Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges • Hacker News Board

Re: Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges

#51

Post by jtbigwoo » Sat, Oct 05, 2013, 12:52 AM UTC

jessaustin wrote: post #29

Prosecutors said they expect to transfer Ulbricht to the East Coast, where he faces a criminal complaint filed in New York and a grand jury indictment handed down in Maryland. If they had arrested someone in New York, the complaint would have been filed in Texas and the grand jury would be impaneled in San Francisco.

Usually they file charges in the jurisdiction where the crime took place. I suspect there's no logical jurisdiction when the transactions occurred remotely. The investigators were apparently in FBI agents in New York and Maryland. The New York and Maryland U.S. Attorneys both conducted investigations and both filed charges. New York apparently indicted him first. He may also have to stand trial in Maryland later. Popehat has more information.

http://www.popehat.com/2013/10/02/the-silk-road-to-federal-p...

Re: Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges

#52

Post by derekp7 » Sat, Oct 05, 2013, 12:54 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #48

derekp7 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I understand it, you can analyze it mathematically. Say one piece of circumstantial evidence puts the likelihood of guilt at 20%/ not guilty at 80%. Now another one has a 15/85 ratio. Take that 15% from 80%, and you now have a 68% not guilty / 32% guilty. Keep going until you have a good enough number, and you have your verdict. Now what that number should be? 90% guilty? 95%?

> The way I understand it, you can analyze it mathematically. Not meaningfully, for a number of reasons. > Say one piece of circumstantial evidence puts the likelihood of guilt at 20%/ not guilty at 80%. Problem with that is that it is rarely easily quantifiable. > Now another one has a 15/85 ratio. Take that 15% from 80% This, of course, assumes that the pieces of evidence are independent , which is not necessarily…

In that case, it is probably a good thing I've never been on a jury before (sat through jury duty once, never got called). I'll have to definitely keep your points in mind if I ever have to serve on one. Thanks.

Re: Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges

#53

Post by jrockway » Sat, Oct 05, 2013, 1:02 AM UTC

mistercow wrote: post #36

wozniacki wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you prepay your attorney(s) / legal team in the form of retainers like they (seem to) do in the television show "The Wire"? The cost of any future trial could be anticipated ahead of time and paid upfront by the perpetrating party. Right? That way there is no burden on the accused, to prove how the cost of the trial will be borne. Right? The state (DA) must know that there is certainly no way "Stringer Bell" or…

I think that is correct. If so, it's also screwed up because it actually favors the guilty. An innocent person who believes in the justice system would think that they have no reason to retain a lawyer in advance. A smart criminal would do so as an obvious precaution.

The goal is to convict someone of a crime, not to convict someone guilty of the crime.

Re: Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges

#54

Post by malandrew » Sat, Oct 05, 2013, 1:27 AM UTC

noir_lord wrote: post #7

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #3

>Ulbricht did not enter a plea. But his public defender,... Looks like the Federales did seize his assets. He may be about to have a bad time.

You can't use the proceeds of crime to fund your defense. If he can't show income then he gets a public defender. Also this is a federal defender and my understanding (I'm a Brit watching from afar) is they are like our QC's (Queens Counsel - essentially very good and experienced legal professionals) rather than the stereotypical "plead to everything and go to lunch" public defenders.

But someone else can fund your defense. If he is in fact DPR, which hasn't been proven yet in a court of law, then he could move bitcoins to someone who could convert them to USD and fund his defense.

Alternatively, what stops people from investing in defendants. If Ulrich is in fact DPR and has 80mm in Bitcoins or large portion thereof stashed away somewhere, wouldn't it make sense for some rich person to fund DPR's defense on the condition that a portion of the 80mm is paid to the investor. Everything would be done through a lawyer the investor trusts, and Ulrich would have attorney client privilege and could in fact privately confide through the lawyer how much return he can make on a successful defense.

Spending $1-2 million defending someone, with the chance of getting a 10x return in 1-2 years seems like a pretty good deal if you can build up the rapport

Re: Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges

#55

Post by fnordfnordfnord » Sat, Oct 05, 2013, 1:35 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #37

revelation wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course the source of the funds may be obvious. That doesn't mean we should short out the usual due process, the same reason we have the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine.

There is a well-established due process scheme for seizing assets. It has a lower standard of proof because it establishes only that a crime took place and that an asset is linked to the crime, without establishing culpability.

Calling it due process is like calling ROT13 encryption. It is a sham. What's well-established is the fact that asset forfeiture is abused far and wide, and for every type of asset and supposed crime.

Re: Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges

#56

Post by tptacek » Sat, Oct 05, 2013, 1:52 AM UTC

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #55

tptacek wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a well-established due process scheme for seizing assets. It has a lower standard of proof because it establishes only that a crime took place and that an asset is linked to the crime, without establishing culpability.

Calling it due process is like calling ROT13 encryption. It is a sham. What's well-established is the fact that asset forfeiture is abused far and wide, and for every type of asset and supposed crime.

What's well established is that it has been abused. What's not well established is how widespread the abuse is, because, obviously, reporters only write about the abuses.

Re: Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges

#57

Post by dobbsbob » Sat, Oct 05, 2013, 2:29 AM UTC

m0nastic wrote: post #32

One thing I'm curious about (but haven't seen mentioned yet), is whether the bitcoins that were seized were Ulbrichts or "DPR's". That might seem like a silly distinction (as obviously the state is arguing that Ulbrict is DPR), but I can imagine a case where it's actually important. i.e.: If the FBI identified the bitcoins as part of their efforts investigating DPR, for Ulbrict to claim ownership of them might actual…

I would imagine it's like all criminal cases where if they find cash lying around during an arrest they seize it.

Re: Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges

#58

Post by sjg007 » Sat, Oct 05, 2013, 3:26 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #48

derekp7 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I understand it, you can analyze it mathematically. Say one piece of circumstantial evidence puts the likelihood of guilt at 20%/ not guilty at 80%. Now another one has a 15/85 ratio. Take that 15% from 80%, and you now have a 68% not guilty / 32% guilty. Keep going until you have a good enough number, and you have your verdict. Now what that number should be? 90% guilty? 95%?

> The way I understand it, you can analyze it mathematically. Not meaningfully, for a number of reasons. > Say one piece of circumstantial evidence puts the likelihood of guilt at 20%/ not guilty at 80%. Problem with that is that it is rarely easily quantifiable. > Now another one has a 15/85 ratio. Take that 15% from 80% This, of course, assumes that the pieces of evidence are independent , which is not necessarily…

In my interpretation it is all about what happened and how you spin the story. We see in books and movies where someone appears to be quite guilty but then in the twist they are not or vice versa. Now, life might be messier in some sense that such is less likely in theory. But even forensic evidence can be manipulated and the science of forensic evidence does not have the same rigorous scientific underpinnings as depicted on CSI. In a digital world, a lot of things can be manipulated, and in the world of espionage probably are.

Re: Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges

#59

Post by sjg007 » Sat, Oct 05, 2013, 3:29 AM UTC

jlgreco wrote: post #43

jpmattia wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tax returns - or the lack thereof. And how is it determined (beyond a reasonable doubt, with a vigorous defense) whether or not you committed the crime of tax evasion?

On the topic of tax evasion... what if they arrest somebody and find many thousands of bitcoins in their possession, but that somebody claims that they mined them themselves (and the block-chain confirms they weren't transferred)? What if they were all mined when they were basically worthless?

Would you have to pay tax only when you convert them to dollars? I mean US multinationals don't pay income tax on foreign income until they repatriate it...

Re: Alleged Silk Road drug kingpin denies charges

#60

Post by tptacek » Sat, Oct 05, 2013, 3:34 AM UTC

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #20

tptacek wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The assets you presume him to have are the proceeds of a massive online narcotics market. Or is there some other source of income you're saying were seized?

You presume the assets to be the proceeds of a massive online narcotics market.

I do, because the narcotics market is the only source of assets that anyone has mentioned in conjunction with this person.