The whole deniability thing...

Say you order a pack, you've followed all protocol (tor, tails...) and get a CD and accept. We all know at this point, in court, its going to boil down to proving the fact that you ordered the pack.

So my question:

If you fund a friend, far away, to buy a burner laptop and go through the checklist, and send the drugs to your addy a thousand miles away... Where, then, lies the liability? On them for using the btc? Or would the liability be in some sort of no-man's-land?


Comments


[3 Points] Joe_Black_:

Well if you leave no traces of communication or money transfer with them I think you'd be fine as they couldn't prove you had any connections with them even if they did find out who they are


[3 Points] Theeconomist1:

Your other party becomes a bigger liability and risk than anything else. Bottom line, you are still in possession of narcotics at the end of the day. the risk you are talking about eliminating is essentially the electronic search they will prob do. I believe you can mitigate that yourself by using proper opsec. Personally I wouldn't trust another person to ensure my freedom for things I can mitigate myself.

So if LE follows the money trail, can you be certain your friend wouldn't be uncovered? Bc if that friend is uncovered I can almost promise you're fucked 99% of the time. I don't care how close a friend it is. So question is - can you cover this irl trail easier than your digital trail.

Also LE is well aware that getting a conviction for a DNM order is difficult. Keep in mind the purpose of the CD is twofold. To get you to fuck up and rat yourself out. If this is done, it doesn't matter if you used a friend or had tight Opsec. Also, a cd gives LE access to your domicile. Is it clean? If they can't convict you for the DNM pack they'll gladly charge you with anything found in your home. Just remember a CD isn't just about the pack of drugs you are holding in your possession.


[3 Points] None:

There is a way to make this work. You just need 10 friends to help. It has to exactly 10 or you are fucked.

So you talk to friend 1 and give him the names and addresses of the other 9 friends. He pays the dealer extra to make 10 nested packs, with the innermost 1 having your address and then 9, then 8, etc.. The outermost 1 has friend 1's address. Dealer mails it to friend 1.

Now, friend 1 mails it to friend 2 and tells him to unwrap the outer coating and put it in the mail. Friend 2 repeats the process down the line.

Eventually it gets to you, but it may take a while.

This is basically how Tor works, so it is guaranteed to be safe.


[2 Points] datfakeaccounttho:

You'd both be committing crimes, if that's what you're asking. Buying drugs through a middleman isn't any more legal than buying them yourself. How likely it is that you'd be caught depends on how well you hid your communication and money transfer.


[2 Points] ChickenMcLovins:

Say you order a pack, you've followed all protocol (tor, tails...) and get a CD and accept. We all know at this point, in court, its going to boil down to proving the fact that you ordered the pack.

So my question:

If you fund a friend, far away, to buy a burner laptop and go through the checklist, and send the drugs to your addy a thousand miles away... Where, then, lies the liability? On them for using the btc? Or would the liability be in some sort of no-man's-land?

To preface, I'm providing a quick over on liability and assuming LE has all necessary evidence to implicate you and your friend as co-conspirators, for convenience sake.

Liability is almost always on someone or some entity if an action occurs giving rise to a situation implicating a codified law. Aside from a force majeure provision negating risk of loss due to unforeseeable consequences (i.e., a natural event destroying the subject matter of a contract), liability is generally traceable somehow (of course there are times where you can't trace liability, in which case there is none, in the eyes of the law- if your asking if no traceable evidence exist in your instance, well, then no liability). With that legal bullshit out of the way to your question.

Quick and dirty: In an abstract legal sense, liability is on you for sending the purchase money; your friend for ordering and sending the drug (you for aiding and abetting in providing the funds for these actions); you for accepting the drugs–as I said quick and dirty summary.

It's so much more complex though, you say a 1,000 miles away, is your hypo-friend in your country? [other questions I don't feel like writing out].

As this would be a federal issue, you'd go to a federal district court. Which one? Numerous factors are considered, but most convenient would be the district where you accepted the drugs. Sorry if this is confusing or not answering your question at all.


[0 Points] AndThenHeSays4:

Looks like you got it down pat you criminal mastermind you!