{"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","text_en":null,"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（跨批次）","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151","batch_canonical_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000151","notice":"这里汇集爆料革命参与者围绕郭文贵案的持续讨论，包括长期深度参与者及自述投入真金白银的投资者。他们分享亲历过程、资金投入与后续遭遇，并结合案卷展开追问、核对和观点交锋。这些来自事件内部的经验与细节，为理解事件经过和投资者处境提供了外部报道之外的重要视角。请结合具体发言判断其经历与依据，引用时保留发言者、时间和上下文。","content_type":"discussion_message","canonical_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5ae3dc5069115a249c28","markdown_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5ae3dc5069115a249c28/markdown","json_url":"https://mubeitech.com/api/discussion-messages/q5ae3dc5069115a249c28","surrounding_messages":[{"id":"qd65c4351415e4ed892fc","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T04:11:58.363Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qd65c4351415e4ed892fc"},{"id":"qcd1081ffe2c93ac6f1a4","speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T04:16:37.412Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qcd1081ffe2c93ac6f1a4"},{"id":"qb2d88bd6472adf9ec982","speaker":"joh***","date":"2026-08-25T04:24:17.609Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb2d88bd6472adf9ec982"},{"id":"q3bdae1850dac4b6711e1","speaker":"beg***","date":"2026-08-25T04:33:16.461Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q3bdae1850dac4b6711e1"},{"id":"q8ebec6bf365a517ddf47","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-25T04:34:18.318Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q8ebec6bf365a517ddf47"},{"id":"q168f5da4d219846f2c51","speaker":"beg***","date":"2026-08-25T04:39:39.155Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q168f5da4d219846f2c51"}],"parent_message":{"id":"qa3a28669699238a193d6","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。","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa3a28669699238a193d6"}}