11–20 of 48 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ulbricht seems likely to do a lot more time than Mitnick ever did. By the time he gets out, I doubt most people will remember who he was.
It depends. I see him as a freedom fighter on the front lines. I will always remember his sacrifices. I guess it depends on your world view.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ulbricht seems likely to do a lot more time than Mitnick ever did. By the time he gets out, I doubt most people will remember who he was.
It depends. I see him as a freedom fighter on the front lines. I will always remember his sacrifices. I guess it depends on your world view.
Yea right? Tor was hacked, or was finally given the backdoor key by the NSA? I imagine the NSA held off for years, but finally knew the FBI would never stop the site--so they reluctantly helped out the FBI? I do wonder why the CIA didn't just assassinate Ross? (Personally, I think it was a mistake to let Terrorists question the security of TOR?)
No one's quite sure why the FBI would be logging exit node traffic in an investigation aimed at the SR1 hidden service.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ulbricht seems likely to do a lot more time than Mitnick ever did. By the time he gets out, I doubt most people will remember who he was.
It depends. I see him as a freedom fighter on the front lines. I will always remember his sacrifices. I guess it depends on your world view.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It depends. I see him as a freedom fighter on the front lines. I will always remember his sacrifices. I guess it depends on your world view.
Freedom fighter who denied being DPR and tried to save his ass by pointing at another guy? http://www.dailydot.com/crime/ross-ulbricht-silk-road-mark-k...
Most attorneys find it is more effective to present evidence during a trial than after their client has been convicted.
Post-trial motions are a standard part of trial practice. For example, a lawyer might argue that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the jury's verdict. In fact, some of these arguments are waived on appeal if not made in a post-trial motion.
In fact, some of these arguments are waived on appeal if not made in a post-trial motion.
What you're saying is accurate but it's not the point. They are basing their new argument on "fresh evidence". To be successful, an appeal must be based on a legal argument and not on new evidence.
Source: http://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources...
The appeals courts do not usually consider new witnesses or new evidence. Appeals in either civil or criminal cases are usually based on arguments that there were errors in the trial’s procedure or errors in the judge's interpretation of the law.
Most attorneys find it is more effective to present evidence during a trial than after their client has been convicted.
> Records of the investigation that were made available to > Ulbricht only just before his trial in January ... show > that
If you made such a motion and the judge denied it, then that becomes the basis of an appeal in that the judge erred by not allowing the extra time. On the other hand, if you never made such an argument and then try to introduce new evidence in a post-trial motion or appeal, you will not be very successful.
Original, on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/DarkNetMarkets/comments/2y9q55/fbi_... No one's quite sure why the FBI would be logging exit node traffic in an investigation aimed at the SR1 hidden service.
Seems plausible to me.