4 ms·

The murder for hire charges were dropped. No evidence of them was shown in court. Because they knew they couldn't win on that one.

• tptacek 9y ago
  This is simply false, and moreover, false in each of its particulars. First: as the appeal opinion clearly states, there's still an open case against Ulbricht for the Force-related murder-for-hire scheme in Maryland. The charges have not been dropped. Second, evidence of the murder-for-hire charges was presented in court. It was an element of the conspiracy charge. Not only was it presented, but it was presented in a way that Ulbricht's defense was obligated to rebut it. Finally, the murder charges were presented again during sentencing, and proven to a "preponderance of evidence" standard during that process as well. These details are all spelled out in the appeals decision.
  • 2845197541 9y ago
    I thought they couldn't even prove that the people to be murdered even existed.
    • tptacek 9y ago
      They don't have to. In federal law (and in several states), you're guilty of attempt if prosecutors can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you had the intent to commit a crime, and took some substantial step towards it. They've more than cleared that bar here.
      • Mtinie 9y ago
        Even if there is no actual target? For example: Is the rational that if I earnestly believed I was planning on murdering someone who I thought existed, that it is the lead up and consideration that is the crime, rather than the actual attempt (which could never happen)?
        • tptacek 9y ago
          Yes. That's why we have a crime of "attempt". You do not need to have a likelihood of success; it only needs to be proven that you did intend, and that you took substantial steps. Ulbricht spent more money on these crimes than most people earn in 10 years.