是总涉案资金，按原有没收清单，还是14亿？","edited":true,"reply_to":"qcd92b690be49af780f74","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q97dacbeaba02dac857ac","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qcd92b690be49af780f74","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa5634ff52844a418ebb0","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":183,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T08:50:57.845Z","text":"王的最终没收已经明确了是几百万了，现在补充初步没收令里的gtv，如果不能把于建民引渡到美国，就得找至少一个能够被抓的人来背，不然最终没收令里就得去掉。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q97dacbeaba02dac857ac","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa5634ff52844a418ebb0","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q97dacbeaba02dac857ac","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qe340cd84028ee241e79b","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":184,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T08:51:42.956Z","text":"美国刑事案被告不认罪，不可以缺席审判。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qe340cd84028ee241e79b","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q56b3e00fca9bd04da3c0","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":185,"speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T08:54:53.529Z","text":"是的，这可能也是，为什么最终没收令，一直不下的原因","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa5634ff52844a418ebb0","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q56b3e00fca9bd04da3c0","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa5634ff52844a418ebb0","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q752d6ea35ff7e89456d2","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":186,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T08:55:45.644Z","text":"现在可以更准确地回答Qodty这个问题了：858的8.89亿美元money judgment确实已经把GTV私募的$411 million从原先约$1.3 billion里剔除了；但是“列明财产/具体账户的没收”是另一套分析，858明确说这次$411m扣减“不影响Listed Property的没收”。 这就是为什么你会看到：money judgment降到了8.89亿，但具体账户清单并没有机械地把所有“曾和GTV有关”的账户全部删掉。\n\n858写得非常清楚：政府主张原来的约$1.3 billion里，$411m来自GTV Private Placement，剩余约$889m来自Farm Loan、G Clubs和Himalaya Exchange。Torres接受了这个拆分，因此最终money judgment变成约$889m。她还特别说，GTV相关实体此前在SEC程序中已经disgorge的$411m应予扣减。\n\n但对具体账户，法院采用的不是“这个账户过去有没有经过GTV钱”这种简单标签，而是另一个问题：\n\n这个specific account里是否包含G Enterprise犯罪所得、或者属于/可追溯到Count 3 money laundering涉及的property。\n\n858明确依赖GXZ26和trial evidence，说某些列明账户包含来自G Enterprise的proceeds以及涉及money laundering的property；因此，$411m GTV deduction不自动让这些Listed Property消失。 \n\n所以，Qodty问的第一部分，答案是：","edited":false,"reply_to":"q97dacbeaba02dac857ac","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q752d6ea35ff7e89456d2","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q97dacbeaba02dac857ac","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q99786ca305e4046c35b1","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":187,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T08:56:07.149Z","text":"对，money judgment的GTV部分已经被剔除；specific-property forfeiture并没有因此按“账户名称/历史资金来源”逐项同步删除。\n\n而且你说“量刑后又增加了几个账户”也是对的。2026年6月30日，Torres又签了Supplemental Preliminary Order of Forfeiture，加入Additional Specific Property。 那份命令明确说，这些新增财产被政府主张为Counts 1、2、4、7–11的proceeds，和/或Count 3 money laundering涉及的property。它还明确提到，Count 3部分在一定范围内与Yvette Wang存在joint and several liability。\n\n但是这里要纠正Qodty后半段的一个推理：\n\n不能仅凭“Wang先plead guilty”，就说政府因此把所有GTV资金继续认定为fraud proceeds，所以总涉案资金仍然是14亿。\n\n目前858的正文恰恰不是这么写的。\n\nTorres在858里明确接受：\n\n$411m GTV Private Placement不进入郭的$889m money judgment。\n\n所以至少对于郭个人money judgment的计算，不能再说“因为Wang认罪，所以GTV仍算进去，故还是原1.3/1.4b”。\n\n真正复杂的是specific property。\n\n这里Yvette Wang的plea确实可能有作用，特别是money laundering property。6月30日的Supplemental POF写得很明确：新增财产可以是Count 3涉及的property，而且对那部分郭与Wang可在Wang的forfeiture judgment范围内承担joint and several liability。\n\n因此，更准确的法律结构是：\n\nGuo money judgment：约$889m，GTV的$411m已经剔除。\n\nSpecific property：不按889m的项目拆分机械删账户；只要政府能证明某个账户/资产属于郭有罪Counts的proceeds或Count 3 laundering property，它仍可能被没收。\n\nWang plea/forfeiture：可能为部分money-laundering property提供独立或共同的没收基础，但不能反过来把郭已经从money judgment剔除的整块GTV $411m重新算成郭的$1.3b。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q99786ca305e4046c35b1","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qa3d9cc40b304cf27b8a7","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":188,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T08:56:25.915Z","text":"所以Qodty真正应该追的，不是：\n\n“总涉案资金是不是还是14亿？”\n\n而应该问一个更尖锐的问题：\n\n858既然认定郭的GTV $411m不属于其$889m money judgment，那么那些仍留在郭Listed Property、以及后来新增的specific accounts中，究竟哪些资产曾被GXZ26归入GTV路径？对于这些财产，政府和法院具体依据哪个Guo conviction——Count 1/2/3/4还是7–11——证明它们仍然forfeitable？如果依据Wang的plea或Wang forfeiture，又如何满足对Guo本人right/title/interest以及Count 3 laundering-property nexus的要求？\n\n这才是真正可能挖出问题的地方。\n\n还有一个很关键的细节：6月30日新增的Supplemental POF本身没有说“因为Wang GTV认罪，所以这些就是GTV fraud proceeds”。 它写的是这些新增财产属于Guo的有罪Counts 1、2、4、7–11的proceeds，和/或Count 3 property involved in laundering。\n\n所以现在不能把“Wang plea guilty”直接当成政府保留所有GTV账户的唯一解释。\n\n我现在会把这条深挖成一张非常具体的表：\n\n原720每个Listed Property → GXZ26里它属于GTV/Farm/GClub/HEX哪条流 → 858之后是否保留 → 6/30以后是否新增 → 政府主张对应哪个Count → 是否依赖Wang forfeiture/plea → 是否有Guo本人的proceeds或laundering nexus finding。\n\n如果最后真出现：\n\n一个账户在GXZ26里主要是GTV路径，郭GTV Counts 5/6无罪、$411m又从money judgment剔除，但法院仍然仅凭笼统“G Enterprise/Count 3”把整个账户没收，没有具体解释非GTV犯罪资金如何进入或郭的权利范围，\n\n那就会比“总数是不是14亿”强得多，可能成为specific-property nexus / acquitted-GTV reuse的真正上诉点。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa3d9cc40b304cf27b8a7","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qcfe797ec678742d8b61b","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":189,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T09:01:31.960Z","text":"Robert 这段话里，有一半是对的，有一半把两种“没收”混在了一起。\n\n最先纠正一个关键点：王雁平的最终没收并不是“只有几百万”。 她在2024年5月认罪时，同意的是 $1.4 billion 的money judgment；司法部在她2025年1月量刑后也仍明确说，她“agreed to pay forfeiture in the amount of $1.4 billion”。 她另外确实同意没收若干specific property，其中包括Hamilton等账户里的具体资金，所以如果Robert说“她实际列出来属于她名下/权益的具体财产只有几百万或有限金额”，那可能是在说specific property，不是在说她的money judgment。\n\n第二，Robert说：\n\n“如果不能把于建民引渡到美国，就得找至少一个能够被抓的人来背，不然最终没收令里就得去掉。”\n\n这个法律逻辑不成立。\n\n美国刑事没收不是说“某笔GTV钱必须再找一个能抓到、能审判的人来背，否则这笔财产就自动从郭的final forfeiture里删除”。真正的问题是：\n\n政府能不能把这项specific property，依法连接到郭本人已经被判有罪的某一个count，或者连接到Count 3 money laundering所涉及的property。\n\n2026年6月30日的Supplemental Preliminary Order就是这么写的：新增specific property被主张为Counts 1、2、4、7–11的proceeds，和/或Count 3涉及的property；对Count 3部分，郭与王在王的forfeiture judgment范围内存在joint-and-several liability。\n\n所以政府不需要因为于建民不在美国，就“再抓个人”才能保住这项财产。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qa5634ff52844a418ebb0","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qcfe797ec678742d8b61b","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa5634ff52844a418ebb0","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q558560fc75095135b9ad","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":190,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T09:02:04.472Z","text":"Gtv的资金流总体上还是比较简单，没有与其它G系列项目混同，也没有与G enterprise里的其它组成部分有混同，全部在sec那里处理，没收清单里完全没有gtv相关资产。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q558560fc75095135b9ad","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q791fde4d3ff4e88f8471","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":191,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T09:02:09.719Z","text":"但Robert第二句话有一个法律上正确的核心\n\n他说：\n\n“美国刑事案被告不认罪，不可以缺席审判。”\n\n基本正确，但要加一个重要限定。\n\nFederal Rule of Criminal Procedure 43规定，被告原则上必须出席审判。如果一个被告从来没有在trial开始时到场，而且也没有plead guilty/nolo contendere，政府不能单纯因为他逃亡海外，就直接对他开一个普通felony jury trial并缺席定罪。Rule 43允许trial继续进行的典型情况，是：\n\n被告一开始已经在trial现场，后来主动逃跑/自愿缺席；\n\n或者他已经plead guilty。\n\n最高法院的 Crosby 原则也是这个方向。\n\n所以如果于建民人在海外、从未出庭、又没有认罪，确实不能简单“缺席审判把他判有罪”。\n\n但这和郭案specific-property forfeiture能不能继续，是两回事。\n\n⸻\n\n真正值得研究的是这一层\n\nRobert的直觉其实碰到了一个更好的问题：\n\n如果某些仍被列在郭Supplemental POF里的账户，主要或完全来自GTV路径，而：\n\n* 郭本人GTV Counts 5/6 = 无罪；\n* 郭的money judgment已经明确把GTV的$411m扣掉，降到$889m；\n* 王虽然认了一个很宽的wire-fraud conspiracy和money-laundering conspiracy，并同意$1.4b forfeiture；\n* 于建民又没有被美国法院定罪；\n\n那么真正该问的是：\n\n政府到底依据谁的什么罪名，把这一项具体GTV-related property继续放在“郭的”没收令里？\n\n如果答案是：\n\n“因为王认罪了，所以GTV就是fraud proceeds，因此郭的相关specific property也可以没收”，\n\n那还不够。\n\n还必须再证明：\n\n这项specific property到底属于郭什么right/title/interest；\n\n它如何属于郭已定罪Counts 1/2/3/4/7–11的proceeds或laundering property；\n\n不能仅仅因为另一个共犯王认罪，就把王的criminal liability自动转嫁成郭对这项specific asset的个人forfeiture liability。\n\n这才是非常值得深挖的点。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qe340cd84028ee241e79b","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q791fde4d3ff4e88f8471","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qe340cd84028ee241e79b","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb5dc8bda42fda1497bb8","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":192,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T09:02:46.321Z","text":"所以我给Robert这段话做个简洁判断：\n\n* “王最终没收只有几百万”——不准确。 王的money judgment是$1.4b；具体资产金额是另一回事。\n* “于建民不来美国，不能直接缺席审判定罪”——基本正确。 Rule 43支持这个方向。\n* “所以必须另找一个人来背，否则GTV必须从郭final forfeiture去掉”——不成立。\n* 真正有价值的问题是：每一个仍保留的GTV-related specific asset，政府能否单独证明它和郭本人现存有罪counts之间的forfeiture nexus。\n\n我觉得你们现在不要再争“必须抓谁来背”了。直接把Supplemental POF里面每个GTV相关账户逐个拆开，问它对应郭哪个有罪count、对应什么资金链、法院有没有具体nexus finding。\n\n这条比Robert现在这套“必须抓一个人”强得多，也更适合二巡。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb5dc8bda42fda1497bb8","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qe59c53c5607ab456dae7","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":193,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T09:05:58.623Z","text":"对，如果你这个事实前提核对无误——GTV资金一直相对独立、主要由SEC那条线处理，而且720/858的Listed Property里本来就没有GTV相关specific assets——那我前面关于“逐个检查没收清单里的GTV账户”的方向就需要纠正。\n\n858本身其实支持这个区分。Torres明确把原约13亿美元中的 $411 million GTV Private Placement 从郭的money judgment里扣掉，最后留下约 $889 million，对应法院所说的Farm Loan、G Clubs和Himalaya Exchange等犯罪所得。她还特别写明，GTV这$411m已经在SEC程序中被disgorged，因此不能再重复计入郭的money judgment。\n\n而858里那句：\n\n“This deduction does not affect the forfeiture of any of the Listed Property.”\n\n如果Listed Property本来就没有GTV-specific assets，那这句话的意思就不是“GTV账户虽然无罪仍继续没收”，而更简单：\n\n扣掉GTV的$411m，只影响money judgment数额；原来720里那些非GTV的specific property继续照常没收。\n\n这就完全说得通。\n\n所以现在Qodty刚才那个疑问也要重新校准：\n\n不是：\n\n858把GTV从8.89亿里剔除了，但政府却又把GTV账户留在没收清单，因此可能借王雁平的plea继续没收GTV。\n\n而更可能是：\n\nGTV那$411m本来走的是SEC disgorgement/Fair Fund体系；郭刑案的specific-property forfeiture清单主要是Farm/G Club/HEX/G Enterprise/money-laundering相关财产。因此858扣掉GTV后，并不存在“清单里还残留一批GTV资产没有删”的矛盾。\n\n这也意味着Robert说的：\n\n“如果于建民不能引渡，就必须找个人来背GTV，否则final forfeiture里得去掉。”\n\n如果没收清单里根本没有GTV-specific assets，那这个问题基本就建立在错误前提上了。 根本不存在一批“等着找人背才能保住”的GTV刑事没收资产。\n\n反而现在有一个更值得研究、也和你自己的退款直接相关的点：\n\n既然美国刑案858已经明确承认GTV Private Placement的$411m已经通过SEC程序处理，并因此把它从郭的money judgment中扣除，那么GTV投资人的恢复路径原则上就更明确地落在SEC Fair Fund/disgorgement体系，而不是郭刑案的remission资产池。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q558560fc75095135b9ad","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qe59c53c5607ab456dae7","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q558560fc75095135b9ad","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb11c5759cbcb80f045c3","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":194,"speaker":"ken***","date":"2026-08-25T09:06:05.360Z","text":"“美国刑事案被告不认罪，不可以缺席审判。”\n\n🤦\n所以即使郭先生已经吐血晕倒了，也得接受审判？","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb11c5759cbcb80f045c3","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q58d641fd23c753b25148","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":195,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T09:08:41.174Z","text":"是你不准确。你们ai自己有时也会把没收清单里列明的财产，可没收性，金钱判决，等概念没有用汉语说清楚。对王的个人资产没收就是只有几百万且应该是政府拿到了这几百万。对郭的个人资产没收令是8.89亿，如果犯罪所得在尽最大努力后没有追缴回来，可以用郭本人的其它本来的个人资产来填充，对郭的个人资产没收令是文件858，对G enterprise 的补充初步没收令，是859，具体没收清单里的财产，是列在859里，一共只有6个多亿。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qb5dc8bda42fda1497bb8","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q58d641fd23c753b25148","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb5dc8bda42fda1497bb8","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q20cec6427c7be93980ce","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":196,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T09:09:35.582Z","text":"铿锵玫瑰问的是：\n\n“所以即使郭先生已经吐血晕倒了，也得接受审判？”\n\n答案是：不是这么绝对。\n\n美国刑事程序里的“被告不得在尚未出庭的情况下直接缺席审判”，和“被告因为身体严重疾病能不能暂停审判”，是两个完全不同的问题。\n\n如果郭先生已经在美国法院出庭、案件已经进入正常刑事程序，原则上他当然要接受审判。但是，如果他的身体状况严重到医学上无法理解庭审、无法与律师有效沟通、或者参加庭审本身存在严重生命危险，法院不能简单说“无论如何都继续”。\n\n这里至少有两个层次。\n\n第一是 competency（受审能力）。18 U.S.C. §4241规定，如果存在合理理由相信被告因为精神疾病或缺陷，已经无法理解诉讼性质和后果，或者无法适当地协助律师，法院必须处理competency问题。18 U.S.C. §4241⁠\n\n但单纯身体疾病不完全等同于§4241的精神competency问题。身体严重到不能参加庭审时，法院可以根据具体情况延期、休庭，甚至需要医学评估。\n\n第二是 physical inability to stand trial（身体上无法参加审判）。如果真出现“吐血、昏厥、严重疾病”，关键不是一句“他吐血了”，而是要有医生证据回答：\n\n他能不能安全地坐在法庭里几个小时？\n能不能保持清醒并理解证词？\n能不能及时和律师交流？\n继续庭审是否存在严重医疗风险？\n\n所以如果有可靠医学证据证明答案是否定的，辩方完全可以要求 adjournment / continuance / medical evaluation。法院必须实际审查，而不能因为“刑事被告必须受审”就无视真实医疗状况。\n\n而截图前面Robert说的：\n\n“美国刑事案被告不认罪，不可以缺席审判。”\n\n他说的其实是另一个规则。\n\nFederal Rule of Criminal Procedure 43要求被告原则上必须在trial的重要阶段出席；最高法院在 Crosby v. United States 中也认定，一个在审判开始时就没有到场的被告，不能仅仅因为逃亡而直接开始缺席审判。 Rule 43⁠\n\n但Rule 43同时规定，如果一个已经参加审判的被告后来自愿逃跑/自愿缺席，trial在一定条件下可以继续。\n\n所以你可以直接在群里回答铿锵玫瑰：\n\n不是“哪怕吐血晕倒也必须硬撑着审判”。Robert说的是被告从来没有到庭、又没有认罪时，美国一般不能直接给一个逃亡海外的人开缺席刑事审判。郭先生已经在美国刑事程序里是另一回事。如果他的身体状况严重到医学上无法安全参加庭审、无法理解庭审或无法有效协助律师，律师可以要求延期、医学评估等救济，法院必须根据医疗证据处理。真正关键的是医学证据，而不是简单一句‘身体不好’或者‘刑事被告必须审判’。\n\n而且这个问题跟“于建民人在海外能不能直接缺席审判”不要混在一起。两个人涉及的是完全不同的程序状态。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qb11c5759cbcb80f045c3","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q20cec6427c7be93980ce","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb11c5759cbcb80f045c3","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qc61288edfa3a3b25d949","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":197,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T09:11:47.643Z","text":"所以我现在把Robert的话重新整理成一个不会混淆的中文版本：\n\n858解决的是郭个人最终应承担多少money judgment——约8.89亿美元。\n\nSpecific Property清单解决的是政府目前具体扣到/识别了哪些资产，并主张这些资产属于郭有罪counts的proceeds或Count 3 laundering property。\n\n具体财产最终没收以后用于冲抵这8.89亿美元。\n\n如果依法应没收的钱追不回来，在§853(p)条件满足时，政府还可以追郭本人的substitute assets。\n\n王的情况也要分开：她的具体个人财产权益到底有多少，和她所签署的整个forfeiture order/money judgment范围不是同一个数字。\n\n这一点Robert批评得有道理：以后我会始终用“金钱判决（money judgment）”“列明具体财产（specific property）”“最终没收（final forfeiture）”“替代资产（substitute assets）”四个词分开说，不再笼统叫‘个人资产没收令’。\n\n至于他说“859里specific property一共只有六亿多”，这个数字现在值得我们下一步直接核原始清单，我不想靠印象答。只要把859原件拿出来，我们可以把每个账户逐项相加，看看究竟是6亿多还是别的数字，并同时区分哪些是郭的right/title/interest、哪些还受第三方§853(n)约束。","edited":false,"reply_to":"q58d641fd23c753b25148","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc61288edfa3a3b25d949","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q58d641fd23c753b25148","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"qb5ecac4e5a5df53cabe5","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":198,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T09:16:07.299Z","text":"对，这次你把 Dkt. 859原件给我以后，可以把前面几个争议彻底钉死了。Robert关于“858和859不是一回事”的纠正是对的。\n\n859到底是什么\n\n859标题就是：\n\nSUPPLEMENTAL PRELIMINARY ORDER OF FORFEITURE AS TO ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC PROPERTY/MONEY JUDGMENT\n\n2026年6月30日，Torres签署。\n\n它自己明确回顾：\n\n2025年8月11日，法院已经在Dkt.720作出约13亿美元money judgment，并同时处理certain Specific Property。\n\n然后859做的事情不是重新判郭多少钱，而是：\n\n把后来发现/扣押的5组Additional Specific Property追加进郭的没收程序。\n\n所以：\n\n858 = 把郭的money judgment最终压到约8.89亿美元。\n\n859 = Supplemental Preliminary Order，追加具体财产。\n\n这两个概念以后必须彻底分开。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb5ecac4e5a5df53cabe5","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q681458b3479ca061c6ea","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":199,"speaker":"reb***","date":"2026-08-25T09:16:37.293Z","text":"差不多。就是因为整个犯罪集团的金钱判决责任，还是包括了gtv那部分，尽管它全部已经由sec处理，且补充初步没收令859里的具体列明的没收财产清单里，以及第一版初步没收令720里，都没有gtv相关资产，但金钱判决如果要坚持13亿，那么gtv一定要抓一个人来背，不然最终给到的对犯罪集团的金钱判决，就要去掉gtv的这4.11亿。","edited":false,"reply_to":"qc61288edfa3a3b25d949","reply_status":"available","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q681458b3479ca061c6ea","reply_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc61288edfa3a3b25d949","reply_label":"查看被回复的发言","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"},{"id":"q247a7ba7cee3334d8db8","batch_id":"batch-000151","seq":200,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T09:16:46.023Z","text":"859新增的具体财产只有5组\n\n我逐项核了原件：\n\n1. G Club Operations LLC — Banco Popular\n    * 约 $2,112,510.70\n    * 2023年10月16日由Banco Popular开出official check\n    * 现在由政府持有。\n2. Kin Ming Je — Barclays Isle of Man\n    * 2024年10月29日FBI依据seizure warrant扣押。\n3. Sin Ting Rong — Barclays Isle of Man\n    * 同样2024年10月29日扣押。\n4. Kin Ming Je — Barclays Jersey portfolio\n    * 2025年4月17日FBI扣押。\n5. Sin Ting Rong — Barclays Jersey portfolio\n    * 2025年4月17日政府扣押。\n\n859没有在正文里写后面4个账户的金额，所以单凭859这6页不能计算“新增财产总额是多少”。\n\n这点要特别注意。\n\n⸻\n\n更重要：859完全没有GTV Counts 5/6\n\n这才是我们刚才争论里最关键的确认。\n\n859明确说，这5组Additional Specific Property被没收的法律基础是：\n\nCounts 1、2、4、7–11的proceeds\n\n和/或\n\nCount 3 money laundering涉及的property。\n\n注意：\n\n没有Count 5。\n\n没有Count 6。\n\n因为郭在GTV的Counts 5、6被判无罪。\n\n所以你刚才说：\n\n“没收清单里完全没有GTV相关资产。”\n\n至少就859新增财产的法定定罪基础而言，原件确实非常支持你的判断：政府没有在859里把新增财产作为郭Count 5/6 GTV实体罪所得来没收。\n\n这也进一步削弱了前面那种：\n\n“政府需要找于建民或者另一个人来背GTV，否则859里的GTV资产就得删掉。”\n\n这种说法。\n\n859本身就没有靠郭的GTV Counts 5/6。","edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q247a7ba7cee3334d8db8","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151"}],"prev_batch_id":"batch-000150","next_batch_id":"batch-000152"}