61–70 of 94 posts
Judge> It was a world of laws that you created, they were your laws. It is fictional to think of Silk Road as some place of freedom. Ouch, terrible strawman; freedom doesn't mean freedom from all laws. It does entail freedom from some unreasonable laws.
Who defines 'unreasonable'?
This quote of the judge as he delivering his verdict is so crazy (he is reading from Ulbricht's journal): Two days later on April 8 you write: "Sent payments to angel for hit on Tony76 and his three associates. Began setting up hecho as standby" -- I have no idea what that is -- "refactored main and category pages to be more efficient."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, then I was misinformed on Ross's case, if he was convicted for the murder conspiracy. I don't know first-hand what happened in his case. I do know first-hand what happened in my case (and in many of cases of friends) where the US Attorney (the prosecutor) misled the court or outright lied, or had a witness lie, to get the defendant a higher sentence. They do it so routinely that it casts doubt on all cases now (f…
>if he was convicted for the murder conspiracy he wasn't. Alleged murders, without ever being tried before court, were used to cause sentence enhancement. All the "evidence" and "testimony" for the murder charges weren't even enough to sustain the charges, less bring them for trial. At the time of the conviction, it wasn't known that the agents were corrupt and thus, not surprisingly, the Judge gave their testimonies…
stand corrected. Judge did know that the agent was corrupted. The murder-for-hire allegations used at the sentencing didn't even have as much as a testimony of corrupt agent behind them.
It's terrible that we are doing this to someone who probably would have learned their lesson with only 5-10 years of prison and been able to return to society. He had the potential to return as a productive member of society and now instead he will be a lifelong debt all for assisting in the sale of drugs that people willingly purchased knowing the risk of death from those drugs. He's no saint but this punishment is…
It's terrible that we are doing this to someone who probably would have learned their lesson with only 5-10 years of prison and been able to return to society. He had the potential to return as a productive member of society and now instead he will be a lifelong debt all for assisting in the sale of drugs that people willingly purchased knowing the risk of death from those drugs. He's no saint but this punishment is…
I'd consider the sentence excessive were it not for the multiple attempted murder-for-hires. If someone is intellectually and morally capable of directing a criminal enterprise that funds murder as a calculated business decision, and they try to do that, they've earned themselves a life sentence in my view.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd consider the sentence excessive were it not for the multiple attempted murder-for-hires. If someone is intellectually and morally capable of directing a criminal enterprise that funds murder as a calculated business decision, and they try to do that, they've earned themselves a life sentence in my view.
I don't think the judge agrees with you since that wasn't mentioned in the sentencing. And he wasn't convicted of attempters murder.
"So, we also have your own violence and there is no doubt -- really none -- that you wanted to and paid for the murders of five people to protect your drug enterprise. That is not the conduct of conviction but it is relevant conduct, so how is that consistent with harm reduction?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the judge addressed that issue. >"No drug dealer from the Bronx selling meth or heroin or crack has ever made these kinds of arguments to the Court. It is a privileged argument, it is an argument from one of privilege. You are no better a person than any other drug dealer and your education does not give you a special place of privilege in our criminal justice system. It makes it less explicable why you did w…
>You can argue that our drug laws are wrong or the punishments are too extreme, but singling out Ulbrich for the specifics ways in which he clearly and repeatedly violated those laws is showing favoritism. If his crimes didn't involve the Internet, there would be nothing newsworthy about his arrest and sentencing. Seriously? IT'S ALL ABOUT THE SPECIFICS. Accidentally beat someone to death in a fight you started and y…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An actual doctor would say: "Dont do MDMA. Don't get off your anti-depressants."
This is akin to abstinence-only sex education. It just doesn't work.
Breaking a treatment regimen to use a drug that wreaks havoc on the specific neurotransmitter the antidepressant acts on doesn't work.
There is no way to reliably control the outcome of stopping treatment and taking street drugs.