Ignorance is NEVER a defense against the government, against parents, your girlfriend or a system admin. Ignorance is ONLY a defense in something that does not matter.
I will never understand how people can fall for this stuff. NFT's.... It's like those websites that are selling e-books and say buy now because we are almost out of stock.
@@calmexit6483 Based on what? Assumptions? you dont know that guy, you dont know what he does for a living, you're just as dumb as the chat you shit on.
So many people are very upset that asmon is anti nft. I've yet to hear a good argument for nfts. The most common thing I hear is imagine putting your virtual item into the game you play. That seems like a really stupid and hard to implement reason to buy an nft.
CS go knives are a kind of NFT which I think are pretty good investment as far as NFTs are concerned, I have made a few hundred dollars on them and their value has sustained and even increased in some instances.
Rather than jpegs i can see the tech being used for something like food stamps, restaurant reservation tickets, movie tickets/concert tickets. The technology has uses but APES.
People who sell NFT's are scammers. I don't fucking care. They are snakeoil salesmen, and it is up to them to demonstrate their legitimacy, not for me to assume their legitimacy.
It is sometimes and not others. In many cases you have a duty to know so ignorance will get you in shit. Though the chat was dumb af about what they were saying lol
I agree but in the context for the example he used, if you're a streamer, and you promote something without even looking into it at all because of money you don't get to use ignorance because you were too lazy to do any research. That said who gives a shit none of us are lawyers here.
@@SmugCanadian I don't think it's sane to put people in prison or ruin their lives in other ways because they were "too lazy to do any research". That's such a mild, basic human thing to do.
@@XavionofThera Ah yes but it's perfectly ok for those same people to use ignorance to potentially ruin others lives lmao get real they fully deserve to go in jail and the sooner one or two of them get the book thrown at them the rest will step in line.
@@SmugCanadian It is "fine" (or rather, not prison-worthy) if it's not their intent. IMO if your intent is slightly bad but has extremely bad consequences - you should only be punished as though you have done something slightly bad. Just like how we don't punish people for accidental crimes - we shouldn't punish people harshly for crimes of minor negligence.
What Asmongold is talking about is mens rea. Mens rea is the mental aspect of a crime, and often both actus reus and mens rea need to be proved in order to convict someone. In the case of the taxi driver he had the actus rea of ferrying drugs, but he did not have the mens rea for the crime since he knew nothing of it. On the other hand chat is fixed on the idea of ignorance of the law not being a defence, meaning that if you were to smoke pot in the street because you thought it wasn't illegal when in fact it was, then you still go to jail as ignorance of the law is not a defence. They are quite distinct because in the case of the taxi driver they had ignorance (lack of information) on the act which was a crime (transporting drugs) he knew not that he had drugs in his car, wheras in the second example they had the mens rea of the offence as they knew they were smoking weed, but they only were ignorant in so much as they did not know the law, and in that case they have no defence. Chat and asmon are both right as so often is the case. applied to the scummy influencers peddling NFT's, it's a little grey and it probably comes down to how much they knew about the bogus nature of the claims. At the end of the day if they fully thought and understood that what they were promoting was a legitimate financial instrument then they are going to be fine, but if there is reason to believe that they knew that the claims were bogus then they could be an accessory to wire fraud. there is strong likelihood that the influencers will have no idea what they are getting into, likely their agents bring them and ad deal, its a seamingly legitimate financial instrument which they have no reason to suspect is bogus, they do the ad they get their money an they forget about the whole project. unless there is a paper trail of some sort to link them to the crime they will all get away with it. Think about if mayweather were to do an ad for BNY bank and then BNY bank were exposed for wire fraud, you wouldnt expect mayweather to go down for it right? same thing here. Shame that there is no law against being an absolute tool, otherwise jake paul and mayweather would be guilty as charged.
Wasn't there a streamer who scammed his watchers into investing a NFT, took the money and admitted to scamming them, and refuse to give back the money?
I guess the question is when does Ignorance become Negligence? If you're taking a boat load of money and people are getting robbed. You might want to reconsider your role in the thing.
@@pixeljauntvr7774 these are different things. Please dont be like asmons chat Ignorance of a law does not exclude the law applying yes. Ignorance of the actual events of a crime going on and you were just a paid advertiser is a perfectly valid defense. While some laws do still allow you to be charged even if ignorant of the actual crime; a large swathe of laws require some level of intent
@@pixeljauntvr7774 i think people here are arguing to different things. Asmon was arguing, just because you legally bought a knife or a gun for a friend and that friend went and killed people doesn't mean you go to jail for it. Because you couldn't know
@@pedropedro1 Asmongold is not a character, i've watched for several years at this point and asmongold himself said that he isnt putting on an act or playing a character, the most he has said about that, is that it is a slightly exaggerated version of himself to make things more interesting/exciting.
The best part about these clowns getting scammed is they actually think we're the morons for not falling for it with them, one look at all the Subreddits about NFTs and crypto etc... and these people actually think this is a good idea. They fully deserve to lose their money in these schemes, as a fool is easily parted from his money.
greed, I guarantee you that maybe 0.001% of those people actually are in NFT's because of other reason, as much as they want to fool them self and tell in their heads about how much of a angels with good intent they are , they are just lying to them self about their real intent .
It's funny because 99% of these people are trying to flip it for profit to some even bigger idiot. There's even a name for it: Bigger fool theory I don't feel bad for them but the people running these scams are scumbags that deserve and need to be punished
here you go from google, "The general rule is that ignorance of the law is not a defense. However, as with many things in the legal realm, there are exceptions to the rule. In limited circumstances, ignorance of the law, or simply not realizing that something is illegal, can be a defense."
He is not saying that ignorance of the law is a free pass but ignorance of the crime being committed depending on the severity of that person‘s involvement can be a pass because of ignorance
I know this was taken from Google, but men's rea lit. "Guilty mind" or knowing you committed a crime is a key aspect of the law for many things like determining sentencing for crimes. Lots of crimes are still punished without mens rea but tend to have lower sentences like manslaughter (lacking men rea completely) vs murder (requiring some degree of men's rea). Literally the severity of the degree of murder charges depends on the extent of men's rea. Usually other non murder types of crimes that lack men's rea tends to be some form of negligence charge instead of the crime as well since if you really are in the dark to your culpability or criminality for some crimes, you really either grossly neglected to research the legality of what you were doing or showed a disturbing lack of empathy to other people. Also not guilty due to insanity charges heavily focus on mens rea as well. The argument being that if a mental illness caused you to commit a crime completely without mens rea than they can't be punished for negligence since they are deemed incapable of the higher form of thought required to acknowledge potential negligence. Also men's rea for the mentally ill is also determined by things like caring if they receive punishment for a crime or trying to cover it up. An insane person might know something is a crime and could fall under that definition of men's rea, but if some mental illness or break makes a person truly not care, commits the crime anyway, and has no thought to try and cover the crime up or try to avoid culpability that's effectively the same as lacking mens rea. I know that was long winded and rambing, but I think it's a fascinating subject. TL;DR: mens rea "Guilty mind" or knowing your committing a crime is a key aspect of modern law. It is by no means required to find you guilty of crimes, many crimes remain virtually unchanged by mens rea, but many crimes also require proof of mens rea for you to be found guilty, many times lacking mens rea either changes the actual crime you're charged with (and usually with that, the severity of it) or is a big factor in the severity of sentencing for the judge.
NFT "projects" that are essentially just about trading tokens, are simply a new spin on the good old pyramid scheme. Going "Oh I made money with it, how is it a scam?" is ridiculous. All the money you make with it, is money other people (further down the scheme) lose. Its not an investment, there is no value generated with the funds you put into it, you are just playing hot potato with it
That money is just made by greater fool theory. Obviously most 'NFT projects' are a scam and you can be part of it without repercussions by selling them on secondary.
Ikr it’s like congratulations if you made some money but the mook you sold it to is just trying to flip it again and returns diminish real fast when trading something that doesn’t generate wealth itself.
this is what reaction channels should be about. KiraTV, SunnyV2, Josh Strife Hays and many others got a huge boost from him. They are all amazing creatora that deserve the shout out, and Asmon does a great job with it.
Sometimes You can be obligated by law to check some things before agreeing to advertise depending on regulations and ignorance can be reason You will be guilty.
Actually, as someone who worked at a bank, the teller can be held responsible for money laundering simply because they failed to notice that that person had suspicious activity in their account. It was something they made us train for every month on the certification training on the work computers. Not knowing about it is not actually a defense in this case, and I’m thinking if there were funds exchanged between influencers and scammers, than there would be a receipt or contract that was agreed upon and that is 100% the responsibility of the influencer to know who they’re doing business with.
The "Ignorance of the law is not a defense" thing gets completely misunderstood- it means that if you know what you were doing, you can't claim that you didn't know it was illegal. It does not mean that if the activity in question was unknown to you altogether that you're in trouble for it. Ignorance of illegality is not a defense, but ignorance of occurrence is.
There's also an argument called "reckless disregard", namely, if a reasonable person with average information access in the same position could have found out it was a crime, and you didn't, your ground to stand on becomes a lot shakier. It's often seen in defamation cases.
Ignorance is a defense when you are unaware of what you're doing. When you know what you're doing but you don't know that activity is illegal. For instance if you're driving 85 miles an hour but don't know the speed limit is 60 you'll still be in trouble. But if you let a Mormon missionary into your house then later find out he was a wanted criminal you aren't gonna go to jail for harboring a criminal. You literally had no clue you were harboring one. While that other person knew 'hey I'm driving 85mph but I think it's okay".
Ignorance is 100% a defence. Specifically in Missouri there was a case where a father was selling drugs out of the basement, the mother of the children said she never went down to the basement and never knew what he did for a living she got off with nothing while he went to jail. Ignorance of the law is not a defense, but ignorance of the crime being committed is defensible.
They go after easy targets that cant fight back easily first as they need to create existing case law before even trying those who have the resources to hire actual lawyers.
The taxi driver wouldn’t get arrested if he didn’t know about the drugs, but mainly because the customer was in sole possession and control of said drugs.
When the bar is set higher a lot of dumb scammers are shaken out, and the more sophisticated and ruthless ones prevail. Like the bots in WoW: the bad ones were weeded out, the best ones made money.
Ice Poseidon pulled money out of the liquidity pool. Which if you don't know what that is, it's basically a way for people to make money by putting their tokens into a big pool and pulling them out later (not going to get into the details) with the expectation that when they pull them out later they'll have more tokens from transaction fees and they'll make a profit. IP just fuckin yoinked a bunch of coins out of that pool.
the taxi situation doesn’t work because in endorsing a product you would VET the product you would have discussion etc, CLEARLY you would not want to endorse a bad product, so ignorance isn’t a pass, it can only limit your liability. especially when the person isn’t just a spokesperson but is the face of the brand. so again, that situation would only make sense if it was a private KYC taxi service where the taxi driver does declare that there is no contraband say for example they go into restricted or government areas. “not knowing” the passenger had something illicit is not a pass
Exactly. You probably can even go business as usual give a ride to a customer even if they say they're carrying something illegal with them (as long as it's just from public area to another public area without restrictions). All you're really doing is that you're not reporting a crime, which as far as I know isn't a crime most of the time. But if you're not a taxi driver, just giving a ride to somebody you know... idk. In that situation it could get a bit more complicated if they stop your car to check it? Kinda would have to prove that it is not yours and that person in the car isn't just holding onto it for you? Idk.
@@spugelo359 The difference is that taxis carry dozens of people that the driver doesnt know personally every day, the odds of a total stranger being in your car with you doing something illegal without your knowledge is extremely low.
This happened in new Zeland, a college girl was used to smuggle drigs into the country, someone put the drugs into her bags without her knowledge. Yet in New Zeland she was charged with drug traficking and sentenced to death.
So there is often a Mens Rea (mental state) element in law, but generally the minimum Mens Rea required is whether the defendant acted negligently. So if a reasonably prudent person in the circumstances should have been aware that they were committing fraud, then whether or not they actually did know is no longer necessary to reach a guilty verdict (although a more severe sentence may be given if the defendant was purposefully fraudulent). Ignorance is not a defense in and of itself, unless the finder of fact determines a reasonably prudent person (in this case a reasonably prudent business person) would not have been able to determine they were promoting fraud, even after they did their own due diligence.
See, even then it isnt just cut and dry and comes down to interpretation of the evidence and circumstance, but everyone here wants to act like the word of asmongold is gospel.
Ignorance shouldn't be a defense in the case of highly paid shills (influencers) who have all the resources to do their do diligence but deliberately won't because there's a lot of zeros on that check. Regulating anything other than advertising/shilling will do absolutely nothing, because yesterday it was Bitconnect, today it's NFT's, and tomorrow it'll be something else. The big shills cash out and retire, the small shills get the short end of the stick and made an example of by the government, and the cycle continues.
The deterrent hypothesis is entirely correct . They did a study some time ago using cardboard cutouts or life-size stickers of police officers. In the locations they used them robberies and thefts dropped . I'm not sure how by much I'm not a statistician but it was enough to notice .
One thing they may do with influencers advertising these but not actually creating them is use financial advice rules, it all depends if they could argue what they did constitutes financial advice, just stating you are not a financial advisor is a get out of jail card.
It's "ignorance of the law" is no excuse. If you commit a crime and aren't aware that it's a crime it doesn't mean you aren't culpable. Asmongold is arguing that if a crime is being committed without you being aware of the actual action it is a different case.
Interesting point on caselaw as this scenario is still very novel so there will be an element of testing the waters in the judicial system. In the UK it wasn't that many years ago that promoting a pyramid scam became a specific offence as opposed to setting up and operating such a scam. Hopefully something along those lines will come into play eventually. I know someone who yapped on about how great NFTs were only a few months ago. They're rather quiet about them now.
Ignorance of the facts is a legal defence but ignorance of the law isn't, to clarify what Asmon is trying to say. The taxi driver can say I didn't know he was carrying drugs, but he can't say I didn't know drugs are illegal.
I think the difference between a clueless taxi driver trafficking drugs and a clueless influencer promoting scam is the scope of accountability-- taxi drivers aren't obliged to know who their passengers are unless compromised
Regarding the whole 'ignorance' discussion, it's real simple. If you had an obligation to have in-depth information about something, ignorance is not a full-proof defense. So that includes promoting things, like Rae did. However, when a business hires you for, let's say, a photo shoot, you are merely there as a model and therefore you're not expected to know anything about the product you're modelling for. So you won't even be considered as a perpetrator 99% of the time.
7:00 Ignorance of the law isn’t a defense, but ignorance of the crime being committed in general is. If you’re aware you’re doing a thing, but don’t know that thing is illegal, it won’t matter. If you aren’t aware a thing is even happening in the first place, you probably won’t get charged for it.
@@1ProAssassin ill be honest, I'm too lazy to read all of that, I just meant to point out that saying its wrong with no context is dumb, but its also twitch chat, and asmon wont read long things, so there's also that, I just thought it was funny XD, I don't necessarily hold it as fact, and I'm sure you have a very good point
In the end I do think NFTs will be adapted into law somehow but under certain criteria just so it is legal. Which I think most people that want to be into NFTs, would like to happen. Make it legit in a way that is legal to law, then they won't be such a fuss about NFTs.
@@tavirosu25 As I understand it, NFTs are meant to be some sort of virtual property, as in you buy some thing, you hold onto it for its value and then you sell it off to someone else, like we do with property in real life. If its regulated by Law in a condition that is fair, it shouldn't be much of a problem. Kicking out the scammers would be a good idea for a start.
@@redzool Except NFT have no use and will not have any use, you also don't need to mint an NFT in order to sell a virtual good... you just need to... well sell it. NFTs are not virtual property btw they are just grocery store tickets that you bought to someone else but you don't have the items listed on it, you buy a unique ID and that ID is "represented" by a virtual item the only thing is that the NFT has no link whatsoever to this item. That means that you effectively bought a unique number on an useless database
Also any uses like "If you have an NFT you can use it in games,etc!" except no... this isn't how technology works, this isn't how assets works, this isn't how programming works it's not because it exists outside of the game that you can copypaste it into it.
Ignorance and lack of knowledge is absolutely a defense. I’ve used that defense in a case I was involved with, involving bad checks. And I won. So idk why people say things so matter of factly when they obviously have no idea what they’re talking about.
What they did wasn't illegal. They said hey buy NFTs. People bought them, they delivered. Nobody outside who bought them wants them. Now they cry fowl they can't sell them.
If you join in on the scam you feel like you're not going to lose your money because you're a "smart investor." So you cant admit to yourself you were scammed. And also with these you feel like you committed a crime because of how seedy the process is. If you are an honest investor you don't invest. Its like the people who lose their account because they use a shady website that tells them their account is going to be set if they put in the login code.
I doubt asmond will see this, but taxi drivers nor passengers are endanger if there are drugs in the car unless the police have a warrant for that specific persons arrest. If the police pull the car over and ask if the drugs are the client's or the taxi driver, most taxi drivers will say its not theirs, or they don't know because they weren't paying attention, which gives both the passenger and the taxi driver the oppertunity to say it may have been thelast passenger, claiming that its not theirs. With the passenger being a client for the taxi driver, the client cannot be arrested without a warrant unless they are outside of the vehicle seen putting drugs in the car. Do what you will with that info.
On the subject of " driver of Taxi lets person with drugs on them in the taxi, do they get charged? " if it's in USA, then YES. They are accountable, they have to ask their passenger if they have anything on them - and be alert to citizens that are gonna be problematic; which is why you _also_ reserve the right to refuse service. Ignorance to the law is NEVER a defense, lol. The phrase gets mangled, but there's :" ignorance" as in situations pertaining to safe-harbour laws - RUclips can't be held accountable for all the content on the site - simply bc there's too much of it to screen int he first place, so they're ignorant to 100% of all content. But not ignorant to the laws that cover copyroghted material
K , he has to ask , but clearly has no rights to search, so how do you stop someone with drugs to get in your car, does McDonald's have to ask each person before entering their property ,or train , bus etc. I just don't believe that taxi driver is responsible , or would be charged if they don't have some reason to believe that he might be linked to other person.
Celebrities promoting fyre festival is a perfect example of ignorance. 250k to tweet about a party, and lets be real it was their publicist who made the post.
It's not "Ignorance is not a proper defense," it's "Ignorance of THE LAW excuses no one." It means you don't have to know something is illegal to be charged with it, but there are tons of laws that require the person to be aware they are TAKING PART IN IT for them to be charged with the crime. Asmon's example was a good one. That taxi driver is not aware that they are trafficking drugs, but they are, in fact, breaking the law. They wouldn't be charged though.
To be clear- ignorance of the LAW is not a defense. Ignorance of the FACTS that made an act illegal IS a defense. Example: you pay for a meal with counterfeit bills. If you didn’t know they were counterfeit you have a defense. If didn’t know paying with counterfeit bills was illegal then you do not have a defense.
The whole argument around 24 mins is so funny. I get what Asmon is trying to say, but even he can't help but laugh when he realizes the two celebrities he's talking about are freaking mayweather and jake paul lol.
Yea you really need to be a lawyer to know the law right? Who needs to know law to avoid breaking it right? Lol get real. Everyone needs to know the law, sounds like you didn't, got impressed by the chat and to you they seem like lawyers when you yourself don't know jack shit like the man and legend himself.
Is asmon a lawyer too? And yeah some of the people in that chat probably ARE lawyers. Funny how you can say something so stupid and get people to agree with you.
So what happened was, Asmongold was saying that it's ignorance when you don't know you're helping commit a crime. This innmy opinion is a valid defence. What chat was trying to say is that ignorance of the law, thats to say, not knowing what you're doing is illegal isn't a defence. Which is also correct, since it it the responsibility of the people who live in a state or country to know what is and isn't against the law.
A lack of knowledge about a crime being committed with your involvement isnt even a solid defense a lot of the time either. And i don't agree with the taxi analogy being analogous to the promotion of a product that turned out to be a scam. If you're promotion a product it is your DUTY to know about it and as such, ignorance of a product you endorsed shouldn't be a valid defense.
Tbh ignorance isn't a defense in most cases. If you don't know all the details about the rules for covid, you get outside and without even knowing it you do something bad (forgot your mask or idk), you can still get fined for that. The person didn't know he was at fault yet he's still getting charged. The example he uses with the taxi I feel like in most cases like that the taxi driver indeed will not get charged but he might get asked to go to court for his own defence / accuse even further the client / passenger he drove.
A year late to this, but ignorance of the law is never a defense. While Asmon is correct, he worded it very incorrectly. There is a complete difference between committing a crime that you didn't know about, and being put in a situation where you've done something illegal without knowing that you did. If you're advertising something that is a scam, but you don't know that the people behind it are scamming, you are not accountable at that moment. Where as if you were doing the scamming and you didn't know that scamming was a crime, that would NOT be a defense. However, if you find out that the thing you're advertising is a scam and you don't do anything about it, now you're accountable.
My father has been scammed multiple times in crypto currency many times. I've been telling him to not invest into anything until he's done research many times but he doesn't listen to me and gets frustrated cuz of it. Ever since then, I've been blocking many sites that involve trading any sort of crypto currency with no proof of getting anything in return especially the NFTs.
Ignorance is a defense because sometimes you don’t know things. It’s hard to know every law or if something is really bad when it’s brand new. Just like how diet soda was actually worse for you but people didn’t know until later on how much worse it technically was. So yes I think ignorance can be a defense if it’s proven the person had no knowledge of any problems prior. Because some people do pull the ignorance card when they intentionally were ignorant and they fail to defend themselves like that once evidence is found.
Ignorance is absolutely a defense because twitch chat keeps getting away with it
Dammmmm.
FACTS
But for real it was so funny to watch asmon start talking about this and not know what he was talking about, like at all
Ignorance is NEVER a defense against the government, against parents, your girlfriend or a system admin.
Ignorance is ONLY a defense in something that does not matter.
Even more of chat was talking out their ass than usual guess that’s what happens when you bring up law
I will never understand how people can fall for this stuff. NFT's.... It's like those websites that are selling e-books and say buy now because we are almost out of stock.
Incredible
not all NFTs are scams
NFT is basically just art for the most part
Even the FC Liverpool was promoting this on his very popular RUclips channel. ppl were shocked
@@einfachtoll all nfts are scam *
"Why is your chat dumb?"
I love how Asmon doesn't even fight that claim.
Basically admitted being dumb himself, which I do not disagree with.
Because the chat is dumb.
@@spugelo359 He's wiser then you by a long shot.
@@calmexit6483 Based on what? Assumptions? you dont know that guy, you dont know what he does for a living, you're just as dumb as the chat you shit on.
@@jebalitabb8228 You did now.
It's still not a complete victory, but anything that fucks NFT bros is still worth celebrating to me
This will definitely put the brakes on their gravy train
So many people are very upset that asmon is anti nft. I've yet to hear a good argument for nfts. The most common thing I hear is imagine putting your virtual item into the game you play. That seems like a really stupid and hard to implement reason to buy an nft.
CS go knives are a kind of NFT which I think are pretty good investment as far as NFTs are concerned, I have made a few hundred dollars on them and their value has sustained and even increased in some instances.
Rather than jpegs i can see the tech being used for something like food stamps, restaurant reservation tickets, movie tickets/concert tickets. The technology has uses but APES.
People who sell NFT's are scammers. I don't fucking care. They are snakeoil salesmen, and it is up to them to demonstrate their legitimacy, not for me to assume their legitimacy.
Ice didn't get taken advantage of....he was very complicit in theft and pretty much has admitted it.
Ice in prison!
@@noobkaka567 he should
Ice admitting his guilt is going to fuck his ass in the long run. He should've just shut up.
Ignorance of the law is not a defense. Ignorance to a crime being committed is absolutely a defense. You definitely have some glue eaters in chat.
It is sometimes and not others. In many cases you have a duty to know so ignorance will get you in shit. Though the chat was dumb af about what they were saying lol
I agree but in the context for the example he used, if you're a streamer, and you promote something without even looking into it at all because of money you don't get to use ignorance because you were too lazy to do any research. That said who gives a shit none of us are lawyers here.
@@SmugCanadian I don't think it's sane to put people in prison or ruin their lives in other ways because they were "too lazy to do any research". That's such a mild, basic human thing to do.
@@XavionofThera Ah yes but it's perfectly ok for those same people to use ignorance to potentially ruin others lives lmao get real they fully deserve to go in jail and the sooner one or two of them get the book thrown at them the rest will step in line.
@@SmugCanadian It is "fine" (or rather, not prison-worthy) if it's not their intent.
IMO if your intent is slightly bad but has extremely bad consequences - you should only be punished as though you have done something slightly bad.
Just like how we don't punish people for accidental crimes - we shouldn't punish people harshly for crimes of minor negligence.
What Asmongold is talking about is mens rea. Mens rea is the mental aspect of a crime, and often both actus reus and mens rea need to be proved in order to convict someone. In the case of the taxi driver he had the actus rea of ferrying drugs, but he did not have the mens rea for the crime since he knew nothing of it. On the other hand chat is fixed on the idea of ignorance of the law not being a defence, meaning that if you were to smoke pot in the street because you thought it wasn't illegal when in fact it was, then you still go to jail as ignorance of the law is not a defence. They are quite distinct because in the case of the taxi driver they had ignorance (lack of information) on the act which was a crime (transporting drugs) he knew not that he had drugs in his car, wheras in the second example they had the mens rea of the offence as they knew they were smoking weed, but they only were ignorant in so much as they did not know the law, and in that case they have no defence. Chat and asmon are both right as so often is the case.
applied to the scummy influencers peddling NFT's, it's a little grey and it probably comes down to how much they knew about the bogus nature of the claims. At the end of the day if they fully thought and understood that what they were promoting was a legitimate financial instrument then they are going to be fine, but if there is reason to believe that they knew that the claims were bogus then they could be an accessory to wire fraud.
there is strong likelihood that the influencers will have no idea what they are getting into, likely their agents bring them and ad deal, its a seamingly legitimate financial instrument which they have no reason to suspect is bogus, they do the ad they get their money an they forget about the whole project. unless there is a paper trail of some sort to link them to the crime they will all get away with it. Think about if mayweather were to do an ad for BNY bank and then BNY bank were exposed for wire fraud, you wouldnt expect mayweather to go down for it right? same thing here.
Shame that there is no law against being an absolute tool, otherwise jake paul and mayweather would be guilty as charged.
Wasn't there a streamer who scammed his watchers into investing a NFT, took the money and admitted to scamming them, and refuse to give back the money?
Ice Poseidon
Coffeezilla covered it
Ice Poseidon is going to prison
@@noobkaka567 is that you hoping he would or has he actually been convicted?
@@c0nc3ntr8d6 That wouldn't really narrow it down. XD
Ignorance can be a defense, gross negligence is a different story
I guess the question is when does Ignorance become Negligence?
If you're taking a boat load of money and people are getting robbed. You might want to reconsider your role in the thing.
@@Mimsie exactly, you’re absolutely right.
It's what they can prove in court. You can have all the facts on your side and still be found guilty cuz of a shitty lawyer or a dick judge
@@pixeljauntvr7774 these are different things.
Please dont be like asmons chat
Ignorance of a law does not exclude the law applying yes.
Ignorance of the actual events of a crime going on and you were just a paid advertiser is a perfectly valid defense.
While some laws do still allow you to be charged even if ignorant of the actual crime; a large swathe of laws require some level of intent
@@pixeljauntvr7774 i think people here are arguing to different things. Asmon was arguing, just because you legally bought a knife or a gun for a friend and that friend went and killed people doesn't mean you go to jail for it. Because you couldn't know
As far as I know, a mistake of fact is a valid defence, a mistake of law is not.
Thank you. Ignorance of law is no defense, but ignorance of fact or circumstance is.
She earned money from promotion a fraudulent business. She can't claim ignorance in that situation. Asmon is just simping.
I was looking for more Elden Ring content but this will do
they got 1 shot by the feds it's the same as elder ring content
Can relate
Why does smegma smell like fish and not cheese?
@@Hotmaildotcomz salt (sweat)
Idk if you’ll see more brother, he beat the game a few days ago. Idk if he’ll do that run with McConnell though
asmon basically babysits his viewers, a bunch of adult looking 5 year olds
Welcome to planet earth, I hope you have a nice stay here.
What do you expect his chat to be when you have streamer exactly like that?
@@pedropedro1 Asmongold is not a character, i've watched for several years at this point and asmongold himself said that he isnt putting on an act or playing a character, the most he has said about that, is that it is a slightly exaggerated version of himself to make things more interesting/exciting.
The best part about these clowns getting scammed is they actually think we're the morons for not falling for it with them, one look at all the Subreddits about NFTs and crypto etc... and these people actually think this is a good idea. They fully deserve to lose their money in these schemes, as a fool is easily parted from his money.
greed, I guarantee you that maybe 0.001% of those people actually are in NFT's because of other reason, as much as they want to fool them self and tell in their heads about how much of a angels with good intent they are , they are just lying to them self about their real intent .
It's funny because 99% of these people are trying to flip it for profit to some even bigger idiot. There's even a name for it: Bigger fool theory
I don't feel bad for them but the people running these scams are scumbags that deserve and need to be punished
here you go from google, "The general rule is that ignorance of the law is not a defense. However, as with many things in the legal realm, there are exceptions to the rule. In limited circumstances, ignorance of the law, or simply not realizing that something is illegal, can be a defense."
He is not saying that ignorance of the law is a free pass but ignorance of the crime being committed depending on the severity of that person‘s involvement can be a pass because of ignorance
@@MTXCraze just putting googles def not saying hes wrong i think hes right
I know this was taken from Google, but men's rea lit. "Guilty mind" or knowing you committed a crime is a key aspect of the law for many things like determining sentencing for crimes. Lots of crimes are still punished without mens rea but tend to have lower sentences like manslaughter (lacking men rea completely) vs murder (requiring some degree of men's rea). Literally the severity of the degree of murder charges depends on the extent of men's rea.
Usually other non murder types of crimes that lack men's rea tends to be some form of negligence charge instead of the crime as well since if you really are in the dark to your culpability or criminality for some crimes, you really either grossly neglected to research the legality of what you were doing or showed a disturbing lack of empathy to other people.
Also not guilty due to insanity charges heavily focus on mens rea as well. The argument being that if a mental illness caused you to commit a crime completely without mens rea than they can't be punished for negligence since they are deemed incapable of the higher form of thought required to acknowledge potential negligence. Also men's rea for the mentally ill is also determined by things like caring if they receive punishment for a crime or trying to cover it up. An insane person might know something is a crime and could fall under that definition of men's rea, but if some mental illness or break makes a person truly not care, commits the crime anyway, and has no thought to try and cover the crime up or try to avoid culpability that's effectively the same as lacking mens rea. I know that was long winded and rambing, but I think it's a fascinating subject.
TL;DR: mens rea "Guilty mind" or knowing your committing a crime is a key aspect of modern law. It is by no means required to find you guilty of crimes, many crimes remain virtually unchanged by mens rea, but many crimes also require proof of mens rea for you to be found guilty, many times lacking mens rea either changes the actual crime you're charged with (and usually with that, the severity of it) or is a big factor in the severity of sentencing for the judge.
NFT "projects" that are essentially just about trading tokens, are simply a new spin on the good old pyramid scheme.
Going "Oh I made money with it, how is it a scam?" is ridiculous. All the money you make with it, is money other people (further down the scheme) lose. Its not an investment, there is no value generated with the funds you put into it, you are just playing hot potato with it
Exactly. I came down here to say exactly this.
That money is just made by greater fool theory. Obviously most 'NFT projects' are a scam and you can be part of it without repercussions by selling them on secondary.
That's the Chinese real estate market 😁
Ikr it’s like congratulations if you made some money but the mook you sold it to is just trying to flip it again and returns diminish real fast when trading something that doesn’t generate wealth itself.
@@tulipalll Canada?
Love how Asmon is basically a KiraTV reaction channel now. Love it.
this is what reaction channels should be about. KiraTV, SunnyV2, Josh Strife Hays and many others got a huge boost from him. They are all amazing creatora that deserve the shout out, and Asmon does a great job with it.
Ignorance is a defence, it's just not a complete defence. It's taken into consideration with the totality of whatever else is presented.
Sometimes You can be obligated by law to check some things before agreeing to advertise depending on regulations and ignorance can be reason You will be guilty.
Ignorance might be a mitigating circumstance but that’s it
Never Underestimate what a human is willing to do if they think they can get away with.
Actually, as someone who worked at a bank, the teller can be held responsible for money laundering simply because they failed to notice that that person had suspicious activity in their account. It was something they made us train for every month on the certification training on the work computers. Not knowing about it is not actually a defense in this case, and I’m thinking if there were funds exchanged between influencers and scammers, than there would be a receipt or contract that was agreed upon and that is 100% the responsibility of the influencer to know who they’re doing business with.
That’s so bullshit that the banks place the liability on individual employees rather than the bank itself.
@@Archy__ It also carries a federal prison sentence, which started being enforced. It was rly scary!
youre doing well on the NFT exposing.
Chat really do be putting on the blinders when they hear “ignorance” and assume its of the law and not of the circumstances.
Image-based NFTs are 100% garbage. Just watch Josh Strife Hayes' video on them.
The "Ignorance of the law is not a defense" thing gets completely misunderstood- it means that if you know what you were doing, you can't claim that you didn't know it was illegal. It does not mean that if the activity in question was unknown to you altogether that you're in trouble for it. Ignorance of illegality is not a defense, but ignorance of occurrence is.
There's also an argument called "reckless disregard", namely, if a reasonable person with average information access in the same position could have found out it was a crime, and you didn't, your ground to stand on becomes a lot shakier. It's often seen in defamation cases.
Ignorance is a defense when you are unaware of what you're doing. When you know what you're doing but you don't know that activity is illegal. For instance if you're driving 85 miles an hour but don't know the speed limit is 60 you'll still be in trouble. But if you let a Mormon missionary into your house then later find out he was a wanted criminal you aren't gonna go to jail for harboring a criminal. You literally had no clue you were harboring one. While that other person knew 'hey I'm driving 85mph but I think it's okay".
Allowing a missionary into your home and endorsing a product for monetary gain are not the same.
Ignorance is 100% a defence. Specifically in Missouri there was a case where a father was selling drugs out of the basement, the mother of the children said she never went down to the basement and never knew what he did for a living she got off with nothing while he went to jail. Ignorance of the law is not a defense, but ignorance of the crime being committed is defensible.
But she wasn't participating in his crime
sometimes I still get surprised on how smart asmon is
They go after easy targets that cant fight back easily first as they need to create existing case law before even trying those who have the resources to hire actual lawyers.
The taxi driver wouldn’t get arrested if he didn’t know about the drugs, but mainly because the customer was in sole possession and control of said drugs.
Never thought of the day that I would arrive early to an Asmon video lol.
When the bar is set higher a lot of dumb scammers are shaken out, and the more sophisticated and ruthless ones prevail. Like the bots in WoW: the bad ones were weeded out, the best ones made money.
Ice Poseidon pulled money out of the liquidity pool. Which if you don't know what that is, it's basically a way for people to make money by putting their tokens into a big pool and pulling them out later (not going to get into the details) with the expectation that when they pull them out later they'll have more tokens from transaction fees and they'll make a profit. IP just fuckin yoinked a bunch of coins out of that pool.
the taxi situation doesn’t work because in endorsing a product you would VET the product you would have discussion etc, CLEARLY you would not want to endorse a bad product, so ignorance isn’t a pass, it can only limit your liability. especially when the person isn’t just a spokesperson but is the face of the brand.
so again, that situation would only make sense if it was a private KYC taxi service where the taxi driver does declare that there is no contraband say for example they go into restricted or government areas. “not knowing” the passenger had something illicit is not a pass
Exactly. You probably can even go business as usual give a ride to a customer even if they say they're carrying something illegal with them (as long as it's just from public area to another public area without restrictions). All you're really doing is that you're not reporting a crime, which as far as I know isn't a crime most of the time. But if you're not a taxi driver, just giving a ride to somebody you know... idk. In that situation it could get a bit more complicated if they stop your car to check it? Kinda would have to prove that it is not yours and that person in the car isn't just holding onto it for you? Idk.
@@spugelo359 The difference is that taxis carry dozens of people that the driver doesnt know personally every day, the odds of a total stranger being in your car with you doing something illegal without your knowledge is extremely low.
I mean, it makes sense they’d start with a super easy target to establish a legal precedent
This happened in new Zeland, a college girl was used to smuggle drigs into the country, someone put the drugs into her bags without her knowledge. Yet in New Zeland she was charged with drug traficking and sentenced to death.
No, wait. It was Australia, sorry.
@@nekoblackout death sentence in australia, alright bro XD
Lol death sentence in Australia hahahaha
Ignorance of the law is not a defense, but ignorance of a crime is a valid defense.
Banks and politicians have been doing this for centuries.
NFTs scam you??.. who would have guessed 🤷
The metal cover of that bitconnect promo is amazing.
Intent doesn't count if she benefited from it. If she earned money by promoting a fraudulent business, she can and should be held accountable.
So there is often a Mens Rea (mental state) element in law, but generally the minimum Mens Rea required is whether the defendant acted negligently. So if a reasonably prudent person in the circumstances should have been aware that they were committing fraud, then whether or not they actually did know is no longer necessary to reach a guilty verdict (although a more severe sentence may be given if the defendant was purposefully fraudulent). Ignorance is not a defense in and of itself, unless the finder of fact determines a reasonably prudent person (in this case a reasonably prudent business person) would not have been able to determine they were promoting fraud, even after they did their own due diligence.
See, even then it isnt just cut and dry and comes down to interpretation of the evidence and circumstance, but everyone here wants to act like the word of asmongold is gospel.
Imagine spending 20 years in a federal prison for scamming your fans... Federal prisons are not fun
Ignorance shouldn't be a defense in the case of highly paid shills (influencers) who have all the resources to do their do diligence but deliberately won't because there's a lot of zeros on that check. Regulating anything other than advertising/shilling will do absolutely nothing, because yesterday it was Bitconnect, today it's NFT's, and tomorrow it'll be something else. The big shills cash out and retire, the small shills get the short end of the stick and made an example of by the government, and the cycle continues.
The deterrent hypothesis is entirely correct . They did a study some time ago using cardboard cutouts or life-size stickers of police officers. In the locations they used them robberies and thefts dropped . I'm not sure how by much I'm not a statistician but it was enough to notice .
Another example of precedent is being able to flip off and swear to cops. It's a work hazard to them and not valid for retaliation.
One thing they may do with influencers advertising these but not actually creating them is use financial advice rules, it all depends if they could argue what they did constitutes financial advice, just stating you are not a financial advisor is a get out of jail card.
If you dont know but should have known then you can't plead ignorance
It's "ignorance of the law" is no excuse. If you commit a crime and aren't aware that it's a crime it doesn't mean you aren't culpable. Asmongold is arguing that if a crime is being committed without you being aware of the actual action it is a different case.
Interesting point on caselaw as this scenario is still very novel so there will be an element of testing the waters in the judicial system. In the UK it wasn't that many years ago that promoting a pyramid scam became a specific offence as opposed to setting up and operating such a scam. Hopefully something along those lines will come into play eventually. I know someone who yapped on about how great NFTs were only a few months ago. They're rather quiet about them now.
Stocks are directly tied to a business.. a business can't just do a rug pull and get away with it.
That streamer who stole that 500k should get reported.
Ignorance of the facts is a legal defence but ignorance of the law isn't, to clarify what Asmon is trying to say. The taxi driver can say I didn't know he was carrying drugs, but he can't say I didn't know drugs are illegal.
Law: innocent until proven guilty. Asmon chat: ignorance is not a defense!
does not mather if you have sold a few nft's and made money from them that don't make it less of a scam. absolutely 110% of NFT's are a major scam
BITT CONNEEEEEEECTT!
I think the difference between a clueless taxi driver trafficking drugs and a clueless influencer promoting scam is the scope of accountability-- taxi drivers aren't obliged to know who their passengers are unless compromised
Ignorance is absolutely a defense if a statute says "knowingly and willfully". If you didn't know then you didn't commit the crime.
Regarding the whole 'ignorance' discussion, it's real simple. If you had an obligation to have in-depth information about something, ignorance is not a full-proof defense. So that includes promoting things, like Rae did. However, when a business hires you for, let's say, a photo shoot, you are merely there as a model and therefore you're not expected to know anything about the product you're modelling for. So you won't even be considered as a perpetrator 99% of the time.
7:00 Ignorance of the law isn’t a defense, but ignorance of the crime being committed in general is. If you’re aware you’re doing a thing, but don’t know that thing is illegal, it won’t matter. If you aren’t aware a thing is even happening in the first place, you probably won’t get charged for it.
ignorance of the law is not a defence. Ignorance is a defence when someone is trying to prove intent.
i tune in to these videos to watch someone play video games badly, but every once in a while, i come out of it learning something new
Ignorance is definitely a defense considering UPS traffics drugs daily in the US whilst being ignorant to it.
17:47 chat starts spamming laugh emojis. That wasn't a joke, folks, it's an actual tactic used by scammers.
Asmon: *Gives perfect example of how ignorance is a defence*, Chat: "Bad example"
@@1ProAssassin ill be honest, I'm too lazy to read all of that, I just meant to point out that saying its wrong with no context is dumb, but its also twitch chat, and asmon wont read long things, so there's also that, I just thought it was funny XD, I don't necessarily hold it as fact, and I'm sure you have a very good point
The only way ignorance is not a defence is only if they were supposed to do their due diligence beforehand but that’s called negligence.
Well the government needs to wait until there's enough money they can seize to make it worth it.
Think my man got his ignorance example from Skyler in breaking bad around the cooking the books
No ignorance by definition is inherently willful by way of refusal or apathy.
Hell yeah, down with NFT’s!
In the end I do think NFTs will be adapted into law somehow but under certain criteria just so it is legal.
Which I think most people that want to be into NFTs, would like to happen.
Make it legit in a way that is legal to law, then they won't be such a fuss about NFTs.
@@tavirosu25 As I understand it, NFTs are meant to be some sort of virtual property, as in you buy some thing, you hold onto it for its value and then you sell it off to someone else, like we do with property in real life.
If its regulated by Law in a condition that is fair, it shouldn't be much of a problem.
Kicking out the scammers would be a good idea for a start.
@@redzool Except NFT have no use and will not have any use, you also don't need to mint an NFT in order to sell a virtual good... you just need to... well sell it.
NFTs are not virtual property btw they are just grocery store tickets that you bought to someone else but you don't have the items listed on it, you buy a unique ID and that ID is "represented" by a virtual item the only thing is that the NFT has no link whatsoever to this item. That means that you effectively bought a unique number on an useless database
Also any uses like "If you have an NFT you can use it in games,etc!" except no... this isn't how technology works, this isn't how assets works, this isn't how programming works it's not because it exists outside of the game that you can copypaste it into it.
@@zeykis7369 Thanks for the information
Not knowing what you're promoting and getting payed for it is ABSOLUTELY NOT a defence. jesus christ
Ignorance and lack of knowledge is absolutely a defense. I’ve used that defense in a case I was involved with, involving bad checks. And I won. So idk why people say things so matter of factly when they obviously have no idea what they’re talking about.
What they did wasn't illegal. They said hey buy NFTs. People bought them, they delivered. Nobody outside who bought them wants them. Now they cry fowl they can't sell them.
You can plead your case based off ignorance, however ignorance of the law is NOT a defense
When it gets a little too meta and you get a Tai Lopez add on this video xD
If you join in on the scam you feel like you're not going to lose your money because you're a "smart investor." So you cant admit to yourself you were scammed. And also with these you feel like you committed a crime because of how seedy the process is. If you are an honest investor you don't invest. Its like the people who lose their account because they use a shady website that tells them their account is going to be set if they put in the login code.
I doubt asmond will see this, but taxi drivers nor passengers are endanger if there are drugs in the car unless the police have a warrant for that specific persons arrest. If the police pull the car over and ask if the drugs are the client's or the taxi driver, most taxi drivers will say its not theirs, or they don't know because they weren't paying attention, which gives both the passenger and the taxi driver the oppertunity to say it may have been thelast passenger, claiming that its not theirs. With the passenger being a client for the taxi driver, the client cannot be arrested without a warrant unless they are outside of the vehicle seen putting drugs in the car. Do what you will with that info.
I think people confuse the word stupidity with ignorance.
On the subject of " driver of Taxi lets person with drugs on them in the taxi, do they get charged? "
if it's in USA, then YES.
They are accountable, they have to ask their passenger if they have anything on them - and be alert to citizens that are gonna be problematic; which is why you _also_ reserve the right to refuse service.
Ignorance to the law is NEVER a defense, lol. The phrase gets mangled, but there's :" ignorance" as in situations pertaining to safe-harbour laws - RUclips can't be held accountable for all the content on the site - simply bc there's too much of it to screen int he first place, so they're ignorant to 100% of all content. But not ignorant to the laws that cover copyroghted material
K , he has to ask , but clearly has no rights to search, so how do you stop someone with drugs to get in your car, does McDonald's have to ask each person before entering their property ,or train , bus etc. I just don't believe that taxi driver is responsible , or would be charged if they don't have some reason to believe that he might be linked to other person.
Celebrities promoting fyre festival is a perfect example of ignorance. 250k to tweet about a party, and lets be real it was their publicist who made the post.
It's not "Ignorance is not a proper defense," it's "Ignorance of THE LAW excuses no one." It means you don't have to know something is illegal to be charged with it, but there are tons of laws that require the person to be aware they are TAKING PART IN IT for them to be charged with the crime. Asmon's example was a good one. That taxi driver is not aware that they are trafficking drugs, but they are, in fact, breaking the law. They wouldn't be charged though.
To be clear- ignorance of the LAW is not a defense. Ignorance of the FACTS that made an act illegal IS a defense.
Example: you pay for a meal with counterfeit bills. If you didn’t know they were counterfeit you have a defense. If didn’t know paying with counterfeit bills was illegal then you do not have a defense.
De’Aron Fox… did a rug pull? YOU’RE LITERALLY GETTING PAID MILLIONS ON MILLIONS PLAYING FOR THE KINGS?
The whole argument around 24 mins is so funny. I get what Asmon is trying to say, but even he can't help but laugh when he realizes the two celebrities he's talking about are freaking mayweather and jake paul lol.
Asmon's viewers are lawyers now 🤦🤷
Yea you really need to be a lawyer to know the law right? Who needs to know law to avoid breaking it right? Lol get real. Everyone needs to know the law, sounds like you didn't, got impressed by the chat and to you they seem like lawyers when you yourself don't know jack shit like the man and legend himself.
@@TheRedRaven_ I kinda understand your name now. But instead of "kraa kraa" you got "cringe cringe".
Is asmon a lawyer too? And yeah some of the people in that chat probably ARE lawyers. Funny how you can say something so stupid and get people to agree with you.
based takes from the bald man
So what happened was, Asmongold was saying that it's ignorance when you don't know you're helping commit a crime. This innmy opinion is a valid defence.
What chat was trying to say is that ignorance of the law, thats to say, not knowing what you're doing is illegal isn't a defence. Which is also correct, since it it the responsibility of the people who live in a state or country to know what is and isn't against the law.
A lack of knowledge about a crime being committed with your involvement isnt even a solid defense a lot of the time either. And i don't agree with the taxi analogy being analogous to the promotion of a product that turned out to be a scam. If you're promotion a product it is your DUTY to know about it and as such, ignorance of a product you endorsed shouldn't be a valid defense.
Well my gandpa always says ''every morning a fool and a scamer wakesup, and when they met, they make a deal''
Criminals investigate criminals, cute.
Ignorance is a defence if the person is unwillingly ignorant not everyone knows everything Holly hell
Tbh ignorance isn't a defense in most cases. If you don't know all the details about the rules for covid, you get outside and without even knowing it you do something bad (forgot your mask or idk), you can still get fined for that. The person didn't know he was at fault yet he's still getting charged. The example he uses with the taxi I feel like in most cases like that the taxi driver indeed will not get charged but he might get asked to go to court for his own defence / accuse even further the client / passenger he drove.
Ignorance of the law is a valid defense when it comes to taxes. (Don't use that as an excuse to not pay taxes)
thats a good point about these never going away
i mean who among us would answer their phone to a unkown number? get any scam calls today?
A year late to this, but ignorance of the law is never a defense. While Asmon is correct, he worded it very incorrectly. There is a complete difference between committing a crime that you didn't know about, and being put in a situation where you've done something illegal without knowing that you did.
If you're advertising something that is a scam, but you don't know that the people behind it are scamming, you are not accountable at that moment. Where as if you were doing the scamming and you didn't know that scamming was a crime, that would NOT be a defense. However, if you find out that the thing you're advertising is a scam and you don't do anything about it, now you're accountable.
ignorance only works if you didnt know a law was broken, not if you dont know the law
ignorance of the Law, is not a defense, ignorance of the crime happening is a defense... two different things.
My father has been scammed multiple times in crypto currency many times. I've been telling him to not invest into anything until he's done research many times but he doesn't listen to me and gets frustrated cuz of it. Ever since then, I've been blocking many sites that involve trading any sort of crypto currency with no proof of getting anything in return especially the NFTs.
Ignorance is a defense because sometimes you don’t know things. It’s hard to know every law or if something is really bad when it’s brand new. Just like how diet soda was actually worse for you but people didn’t know until later on how much worse it technically was. So yes I think ignorance can be a defense if it’s proven the person had no knowledge of any problems prior. Because some people do pull the ignorance card when they intentionally were ignorant and they fail to defend themselves like that once evidence is found.
I hope Big Time isn't a huge scam i hold Jade pass we shall see!!! 😅
If youre worried its a scam, and you invested, it is probably a scam.
Me: I didn't know I couldn't kill someone sorry officer
Officer: no worries you didn't know you can go sir