Topic: DPR subpoena - page 4. (Read 11704 times)

Why don't you ask theymos for a copy of the post and then post it here (if it isn't too incriminating).

I think the Ross Ulbright case will certainly be the court case to watch it 2015, and will almost certainly be appealed to the supreme court (assuming he is found guilty, which I think he will be initially) 

I got this PM, I forget what I posted Interesting nevertheless.

Oh, I'm totally kidding. "j/k" was supposed to mean "just kidding".

Thanks for this post , any news about this case ?

Yea, I see that now. That was my mistake. I would say it could be possible that Ross could dispute the validity of what was submitted and ask him to testify, but I would find this somewhat unlikely (if theymos did have to testify, it might be about the integrity of the DB after various hacks/hack attempts of the forum).   
I am not entirely sure about this. My understanding of testimony is that it must be done in front of a Jury and that the defendant has the right to cross examine any testimony that a witness presents. Although I do not have a law degree and have very little experience in a courtroom so I may be wrong on this.   

If he was being asked to testify, of course they can do it before hand. The plaintiffs do one deposition and submit the logs to the court and defendants, and then the defendants get to do a similar process and are free to cross examine anything that is said. I think you might have been watching too many films, but a lot of what happens in the court room is processing and reviewing evidence that has already been submitted in documents. It would be rarer that new evidence is freshly submitted in a court room as no one can do anything until both parties have had time to review the evidence and prepare a response.

The subpoena says that a personal appearance is necessary.

I am certain that he would not be able to per-record his testimony as this would deprive Ross his right to face his accusers and to question theymos if he wanted to do so. In theory it could be done via skype or via some other video conferencing software, however this is generally rare.     

You should have at least called in to the DA's office to check it was a valid subpoena, there could be liability if you release information to a spoofed subpoena. Someone (with motive/connection or not) could have sent you that email spoofed to the DA's office about the credible case, without it being from the DA.

AFAIK only if the plaintiffs want to use his testimony and so has to be available for questions. Alternatively can do it pre-trial and prerecorded.

What do u mean ?

But I assume you have been arrested dozens of times?

J/K, thanks for sharing this info.

good to know. Thanks for sharing.

Does this mean that you'll need to be present (or at least, a representative) at NYC that time?

I always hate trying to answer things like this as if I'm staking my reputation on the data being "absolutely" correct. At best, even as a sysadmin, we can only know "to the best of our knowledge" that the data is accurate, though these subpeonas try to make it sound like it's cold hard facts and that the data could never have been tampered with. For example, the forums were compromised last year and even though you may not suspect anything was changed/deleted, it's hard to say that you *know for sure* nothing was, and even if you did know, it's always to the best of your knowledge, not an absolute.

When/if you show up in court, if the defense asks you stuff like this to try to put your reputation on the line, I'd caution against claiming absolutes. I'm confident you'll do fine, but I'd hate for them tear you apart and the prosecution to sacrifice you because they don't care. They might not even put you on the stand, though, hard to tell if this is even going to be a point of contention, they might not care to fight the case on this particular issue. If I was a lawyer though, I'd tear a sysadmin's word apart just because I know from being a sysadmin how uncertain things we believe to be true can sometimes be. Especially in troubleshooting.

Sorry to see you got dragged into this stuff, don't trust anyone but the judge if you're on the stand.

https://bitcointalk.org/docs/ulbricht.pdf

I won't post my response because it contains deleted posts which should remain private if at all possible. Probably my response will end up as part of public record, but I'm not going to speed up the process or make it easier for people to find. I already PMed the users affected by this.


This is the first government request/inquiry I've received related to Ulbricht's case. I have received a few other inquiries for other cases.

Don't leave us hanging, post it.

This is an abominable precedent. When the subpoena arrives, the subpoena should go up. Not to mention that this thread was born well after the prosecution's discovery should have been submitted to the defense in the Ulbricht case.

Maybe this is the first time Theymos experienced a formal subpoena, but I have trouble believing that this is the first time he experienced a law enforcement inquiry. Especially considering the FBI and Treasury Department showed up at my front door because I used DBordello's BTCPak service way back in the day, Per: http://www.thedrinkingrecord.com/2014/08/25/a-law-enforcement-encounter-if-you-ran-a-bitcoin-related-service-before-the-thing-hit-100-you-prolly-ought-to-be-somewhat-concerned-andor-prepared/

Whatever DPR or Ulbricht or the Alleged suspect did, the rule of Just law is paramount and people in the position to disclose requests for this information ought to disclose these requests as they are received. Sure, running or patronizing a darknet drug market is one of the stupidest things a Bitcoin user could do, but it is also very shitty for a trusted member of the community running a venue to just go "Hey I got a subpoena" without offer its contents.

GPG signed version of this post: http://www.thedrinkingrecord.com/2014/12/03/for-posterity/

I was under the impression that this was received well over a year ago.

Are you able to disclose specifically what was requested (e.g. a copy of the subpoena) and/or specifically what was provided (a copy of your response)?

EDIT: I think this person pretty much got what happened to SR1 spot on:

And I wonder if this post was what inspired Ross to start SR

Very surprising.
But not as surprised as reading some of the comments in the heroin store thread.

I'd say interesting, but not very exciting. Did they ask for private messages or IPs or anything like that? Looks like his last post on the forums was trying to recruit someone to be what I assume was a dev of SR. Obviously one of his first mistakes.


I'm sure it wont be the last.