They are throwing the book at him to make an example so that others won't think about following in his footsteps
What footsteps? Publishing his personal email? That is what people should learn not to do.
Topic: Ross Ulbricht: FBI Didn't Have Search Warrant, Violated Fourth Amendment - page 3. (Read 2967 times)
August 05, 2014, 11:36:54 AM
What footsteps? Publishing his personal email? That is what people should learn not to do.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
August 05, 2014, 11:31:48 AM
IMO this case is too high profile for a judge to grant a dismissal. They are throwing the book at him to make an example so that others won't think about following in his footsteps
People started following in his footsteps within days.
August 05, 2014, 11:29:33 AM
IMO this case is too high profile for a judge to grant a dismissal. They are throwing the book at him to make an example so that others won't think about following in his footsteps
I doubt that trial judge will dismiss the case based on a technicality, however I would say there is a good chance that he can win via the appeals process. 
August 05, 2014, 11:23:39 AM
IMO this case is too high profile for a judge to grant a dismissal. They are throwing the book at him to make an example so that others won't think about following in his footsteps
People started following in his footsteps within days.
Still I love the low quality reporting by coinfinance
Quote
In the US legal system, if it can be proven that a law enforcement official searched the property of a suspect, without his or her consent, without first obtaining a warrant, all charges against the suspect must be dropped.
Well no that is not the case. Evidence from an illegal search can be excluded on the grounds that it violated the defendants rights. It is also possible that any subsequence evidence obtained could also be excluded "fruit of the poisonous tree". That is what the lawyer is seeking.
Even if a judge agrees and excludes some or all of the evidence, it is possible to sustain the indictment using evidence which isn't excluded. On the other hand it is is possible that with the evidence excluded the government will not be able to meet the minimum burden required. The defense would then move to have the charges dropped with prejudice (jeopardy has already attached) on the grounds that the prosecution has not met its prima facie case. This could be done immediately and it could also be done when the prosecution rests its case. It would be a huge victory for DPR but there is no magic "bad search = drop charges" law in the US.
August 05, 2014, 11:22:14 AM
did anything like this ever get off on a technicality?
I feel sorry for the guy, appears to be desperately trying everything without believing that he's doomed.
I feel sorry for the guy, appears to be desperately trying everything without believing that he's doomed.
August 05, 2014, 11:05:33 AM
IMO this case is too high profile for a judge to grant a dismissal. They are throwing the book at him to make an example so that others won't think about following in his footsteps
August 05, 2014, 10:58:40 AM
If you see something say something!!!!!
911 + patriot act + NDAA = We Don't NEED no stinking search warrant.
Ross is lucky he is still alive and not disappeared.
The SanFran library is lucky it wasn't droned.
911 + patriot act + NDAA = We Don't NEED no stinking search warrant.
Ross is lucky he is still alive and not disappeared.
The SanFran library is lucky it wasn't droned.
August 05, 2014, 07:38:10 AM
A new statement released by the defense team of Ross Ulbricht, the alleged owner of Silk Road, a DarkNet drug marketplace, accuses the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of violating the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. They claim that the Bureau did not have a legal search warrant when they found the Silk Road servers, which were located in Iceland. Ulbricht’s defense has requested that the court drop all charges, since the federal government of the United States broke their own laws when seeking out the location of the Silk Road Servers.
More info at http://coinfinance.com/news/ross-ulbricht-fbi-didnt-have-search-warrant-violated-fourth-amendment
More info at http://coinfinance.com/news/ross-ulbricht-fbi-didnt-have-search-warrant-violated-fourth-amendment
Jump to: