20 ms·

I think his original sentence was absolutely deserved—even though the charge of hiring a contract killer to assassinate his business competition may have been d

I think his original sentence was absolutely deserved—even though the charge of hiring a contract killer to assassinate his business competition may have been dropped, I think it's clear he did many things in the same vein. Even if you support his original pursuit of a free and open online marketplace, I think most people would agree he took it a bridge too far in the end. That said, I do think he absolutely deserved to be released, not because he didn't deserve to be locked up in the first place, but because he's clearly been rehabilitated and has done great work during his time in prison. All that considered, ten years seems like a not unreasonable prison sentence for what he did. I hope he'll continue to do good when he's released.

outside415 2y ago
[flagged]
nadermx 2y ago
What has always sat odd with me regarding this, is we don't truly know the extent of the fbi's corruption in this. They stole, so it's not hard to imagine they planted evidence too.
- mplewis 2y ago
  What evidence would you have even needed to plant? He ran the largest internet drug market and openly tried to assassinate a competitor.
  - TheAmazingRace 2y ago
    Agreed. He willingly engaged with the alleged hitman (which ended up being the FBI contact). He didn't need to do anything or not have the thought to murder others cross his mind.
    - andirk 2y ago
      Allegedly. The 2 rules of his Fight Club were no underage sex stuff and no physical harm. That hitman claim was not part of his charges or sentencing. The heavy sentencing was to like "send a message" the judge said.
      - TheAmazingRace 2y ago
        They weren't part of his sentencing because a different court entirely was pursuing the hit for hire attempt charge, but because another court in NY got the book thrown at him for running the site, they decided to drop it because it didn't seem necessary anymore. In hindsight, the prosecution probably wished they didn't do that, since they are said to have had overwhelming evidence and proof, and there is even a Wired article about chat logs pertaining to DPR seeking services, but those are the breaks! If you don't do your due diligence, criminals can be let off on a technicality too!
        andirk 2y ago
        I haven't looked into the case(s) for years, but prosecutors don't often just drop charges because other charges were found guilty. People get charged even after life sentences have been handed down.
        TheAmazingRace 2y ago
        Perhaps. I can't think of why they ultimately decided not to move forward with it, but here we are.
        buckle8017 2y ago
        They dropped the murder for hire charges because discovery would have.. discovered the FBI doing very very bad things.
        TheAmazingRace 2y ago
        I doubt that's the reason. It could simply be bandwidth reasons as another commenter in the thread implied.
  - nadermx 2y ago
    He never admitted to the attempted murder. So it's not a leap to assume that might of been tainted
    - mplewis 2y ago
      Tainted how?
    - seanw444 2y ago
      But the feds would never attempt shading means of solving a problem that they're being heavily pressured to solve in a timely manner! Don't be a hecking conspiracy theorist.
  - jMyles 2y ago
    > openly tried to assassinate a competitor. Unmitigated nonsense. The evidence that he was involved in this is somewhere between unreliable and nonexistent, and he (and the supposed victim) have disputed it since day one. WTF do you mean "openly"?
    - cbg0 2y ago
      Is this between unreliable and non-existent ? - Log files found on Ulbricht's laptop with entries corresponding to the murder-for-hire events - Bitcoin transaction records showing payments - Messages between DPR and vendors/users about the situations The court found this evidence admissible as: - Direct evidence of the charged offenses - Proof of Ulbricht's role as site administrator - Evidence of Ulbricht's identity as DPR - Demonstration of his willingness to use violence to protect the criminal enterprise The court determined that while prejudicial, the probative value of this evidence outweighed any unfair prejudice, particularly since the government would stipulate no murders actually occurred. The above is summarized from https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-ulbricht-10 https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-ulbricht-10
      - 39x9 2y ago
        Except the government blocked a codefendant from testifying that Ross wasn't the current DPR. The person who set up the fake murder was a Secret Service agent who went to federal prison. The target, Curtis Green, said the alleged diary was suspect. The court also kept out the role of the two convicted federal agents, not to mention 8+ other federal employees who committed crimes or unethical behavior. And an indictment is not proof that the allegations are real or not manipulated. US Attorneys are a deeply amoral group, they don't care about truth or justice, just winning at any cost.
        cbg0 2y ago
        > Except the government blocked a codefendant from testifying that Ross wasn't the current DPR. What is this based on? Can't find this on Google. Also, which fake murder are you talking about? There were 6 alleged murder-for-hire solicitations.
  - plsbenice34 2y ago
    Many people, including myself, do not believe that he really did any of the activity related to the assassination attempts. Demonstrably corrupt law enforcement agents had the opportunity to do it all themselves and it would be typical behaviour for those agencies. He is (and was) politically passionate about non-violence and it would go against everything he stood for. I cannot believe he would do it. What do you mean "openly"?
    - mikeyouse 2y ago
      He wrote about them extensively in his journals - journals he could have disclaimed if they were faked but were obviously not.
      - plsbenice34 2y ago
        I can't say anything about these journals because I cant even remember anything about them. It certainly isn't obvious to me, since the case is incredibly complex and objectively fraught with corruption
- VWWHFSfQ 2y ago
  Ross Ulbricht was not a good person. Full stop. He organized and operated a global criminal drug ring and conspired to have people killed. The only difference between DPR and Pabla Escobar is that DPR was running his drug business in the 2010s instead of the 1980s.
  - dogmatism 2y ago
    wait what? Escobar was responsible for conservatively 4,000 people killed, some at his own hand DPR conspired but didn't actually directly kill anyone Not saying DPR was a good person, but a little perspective is in order
    - adastra22 2y ago
      He did order (and pay for) at least one murder. It just happens that both the victim and the would-be hit man were both informants so they staged the murder. Ross’ argument is that he knew it was fake, but that makes no sense in context. It was right that they dropped the charge because it was quite obviously entrapment. But none of it reflects well on Ross Ulbricht’s character.
      - echoangle 2y ago
        There’s still a difference between ordering a hit and killing 4000 people, some of them yourself.
        adastra22 2y ago
        A difference in scale. I really don't see a meaningful moral difference between murder for hire and doing it yourself.
        echoangle 2y ago
        Ok, but the difference between 4 and 4000 murders is still not insignificant in my opinion.
- potato3732842 2y ago
  I assume that the feds corruption is as bad as it is in every other high profile case case involving fed informants and politically charged topics. Randy Weaver, all the muslims they radicalized and then goaded into doing terrorist things post 9/11, the Michigan Fednapping. It seems like every time these people have a chance to entrap someone they do, but they do it in a "haha, jokes on you we run the system so while this probably would be entrapment if some beat cops did it the court won't find it that way" sort of way. They just can't touch anything without getting it dirty this way and the fact that that is a 30yr pattern at this point depending on how you count speaks volumes IMO. While I'm sure they can solve an interstate murder or interstate fraud or whatever just fine I just don't trust them to handle these sorts of cases. It seems like all of these people they wind up charging probably are questionable people who wanted to do the thing and probably did some other lesser things but they probably would have given up on the big thing if there wasn't a federal agency running around doing all the "the informant says the guy is lamenting not having explosives, quick someone get him some explosives" things in the background.
  - GolfPopper 2y ago
    It took a bit of tracking down, but I finally found an apparently egregious example of this sort of thing I had vaguely remembered: Iraqi citizen and legal US resident Shihab Ahmed Shihab Shihab was sentenced last February to 14 years in prison for his role in an alleged plot to murder George W. Bush, and his involvement in smuggling terrorists into the United States. [1] But his sentencing (after his guilty plea) contains an interesting caveat: lifetime supervised release. Why is a terrorist and would-be assassin of a former President getting lifetime supervised release? None of the media coverage of the case, going back years, makes that clear. However, a footnote in the original criminal complaint against[2] him offers a likely explanation: "In or around the end of March 2022, United States immigration officials conducted an asylum interview with SHIHAB. After the interview was conducted United States immigration officials advised the FBI that SHIHAB may have information regarding an ISIS member that was recently smuggled into the United States." With a little reading between the lines of the criminal complaint, a very different story emerges: Shihab never dealt with any terrorists. He was a paid middleman between two government informants or agents pretending to be terrorists. He took their money, played along, and ratted them out to INS during an asylum interview. After that, once they realized the jig was up, the FBI arrested and charged him at its earliest opportunity - for the plot they had created and paid him to participate in, and which he in turn had informed the government about. 1. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdoh/pr/columbus-man-sentenced-more-14-years-prison-attempting-support-terrorist-plot-murder https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdoh/pr/columbus-man-sentenced-... 2. https://truthout.org/app/uploads/2022/06/Shihab-complaint.pdf https://truthout.org/app/uploads/2022/06/Shihab-complaint.pd...
- lettergram 2y ago
  As part of the FBI conviction they were accused of tampering user logs and taking over accounts. So… literally none of it can be used as evidence imo.
- trhway 2y ago
  >we don't truly know the extent of the fbi's corruption in this the corruption what we do know about already tainted the case to the point that it should have been thrown out. I don't care about Ulbricht, and whether he is guilty of all or some of the charges or innocent. What bothers me in this case is that the government can get away and in particular can get its way in court even with such severe criminal behavior by the government. Rare case when i agree with Trump: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7e0jve875o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7e0jve875o "The scum that worked to convict him were some of the same lunatics who were involved in the modern day weaponization of government against me," Trump said in his post online on Tuesday evening." Trump even personally called Ulbricht mother. I start to wonder whether i have been all that time in blind denial about Trump.
  - wizzwizz4 2y ago
    > A heartbreaking story is currently unfolding that’s sure to have devastating ramifications for years to come. Just moments ago, without any warning, the worst person you know just made a great point. https://clickhole.com/heartbreaking-the-worst-person-you-know-just-made-a-gr-1825121606/ https://clickhole.com/heartbreaking-the-worst-person-you-kno... You shouldn't necessarily change your negative opinion of someone, just because they're right about something. To invoke Godwin's law: Adolf Hitler was a staunch opponent of smoking, in a time when many Allied cultures thought smoking was great, but that doesn't mean you're wrong about him.
    - trhway 2y ago
      imagine if your physical theory of Universe works perfectly for the Universe at all scales, all times, all places except for one small star whose behavior contradicts your theory - that means that your theory at least requires an adjustment and at worst it may be total thrash. Your smoking example doesn't have such contradiction - whether he was anti- or pro-smoker is orthogonal to the rest of the story. On the other hand Trump showing empathy and correcting gross injustice stemming from the gross government corruption doesn't fit well into my perception of Trump and thus seriously challenges it.
daveguy 2y ago
According to Reuters he was found guilty of "charges including distributing drugs through the Internet and conspiring to commit computer hacking and money laundering." In addition to running an illegal market bazaar for 4 years.
- slt2021 2y ago
  - sackler family engineered opioid crisis and went unscathed - hacking is a bogus charge applied to everything touching PCs - money laundering is another victimless crime that very few actual money launderers gets charged with, for some reason
  - daveguy 2y ago
    Yeah, the Sacklers should be in jail too. And you didn't bother to address that he ran a market for illegal goods and services, for some reason.
    - slt2021 2y ago
      >Sacklers should be in jail too. but they didn't, so we can forget about concept of justice.
  - arcticbull 2y ago
    So that means Sackler should be charged, not that Ross should get off lol.
  - foogazi 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - andirk 2y ago
      Case law obsessively cites other case law. So yeah, that's how it works. His trial was a farce and was meant to send a message to others to not, um, do drugs online or something.
LarsDu88 2y ago
People have served more time for selling less drugs and attempting to murder fewer people than Ross Ulbricht did. Just because he was decent with computers does not mean he should be busted out of jail.
- rappatic 2y ago
  What makes you think I support those people being locked up either? Also, afaik Ulbricht didn't sell drugs himself, he simply provided an unmoderated marketplace.
  - arcticbull 2y ago
    Because attempted murder is bad. I didn't think that would be contentious.
    - Nezghul 2y ago
      If the law is unethical then you may be pushed to do "bad" things. For example if you are a Jew living with family in a Nazi Germany and someone know your secret and he feels he need to disclose it to the authorities then you may consider... murdering him. Would you really be a bad guy?
      - arcticbull 2y ago
        The hypothetical is simply a bob and weave. Hiring a contract killer to execute a business rival is clear and unequivocal.
  - tveita 2y ago
    > afaik Ulbricht didn't sell drugs himself FWIW he kickstarted the marketplace by selling shrooms that he grew himself. Hardly the worst he did. Note a certain Trumps position on the issue though: "We're going to be asking everyone who sells drugs, gets caught selling drugs, to receive the death penalty for their heinous acts," https://reason.com/2023/10/24/trump-who-freed-drug-offenders-also-wants-to-kill-them/ https://reason.com/2023/10/24/trump-who-freed-drug-offenders...
bko 2y ago
Ross Ulbricht was not sentenced for murder-for-hire charges. Those allegations were used to deny him bail and influenced public perception, they were not part of his formal conviction or sentencing. He was convicted on non-violent charges related to operating the Silk Road website, including drug distribution, computer hacking, and money laundering. Does this change your opinion of sentencing being well-deserved?
- karlgkk 2y ago
  It does not change my opinion that the sentence was well deserved in the eyes of the law. Those are all things, that independently, can lead to serious jail time. The scale of his operation was also substantial.
  - ekianjo 2y ago
    There are murderers who hardly do more than a few years in prison. He was jailed for much longer than what violent criminals get.
    - gretch 2y ago
      yeah it's a tragedy - those violent criminals should have received more time
      - ekianjo 2y ago
        Yet nobody complaints about that on HN on a daily basis
        cbg0 2y ago
        Calm your whataboutism, folks on HN are not in support of violent criminals doing less time.
    - listenallyall 2y ago
      There are also many murderers who get life. And serve it all. So, it's also true he was jailed for a much shorter time than what violent criminals get. Your comment is negated.
77pt77 2y ago
> has done great work during his time in prison What work?
- sunnybeetroot 2y ago
  He set up an excellent in prison market
  - OccamsMirror 2y ago
    He's known to locate certain things from time to time.
reg_dunlop 2y ago
I'm more interested in the subtext of the pardon. Why this person specifically? And why at this time? Perhaps the discussion shouldn't be about the actual subject of the pardon, and perhaps more about the motives of the pardoner...
- Y_Y 2y ago
  Bitcoin
- orblivion 2y ago
  Trump came to the Libertarian Party convention and specifically promised to free Ross if he got their support. He actually promised a commutation; I wonder why he upgraded to pardon. He also promised a libertarian in his cabinet; oh well. The LP chairwoman has made very interesting political moves this election.
  - mrandish 2y ago
    Yeah, I'm pleased that Ross is out after serving over 10 years, but I wish it had been a commutation. He was guilty. The problem is the judge wildly over sentencing. Ten years served is about right for what he was convicted of.
    - briandear 2y ago
      The problem was the miscarriage of justice.
    - webXL 2y ago
      Guilty of what exactly? Facilitating drug dealing? Something we both know is going to occur whether the nanny state permits it or not. Ross made it safer for those involved, and even those not involved. Inner cities are war zones because drug deals must be done in person. He deserves a full pardon.
jyap 2y ago
His original sentence was life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. So you can’t agree with the original sentence and then say he “absolutely deserved to be released.” Without the chance of parole, a pardon from the president is one of the few ways he could get out of jail.
- rappatic 2y ago
  Good point, you are absolutely correct. Then I suppose life “with the possibility of parole” would have been a more appropriate sentence, though I don’t know if that’s typically given. In any case, I feel prisons ought to release prisoners if they demonstrate exceptional rehabilitation and remorse, as Ross has, though of course that’s a difficult line to draw in practice.
  - ascorbic 2y ago
    Life imprisonment – with or without parole – for a non-violent crime still seems excessive. If they'd convicted him of conspiracy to murder for hiring the hitman then that's a different matter.
    - ty6853 2y ago
      He only allegedly needed to hire a hitman because the government invented the whole blackmail scenario behind it. You can't make this shit up, Silk Road was extra evil because it lead to the government creating hitmen and reasons to use them. We need gangster hoodlums on the street because lookie here sonny, an online marketplace is dangerous and if it isn't dangerous enough well feds will make it that way.
      - Thorrez 2y ago
        >He only allegedly needed to hire a hitman You don't need to hire a hitman when someone blackmails you.
    - rbanffy 2y ago
      The non-violent crime part doesn't work for me. He acted as an enabler to countless violent crimes. That's quite clear.
soulofmischief 2y ago
These two thoughts are incompatible though, aren't they? Politics and shenanigans around the case aside, the original sentence should have taken into account the possibility of rehabilitation. But he got life without parole. That said, it was entrapment and everyone involved should be deeply ashamed and prosecuted. At least those two agents did get some wire fraud charges [0], but the entrapment angle got explored because the charges were dropped. [0] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-federal-agents-charged-bitcoin-money-laundering-and-wire-fraud https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-federal-agents-charged...
- soulofmischief 2y ago
  *never got explored
bdcravens 2y ago
A 10 year prison sentence was apt. He did knowingly break the law (the marketplace defense doesn't really apply, since admins had to create the categories that were obviously illegal). A life sentence was ridiculous, and added punishment for unconvicted crimes, however likely, is a gross violation of constitutional protections.
pmarreck 2y ago
Ross Ulbricht was widely regarded by friends and family as a fundamentally decent and idealistic person—if admittedly naïve about the implications of his actions. Those who knew him personally describe him as thoughtful, intelligent, and motivated by a vision of a freer and more equitable society. His philosophical motivations were rooted in libertarian ideals, particularly the belief that consenting adults should have the right to make decisions about their own lives, including the substances they consume. I just learned that he was an Eagle Scout. Not exactly the résumé of someone getting locked up and the key thrown away.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- GIFtheory 2y ago
  This argument is problematic because it implies that a person from a different background who committed the same crimes (e.g., a poor, black, uneducated person without any fancy philosophical ideals) /should/ be locked up and the key thrown away. It doesn’t work that way. The law applies the same to all, and that’s the way I like it.
  - BoiledCabbage 2y ago
    Seriously, that was pretty blatant "he was one of the good guys like me and so the law shouldn't really punish him, not like one of those other people with different value that should be punished to the full extent."
    - miningape 2y ago
      I mean there's a legal concept of motivation. A murder is sentenced very differently if it's premeditated, or not. The idea of looking at someone's motivations to determine their sentencing is critical to our legal system - otherwise important defences like the "Battered Wife Defence" wouldn't work. I think most of us can also see a difference between a poor person stealing some gloves to stay warm in the winter and a rich person stealing those same gloves for the thrill. The only difference here is you don't like the fact that Ulbricht's motivations were more high minded than your average crack pusher (cough CIA cough) - the judge didn't either - in fact he sentenced him harder for it to make an example of him.
napierzaza 2y ago
[dead]
jMyles 2y ago
> I think it's clear he did many things in the same vein It is clear as mud. We now know: * At least four other people had access to the DPR account, by design. * One of those people (the person whose murder was supposedly ordered, who has vehemently defended Ross!) asserts that he knew that Nob (who we know who was a DEA agent) was one of those four people. * Nob is a serial liar, and is now in prison for having stole some of the bitcoin from this operation. ...what about that make clear that Ross was within a mile of this supposed 'murder for hire' business?
zik 2y ago
They dropped the contract killer charges - it appears that they were fabricated to try to turn public opinion against him and get him jailed. But as soon as they went to trial the charges were dropped for lack of evidence.
- xadhominemx 2y ago
  They were not fabricated although it may have been challenging to secure a conviction and in any event Ross was going to be sentenced to many decades in prison.
  - zik 2y ago
    Do you have a reference which shows they weren't fabricated or is this just your opinion? Because I feel if we know for sure they weren't fabricated they'd have at least proceeded to trial with it. Particularly considering they claimed they posed as hit-men to entrap him, which would be solid evidence. But later they dropped that claim entirely.
    - xadhominemx 2y ago
      I am not Google. There is a lot of information about this case at your fingertips.
offsign 2y ago
"he took it a bridge too far" is a massive trivialization. The guy operated a marketplace for illegal goods in order to enrich himself. The illegality wasn't just incidental, it was literally his business model -- by flouting the law, he enjoyed massive market benefit (minimal competition, lack of regulation, high margins etc) by exploiting the arbitrage that the rest of us follow the rules. Said a different way, he knowingly pursued enormous risk in order to achieve outsized benefits, and ultimately his bet blew up on him -- we shouldn't have bailed him out.
- celticninja 2y ago
  Not sure it was high margin as much as it was low fees on a large number of transactions, coupled with bitcoin appreciation this meant he made a lot of money.
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    It was a very high RoI. The cost to run it was negligible compared to the income it generated.
- ty6853 2y ago
  Trump is a bit of an agorist is well. It's part of the American wild west mythical psyche, to the point America made a sport from moonshine running cars. Not hard for me to see how he half won and walked away with an unconditional pardon.
  - ssl232 2y ago
    > to the point America made a sport from moonshine running cars Huh, is that NASCAR?
    - ty6853 2y ago
      I believe so
    - kortilla 2y ago
bhawks 2y ago
The most prolific drug dealers who sold on silk road have served their sentences and are out of prison. Ross was given a life sentence without possibility of parole an incomparable sentence in relation to all other parties that were involved.
highwaylights 2y ago
I don’t see why he deserves to be released. So many people are in jail for crimes they didn’t commit, or for non-violent offenses that were committed out of hardship and a need to eat. They gave evidence he tried to have someone killed, and that he saw confirmation it had been done. Even if the accusation is somehow false and he didn’t order that killing, how many people did he actually kill just by running Silk Road? I’m so sick of the narrative that aww shucks he’s a good kid from a good family and he just made a boo-boo and didn’t mean to build a multi-billion dollar illicit fortune from trafficking deadly drugs and outright poisons all over the world. If this dude wasn’t a money-raised white kid from California no-one would care.
- Aeolun 2y ago
  He didn’t deserve to be imprisoned that long in the first place, ergo, he deserves to be released. The fact that nearly half the US prison population deserves to be released doesn’t change anything about this guy being deserving too? People generally don’t get locked up for life even if they do kill someone (in civilized countries), as long as they can be rehabilitated.
belter 2y ago
He might even run for President....
Spacemolte 2y ago
What? - whatever nasty stuff happened because of those drugs being distributed and sold still falls back on that guy, and lets be real, some shitty stuff has to have happened with a direct link back to those drugs.
- herbst 2y ago
  This was the first time many people had access to clean drugs in a comfortable way. It's easy to blame him, but the reality is that the alternatives are worse for customers.
627467 2y ago
I personally find it ridiculous that people agree with the sentencing when you compare to sentences for tobacco industry practices, opioid epidemic, etc..
butlike 2y ago
> I think his original sentence was absolutely deserved The original sentence was two life terms. TO be pedantic, it sounds like you meant to say he deserved sentencing, but not the original sentence.

outside415 2y ago

[flagged]

nadermx 2y ago

What has always sat odd with me regarding this, is we don't truly know the extent of the fbi's corruption in this. They stole, so it's not hard to imagine they planted evidence too.

mplewis 2y ago
What evidence would you have even needed to plant? He ran the largest internet drug market and openly tried to assassinate a competitor.
- TheAmazingRace 2y ago
  Agreed. He willingly engaged with the alleged hitman (which ended up being the FBI contact). He didn't need to do anything or not have the thought to murder others cross his mind.
  - andirk 2y ago
    Allegedly. The 2 rules of his Fight Club were no underage sex stuff and no physical harm. That hitman claim was not part of his charges or sentencing. The heavy sentencing was to like "send a message" the judge said.
    - TheAmazingRace 2y ago
      They weren't part of his sentencing because a different court entirely was pursuing the hit for hire attempt charge, but because another court in NY got the book thrown at him for running the site, they decided to drop it because it didn't seem necessary anymore. In hindsight, the prosecution probably wished they didn't do that, since they are said to have had overwhelming evidence and proof, and there is even a Wired article about chat logs pertaining to DPR seeking services, but those are the breaks! If you don't do your due diligence, criminals can be let off on a technicality too!
      - andirk 2y ago
        I haven't looked into the case(s) for years, but prosecutors don't often just drop charges because other charges were found guilty. People get charged even after life sentences have been handed down.
        TheAmazingRace 2y ago
        Perhaps. I can't think of why they ultimately decided not to move forward with it, but here we are.
        buckle8017 2y ago
        They dropped the murder for hire charges because discovery would have.. discovered the FBI doing very very bad things.
        TheAmazingRace 2y ago
        I doubt that's the reason. It could simply be bandwidth reasons as another commenter in the thread implied.
- nadermx 2y ago
  He never admitted to the attempted murder. So it's not a leap to assume that might of been tainted
  - mplewis 2y ago
    Tainted how?
  - seanw444 2y ago
    But the feds would never attempt shading means of solving a problem that they're being heavily pressured to solve in a timely manner! Don't be a hecking conspiracy theorist.
- jMyles 2y ago
  > openly tried to assassinate a competitor. Unmitigated nonsense. The evidence that he was involved in this is somewhere between unreliable and nonexistent, and he (and the supposed victim) have disputed it since day one. WTF do you mean "openly"?
  - cbg0 2y ago
    Is this between unreliable and non-existent ? - Log files found on Ulbricht's laptop with entries corresponding to the murder-for-hire events - Bitcoin transaction records showing payments - Messages between DPR and vendors/users about the situations The court found this evidence admissible as: - Direct evidence of the charged offenses - Proof of Ulbricht's role as site administrator - Evidence of Ulbricht's identity as DPR - Demonstration of his willingness to use violence to protect the criminal enterprise The court determined that while prejudicial, the probative value of this evidence outweighed any unfair prejudice, particularly since the government would stipulate no murders actually occurred. The above is summarized from https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-ulbricht-10 https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-ulbricht-10
    - 39x9 2y ago
      Except the government blocked a codefendant from testifying that Ross wasn't the current DPR. The person who set up the fake murder was a Secret Service agent who went to federal prison. The target, Curtis Green, said the alleged diary was suspect. The court also kept out the role of the two convicted federal agents, not to mention 8+ other federal employees who committed crimes or unethical behavior. And an indictment is not proof that the allegations are real or not manipulated. US Attorneys are a deeply amoral group, they don't care about truth or justice, just winning at any cost.
      - cbg0 2y ago
        > Except the government blocked a codefendant from testifying that Ross wasn't the current DPR. What is this based on? Can't find this on Google. Also, which fake murder are you talking about? There were 6 alleged murder-for-hire solicitations.
- plsbenice34 2y ago
  Many people, including myself, do not believe that he really did any of the activity related to the assassination attempts. Demonstrably corrupt law enforcement agents had the opportunity to do it all themselves and it would be typical behaviour for those agencies. He is (and was) politically passionate about non-violence and it would go against everything he stood for. I cannot believe he would do it. What do you mean "openly"?
  - mikeyouse 2y ago
    He wrote about them extensively in his journals - journals he could have disclaimed if they were faked but were obviously not.
    - plsbenice34 2y ago
      I can't say anything about these journals because I cant even remember anything about them. It certainly isn't obvious to me, since the case is incredibly complex and objectively fraught with corruption
VWWHFSfQ 2y ago
Ross Ulbricht was not a good person. Full stop. He organized and operated a global criminal drug ring and conspired to have people killed. The only difference between DPR and Pabla Escobar is that DPR was running his drug business in the 2010s instead of the 1980s.
- dogmatism 2y ago
  wait what? Escobar was responsible for conservatively 4,000 people killed, some at his own hand DPR conspired but didn't actually directly kill anyone Not saying DPR was a good person, but a little perspective is in order
  - adastra22 2y ago
    He did order (and pay for) at least one murder. It just happens that both the victim and the would-be hit man were both informants so they staged the murder. Ross’ argument is that he knew it was fake, but that makes no sense in context. It was right that they dropped the charge because it was quite obviously entrapment. But none of it reflects well on Ross Ulbricht’s character.
    - echoangle 2y ago
      There’s still a difference between ordering a hit and killing 4000 people, some of them yourself.
      - adastra22 2y ago
        A difference in scale. I really don't see a meaningful moral difference between murder for hire and doing it yourself.
        echoangle 2y ago
        Ok, but the difference between 4 and 4000 murders is still not insignificant in my opinion.
potato3732842 2y ago
I assume that the feds corruption is as bad as it is in every other high profile case case involving fed informants and politically charged topics. Randy Weaver, all the muslims they radicalized and then goaded into doing terrorist things post 9/11, the Michigan Fednapping. It seems like every time these people have a chance to entrap someone they do, but they do it in a "haha, jokes on you we run the system so while this probably would be entrapment if some beat cops did it the court won't find it that way" sort of way. They just can't touch anything without getting it dirty this way and the fact that that is a 30yr pattern at this point depending on how you count speaks volumes IMO. While I'm sure they can solve an interstate murder or interstate fraud or whatever just fine I just don't trust them to handle these sorts of cases. It seems like all of these people they wind up charging probably are questionable people who wanted to do the thing and probably did some other lesser things but they probably would have given up on the big thing if there wasn't a federal agency running around doing all the "the informant says the guy is lamenting not having explosives, quick someone get him some explosives" things in the background.
- GolfPopper 2y ago
  It took a bit of tracking down, but I finally found an apparently egregious example of this sort of thing I had vaguely remembered: Iraqi citizen and legal US resident Shihab Ahmed Shihab Shihab was sentenced last February to 14 years in prison for his role in an alleged plot to murder George W. Bush, and his involvement in smuggling terrorists into the United States. [1] But his sentencing (after his guilty plea) contains an interesting caveat: lifetime supervised release. Why is a terrorist and would-be assassin of a former President getting lifetime supervised release? None of the media coverage of the case, going back years, makes that clear. However, a footnote in the original criminal complaint against[2] him offers a likely explanation: "In or around the end of March 2022, United States immigration officials conducted an asylum interview with SHIHAB. After the interview was conducted United States immigration officials advised the FBI that SHIHAB may have information regarding an ISIS member that was recently smuggled into the United States." With a little reading between the lines of the criminal complaint, a very different story emerges: Shihab never dealt with any terrorists. He was a paid middleman between two government informants or agents pretending to be terrorists. He took their money, played along, and ratted them out to INS during an asylum interview. After that, once they realized the jig was up, the FBI arrested and charged him at its earliest opportunity - for the plot they had created and paid him to participate in, and which he in turn had informed the government about. 1. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdoh/pr/columbus-man-sentenced-more-14-years-prison-attempting-support-terrorist-plot-murder https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdoh/pr/columbus-man-sentenced-... 2. https://truthout.org/app/uploads/2022/06/Shihab-complaint.pdf https://truthout.org/app/uploads/2022/06/Shihab-complaint.pd...
lettergram 2y ago
As part of the FBI conviction they were accused of tampering user logs and taking over accounts. So… literally none of it can be used as evidence imo.
trhway 2y ago
>we don't truly know the extent of the fbi's corruption in this the corruption what we do know about already tainted the case to the point that it should have been thrown out. I don't care about Ulbricht, and whether he is guilty of all or some of the charges or innocent. What bothers me in this case is that the government can get away and in particular can get its way in court even with such severe criminal behavior by the government. Rare case when i agree with Trump: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7e0jve875o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7e0jve875o "The scum that worked to convict him were some of the same lunatics who were involved in the modern day weaponization of government against me," Trump said in his post online on Tuesday evening." Trump even personally called Ulbricht mother. I start to wonder whether i have been all that time in blind denial about Trump.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  > A heartbreaking story is currently unfolding that’s sure to have devastating ramifications for years to come. Just moments ago, without any warning, the worst person you know just made a great point. https://clickhole.com/heartbreaking-the-worst-person-you-know-just-made-a-gr-1825121606/ https://clickhole.com/heartbreaking-the-worst-person-you-kno... You shouldn't necessarily change your negative opinion of someone, just because they're right about something. To invoke Godwin's law: Adolf Hitler was a staunch opponent of smoking, in a time when many Allied cultures thought smoking was great, but that doesn't mean you're wrong about him.
  - trhway 2y ago
    imagine if your physical theory of Universe works perfectly for the Universe at all scales, all times, all places except for one small star whose behavior contradicts your theory - that means that your theory at least requires an adjustment and at worst it may be total thrash. Your smoking example doesn't have such contradiction - whether he was anti- or pro-smoker is orthogonal to the rest of the story. On the other hand Trump showing empathy and correcting gross injustice stemming from the gross government corruption doesn't fit well into my perception of Trump and thus seriously challenges it.

daveguy 2y ago

According to Reuters he was found guilty of "charges including distributing drugs through the Internet and conspiring to commit computer hacking and money laundering." In addition to running an illegal market bazaar for 4 years.

slt2021 2y ago
- sackler family engineered opioid crisis and went unscathed - hacking is a bogus charge applied to everything touching PCs - money laundering is another victimless crime that very few actual money launderers gets charged with, for some reason
- daveguy 2y ago
  Yeah, the Sacklers should be in jail too. And you didn't bother to address that he ran a market for illegal goods and services, for some reason.
  - slt2021 2y ago
    >Sacklers should be in jail too. but they didn't, so we can forget about concept of justice.
- arcticbull 2y ago
  So that means Sackler should be charged, not that Ross should get off lol.
- foogazi 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - andirk 2y ago
    Case law obsessively cites other case law. So yeah, that's how it works. His trial was a farce and was meant to send a message to others to not, um, do drugs online or something.

LarsDu88 2y ago

People have served more time for selling less drugs and attempting to murder fewer people than Ross Ulbricht did. Just because he was decent with computers does not mean he should be busted out of jail.

rappatic 2y ago
What makes you think I support those people being locked up either? Also, afaik Ulbricht didn't sell drugs himself, he simply provided an unmoderated marketplace.
- arcticbull 2y ago
  Because attempted murder is bad. I didn't think that would be contentious.
  - Nezghul 2y ago
    If the law is unethical then you may be pushed to do "bad" things. For example if you are a Jew living with family in a Nazi Germany and someone know your secret and he feels he need to disclose it to the authorities then you may consider... murdering him. Would you really be a bad guy?
    - arcticbull 2y ago
      The hypothetical is simply a bob and weave. Hiring a contract killer to execute a business rival is clear and unequivocal.
- tveita 2y ago
  > afaik Ulbricht didn't sell drugs himself FWIW he kickstarted the marketplace by selling shrooms that he grew himself. Hardly the worst he did. Note a certain Trumps position on the issue though: "We're going to be asking everyone who sells drugs, gets caught selling drugs, to receive the death penalty for their heinous acts," https://reason.com/2023/10/24/trump-who-freed-drug-offenders-also-wants-to-kill-them/ https://reason.com/2023/10/24/trump-who-freed-drug-offenders...

bko 2y ago

Ross Ulbricht was not sentenced for murder-for-hire charges. Those allegations were used to deny him bail and influenced public perception, they were not part of his formal conviction or sentencing. He was convicted on non-violent charges related to operating the Silk Road website, including drug distribution, computer hacking, and money laundering. Does this change your opinion of sentencing being well-deserved?

karlgkk 2y ago
It does not change my opinion that the sentence was well deserved in the eyes of the law. Those are all things, that independently, can lead to serious jail time. The scale of his operation was also substantial.
- ekianjo 2y ago
  There are murderers who hardly do more than a few years in prison. He was jailed for much longer than what violent criminals get.
  - gretch 2y ago
    yeah it's a tragedy - those violent criminals should have received more time
    - ekianjo 2y ago
      Yet nobody complaints about that on HN on a daily basis
      - cbg0 2y ago
        Calm your whataboutism, folks on HN are not in support of violent criminals doing less time.
  - listenallyall 2y ago
    There are also many murderers who get life. And serve it all. So, it's also true he was jailed for a much shorter time than what violent criminals get. Your comment is negated.

77pt77 2y ago

> has done great work during his time in prison What work?

sunnybeetroot 2y ago
He set up an excellent in prison market
- OccamsMirror 2y ago
  He's known to locate certain things from time to time.

reg_dunlop 2y ago

I'm more interested in the subtext of the pardon. Why this person specifically? And why at this time? Perhaps the discussion shouldn't be about the actual subject of the pardon, and perhaps more about the motives of the pardoner...

Y_Y 2y ago
Bitcoin
orblivion 2y ago
Trump came to the Libertarian Party convention and specifically promised to free Ross if he got their support. He actually promised a commutation; I wonder why he upgraded to pardon. He also promised a libertarian in his cabinet; oh well. The LP chairwoman has made very interesting political moves this election.
- mrandish 2y ago
  Yeah, I'm pleased that Ross is out after serving over 10 years, but I wish it had been a commutation. He was guilty. The problem is the judge wildly over sentencing. Ten years served is about right for what he was convicted of.
  - briandear 2y ago
    The problem was the miscarriage of justice.
  - webXL 2y ago
    Guilty of what exactly? Facilitating drug dealing? Something we both know is going to occur whether the nanny state permits it or not. Ross made it safer for those involved, and even those not involved. Inner cities are war zones because drug deals must be done in person. He deserves a full pardon.

jyap 2y ago

His original sentence was life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. So you can’t agree with the original sentence and then say he “absolutely deserved to be released.” Without the chance of parole, a pardon from the president is one of the few ways he could get out of jail.

rappatic 2y ago
Good point, you are absolutely correct. Then I suppose life “with the possibility of parole” would have been a more appropriate sentence, though I don’t know if that’s typically given. In any case, I feel prisons ought to release prisoners if they demonstrate exceptional rehabilitation and remorse, as Ross has, though of course that’s a difficult line to draw in practice.
- ascorbic 2y ago
  Life imprisonment – with or without parole – for a non-violent crime still seems excessive. If they'd convicted him of conspiracy to murder for hiring the hitman then that's a different matter.
  - ty6853 2y ago
    He only allegedly needed to hire a hitman because the government invented the whole blackmail scenario behind it. You can't make this shit up, Silk Road was extra evil because it lead to the government creating hitmen and reasons to use them. We need gangster hoodlums on the street because lookie here sonny, an online marketplace is dangerous and if it isn't dangerous enough well feds will make it that way.
    - Thorrez 2y ago
      >He only allegedly needed to hire a hitman You don't need to hire a hitman when someone blackmails you.
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    The non-violent crime part doesn't work for me. He acted as an enabler to countless violent crimes. That's quite clear.

soulofmischief 2y ago

These two thoughts are incompatible though, aren't they? Politics and shenanigans around the case aside, the original sentence should have taken into account the possibility of rehabilitation. But he got life without parole. That said, it was entrapment and everyone involved should be deeply ashamed and prosecuted. At least those two agents did get some wire fraud charges [0], but the entrapment angle got explored because the charges were dropped. [0] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-federal-agents-charged-bitcoin-money-laundering-and-wire-fraud https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-federal-agents-charged...

soulofmischief 2y ago
*never got explored

bdcravens 2y ago

A 10 year prison sentence was apt. He did knowingly break the law (the marketplace defense doesn't really apply, since admins had to create the categories that were obviously illegal). A life sentence was ridiculous, and added punishment for unconvicted crimes, however likely, is a gross violation of constitutional protections.

pmarreck 2y ago

Ross Ulbricht was widely regarded by friends and family as a fundamentally decent and idealistic person—if admittedly naïve about the implications of his actions. Those who knew him personally describe him as thoughtful, intelligent, and motivated by a vision of a freer and more equitable society. His philosophical motivations were rooted in libertarian ideals, particularly the belief that consenting adults should have the right to make decisions about their own lives, including the substances they consume. I just learned that he was an Eagle Scout. Not exactly the résumé of someone getting locked up and the key thrown away.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
GIFtheory 2y ago
This argument is problematic because it implies that a person from a different background who committed the same crimes (e.g., a poor, black, uneducated person without any fancy philosophical ideals) /should/ be locked up and the key thrown away. It doesn’t work that way. The law applies the same to all, and that’s the way I like it.
- BoiledCabbage 2y ago
  Seriously, that was pretty blatant "he was one of the good guys like me and so the law shouldn't really punish him, not like one of those other people with different value that should be punished to the full extent."
  - miningape 2y ago
    I mean there's a legal concept of motivation. A murder is sentenced very differently if it's premeditated, or not. The idea of looking at someone's motivations to determine their sentencing is critical to our legal system - otherwise important defences like the "Battered Wife Defence" wouldn't work. I think most of us can also see a difference between a poor person stealing some gloves to stay warm in the winter and a rich person stealing those same gloves for the thrill. The only difference here is you don't like the fact that Ulbricht's motivations were more high minded than your average crack pusher (cough CIA cough) - the judge didn't either - in fact he sentenced him harder for it to make an example of him.

napierzaza 2y ago

[dead]

jMyles 2y ago

> I think it's clear he did many things in the same vein It is clear as mud. We now know: * At least four other people had access to the DPR account, by design. * One of those people (the person whose murder was supposedly ordered, who has vehemently defended Ross!) asserts that he knew that Nob (who we know who was a DEA agent) was one of those four people. * Nob is a serial liar, and is now in prison for having stole some of the bitcoin from this operation. ...what about that make clear that Ross was within a mile of this supposed 'murder for hire' business?

zik 2y ago

They dropped the contract killer charges - it appears that they were fabricated to try to turn public opinion against him and get him jailed. But as soon as they went to trial the charges were dropped for lack of evidence.

xadhominemx 2y ago
They were not fabricated although it may have been challenging to secure a conviction and in any event Ross was going to be sentenced to many decades in prison.
- zik 2y ago
  Do you have a reference which shows they weren't fabricated or is this just your opinion? Because I feel if we know for sure they weren't fabricated they'd have at least proceeded to trial with it. Particularly considering they claimed they posed as hit-men to entrap him, which would be solid evidence. But later they dropped that claim entirely.
  - xadhominemx 2y ago
    I am not Google. There is a lot of information about this case at your fingertips.

offsign 2y ago

"he took it a bridge too far" is a massive trivialization. The guy operated a marketplace for illegal goods in order to enrich himself. The illegality wasn't just incidental, it was literally his business model -- by flouting the law, he enjoyed massive market benefit (minimal competition, lack of regulation, high margins etc) by exploiting the arbitrage that the rest of us follow the rules. Said a different way, he knowingly pursued enormous risk in order to achieve outsized benefits, and ultimately his bet blew up on him -- we shouldn't have bailed him out.

celticninja 2y ago
Not sure it was high margin as much as it was low fees on a large number of transactions, coupled with bitcoin appreciation this meant he made a lot of money.
- rbanffy 2y ago
  It was a very high RoI. The cost to run it was negligible compared to the income it generated.
ty6853 2y ago
Trump is a bit of an agorist is well. It's part of the American wild west mythical psyche, to the point America made a sport from moonshine running cars. Not hard for me to see how he half won and walked away with an unconditional pardon.
- ssl232 2y ago
  > to the point America made a sport from moonshine running cars Huh, is that NASCAR?
  - ty6853 2y ago
    I believe so
  - kortilla 2y ago

bhawks 2y ago

The most prolific drug dealers who sold on silk road have served their sentences and are out of prison. Ross was given a life sentence without possibility of parole an incomparable sentence in relation to all other parties that were involved.

highwaylights 2y ago

I don’t see why he deserves to be released. So many people are in jail for crimes they didn’t commit, or for non-violent offenses that were committed out of hardship and a need to eat. They gave evidence he tried to have someone killed, and that he saw confirmation it had been done. Even if the accusation is somehow false and he didn’t order that killing, how many people did he actually kill just by running Silk Road? I’m so sick of the narrative that aww shucks he’s a good kid from a good family and he just made a boo-boo and didn’t mean to build a multi-billion dollar illicit fortune from trafficking deadly drugs and outright poisons all over the world. If this dude wasn’t a money-raised white kid from California no-one would care.

Aeolun 2y ago
He didn’t deserve to be imprisoned that long in the first place, ergo, he deserves to be released. The fact that nearly half the US prison population deserves to be released doesn’t change anything about this guy being deserving too? People generally don’t get locked up for life even if they do kill someone (in civilized countries), as long as they can be rehabilitated.

belter 2y ago

He might even run for President....

Spacemolte 2y ago

What? - whatever nasty stuff happened because of those drugs being distributed and sold still falls back on that guy, and lets be real, some shitty stuff has to have happened with a direct link back to those drugs.

herbst 2y ago
This was the first time many people had access to clean drugs in a comfortable way. It's easy to blame him, but the reality is that the alternatives are worse for customers.

627467 2y ago

I personally find it ridiculous that people agree with the sentencing when you compare to sentences for tobacco industry practices, opioid epidemic, etc..

butlike 2y ago

> I think his original sentence was absolutely deserved The original sentence was two life terms. TO be pedantic, it sounds like you meant to say he deserved sentencing, but not the original sentence.