🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@AmpBenzScientist

A drug trade doesnt create wealth usually.. I mean if i sell heroin, heroin itself doesnt really have utility (as it only harms people)... and ultimately leads people to behave in ways that are wealth destroying... so no... that wouldnt generate wealth, it would be one of the main examples of destroying wealth.

@LouisIngenthron @admitsWrongIfProven

@LouisIngenthron I think its possible a judge might decide to be less harsh in his punishment of you... I think it would be a bit of a crap shoot and just depends on the judge you get maybe and what impression it makes on him... and i only think it is likely to have much of an effect, if any, in sentencing.

But hey, what the fuck do I know.

@LouisIngenthron Yes but it doesnt matter if you intend to break the law, it matters if you intend to do thing X... thing X is a thing that breaks the law... but your knwoledge of it being illegal isnt the factor, your intent to do it is.

Intending to murder someone is more illegal than accidentally murdering someone. knowing murder is illegal has no effect there that dichotomy is true regardless.

@LouisIngenthron I have never heard of intentionally breaking a law vs accidentally breaking a law making a difference... i guess in sentancing maybe.. i dunno, youd have to ask someone who knows more than me, but I dont think so.... In terms of guilt/innocent im pretty certain it wouldnt matter though... but sentancing i dunno..

I guess you can think of murder right... if you intentionally kill someone its murder, if you accidentally but negligently kill someone its man slaughter... your knowledge of the law wont effect your verdict **at all**... but your intent to murder will effect it.. its just, it doesnt matter if you know murder is illegal or not.

So to bring that back here... getting her to invest that exploits her may not be intentional.. but whether you know exploiting her is illegal or not really wont effect it, what matters is did you intend to exploit her or not.

@LouisIngenthron Well I doubt that.. ignorance of the law is never an excuse... its not the ignorance of the law working in your favor, it is your good vs bad intent... intent is a big part of the law, ignorance of the law doesnt factor in too much, at least not directly.

@LouisIngenthron Yea to be honest I would have expected some exemptions for immediate family.. if there are any neither I nor my friend know about it.

Keep in mind these are just the federal restrictions... state by state restrictions can be even worse.

@LouisIngenthron Comes back to "the totality of the circumstances"... I think its reasonable to say that the sentancing would be harsher if the evidence shows you were intentionally trying to defraud them... for sure. I mean again non-lawyer, but that tracks with what I know and am learning.

@LouisIngenthron Neither me nor my friend would be comfortable saying with any authority... thats just enough detail to need a lawyer to get any meaningful answer..

From what me and my friend are kinda agreeing on (and keep in mind its speculation) is that it depends but i dont think it would count.

Education itslef or any one factor doesnt matter. Courts look at "the totality of the circumstances" as my friend just put it. Basically what this means is you can be a high school dropout, but if you demonstrated you are an expert in other ways, thats fine. But if you have a deggree in business that too may qualify you if everything lines up.

Based on everything im hearing (and my friend agrees).. if, for example, someone works as a secretary in a doctors office, that wouldnt, for example, qualify them to invest in a medical company..