Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 641 posts

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#591

Post by rbobby »

tracker1 wrote: post #539
rat87 wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May I reccomend http://www.reddit.com/r/iamverysmart/top/ to you? Also you're assuming some sort of strong correlation between IQ or some other measure of intelligence and good political judgement.

I was recently in a conversation where it was pointed out that my rather cold analytic nature when it comes to these kinds of things puts me at odds with more emotionally driven decisions. Even without agreeing, I can see the point. That said, in my mind short of violent action, I find it hard to see how having to serve more than two decades in prison is any kind of justice for any kind of non-violent crime. I also f…

> having to serve more than two decades in prison is any kind of justice for any kind of non-violent crime

Bernie Madoff got 150 years.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#592

Post by gwern »

tptacek wrote: post #399
gwern wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The prosecution didn't make a very good case for the 5 deaths; a lot of missing information and they were using other drugs and had other health issues.

By "other health issues", you are might be referring "Jordan M", who was found cold to the touch with Silk Road open on his computer, a looped belt by his dangling arm, and an open express mail package full of heroin on his desk, who was found at autopsy to have died of intoxication by xanax, heroin, and valium --- all three of which he ordered on SR. The "other health issues" here are the fact that "Jordan M." was,…

No, I was referring to Jordan M's other health problems which went well beyond 'overweight', to how the Australian teen had multiple drugs in his system, the lack of autopsy and other relevant documents, and to several other issues raised in Ulbricht's lawyer's original filing criticizing the health issues. I would pull it up out of PACER but I don't feel like spending $3+ again to go through the docket and find the full filing again.

tptacek, if you're going to act like an expert on this case, you should read all the documents, not just the indictment and one or two of the shorter things.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#593

Post by gwern »

tptacek wrote: post #368
gwern wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An indictment is also pre-trial. It is, in fact, about as pre-trial as documents get.

The indictment is the whole premise of the trial. Please remember: the argument isn't "did the government conclusively prove that Ulbricht attempted to commission a murder". It is: "There was no such thing [here: >] introduced for the trial " (exact words taken from the comment rooting this subthread and the parent comment that provoked it). That's not only false, it's pretty much the opposite of what happened: not o…

> The indictment is the whole premise of the trial.

No, the indictment is simply the initial document filed years ago which started the case and the specific charges can be, and were (right up to before Ulbricht's sentencing, even, where I believe some charges were combined or something) amended and strategies changed. You seem to think that indictments are immutable and all you have to do is quote a line from it, but you are not a lawyer.

> That's not only false, it's pretty much the opposite of what happened: not only was evidence of the murder-for-hire scheme formally introduced at trial, but it was ventured at trial, in a manner that put a part of the prosecution's case on the line for it.

The prosecution did not introduce the murder for hire and during the trial, as I already quoted, explicitly disclaimed that it was trying to do so and that they were only talking about other things like control of Bitcoins.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#594

Post by xnull2guest »

Natsu wrote: post #515
omegaham wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "there is no chutzpah defense." This. If he hadn't created a multi-million dollar drug empire, there would've been no blackmail. Therefore, the fact that he had to resort to murder to stop the blackmail is no defense at all.

Not to quibble, but it's also not the case that 'hire a hitman' is the only solution to being blackmailed. That's not exactly the first idea a law abiding citizen would come up with as the solution now, is it? It's his own fault he couldn't go to the police for help with the blackmail, so the court cannot reasonably excuse him for not doing so.

He didn't come up with it. Law enforcement did.

"It's his own fault he couldn't go to the police for help with the blackmail, so the court cannot reasonably excuse him for not doing so."

That's not how blackmail works within the legal system.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#595

Post by eeeeeeeeeeeee »

zanny wrote: post #168
deweller wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

allegedly tried to have multiple people killed. The prosecution brought this up at trial but he was not charged or convicted of this in the criminal trial.

This is the key point. He is going to spend the rest of his life in prison, pretty much, for running a website. Not for hurting anyone, not for even threatening to kill anyone - those charges weren't a part of his conviction - but simply by enabling the exchange of drugs he apparently should be locked away forever. Go Team 'Murica....

Give me a break. I also think the punishment was excessively harsh (the murder-for-hire stuff likely played a role even though he was not convicted on that), but saying he is getting life in prison for "running a website" is a huge oversimplification of the ruling.

That being said, I think this is the federal government showing, through the courts, how terrified they are of people running things they cannot control. Bitcoin terrifies them. They want to send a very clear message.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#596

Post by ChrisLomont »

indrax wrote: post #560
ChrisLomont wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What law allows killing to prevent a robbery? I think you're mistaken. Some places allow using lethal force when your own life is threatened. I am not aware of any place in the US where one is justified in killing merely to prevent a robbery. And if there is, can you show me a law in the US where a citizen can go after a robber long after the robbery is over and then kill them? I think not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justifiable_homicide#Examples_o... Texas was the first thing to come to my mind : http://nation.time.com/2013/06/13/when-you-can-kill-in-texas... The laws do seem to allow less after the fact, with good reason. My point was that we clearly allow for people to value money over lives. When is a robbery over? The stuff never stops being yours, and they never stop running away with it. A lot…

> Texas was the first thing to come to my mind

From your source " the protection-of-property element of the deadly force law is “pretty unique to Texas.” ".

If this type of law is pretty unique to Texas, let's look at the Texas law, instead of necessarily simplistic summaries.

Here [1] is the actual Texas state law. The relevant section is 9.42. The law states that deadly force may only be used in the case you claim if the person meets (among other conditions) that "the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.". Section 9.42B.

So no, you're not just free to shoot people for robbery, willy nilly. There are several steps that, even in Texas, need to be met.

>When is a robbery over? The stuff never stops being yours, and they never stop running away with it.

and

>I think it's legal to try to catch the robber yourself indefinitely, and defend yourself if threatened in the process.

is just nonsense. Even Texas requires that a person be defending their property or (Section 9.41b) "if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:" with some more constraints after that. You cannot just chase them months later and do anything.

So, "laws don't allow killing for robbery," unless there are quite a bit of other circumstances, and very few places allow it for any circumstance except when there is presumed lethal threat to the defender.

And absolutely certainly the laws do not allow Ulbrecht to hire someone to kill another no matter what the circumstances.

Please cite law statute or legal cases with links. Poorly researched news stories and opinions are much less useful.

[1] http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/PE/htm/PE.9.h...

>I think it's legal to try to catch the robber yourself indefinitely

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#597

Post by tptacek »

gwern wrote: post #592
tptacek wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By "other health issues", you are might be referring "Jordan M", who was found cold to the touch with Silk Road open on his computer, a looped belt by his dangling arm, and an open express mail package full of heroin on his desk, who was found at autopsy to have died of intoxication by xanax, heroin, and valium --- all three of which he ordered on SR. The "other health issues" here are the fact that "Jordan M." was,…

No, I was referring to Jordan M's other health problems which went well beyond 'overweight', to how the Australian teen had multiple drugs in his system, the lack of autopsy and other relevant documents, and to several other issues raised in Ulbricht's lawyer's original filing criticizing the health issues. I would pull it up out of PACER but I don't feel like spending $3+ again to go through the docket and find the…

Jordan M. did in fact receive an autopsy, which confirmed he died of an overdose of drugs of the kind he ordered on Silk Road. The defense attempted to refute the autopsy using their own pathologist, who did not conduct an autopsy. The defense witness was an expert-witness-for-hire who resigned a position as Rockland County medical examiner under a cloud of accusations about incompetence.

Your suggestion that I read more of the documents in this case is rude, uncalled for by anything I said, and unproductive.

It is totally reasonable for you to be skeptical or even cynical of the prosecution's case.

It is not at all reasonable for you to demand that everyone else on this thread share exactly your perspective on the case, or to suggest that people who disagree with you must do so because they're uninformed --- an accusation I would not have considered making about you.

Edit: rereading your comment, just to make sure I wasn't out of line (I don't think I was): you don't need to go to PACER to get the Taff declaration (about all 6 pathology cases). All of these documents are available from a Google search, from DOJ, "FreeRoss", and Cryptome.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#598

Post by tptacek »

gwern wrote: post #593
tptacek wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The indictment is the whole premise of the trial. Please remember: the argument isn't "did the government conclusively prove that Ulbricht attempted to commission a murder". It is: "There was no such thing [here: >] introduced for the trial " (exact words taken from the comment rooting this subthread and the parent comment that provoked it). That's not only false, it's pretty much the opposite of what happened: not o…

> The indictment is the whole premise of the trial. No, the indictment is simply the initial document filed years ago which started the case and the specific charges can be, and were (right up to before Ulbricht's sentencing, even, where I believe some charges were combined or something) amended and strategies changed. You seem to think that indictments are immutable and all you have to do is quote a line from it, bu…

The indictment to which we are referring was filed on February 4, 2014. It does not appear to have been superseded, and is the indictment the prosecution makes direct references to.

Is there a newer indictment you can point us to? One in which the murder-for-hire scheme is not ventured as part of the case?

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#599

Post by indrax »

ChrisLomont wrote: post #596
indrax wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justifiable_homicide#Examples_o... Texas was the first thing to come to my mind : http://nation.time.com/2013/06/13/when-you-can-kill-in-texas... The laws do seem to allow less after the fact, with good reason. My point was that we clearly allow for people to value money over lives. When is a robbery over? The stuff never stops being yours, and they never stop running away with it. A lot…

> Texas was the first thing to come to my mind From your source " the protection-of-property element of the deadly force law is “pretty unique to Texas.” ". If this type of law is pretty unique to Texas, let's look at the Texas law, instead of necessarily simplistic summaries. Here [1] is the actual Texas state law. The relevant section is 9.42. The law states that deadly force may only be used in the case you claim…

The point was the motivation of protecting money. Under the Texas law, the defender doesn't need to be defending life, only seeking to recover property. Most of what you've said isn't a counterargument to what I said. Willy nilly was never a claim.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine#State-by-state_...

Louisiana appears to allow lethal force just to prevent unlawful entry into a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.

You're also looking at one law about one situation to dispute what I conjectured about a different situation. Is it not legal to chase down the thief yourself? If you are threatened in the process, is it not then legal to defend yourself? Are 'dead or alive' bounties not legal? The effect may well be the same.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#600

Post by Natsu »

xnull2guest wrote: post #594
Natsu wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to quibble, but it's also not the case that 'hire a hitman' is the only solution to being blackmailed. That's not exactly the first idea a law abiding citizen would come up with as the solution now, is it? It's his own fault he couldn't go to the police for help with the blackmail, so the court cannot reasonably excuse him for not doing so.

He didn't come up with it. Law enforcement did. "It's his own fault he couldn't go to the police for help with the blackmail, so the court cannot reasonably excuse him for not doing so." That's not how blackmail works within the legal system.

It doesn't matter what the police offer, if he chooses to hire a hitman (even a fake one) with their help, he's guilty, because an innocent person would say "no".

You don't get to kill other people to cover up your own crimes, period. Self-defense is the only possible justification, and that requires an imminent threat to his life (or at least grievous bodily injury). Threats to incriminate you don't count for anything.

Please refer to the guide, it explains all of these myths. If you think things work some other way, cite law to the contrary.

Post reply on HN