So let's get this straight for the justice system: 1. misleading the American public into going to a series of costly wars through lies about WMDs -> not punishable 2. Weakening Glass-Stegal and encouraging questionable and irresponsible risk-taking at major banking institutions -> not punishable 3. Fraudulent evaluation of risk-ratings by trusted agencies for the sake of profit leading to worst financial disaster si…
I would change "not punishable" to "not punished". Sure you could be punished for all those things, but there just isnt enough political will to do so. Ulbricht's error was being a criminal whose punishment affects nobody in power.
Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison
601–610 of 641 posts
Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison
#602Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the law guide I linked it to would file this under "there is no chutzpah defense." He had legal options that did not include "hire a hitman" ("do nothing" is a valid option) and he had a big hand in creating the problem to begin with, or there would be nothing to blackmail him with in the first place. And the state didn't corrupt him, he was already leading a criminal operation when they set out to catch him.…
Doesn't "there is no chutzpah defense" imply that he is guilty of a range of other things - then not yet determined in court? And does it really work that way? You can be entrapped so long as your defense has no chutzpah? Isn't it the case that law enforcement can be guilty of entrapment AND the defendant guilty of a crime? Hasn't this been established many times before? Wouldn't this exclude 'chutzpah' arguments? I'…
Further, offering you hitman services is NOT entrapment. This would never ensnare an innocent person: they'd say no!
To the best of my knowledge, DPR's lawyers have not even alleged that the police committed any crimes. That would have allowed them to suppress the evidence and, as learned in the link I posted earlier, the evidence that he hired a hitman WAS allowed in court because it was part of the crimes he was charged with.
I did reply to your other post about it 'not being his idea'. That EXACT argument is explained in the law guide, right here: http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=646
The short answer is that, even if they offer you a hitman, all you ever had to do was say no. Giving you an opportunity is not entrapment. It just shows that if it hadn't been for the police, you would have committed a crime (solicitation for murder, here).
Finally, 'due process' means that he had his day in court. He got that and was sentenced by a jury of his peers. You can disagree with the reasons behind it, but there are good reasons for these rules which are clearly explained in the guide.
The fact that he was willing to deal with hitmen is the problem here. It's not self-defense, nor can it be. It's not a solution a non-criminal would ever accept. The fact that he had only bad solutions was due to his own guilt--there would be no illegal activities for the blackmailer to expose if he had not engaged in any. And if the blackmail was false, he'd have every reason to want to cooperate with the police and prove his innocence by working with them to catch the blackmailer.
Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison
#603Earlier quoted context omitted.
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....
Are you implying drugs don't hurt anyone? Even the most ardent proponent of full legalization usually acknowledges that many drugs are very harmful--they just believe the people should be free to do things even if they are harmful to themselves. I generally support decriminalization or even legalization, but I would be reluctant to allow internet sales. I'd require sales to be through licensed dealers and in person,…
Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison
#604Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cars and guns also hurt people but pretty much anyone can sell those. I agree that drug sales should be regulated but that doesn't in any way make sentencing someone to life in prison for running a website any less fucked up.
> Cars and guns also hurt people but pretty much anyone can sell those. The following applies only to the US. Since 1968 you need a license granted by the federal government to sell guns ( https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/who-can-obtain-federal-firea... ). The law allowing you to carry a firearm was passed in 1791. Driver's licenses have been around since 1899. You can't sell a car to someone without one. When thinkin…
Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison
#605Earlier quoted context omitted.
So many people were convinced that "Obummer is gunner take r gunz" that they created a bullet shortage that lasted for years. Um, sounds like like addiction to me.
Heh. It was military hardware that was using those bullets, my friend. :)
If I want to protect myself, I'm going to want a bullet with quite a bit more punch, thanks.
Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison
#606Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're an idiot. Flashbacks are not a real thing. Pretty much every negative effect of LSD is exaggerated or based on biased reports by the government to justify making anything that gets you high illegal. An LSD 'flashback' is more like deja vu, like "Wow this is really similar to something I've experienced before", not like you just randomly go back into a full on trip. If you're schizophrenic you probably shouldn'…
Right. PTSD flashbacks are a real thing, though.
Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison
#607Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 anythi…
Can you be specific about which webcomic had law enforcement blackmailing someone? I didn't see one that covers our case there.
> 'because an innocent person would say "no".'
Doesn't that imply that all entrapment is legal? And is it even true? People can be blackmailed for things they haven't done and even easily give false confessions of guilt...
Thanks for the conversation Natsu. I don't think you're the legal expert I was hoping would be in this thread. Again thank you for sharing your opinion.
Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison
#608Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't "there is no chutzpah defense" imply that he is guilty of a range of other things - then not yet determined in court? And does it really work that way? You can be entrapped so long as your defense has no chutzpah? Isn't it the case that law enforcement can be guilty of entrapment AND the defendant guilty of a crime? Hasn't this been established many times before? Wouldn't this exclude 'chutzpah' arguments? I'…
He was found guilty of a wide-ranging criminal enterprise. I've already quoted the judge's own words regarding what DPR was charged (and later convicted) of, but HN seems to think it's a lot different than what the court documents reflect. Further, offering you hitman services is NOT entrapment. This would never ensnare an innocent person: they'd say no! To the best of my knowledge, DPR's lawyers have not even allege…
Nope, but creating a false circumstance of blackmail is. That's what we're talking about.
But we've gone in circles. I think we both need to talk to other (knowledgeable) people. Thanks for the chat.
Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison
#609Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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
#610Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
That would be a good point if it were medical incompetence but the criticisms of Taff were that police did not like his management style and thought personnel arrived at scenes late because they lived outside the county, no? I didn't see anywhere that the prosecution brought this up, even though hearsay is allowed at this point.
> The defense attempted to refute the autopsy using their own pathologist, who did not conduct an autopsy.
He doesn't need to conduct an autopsy to point out problems in how things were done (waiting 4 days to do Wilsdon's autopsy? not doing an autopsy at all on Bridges?) or that the prosecution is straining to associate any death it can with and trying to ignore the long histories of poor health or multiple drug abuse and multiple drug sources.
> 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 Lewis affidavit says that the autopsy confirmed the presence of brain hemorrhage, liver problems (in addition to spleen), and that specifically, "the autopsy report correctly attributed death to multiple/combined drug intoxication. Heroin/opiate, however, was not singled out primary cause of death, and of course, for reasons unknown, the brain hemorrhage was ignored by the authorities conducting the investigation of Mr. Mettee’s death."; in addition, he had other drugs such as diazepam in his system which the prosecution does not claim he bought from SR.
> an accusation I would not have considered making about you.
Nor one I would make about you... about your area of expertise, as opposed to the DNMs.
> All of these documents are available from a Google search, from DOJ, "FreeRoss", and Cryptome.
Not all of them. They are all in RECAP, but that seems to be broken tonight and not allowing downloads of any of the Ulbricht filings.