Scottish prisoner plots £2 million crypto break-in from cell, gets eight years

Robert Barr, a 29-year-old Scottish prisoner, plotted a £2 million ($2.7 million) crypto heist from his cell with smuggled phones, but a couple’s doorbell camera helped foil it. The High Court in Glasgow sentenced him to eight years on November 10, 2026.

Lord Cubie sentenced Barr alongside Sean Favier, 26, and Iain Doyle, 37, after all three pleaded guilty to involvement in serious organised crime. Favier received four years in prison, while Doyle was sentenced to five years.

The plot targeted a couple in Bonnyrigg, Midlothian, whose cryptocurrency holdings included assets associated with a digital currency venture. Neither attempt to steal their digital assets succeeded.

Crypto heist combined prison communications with planned home invasion

Barr was already serving a sentence for cryptocurrency-related fraud when he coordinated the operation using illicit mobile phones.

His plan required accomplices to enter the couple’s residence and compel them to install AnyDesk, a legitimate remote-access application. Barr intended to use that access to transfer cryptocurrency from the victims’ wallet into accounts he controlled.

Lord Cubie described the operation as a crime that “married 21st century computer sophistication with old fashioned housebreaking in an audacious attempt to steal cryptocurrency worth up to £2 million.”

The crypto heist therefore depended on physical access to the victims as well as Barr’s technical knowledge. The accomplices’ role was to create the conditions in which he could remotely take control of the computer and move the funds.

Investigators recovered extensive communications from Barr’s phone. Those exchanges documented reconnaissance, surveillance and preparations that contemplated intimidation or violence.

The messages showed that the operation involved sustained planning. One instruction emphasised the need to get the victim onto his computer and install the remote-access software quickly once the men were inside.

Doorbell camera helped stop the crypto heist

The criminals first attempted to obtain the assets through a burglary in January 2024. A hardware wallet was stolen, but the perpetrators could not access the cryptocurrency it protected.

A subsequent attempt took place at approximately 11:30 p.m. on April 17, 2024. Favier and Doyle approached the property wearing dark clothing and concealing their faces.

The couple saw the men through their doorbell camera and refused to open the door. That decision prevented the accomplices from entering and carrying out the planned coercion.

Lord Cubie said the operation was “only frustrated because the victims had the sense not to open their front door at 11:30 p.m. at night to unknown men, dressed in dark clothing with their faces obscured.”

The failed crypto heist did not result in the loss of the targeted digital assets. The £2 million figure represented the value the criminals sought to steal, rather than money successfully taken.

The two attempts also exposed the limits of the perpetrators’ access. Possession of the stolen hardware wallet had not enabled them to obtain the funds, and their later plan depended on confronting the victims inside their home.

Judge rejects mastermind’s claim that he was easily led

During sentencing, Lord Cubie rejected Barr’s suggestion that he had been easily influenced by others. The judge instead pointed to his leadership of the group and his technical capabilities.

Barr had accepted being the head of the organised crime group responsible for the offence. The court also considered his previous cryptocurrency fraud conviction and his decision to organise another crime while incarcerated.

The crypto heist proceedings drew distinctions between the defendants’ roles. Barr directed the scheme, while Favier’s involvement was considered comparatively peripheral.

Doyle argued that he had intended only to deliver a telephone. Lord Cubie rejected that account, noting his awareness of the potential for violence.

Although the plot failed, the judge treated its planning, intended intrusion and risk of coercion as serious features of the offending. The sentences reflected participation in the criminal enterprise rather than a successful transfer of cryptocurrency.

Failed theft still carried serious consequences

In assessing the crypto heist, Lord Cubie stressed that the absence of a financial loss did not erase the danger posed to the couple.

“This was a serious crime, a pre-planned and meaningful, although ultimately unsuccessful, attempt to steal a substantial asset which involved the invasion of the home of the victims, a real potential for violence, and if successful, material assistance in the financing of serious and organized crime,” the sentencing statement said.

Barr’s eight-year sentence runs from August 25, 2025, when his previous prison term expired. Consideration of a Serious Crime Prevention Order was postponed until November 17.

The crypto heist case illustrates how digital asset theft can involve physical coercion alongside computer access. Here, the plan relied on forcing the victims to make their own device available to the organiser.

Despite months of preparation, the crypto heist ultimately failed at the doorstep. The couple’s refusal to admit the masked men prevented the planned confrontation and left the targeted cryptocurrency beyond the group’s reach.