6 ms·

I mean, didn't he end up paying a DEA agent to murder someone?

morogop 8y ago
Yes, but HN likes to pretend that he's a hero, because he's a white guy who got rich while doing a mix of harmless things that should be legal, and attempting to have people murdered.
beaner 8y ago
Can't tell if this is some kind of recursive sarcasm, but this is literally the point being debated. Are you even paying attention??
- vkou 8y ago
  There there was a lot of police impropriety surrounding it does not mean the case has no merit. It is quite possible for: 1. Billy to commit a crime. 2. The police to completely bungle their investigation. 3. Billy to be found not guilty, because of #2. As a result: The case against Billy has merit, because he actually did it (See #1). Also, he did it (See #1). But he should be found not guilty (See #2). I mean, does anyone seriously dispute that Ross paid an undercover agent to murder someone? What's under dispute is whether or not the police behaved properly in this case (Which can sometimes be enough to throw out a conviction).
  - CPLX 8y ago
    > does anyone seriously dispute that Ross paid an undercover agent to murder someone Yes at least one person does, the defendant. And given that the investigating officers were -- literally -- criminals, it's not a stretch to say there's the possibility of reasonable doubt here. Someone willing to fabricate stories about stolen bitcoins could be considered likely to have fabricated other things too.
    - vkou 8y ago
      Ross doesn't deny sending the messages where he ordered the hit. He has a marvelous, fantastic story for why he sent them, where he claims that he knew for a certainty that he was not actually ordering a 'real' hit, yet still wired hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bitcoin to the assassin. It's about as plausible as 'This pound of cocaine, along with a stolen 9mm handgun fell from the sky, right into my person, your honor, I swear they aren't mine.' There's possibility, with all the police misconduct, for him to claim something similar to the 'fruit of the poisoned tree', which might hypothetically. get the conviction thrown out. But its pretty much a certainty that he ran a drug marketplace, and tried to assassinate someone.
- baseballdork 8y ago
  No sarcasm, just wondering how you get to "no merit" from "paying someone to kill someone else" for a murder-for-hire charge...
tptacek 8y ago
Yes, he did.
- ddtaylor 8y ago
  That's what he was accused of, but since he never got a trial on that matter why do you assume it happened?
  - tptacek 8y ago
    No, he was tried on that matter: the murder-for-hire scheme was a predicate for the conspiracy charge he was eventually convicted for.
    - ddtaylor 8y ago
      Where does it say he was convicted of murder for hire? Isn't this story about the charges which were dropped?
      - tptacek 8y ago
        I think you're commenting about Ulbricht's case without having read the actual indictment. It's easy to find and read; you should go do that.

Yes, but HN likes to pretend that he's a hero, because he's a white guy who got rich while doing a mix of harmless things that should be legal, and attempting to have people murdered.

beaner 8y ago

Can't tell if this is some kind of recursive sarcasm, but this is literally the point being debated. Are you even paying attention??

vkou 8y ago
There there was a lot of police impropriety surrounding it does not mean the case has no merit. It is quite possible for: 1. Billy to commit a crime. 2. The police to completely bungle their investigation. 3. Billy to be found not guilty, because of #2. As a result: The case against Billy has merit, because he actually did it (See #1). Also, he did it (See #1). But he should be found not guilty (See #2). I mean, does anyone seriously dispute that Ross paid an undercover agent to murder someone? What's under dispute is whether or not the police behaved properly in this case (Which can sometimes be enough to throw out a conviction).
- CPLX 8y ago
  > does anyone seriously dispute that Ross paid an undercover agent to murder someone Yes at least one person does, the defendant. And given that the investigating officers were -- literally -- criminals, it's not a stretch to say there's the possibility of reasonable doubt here. Someone willing to fabricate stories about stolen bitcoins could be considered likely to have fabricated other things too.
  - vkou 8y ago
    Ross doesn't deny sending the messages where he ordered the hit. He has a marvelous, fantastic story for why he sent them, where he claims that he knew for a certainty that he was not actually ordering a 'real' hit, yet still wired hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bitcoin to the assassin. It's about as plausible as 'This pound of cocaine, along with a stolen 9mm handgun fell from the sky, right into my person, your honor, I swear they aren't mine.' There's possibility, with all the police misconduct, for him to claim something similar to the 'fruit of the poisoned tree', which might hypothetically. get the conviction thrown out. But its pretty much a certainty that he ran a drug marketplace, and tried to assassinate someone.
baseballdork 8y ago
No sarcasm, just wondering how you get to "no merit" from "paying someone to kill someone else" for a murder-for-hire charge...

tptacek 8y ago

Yes, he did.

ddtaylor 8y ago
That's what he was accused of, but since he never got a trial on that matter why do you assume it happened?
- tptacek 8y ago
  No, he was tried on that matter: the murder-for-hire scheme was a predicate for the conspiracy charge he was eventually convicted for.
  - ddtaylor 8y ago
    Where does it say he was convicted of murder for hire? Isn't this story about the charges which were dropped?
    - tptacek 8y ago
      I think you're commenting about Ulbricht's case without having read the actual indictment. It's easy to find and read; you should go do that.