After putting together our report on Joby Weeks’ release appeal yesterday, I noted the DOJ had filed an opposition while I was working on the report.

Having detailed
Weeks’ arguments for release on appeal
, today we go over the DOJ’s response.

The DOJ opens their opposition by pointing out that Weeks (right) has been deemed a flight risk by “two separate federal judges on three separate occasions”.

Despite extensive briefing and several hours of argument in support of his prior, unsuccessful bail applications, Weeks now appeals to this Court to obtain a different result from the thoughtful determinations by those two federal judges.

And so the tone of the DOJ’s opposition is set.

Joby Weeks is an unreasonable flight risk

A major roadblock for Weeks securing release is convincing a Judge he’s not a flight risk.

The DOJ’s stance on this is quite clear.

Weeks’ criminal conduct in this case is substantial.

Weeks convinced unwitting investors to spend their money on investment products provided by the BitClub Network.

He brokered contracts with third-party vendors in an effort to make the BitClub Network seem legitimate to victim investors.

He shamed online skeptics who voiced their suspicions that the BitClub Network was a fraud.

He made millions of dollars but admittedly has not paid a dime in taxes.

In short, for years, Weeks manipulated BitClub Network victims and bent rules he found inconvenient to prolong the fraud and preserve his unjust profit.

Weeks’ offense conduct strongly demonstrates why he presents an unreasonable risk of flight.

In answer to Weeks portraying himself as “a tiny player” in BitClub Network, the DOJ presents him as instrumental in BitClub Network defrauding victims, “many from developing countries and (who were) technologically unsavvy”, out of “hundreds of millions of dollars”.

This is supported by a prior finding by a Judge that Weeks’ position within BitClub Network was “unique”.

Weeks also held influence over a large number of BitClub Network investors, as evidenced by an email he sent to a redacted third-party.

You guys open to me doing [redacted]?? I could put 300,000 people in within a year probably.

Half of bitclub would join me. Right away.

The DOJ state Weeks was interested in using the third-party business’ name to “create another business similar to BitClub Network”.

Weeks’ acknowledgement that he could convince half of the BitClub Network’s victims to join his new venture runs contrary to the characterization in his brief that he had very little to do with attracting new victims into the scheme.

Weeks was not someone who merely signed up for the BitClub Network and whose access or involvement was limited to promoting new investment.

As part of the Ponzi scheme’s operations, Weeks brokered contracts for mining power and equipment.

These instruments were used to create a false air of legitimacy around BitClub Network.

To negotiate these business arrangements, which sometimes exceeded ten

🤖 Quick Answer

Why has the DOJ opposed Joby Weeks' release appeal?
The Department of Justice maintains that Weeks poses an unreasonable flight risk, citing determinations by two separate federal judges across three separate occasions. Despite extensive briefing and arguments supporting previous bail applications, the DOJ contends that Weeks' appeal seeks a different outcome from those thoughtful judicial determinations already made.

🔗 Related Articles

- Crypto 7 Continents Review: Global Trading Club clone Ponzi
- Fission Coin Review: Three tiers of Ponzi points
- Ash Mufareh declares “only God can stop OnPassive!”
- Traffic Monsoon clawback lawsuit case closed
- CEO Paul Burks admits Zeek Rewards a Ponzi scheme