4 ms·

Is this grounds to give Ulbricht a new trial?

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
DaveWalk 11y ago
IANAL, but from what I remember of the Wired reporting the evidence and involvement of this officer was left out of the prosecution.
- fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
  There was an earlier plea for a new trial and claims of a Brady violation (withholding this? evidence) that was denied. But the prosecutors' letter to the judge for sentencing was peppered with comments alluding to the alleged murder plots, which are directly related to the work done on the case by agents Force and Bridges. http://cryptome.org/2015/05/ulbricht-256.pdf http://cryptome.org/2015/05/ulbricht-256.pdf
gamblor956 11y ago
No. Ulbricht was charged in multiple jurisdictions for multiple crimes. Force was not involved in the trial in which Ulbricht was convicted, and the murder-for-hire charges were not brought up during the trial. The murder-for-hire charges were brought up during the sentencing phase (after guilt was adjudicated). Normally, judges generally use the Federal Sentencing Guidelines to determine the length of a federal prison sentence, so that sentences are "normalized" across crimes and defendants. (The Guidelines are no longer mandatory, after the 2005 Booker case.) Judges will also consider evidence calling for a reduced (or extended) sentence than the Guidelines would impose. In this case, the Guidelines called for life imprisonment. The murder-for-hire charges were introduced at the sentencing hearings to counter evidence provided of Ulbricht's good character. Even if the murder-for-hire charges had not been brought up at sentencing, Ulbricht still faced life in prison. Bringing them up in sentencing merely sealed his fate.
- fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
  >No. Ulbricht was charged in multiple jurisdictions for multiple crimes. So you keep saying. >The murder-for-hire charges were brought up during the sentencing phase (after guilt was adjudicated). Guilt of crimes which according to you are not related. >The murder-for-hire charges were introduced at the sentencing hearings to counter evidence provided of Ulbricht's good character. Maybe they affected sentencing then? And since the testimony has been reduced from "let's convict Ulbricht of murder for hire" to "character witness hearsay from disgraced and corrupt federal agents who themselves provoked the alleged crimes by stealing many hundreds of thousands of dollars from Ulbricht"; can sentencing be revisited by the court, or is a new trial required?
  - gamblor956 11y ago
    >No. Ulbricht was charged in multiple jurisdictions for multiple crimes. So you keep saying. I'm not sure what you're arguing here. You agree in other threads that Ulbricht was charged of separate crimes in New York and Maryland courts. Guilt of crimes which according to you are not related.* I'm not saying the crimes were unrelated at all. I'm saying that the sentencing phase of a trial is different from the guilt phase. In sentencing hearings, the normal rules of evidence are relaxed, so evidence that was excluded from trial can be considered. Maybe they affected sentencing then? That's exactly what I'm saying, and that's the reason those allegations and underlying evidence were introduced at the sentencing hearing: to show that Ulbricht deserves to be locked up for a long time. And since the testimony has been reduced from "let's convict Ulbricht of murder for hire" to "character witness hearsay from disgraced and corrupt federal agents who themselves provoked the alleged crimes by stealing many hundreds of thousands of dollars from Ulbricht"; can sentencing be revisited by the court, or is a new trial required? Separate case. Ulbricht was convicted of several counts, each of which by themselves would justify a 20+ year sentence or life sentence. It wasn't even necessary to bring up the murder-for-hire allegations. The prosecution only did that because Ulbricht's lawyer tried to argue that he was really just a good guy. The sentencing can be appealed, but there's a 0% chance that he would succeed at reducing the sentence given that it's well within the established guidelines for crimes of this nature. It's also possible to appeal the underlying conviction, but there's almost 0% chance of that as well, since the murder-for-hire allegations and the acts of the corrupt Maryland federal agents were not relevant to the New York convictions.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

IANAL, but from what I remember of the Wired reporting the evidence and involvement of this officer was left out of the prosecution.

fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
There was an earlier plea for a new trial and claims of a Brady violation (withholding this? evidence) that was denied. But the prosecutors' letter to the judge for sentencing was peppered with comments alluding to the alleged murder plots, which are directly related to the work done on the case by agents Force and Bridges. http://cryptome.org/2015/05/ulbricht-256.pdf http://cryptome.org/2015/05/ulbricht-256.pdf

gamblor956 11y ago

No. Ulbricht was charged in multiple jurisdictions for multiple crimes. Force was not involved in the trial in which Ulbricht was convicted, and the murder-for-hire charges were not brought up during the trial. The murder-for-hire charges were brought up during the sentencing phase (after guilt was adjudicated). Normally, judges generally use the Federal Sentencing Guidelines to determine the length of a federal prison sentence, so that sentences are "normalized" across crimes and defendants. (The Guidelines are no longer mandatory, after the 2005 Booker case.) Judges will also consider evidence calling for a reduced (or extended) sentence than the Guidelines would impose. In this case, the Guidelines called for life imprisonment. The murder-for-hire charges were introduced at the sentencing hearings to counter evidence provided of Ulbricht's good character. Even if the murder-for-hire charges had not been brought up at sentencing, Ulbricht still faced life in prison. Bringing them up in sentencing merely sealed his fate.

fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
>No. Ulbricht was charged in multiple jurisdictions for multiple crimes. So you keep saying. >The murder-for-hire charges were brought up during the sentencing phase (after guilt was adjudicated). Guilt of crimes which according to you are not related. >The murder-for-hire charges were introduced at the sentencing hearings to counter evidence provided of Ulbricht's good character. Maybe they affected sentencing then? And since the testimony has been reduced from "let's convict Ulbricht of murder for hire" to "character witness hearsay from disgraced and corrupt federal agents who themselves provoked the alleged crimes by stealing many hundreds of thousands of dollars from Ulbricht"; can sentencing be revisited by the court, or is a new trial required?
- gamblor956 11y ago
  >No. Ulbricht was charged in multiple jurisdictions for multiple crimes. So you keep saying. I'm not sure what you're arguing here. You agree in other threads that Ulbricht was charged of separate crimes in New York and Maryland courts. Guilt of crimes which according to you are not related.* I'm not saying the crimes were unrelated at all. I'm saying that the sentencing phase of a trial is different from the guilt phase. In sentencing hearings, the normal rules of evidence are relaxed, so evidence that was excluded from trial can be considered. Maybe they affected sentencing then? That's exactly what I'm saying, and that's the reason those allegations and underlying evidence were introduced at the sentencing hearing: to show that Ulbricht deserves to be locked up for a long time. And since the testimony has been reduced from "let's convict Ulbricht of murder for hire" to "character witness hearsay from disgraced and corrupt federal agents who themselves provoked the alleged crimes by stealing many hundreds of thousands of dollars from Ulbricht"; can sentencing be revisited by the court, or is a new trial required? Separate case. Ulbricht was convicted of several counts, each of which by themselves would justify a 20+ year sentence or life sentence. It wasn't even necessary to bring up the murder-for-hire allegations. The prosecution only did that because Ulbricht's lawyer tried to argue that he was really just a good guy. The sentencing can be appealed, but there's a 0% chance that he would succeed at reducing the sentence given that it's well within the established guidelines for crimes of this nature. It's also possible to appeal the underlying conviction, but there's almost 0% chance of that as well, since the murder-for-hire allegations and the acts of the corrupt Maryland federal agents were not relevant to the New York convictions.