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

Free Ross Ulbricht

freeross.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 121 posts

Re: Free Ross Ulbricht

#41

Post by P_I_Staker »

DoItToMe81 wrote: post #10

I think people who facilitate the sale of community destroying hard drugs deserve punishment, but this trial was a farce. The media ran ceaseless stories making it sound like he was selling guns to terrorists and child abuse material. There's no way he could have been fairly judged by a jury with how prevalent that type of reporting was.

Nope it's the institutions that trample on people and violate their civil rights that should be suffering punishment. The government, medical, and mental health community are highly discriminatory and don't respect freedom of religion.

It's created a perfect storm of death in destruction in the USA. The system needs to be reboot and built to protect citizens, not abusive / incompetent doctors, insurance companies.

Drug addicts are people that deserve to be respected, not spit on and turned away. Even if you aren't a drug addict, you can really quickly have your rights stripped away. Drug use, even repeated, isn't always addiction. Drugs are often a critical component of our health.

I've become increasingly aware of the role the medical industry is playing in exacerbating drug abuse and suicide. So many people are driven away from care and into a suicide/jail or other health problems like morbid obesity.

Re: Free Ross Ulbricht

#42

Post by tchalla »

jjallen wrote: post #40

This is a good lesson about not forgetting that much of life is not binary. Here we have someone who was convicted of doing illegal things. There is also strong evidence that he hired and paid someone to kill five people. So the question isn't free or don't free him. The question is "how long should he be in jail for?". There's a middle ground here. Many people, including the OP website just say "free" him. I don't k…

I wish we though about almost everything probabilistically instead of raging over false binaries.

Re: Free Ross Ulbricht

#43

Post by whatitmatteryo »

aeternum wrote: post #31
SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>creating an anonymous e-commerce website called Silk Road. An entrepreneur passionate about free markets and privacy, That wording really goes out of it's way to sound like this might conceivably be legal, or at least not knowingly criminal.

Was Napster knowingly criminal? By most accounts yes. How about Uber? In most cities they were by allowing airport pickups? How about Amazon? Remember when they aided and abetted customers with sales tax evasion for years?

Napster was knowingly criminal. Source: I was there.

During discovery they found emails from Parker saying, "Of course it's illegal. We know it, they know it, we're going to be the biggest thing in the world anyways".

Re: Free Ross Ulbricht

#44

Post by etchalon »

boomskats wrote: post #5
dutchbrit wrote: post #2

Didn't Ross hire a hitman?

The article linked here addresses that multiple times. That accusation, largely overinflated by the media, was dismissed with prejudice. He was never even charged with it.

The article conflates the case in Maryland, which was dismissed after Ulbricht was already convicted and his appeals denied by SCOTUS.

The article pretends this exonerated Ross when it reality the government didn't see a reason to go through another trial when he was already serving multiple life sentences.

The article also does the hand-waivey "it was never shown the messages were authored by Ross."

Those messages were presented into evidence, during the trial. Ross lawyers had no explanation for them.

Re: Free Ross Ulbricht

#45

Post by etchalon »

DoItToMe81 wrote: post #12
avalys wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does "largely overinflated" mean, and how does it differ from "completely fabricated"?

The FBI accepted that multiple people were behind the DreadPirateRoberts account and that the writing style did not match his. He was ultimately not charged with it, but the story was used to slander him and make him seem dangerous and violent.

That is not what happened.

Re: Free Ross Ulbricht

#46

Post by borski »

vkou wrote: post #33
Synaesthesia wrote: post #6

It was totally a political trial with many exaggerations and the government trying to "set an example". - First-time offender - All non-violent charges - Two life sentences plus 40 years without parole >Ross Ulbricht is condemned to die in prison for creating an anonymous e-commerce website called Silk Road. An entrepreneur passionate about free markets and privacy, he was 26 when he made the site. He was never prose…

> >Ross was not convicted of selling drugs or illegal items himself, but was held responsible for what others sold on the site. I'm pretty sure that running an illegal drug marketplace is also illegal.

Sure, but that alone shouldn’t net someone two life sentences. Hiring a hit man to kill 5 people might.

Re: Free Ross Ulbricht

#47

Post by ffggffggj »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #7
EdwardDiego wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that sounds dispassionate and unbiased. And oh hey, he's a model prisoner ...none of this is utilizing actual facts, it's just assertions and emotive wording.

The website is called "free Ross Ulbricht," they aren't quiet about their bias. >none of this is utilizing actual facts, "The allegations were never charged at trial, never proven, never submitted to, or ruled on by, a jury, and eventually dismissed with prejudice" are the actual facts.

Being proud of your bias doesn’t absolve you of its fact corruption effect, that is just silly. If anything it makes you more likely to stretch the truth.

Re: Free Ross Ulbricht

#48

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

aeternum wrote: post #31
SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>creating an anonymous e-commerce website called Silk Road. An entrepreneur passionate about free markets and privacy, That wording really goes out of it's way to sound like this might conceivably be legal, or at least not knowingly criminal.

Was Napster knowingly criminal? By most accounts yes. How about Uber? In most cities they were by allowing airport pickups? How about Amazon? Remember when they aided and abetted customers with sales tax evasion for years?

If this is no big deal, then there would be no need to dance around it, right?

But I would not conflate sharing a music file with hiring a hit-man.

Re: Free Ross Ulbricht

#50

Post by jahewson »

rob74 wrote: post #16
EdwardDiego wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that sounds dispassionate and unbiased. And oh hey, he's a model prisoner ...none of this is utilizing actual facts, it's just assertions and emotive wording.

The fact remains that someone should be considered innocent of a crime until proven guilty. If the prosecution couldn't prove that he hired a hitman (sounds like they didn't even try), then that shouldn't influence his sentencing.

That’s not how it works. The evidentiary standard for a jury is “beyond a reasonable doubt” but for the sentencing judge is “preponderance of the evidence”, with the caveat that the judge can’t use that to hand down a sentence harsher than legally permitted by what the jury convicted on (in this case narcotics distribution - resulting in deaths of overdose victims).
Post reply on HN