5 ms·

> He was never prosecuted for causing harm or bodily injury and no victim was named at trial. didn't he pay for a would-have-been hit to get somebody killed b

> He was never prosecuted for causing harm or bodily injury and no victim was named at trial. didn't he pay for a would-have-been hit to get somebody killed but it was actually an FBI agent (aka he got set up and fell for the trap)? > Ross was not convicted of selling drugs or illegal items himself, but was held responsible for what others sold on the site. isn't that arguably worse? he helped people in a lot of countries break the law (created a place where illegal sales can be facilitated) it isn't like he moderated them off the platform. it was almost exclusively the entire purpose of the platform. Judge : Unfortunately for you, the line you crossed was real and the plants you brought with you were illegal, so your bail is twenty thousand dollars. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0221027/characters/nm0528147 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0221027/characters/nm0528147

CommitSyn 4y ago
He was never prosecuted for it. AFAIK they didn't even really bring it up.
- xapata 4y ago
  Isn't that a common theme for certain kinds of criminals? I remember reading that organized crime bosses are often prosecuted for tax fraud rather than the violent crimes they're also (presumed) guilty of.
- adastra22 4y ago
  It was a major factor in sentencing, which is the issue at stake here.
  - CommitSyn 4y ago
    I guess I have to look into it more, because I didn't think you could be sentenced for something you weren't convicted of.
    - adastra22 4y ago
      He wasn’t sentenced for it, but rather it was mentioned as the reason for the maximum punishment being doled out for the nonviolent crimes he was convicted of. Which, yes, is still extremely suspect because he never got his day in court to address that allegation, and I think his appeals are based more on altering that prejudicial sentencing rather than the conviction itself.
SamPatt 4y ago
>didn't he pay for a would-have-been hit to get somebody killed but it was actually an FBI agent (aka he got set up and fell for the trap)? I don't know, did he? The government dropped those charges, and then when his defense team tried to present evidence defending him from those allegations (note that two federal agents eventually went to jail for their corruption during this case) the judge wouldn't allow them to present their evidence. Basically, he never got a chance to defend himself from that allegation. Yet it was used at his sentencing to show he deserved life in prison (for non-violent crimes).
- mike_d 4y ago
  > for non-violent crimes I get that a lot of people like to smoke weed and maybe do mushrooms at Coachella, but not all drugs are the same. Silkroad and other darknet markets sell everything from date rape drugs to fentanyl. Framing it as facilitating a harmless or victimless crime is disingenuous. Not to mention the ancillary services that often pop up like counterfeit documents, money laundering services, guides and tools for scamming people, and other crap.
  - SamPatt 4y ago
    Silk Road had rules against selling certain things, which included tools for fraud. Drugs shouldn't be illegal. Prohibition has always failed. Regardless, he didn't commit violence. The distinction between violent and non-violent crime is a meaningful one, and I strongly oppose his life sentencing.
    - 988747 4y ago
      [dead]
    - mike_d 4y ago
      > The distinction between violent and non-violent crime is a meaningful one Consider someone who knowingly brokered a sale of baby formula that they knew was tainted with rat poison and killed dozens of children, would you consider that a non-violent crime that deserves leniency in sentencing?
Genbox 4y ago
> isn't that arguably worse? he helped people in a lot of countries break the law (created a place where illegal sales can be facilitated) The logic is not sound. 1. If someone started selling drugs using someones GitHub/GitLab issue tracker, would the project owner be accountable? I understand that Ross was likely well aware about the drug sales on his website, but saying someone is facilitating the activities because they own the place is not a great argument in isolation. 2. What is illigal is very different different from country to country. A majority of the sales on Silk Road was marihuana, which is now legal in a 21 US states and decriminalized in 10 others. There are countries where it has never been illigal. Personal posession of AR-15 is legal in the USA, but illigal in a lot of other countries. Suffice to say that it is pretty subjective.

CommitSyn 4y ago

He was never prosecuted for it. AFAIK they didn't even really bring it up.

xapata 4y ago
Isn't that a common theme for certain kinds of criminals? I remember reading that organized crime bosses are often prosecuted for tax fraud rather than the violent crimes they're also (presumed) guilty of.
adastra22 4y ago
It was a major factor in sentencing, which is the issue at stake here.
- CommitSyn 4y ago
  I guess I have to look into it more, because I didn't think you could be sentenced for something you weren't convicted of.
  - adastra22 4y ago
    He wasn’t sentenced for it, but rather it was mentioned as the reason for the maximum punishment being doled out for the nonviolent crimes he was convicted of. Which, yes, is still extremely suspect because he never got his day in court to address that allegation, and I think his appeals are based more on altering that prejudicial sentencing rather than the conviction itself.

SamPatt 4y ago

>didn't he pay for a would-have-been hit to get somebody killed but it was actually an FBI agent (aka he got set up and fell for the trap)? I don't know, did he? The government dropped those charges, and then when his defense team tried to present evidence defending him from those allegations (note that two federal agents eventually went to jail for their corruption during this case) the judge wouldn't allow them to present their evidence. Basically, he never got a chance to defend himself from that allegation. Yet it was used at his sentencing to show he deserved life in prison (for non-violent crimes).

mike_d 4y ago
> for non-violent crimes I get that a lot of people like to smoke weed and maybe do mushrooms at Coachella, but not all drugs are the same. Silkroad and other darknet markets sell everything from date rape drugs to fentanyl. Framing it as facilitating a harmless or victimless crime is disingenuous. Not to mention the ancillary services that often pop up like counterfeit documents, money laundering services, guides and tools for scamming people, and other crap.
- SamPatt 4y ago
  Silk Road had rules against selling certain things, which included tools for fraud. Drugs shouldn't be illegal. Prohibition has always failed. Regardless, he didn't commit violence. The distinction between violent and non-violent crime is a meaningful one, and I strongly oppose his life sentencing.
  - 988747 4y ago
    [dead]
  - mike_d 4y ago
    > The distinction between violent and non-violent crime is a meaningful one Consider someone who knowingly brokered a sale of baby formula that they knew was tainted with rat poison and killed dozens of children, would you consider that a non-violent crime that deserves leniency in sentencing?

Genbox 4y ago

> isn't that arguably worse? he helped people in a lot of countries break the law (created a place where illegal sales can be facilitated) The logic is not sound. 1. If someone started selling drugs using someones GitHub/GitLab issue tracker, would the project owner be accountable? I understand that Ross was likely well aware about the drug sales on his website, but saying someone is facilitating the activities because they own the place is not a great argument in isolation. 2. What is illigal is very different different from country to country. A majority of the sales on Silk Road was marihuana, which is now legal in a 21 US states and decriminalized in 10 others. There are countries where it has never been illigal. Personal posession of AR-15 is legal in the USA, but illigal in a lot of other countries. Suffice to say that it is pretty subjective.