3 ms·

Prosecutors can write whatever fiction they want in a criminal complaint. The false criminal complaint I was once extradited on, for example, was based upon a f

by rabite 12y ago

Prosecutors can write whatever fiction they want in a criminal complaint. The false criminal complaint I was once extradited on, for example, was based upon a fictitious claim that AT&T was headed in New Jersey, when a simple search of SEC Edgar or Wikipedia can verify that it is headquartered in Dallas, Texas. Federal agents have been caught lying multiple times to everyone from the public to Congress, and yet for some reason people still consistently take the garbage they say seriously.

Steko 12y ago
The idea that because some Federal agents have lied therefore we should discount anything all of them say is farcial.
- phaus 12y ago
  I don't think that's what he's suggesting at all. We shouldn't automatically discount their statements, but we should start scrutinizing them very carefully before we make a call.
  - mpyne 12y ago
    Scrutiny is fine, but the "scrutiny" on display in this thread is quite fanciful indeed. It's almost as if people were hoping that FBI is, somehow, someway, wrong, instead of skeptically analyzing the data presented using critical analysis and then following where the evidence leads. E.g. the top comment right now claims that a footnote practically proves FBI employed parallel construction, based on no reasoned argument, and without examining even the possibility that there is a reasonable explanation on the FBI's behalf. So if scrutiny is the byword, let's practice scrutiny. But I'm just seeing advocacy.
tveita 12y ago
He has. Conspiracy to Distribute a Controlled Substance; Attempted Witness Murder; Use of Interstate Commerce Facilities in Commission of Murder-for-Hire; Aiding and Abetting https://ia601904.us.archive.org/1/items/gov.uscourts.mdd.238311/gov.uscourts.mdd.238311.4.0.pdf https://ia601904.us.archive.org/1/items/gov.uscourts.mdd.238...
- tveita 12y ago
  (This was in response to a sentence that has now been edited out that claimed Ulbricht has never been charged for murder for hire.)

by rabite 12y ago

Steko 12y ago

The idea that because some Federal agents have lied therefore we should discount anything all of them say is farcial.

phaus 12y ago
I don't think that's what he's suggesting at all. We shouldn't automatically discount their statements, but we should start scrutinizing them very carefully before we make a call.
- mpyne 12y ago
  Scrutiny is fine, but the "scrutiny" on display in this thread is quite fanciful indeed. It's almost as if people were hoping that FBI is, somehow, someway, wrong, instead of skeptically analyzing the data presented using critical analysis and then following where the evidence leads. E.g. the top comment right now claims that a footnote practically proves FBI employed parallel construction, based on no reasoned argument, and without examining even the possibility that there is a reasonable explanation on the FBI's behalf. So if scrutiny is the byword, let's practice scrutiny. But I'm just seeing advocacy.

tveita 12y ago

He has. Conspiracy to Distribute a Controlled Substance; Attempted Witness Murder; Use of Interstate Commerce Facilities in Commission of Murder-for-Hire; Aiding and Abetting https://ia601904.us.archive.org/1/items/gov.uscourts.mdd.238311/gov.uscourts.mdd.238311.4.0.pdf https://ia601904.us.archive.org/1/items/gov.uscourts.mdd.238...

tveita 12y ago
(This was in response to a sentence that has now been edited out that claimed Ulbricht has never been charged for murder for hire.)