That's a load of crap - let him know the witnesses. Otherwise, he'll have a bloody good case when he gets the charges dropped for violating the right to a fair trial.
Fucking judges -neever learn anything.
Topic: [2014-12-14] Wired: Silk Road Judge: I Won’t Reveal Witnesses Because Ulbricht (Read 1561 times)
December 15, 2014, 07:14:24 PM
December 15, 2014, 06:50:49 PM
Her ruling followed a request from prosecutors to redact certain names from the full list to reduce the risk of “harm and intimidation.” They cited the FBI’s account that Ulbricht paid for the murders of six people, including at least one employee who he feared would inform on him to law enforcement.
The judge relied on the FBI's account?
If the above account was actually proved, Ulbricht would be in a lot more trouble.
The judge relied on the FBI's account?
If the above account was actually proved, Ulbricht would be in a lot more trouble.
Indeed. In fact, this FBI account was also cited to deny Ross bail.
Interesting that he's not even being charged with anything related to hiring hit-men.
December 15, 2014, 01:14:05 PM
Her ruling followed a request from prosecutors to redact certain names from the full list to reduce the risk of “harm and intimidation.” They cited the FBI’s account that Ulbricht paid for the murders of six people, including at least one employee who he feared would inform on him to law enforcement.
The judge relied on the FBI's account?
If the above account was actually proved, Ulbricht would be in a lot more trouble.
The judge relied on the FBI's account?
If the above account was actually proved, Ulbricht would be in a lot more trouble.
December 15, 2014, 11:03:26 AM
Umm - if the accused can hire hits on witnesses from his jail cell couldn't he also hire hits on judges, prosecutors, Wired Magazine staff, and the tooth fairy?
Guilt by press release.
Guilt by press release.
I think it would be easier for witnesses to get taken out than Judges etc and judges can always be replaced but witnesses can't.
And therefore what - what follows from that? I am not yet sure how your comment relates to mine. I do not disagree with your point.
December 15, 2014, 10:44:59 AM
Umm - if the accused can hire hits on witnesses from his jail cell couldn't he also hire hits on judges, prosecutors, Wired Magazine staff, and the tooth fairy?
Guilt by press release.
Guilt by press release.
I think it would be easier for witnesses to get taken out than Judges etc and judges can always be replaced but witnesses can't.
December 15, 2014, 10:34:55 AM
Umm - if the accused can hire hits on witnesses from his jail cell couldn't he also hire hits on judges, prosecutors, Wired Magazine staff, and the tooth fairy?
Guilt by press release.
Guilt by press release.
December 15, 2014, 10:10:40 AM
He may or may not have tried to hire hits on people but I doubt he's going to be able to do anything from his jail cell. Not exactly a mafia boss. Doubt he's allowed any where near a computer.
He is sued for cybercrimes so he of course has no access to any computer as they think he is some kind of computer superhero rofl. December 15, 2014, 09:44:32 AM
He may or may not have tried to hire hits on people but I doubt he's going to be able to do anything from his jail cell. Not exactly a mafia boss. Doubt he's allowed any where near a computer.
December 15, 2014, 09:22:12 AM
I don't care much about a self-admitted drug dealer who's trying to get out of a situation he brought on himself but it sounds to me like the 'witness' they have is either extremely questionable or doesn't exist, this kind of thing is a classic stunt used by the U.S government, much like with the rape allegations against Assange they were using to try and trap him with, normally if it's real, women are more than happy to put someone behind bars that hurt them that way.
If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
"Self-admitted drug dealer" if i'm right then he was just developer and admin of online anonynous marketplace.If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
Oh come on, even as an Anarchist I don't use those kind of bullshit justifications, I get that he has to say that kind of stuff to stay out of jail but even if he didn't actively partake in any deals ( which I doubt is the case ) he certainly faciliated them by allowing people to do it in the first place.
This is based on the articles and everything i did read since SR1 not my personal experience.
December 15, 2014, 07:33:36 AM
I don't care much about a self-admitted drug dealer who's trying to get out of a situation he brought on himself but it sounds to me like the 'witness' they have is either extremely questionable or doesn't exist, this kind of thing is a classic stunt used by the U.S government, much like with the rape allegations against Assange they were using to try and trap him with, normally if it's real, women are more than happy to put someone behind bars that hurt them that way.
If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
"Self-admitted drug dealer" if i'm right then he was just developer and admin of online anonynous marketplace.If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
Oh come on, even as an Anarchist I don't use those kind of bullshit justifications, I get that he has to say that kind of stuff to stay out of jail but even if he didn't actively partake in any deals ( which I doubt is the case ) he certainly faciliated them by allowing people to do it in the first place.
December 15, 2014, 05:47:19 AM
I don't care much about a self-admitted drug dealer who's trying to get out of a situation he brought on himself but it sounds to me like the 'witness' they have is either extremely questionable or doesn't exist, this kind of thing is a classic stunt used by the U.S government, much like with the rape allegations against Assange they were using to try and trap him with, normally if it's real, women are more than happy to put someone behind bars that hurt them that way.
If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
"Self-admitted drug dealer" if i'm right then he was just developer and admin of online anonynous marketplace. If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
December 15, 2014, 05:45:20 AM
I don't care much about a self-admitted drug dealer who's trying to get out of a situation he brought on himself but it sounds to me like the 'witness' they have is either extremely questionable or doesn't exist, this kind of thing is a classic stunt used by the U.S government, much like with the rape allegations against Assange they were using to try and trap him with, normally if it's real, women are more than happy to put someone behind bars that hurt them that way.
If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
May be classic, judges shouldn't be involved in these schemes. Assuming there is no witness, the judicial branch shouldn't be involved in psy-ops. Assuming there is one and the prosecutor asked the judge to keep the witness secret, the judge should have refused because there isn't a legitimate reason. Regardless, corruption or ineptitude is implied. If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
December 15, 2014, 05:11:14 AM
I don't care much about a self-admitted drug dealer who's trying to get out of a situation he brought on himself but it sounds to me like the 'witness' they have is either extremely questionable or doesn't exist, this kind of thing is a classic stunt used by the U.S government, much like with the rape allegations against Assange they were using to try and trap him with, normally if it's real, women are more than happy to put someone behind bars that hurt them that way.
If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
if he did these things (and i think he did) he should have a nice 30 years in prison.
December 15, 2014, 04:50:31 AM
Whenever i see a story like this it makes me wounder how much faith judges have in the prision system.
Don't know what the system is like in the US but here in Aus we have some jails that are private run and those jails are awash with drugs, anything can be got for a price in the private ones.
Still don think Ulbricht will get a fair trial.
Don't know what the system is like in the US but here in Aus we have some jails that are private run and those jails are awash with drugs, anything can be got for a price in the private ones.
Still don think Ulbricht will get a fair trial.
December 15, 2014, 04:16:34 AM
I don't care much about a self-admitted drug dealer who's trying to get out of a situation he brought on himself but it sounds to me like the 'witness' they have is either extremely questionable or doesn't exist, this kind of thing is a classic stunt used by the U.S government, much like with the rape allegations against Assange they were using to try and trap him with, normally if it's real, women are more than happy to put someone behind bars that hurt them that way.
If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
If the witness really knew something and existed they would have brought them forward and have them under protection in a safehouse to get the trial over with.
December 15, 2014, 02:35:23 AM
I'm pretty sure hes not a mafia boss member
(Ross shouldn't be able to arrange assinations through his cell without an internet connection)
(And theres always the chance he gets another FBI agent lol)
(Ross shouldn't be able to arrange assinations through his cell without an internet connection)
(And theres always the chance he gets another FBI agent lol)
December 14, 2014, 06:52:52 AM
I'm not a huge Ulbricht supporter by any means, and I didn't read the article, but the for me, title of this article translates roughly to:
"I'm going to deny the defendant his right to a fair trial because someone who has dirt on me wants to use him as an example."
or, with a bit less paranoia:
"I'm going to deny the defendant his right to a fair trial because I am not impartial."
In either case, score 1 for additional corruption in our justice system.
"I'm going to deny the defendant his right to a fair trial because someone who has dirt on me wants to use him as an example."
or, with a bit less paranoia:
"I'm going to deny the defendant his right to a fair trial because I am not impartial."
In either case, score 1 for additional corruption in our justice system.
December 14, 2014, 06:19:07 AM
Silk Road Judge: I Won’t Reveal Witnesses Because Ulbricht Could Have Them Killed
When alleged Silk Road mastermind Ross Ulbricht’s trial begins in less than a month, he’ll face charges of narcotics conspiracy, money laundering, and computer fraud—not murder. But the specter of violence is creeping into Ulbricht’s trial nonetheless. The prosecution and judge in his case have now refused to let him know which witnesses will be testifying against him for fear that he might orchestrate their killing from his jail cell.
http://www.wired.com/2014/12/silk-road-judge-ulbricht-could-kill-witnesses/?mbid=social_twitter
When alleged Silk Road mastermind Ross Ulbricht’s trial begins in less than a month, he’ll face charges of narcotics conspiracy, money laundering, and computer fraud—not murder. But the specter of violence is creeping into Ulbricht’s trial nonetheless. The prosecution and judge in his case have now refused to let him know which witnesses will be testifying against him for fear that he might orchestrate their killing from his jail cell.
http://www.wired.com/2014/12/silk-road-judge-ulbricht-could-kill-witnesses/?mbid=social_twitter
Jump to: