Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht arrested, tried, convicted

[kcchiefs6465]

The feds have caught up to the Silk Road. The underground website long known for drug trafficking and other illegal activity was seized by the FBI who also arrested the owner on three criminal counts. New York State prosecutors charged Ross William Ulbricht with one count each of narcotics trafficking conspiracy, computer hacking conspiracy and money laundering conspiracy, according to a court filing.

Update: Further examining of the court documents revealed that Ulbricht solicited for murder after a Silk Road user threatened to reveal user info. More Info Here.
Silk Road has long existed in the corner of the Internet dubbed Deep Web and accessible only through the seemingly secure Tor Network. Launched in 2011, the site quickly gained notoriety for its shadowy marketplace of drugs and guns. Silk Road became the Amazon of illegal things. As of July 23, 2013, there were approximately 957,079 registered user accounts, and as the court docs note, this does not necessarily equal the number of actual users.

Although obscured, Silk Road netted big money. The total revenue generated from launch until July 23, 2013, resulted in approximately 9,519,664 Bitcoins and 614,305 Bitcoins of commission for Silk Road itself, court documents reveal. That converts to roughly $1.2 billion in revenue and $79.8 million in commissions, at current Bitcoin prices.

A Silk Road competitor, Atlantis, aimed to add a bit of whimsy and Web 2.0 marketing pizzazz to the same markets. It closed last month.

As the court documents note, the owner of Silk Road, Ross William Ulbricht, intentionally and knowingly violated U.S. narcotics laws. The document, available here, reads:

From in or about 2011, up to and including in or about September 2013, ROSS WILLIAM ULBRICHT, a/k/a “Dread Pirate Roberts,” a/k/a “DPR,” a/k/a “Silk Road,” the defendant, owned and operated an underground website, known as “Silk Road,” that provided a platform for drug dealers around the world to sell a wide variety of controlled substances via the Internet.

But that’s just the start of Ulbricht’s troubles. He is also charged with hacking conspiracy and money laundering. The site is currently down, seized by the FBI. It should be interesting, however, to see how the government handles this hydra of an organization. The vast majority of interactions on the Silk Road are anonymous, performed using Bitcoin transfers between parties and set up in secure email exchanges.

According to the court documents, law enforcement agents made over 100 individual undercover purchases through Silk Road, obtaining Schedule I and II drugs, including ecstasy, cocaine, heroin, LSD and others.

Ulbricht was reportedly arrested yesterday, October 1, 2013, at the Glenn Park library in San Francisco.

hxxp://techcrunch.com/2013/10/02/fbi-seize-deep-web-marketplace-silk-road-arrest-owner/

---

RELATED:

• Trump Is Considering Clemency for Silk Road Founder
• Trump to address LP 2024 national convention
  
  (esp. wrt this post and this post)​
• Trump's "Day One" test
• Trump pardons Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht
• Thomas Massie discusses Ross Ulbricht on Timcast

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

intentionally and knowingly violated U.S. narcotics laws

Just like the Administration and the complicit Congress.

Taking pot off Schedule 1 would not require a change in the law; it would only require that the President start obeying the existing law....

 

[TomKat]

Video: Silk Road "Founder's" Mother Speaks Out To We Are Change

Interesting, according to mom the formal arraignment a few weeks ago didn't include the "murder for hire" charges.

 

[dannno]

Interesting, according to mom the formal arraignment a few weeks ago didn't include the "murder for hire" charges.

Probably because they were fabricated or something.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Prosecutors fear Jury Nullification in the Ross Ulbricht "Silk Road" case

h/t LRC: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/12/robert-wenzel/what-government-prosecutors-fear-most/

Government Prosecutors Fear Liberty and Jury Nullification
http://www.targetliberty.com/2014/12/government-prosecutors-fear-liberty-and.html
Robert Wenzel (13 December 2015)

This post needs to be spread far and wide - RW

Lyn Ulbricht, the mother of the Ross Ulbricht who is sitting in jail because the government alleges he was the operator of Silk Road, emails:

Bob,

I thought you’d be interested to know that the government has asked the judge to limit the defense by not allowing any of Ross’ political or philosophical beliefs to be introduced to the jury as they might influence the jury in his favor. The prosecution goes so far as to say that they fear that exposing the jury to his political thought could invite a jury nullification verdict.

The government obviously doesn’t want this trial to become about internet freedom, the drug war, or liberty. But these crucial issues are on trial along with Ross. This trial is poised to be the most important of 2015 in the fight for freedom. Obviously the government thinks so. They are doing their best to smear Ross and obstruct his defense.

I’m attaching an excerpt (bolds and highlights mine) from the prosecution’s motions illustrating what I’m saying. If you want the original document, just let me know.

This outrage needs to become known, so please spread the word!

Many thanks,
Lyn​

Lyn did not include the attachments, so I emailed her back and told her I was going to post but that I would like the attachments. She sent them with this further note:

Hi Bob,

Great, thanks. Sorry, I’m so upset I’m forgetting lots of things! Here are the attachments.

In addition, the judge has already ruled that the defense cannot see which witnesses will be testifying against Ross for fear that he might orchestrate their killing from his jail cell! That’s with no email access and monitored phone calls. And the prosecution isn’t indicting him for any planned murder!

See http://www.wired.com/2014/12/silk-road-judge-ulbricht-could-kill-witnesses/​

IV. THE COURT SHOULD PRECLUDE CERTAIN DEFENSE EVIDENCE QUESTIONING AND COMMENTS IN OPENING STATEMENTS AND ARGUMENT

In an abundance of caution, the Government moves to preclude the defendant from making particular arguments, or from attempting to introduce evidence on two topics: (1) the potential consequences to the defendant in the event he is convicted; and (2) the defendant’s political views or other attempts to excuse his conduct notwithstanding its criminality.

First, the Court should preclude the defendant from presenting any evidence or argument concerning his sentencing exposure or otherwise exposing the jury to the potential consequence of convicting the defendant. The Supreme Court and the Second Circuit have reiterated the “well established” rule that juries should not be permitted to consider the potential penalties Case 1:14-cr-00068-KBF Document 108 Filed 12/09/14 Page 27 of 29 28 faced by criminal defendants. Shannon v. United States, 512 U.S. 573, 579 (1994); see also United States v. Blume, 967 F.2d 45, 49 (2d Cir. 1992) (“Federal courts usually instruct juries not to consider a verdict’s consequences.”). This case presents no reason for the Court to depart from this well settled rule. Accordingly, the Court should preclude the parties from introducing any information – whether through jury addresses, witness examinations, or otherwise – about any of the potential consequences of conviction. Second, the defendant should be prohibited from raising any arguments or presenting any evidence regarding the defendant’s purported political views – including but not limited to views concerning the propriety of U.S. or international drug laws or the propriety of government regulation of individual conduct or commerce on the Internet – or anything else meant to convince the jury that the defendant’s conduct should be excused, even if criminal, for any reason. As the Second Circuit has explained, a defendant should not be allowed to mount a “political defense,” because it is an “erroneous assumption that good motive is inconsistent with criminal intent.” Rosado, 728 F. 2d at 93. The defendant’s professed personal and political viewpoints on drug laws and government regulation are plainly not relevant to whether or not his conduct was in violation of the law, and cannot form the basis for a legal defense. Rather, such arguments and evidence only serve to invite jury nullification and should therefore be excluded. See United States v. Thomas, 116 F.3d 606, 616 (2d Cir. 1997) (holding that “trial courts have the duty to forestall or prevent [jury nullification]”); see also United States v. Reese, 933 F.Supp. 2d 579, 583 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (“[T]he Court will not permit [defendant] to advance arguments aimed at jury nullification.”); United States v. Ahrendt, 560 F.3d 69, 75-76 (1st Cir. 2009) (affirming preclusion of evidence regarding defendant’s personal religious views on use of drugs because it promoted jury nullification); United States v. Scarmazzo, 554 F. Supp. 2d 1102,Case 1:14-cr-00068-KBF Document 108 Filed 12/09/14 Page 28 of 29

The full motion is here.

Spread this post!

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

BASTARDS!

-t

 

[kpitcher]

He needs to quickly become a mail order minister so he can have some religious beliefs about drugs and data...

I had no idea juries couldn't know about what a guilty verdict would mean. It seems like a death penalty or a life in prison would play a part in how 12 peers would view any person's actions.

 

[osan]

Criminal law has little to do with justice and much to do with formality. The formalities are geared to lend advantage to prosecutors to the greatest degree possible without losing all credibility. As the tyrants become less concerned with credibility, their manipulations to best guarantee forgone results of the desired sort become ever more blatant. We can see this in the history of our own courts. It is so in-yer-face obvious that nobody sees it. It would be funny, were it not for the fact that these crazy people who live in this arena of fixed gladiatorial gaming destroy lives by the hundreds of thousands every year.

People commonly appear to think they know the appearances of monsters. They are so very wrong. The worst of them wear costly suits and black robes.

 

[jmdrake]

h/t LRC: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/12/robert-wenzel/what-government-prosecutors-fear-most/
The government obviously doesn’t want this trial to become about internet freedom, the drug war, or liberty. But these crucial issues are on trial along with Ross. This trial is poised to be the most important of 2015 in the fight for freedom. Obviously the government thinks so. They are doing their best to smear Ross and obstruct his defense.

The prosecutor will likely try to strike any juror under 60.

 

[cindy25]

jury nullification should be promoted, not just in this case but in any case involving taxes, drugs, gambling, copyrights, and a ton of others.

 

[cindy25]

jury nullification should be promoted, not just in this case but in any case involving taxes, drugs, gambling, copyrights, and a ton of others.

 

[donnay]

Criminal law has little to do with justice and much to do with formality. The formalities are geared to lend advantage to prosecutors to the greatest degree possible without losing all credibility. As the tyrants become less concerned with credibility, their manipulations to best guarantee forgone results of the desired sort become ever more blatant. We can see this in the history of our own courts. It is so in-yer-face obvious that nobody sees it. It would be funny, were it not for the fact that these crazy people who live in this arena of fixed gladiatorial gaming destroy lives by the hundreds of thousands every year.

People commonly appear to think they know the appearances of monsters. They are so very wrong. The worst of them wear costly suits and black robes.

Well said.

 

[Occam's Banana]

jury nullification should be promoted, not just in this case but in any case involving taxes, drugs, gambling, copyrights, and a ton of others.

//

 

[KCIndy]

The prosecutor will likely try to strike any juror under 60.

You're very likely right.

 

[Warlord]

This is a setup. they want this kid to go to prison for 30 years

 

[Christian Liberty]

The prosecutor will likely try to strike any juror under 60.

How is that "jury of his peers?"

I'm going to pray that someone who understands liberty ends up on that jury and can teach everyone else...

 

[DP714]

The prosecutor will likely try to strike any juror under 60.

Probably, but they only have a limited amount of strikes, and the defendant has more strikes than the prosecution if I'm understanding Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure: Rule 24. Regardless, they usually get their desired convictions, but if this guy has money to keep litigating he may be able to escape the harsher charges... He will Still probably be put in the slammer for decades, I'm guessing..

 

[coastie]

He needs to quickly become a mail order minister so he can have some religious beliefs about drugs and data...

I had no idea juries couldn't know about what a guilty verdict would mean. It seems like a death penalty or a life in prison would play a part in how 12 peers would view any person's actions.

I think what they are saying is that they are trying to not set a precedent of future jury nullification, not how sentencing would effect him.

 

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

American citizens have the right to return a Not Guilty verdict on the basis of nothing more than disagreement with the law. Americans cannot be punished for a verdict in a jury trial.

What's so complicated about that? What sad sonufabitch doesn't know that in 2014? If the prosecutors are so damned scared of they jury exercising their right to flip the system the bird, why bring the matter to trial in the first place?

Oh...yeah...it's a show trial...I forgot. Free people buying and selling in a clandestine, anonymous market in a currency other than FRNs? I'm surprised the arresting officers didn't shoot the guy in the head by accident.

You can all have this thread back now.

 

[TheCount]

Ross Ulbricht who is sitting in jail because the government alleges he was the operator of Silk Road

There's also that tricky little thing about allegedly hiring hitmen to kill six people.