Bitcoin Forum

OK, first I apologize for having this data in two threads, but the first thread (how it all started) concerns Variety Jones and not Ross, so......

In light of my discoveries:


and:




What do you think?

Well the fact is that we can't really know what happened and the government will deny it. I for one think that he was framed nicely as the government wanted to make an example of Ross.
I'm not sure how that worked out for them as these sites have been popping up again.

Not necessarily.....

If that is actual evidence/exhibitions then it has been tampered with.
Therefor ANYTHING coming from Ross's laptop is invalid as there is no way to prove that it is genuine data (unless he admits to it which I doubt).

So...... guess what happens!

Problem is: how can you prove that the files on his computer were manipulated?

Also another thing is, that IF the agents Force + Bridges planted the manipulated files on Ross' pc, why did they leave all the evidence about their fraud? Doesn't make sense. They would have erased everything about the "murder chats", entries in the (manipulated) journal and the insider information Force was giving to DPR as "frenchmaid" and "alpacino". No way they would've forgotten this!

This all leads to Variety Jones as the main suspect in my opinion: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=935434.0

He gained a lot of trust from Ross and it was probably easy for him to hack his pc with a 0-day, plant a stealth backdoor with eternal access and do whatever he wants at later time. He could play a multi character game around Ross. He takes over the Silk Road site and at a certain time, when he feels unsafe, he puts Ross back in the spotlight and disappears with a lot of Bitcoins.
He does the same with SR2 and leaves Blake Benthall as the fall guy.

Interesting find on that timeline from 2006! (Plural of Mongoose = Variety Jones)

It seems pretty likely that Ross actually is guilty. The Fed's story is also likely to have lot's of holes as well. So, the picture they spun may not be a 100% match to reality, but it would seem it was close enough to get him convicted.

Ross left a lot of material for them and law enforcement really are just used car salesmen. The Feds just needed to take the pieces they could use and fold them into a story which they could sell to a jury.

I don't know about that, but he definetly knows who VJ is and so does Shabang:

If my findings in the OP are evidence from the trial it would be hard for the feds to prove that it wasn't manipulated  ;)

There is your answer. Even if you try proving something the government will always deny it or ignore it.
The case is rather very complicated. I wonder though what kind of mastermind Variety Jones is?

Feel free to join the "hunt": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=935434.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=935434.0)
http://antilop.cc/sr/#timeline (http://antilop.cc/sr/#timeline)

What's the second link about?
I'm getting this:
https://i.imgur.com/r2Hyr4p.png

I don't have any problems with it.
It is the Silk Road timeline.

Try this - same but with out the #timeline: http://antilop.cc/sr/ (http://antilop.cc/sr/)


EDIT: ONLY BitDefender and WebSense claim Malware: https://www.virustotal.com/en/url/1e98c9915053c5fd89623d5a4e45d3b8b561db2b1d0c13eb860111d7e1be4984/analysis/1430111764/ (https://www.virustotal.com/en/url/1e98c9915053c5fd89623d5a4e45d3b8b561db2b1d0c13eb860111d7e1be4984/analysis/1430111764/)

It was early in the morning and I didn't have time to test it. It's possible that some link on the website is just malicious to the AV so it shows the whole site.
The timeline looks great. Who made it?

I wonder if Variety Jones will stay a mystery like Satoshi? Although Satoshi should be left in peace, VJ should not.

I have no clue who made it, it was pointed out to me recently by AGD.
Variety Jones did meet in person with PoM and Shabang, so they know who he is since they met at VJs house: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1038833.msg11208170#msg11208170 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1038833.msg11208170#msg11208170)

I think it's only a matter of time.

So how do you explain my finds?

You are.
Read my OP again carefully.
If you still have trouble understanding what happened (or more like what they did), let me know and I 'll break it down to you  ;)

Crap....
You are asking me to go back through all the logs to find the chat of Ross with VJ which says that it was him/her that inspired him to change his username from Silk Road ([1] Admin) to Dread Pirate Roberts.
Just go through the timeline and you will find many flaws on this "story"

[1] Why did VJ tell him to change it from 'Admin' to Dread Pirate Roberts when Ross was registered as Silk Road?
There are many flaws in this story man.
I am not saying Ross is innocent but looking at the bullshit finds/evidence makes me wonder if he is a scapegoat....

That brings us to one question: Who the f*ck is Variety Jones : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=935434.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=935434.0)

The site is definitely something. Yes, I've read that. Who are PoM and Shabang? Well I hope that this mystery person gets found. One must say that this is quite exciting when thinking about it.

Well it does not make sense. I guess either Ross was framed by the FBI or he was tricked by VJ or another person.
I don't believe he's on it alone (if he's guilty of almost anything that is).

Is his lawyer claiming this?
It seems only people here are saying he was framed. How did you arrive at that conclusion even when his own defense is not making such a claim? If he was framed you would think he would mention it.

Latest news from today:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/katevinton/2015/04/27/ulbrichts-defense-calls-for-delayed-sentencing-after-feds-reveal-six-alleged-silk-road-drug-overdose-deaths/

I think the only thing ulbricht got framed by was his own stupidity. It will be interesting to see if he gets a retrial due to this new 'evidence' though. I'm on the fence about him on a whole though but it would be nice to get the truth of the whole story.

Of course Ross Ulbricht was framed by the FBI and others, even the whole justice system. But the biggest method that they framed him was to keep him thinking that they had a case against him. So, essentially, he framed himself.

In American law and courts, if Ross had simply fired his attorneys and:
1. Stood as a man in court, present, not representing himself and not being represented;
2. Wished, required and demanded that his accuser come forward, swear or affirm to tell the truth and take the stand so that Ross could cross examine him/her about whatever harm or damage Ross had done to him/her...

... nothing else would have mattered. Why not? Because the plaintiff must appear and get on the stand (if a person demands it man to man), and the plaintiff in Ross's case couldn't appear and get on the stand, because THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (the plaintiff in this case) can't do anything... not swear to tell the truth, not take the stand, not answer questions... nothing, because the plaintiff is paperwork.

If Ross had done this, and had stood his ground and did this clearly under all circumstances, he could have been set free, and demanded his property - computer and bitcoins - be returned to him, and government would have had to do it.

In fact, Ross's time for sentencing is coming up. If he does this even at sentencing, he can get off scott free.

Listen here http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-39904/TS-963949.mp3 to see how things work (almost 4 hours audio).

:)

Look, if you were walking down the sidewalk in your favorite city, and some guy named Pete passed you walking on the sidewalk, and you both said "hi" like people often do, and you went on your way and so did Pete, can Pete take you to court and sue you for harming him?

Yes, he can try... but...

Pete needs to have some harm or damage to himself.
Pete needs to show that it was you who did the harm or damage through some evidence.
Pete needs to have an impartial witness who saw that you did the harm or damage.

If Pete doesn't have all of these, he has no case.

In addition, since it is Pete who is accusing you, he has to be available at your trial to get on the stand and testify that these things are true. You have to be given the chance to question Pete.

This is standard American law.

----------

In Ross Ulbricht's case, who did Ross hurt? Where is the person who got a bloody nose or a broken arm, or some harm that was done by Ross? What person is going to come forward and say on the stand, "I was hurt, I was damaged, by Ross." Whose property did Ross damage? What property was it? Show the damage and the harm.

The laws don't count because Ross didn't have anything to do with making the laws or taking an oath to obey the laws.

You can use this to get out of ALL the traffic tickets you ever got into. As long as you don't harm somebody, or damage someone's property, and as long as the person is unwilling to get on the stand and literally testify that it was his property or person that was harmed or damaged, they have no case against you.

The trick is opening up your own case right in the middle of their case against you. You need to write a 2 or 3 sentences notice to the court that:
1. I, a man, Joe Blow, wish, require and demand that any man/woman whom I have harmed, or whose property I have damaged come forward and make their claim against me so that I can repay them for the harm or damage.
2. I wish, require and demand that if nobody comes forward to make a claim of harm or property damage against me, that this case against me be discharged.
3. I wish, require and demand that all of my property that was wrongfully taken from me regarding this case be immediately returned to me.
4. I wish, require and demand $100,000 as damages from my accusers for filing a false claim against me.

Give the notice in writing. Swear it under oath from the stand. And stick to it no matter what they say. Say almost nothing else.

America is a common law country. And "common law" means that you are set free if you haven't done any harm or damage, and your property is returned to you. In addition, if anyone has filed a false claim against you, you can require damages from him for making the false claim.

See http://voidjudgments.com/.

Ross can win big time if he only does something like this, and sticks to it.

And, you can use this in all your cases, as well.

:)

Yes ! sure he was ..  8)

Exactly how is it his fault that someone bought drugs from some person and overdosed? Ross had no influence over who bought what nor how would they take it.

I rarely agree with you due to certain reasons, but now I have to. I remember watching some video or reading something about this.
This is quite real and possible; certainly some would doubt it. The question is how to get this information to Ross himself?
His defense lawyers could be influenced by the FBI as well!

Update:
After taking a look at this website: http://freeross.org/contact-us-2/ there seems to be a way to contact him. Can someone confirm this?

I can confirm.

Yes, getting the info to Ross is part of the problem. More of the problem is how to get him to believe. More of the problem shows itself when he believes, in that he can't play in both worlds with this. He either has to go as he has, or he must go in exclusively under common law. The government will attempt to trick him into remaining as he is, or into perjuring his common law testimony by changing it.

If anyone can get Ross off, winning this battle all the way, it would be a great help both for Bitcoin and for freedom to use psychedelic drugs as they wanted.

We want freedom from government. We have it if we use the process I express in my previous post correctly.

:)

It's not a law I like, but I think he could be charged with their deaths in some states. If he is facilitating a criminal enterprise then he may be held responsible for all the actions of that enterprise. For example, if I ran a murder for hire ring that preformed several hits, I could be charged with those murders even if I did not participate in any way. Simply being the leader of the group that specifically kills people could be enough.
It is similar to how a a bank robbery that causes a death is on every member of the team that robs the bank. They can all be charged with the same death. In fact they don't even have to kill anyone. If the bank guard dies of a heart attack during the robbery, then all the robbers may be charged with reckless homicide. 
I don't know what the laws are in NYC. Murder is not against federal law, states decide what murder is and who should be charged.

Well that is ridiculous. Running a website where people trade illegal goods shouldn't be comparable to that, but I guess the people running the states aren't very smart. Such a law shouldn't be applied on all criminal enterprises since it obviously has variations. Selling someone drugs, and hosting a website where someone else is selling drugs shouldn't be put in the same bag.
Getting him to believe that he can walk away free if he calls upon America on the stand? I don't think we'd have a problem with that since his defense horribly failed.
How about getting in touch with his mother?  
 

Yes, and in this case it's once more removed. As you point out, HE did not even sell the drugs. I could imagine an argument against someone who helped Al Qaeda get a nuke. We would not let that guy go free because he should have some responsibility when they blow up London. But how far can you carry this logic?
 

It should be somehow judged on case to case. In this case Ross would have provided the location for the nuke buy/exchange. Although one can't compare nukes and drugs. Things become complicated the deeper we go.
If he does get convicted for these overdoses then something is definitely wrong. They're trying to bury Ross so deep that no amount of evidence would set him free.

That's what happens when the government wants to make an example of you.

The point isn't what he could be charged with, the point is who is doing the charging. In man-to-man common law, the one doing the charging has to be a human being who was personally harmed, or whose property was personally damaged. The accuser has to get on the stand and swear that the harm or damage is true, and that Ross did it.

The accuser has to have a witness to the harm or damage being done by Ross, one who can get on the stand and swear that he saw Ross do do the harm or damage.

On top of this, there needs to be evidence that unconditionally points to Ross.

But, none of this is required if Ross doesn't stand as a man, unrepresented in any way, rather present himself, and requiring that his accuser get on the stand so that he can question him. If Ross doesn't stand up, the courts can do anything to him that they want.

Such is the basic, foundational law in America in cases where some human being is accused of anything.

:)

This is literally magical thinking.

It's like you believe that legal arguments are some kind spell incantation that has power over people if they are just recited correctly.

The government never "has to" do anything - they have all the guns.

It doesn't matter what you find in the legislation, or in some old copy of Black's Law Dictionary, or whether you write your spell in capital or lower case letters.

To the extent they pretend that the law has any power over them, they do so because maintaining the illusion is more profitable than not.

The instant that changes, they stop.

I understand why believing in magic is more comfortable than accepting that we just live thrall to a well-dressed mafia with a great propaganda arm, but at some point you need to grow up and face reality as it is.

His lawyer, Josh Dratel, is not claiming this. During the trial, Mr. Dratel admitted that Ross Ulbricht ran Silk Road. That seems to settle the matter.

Not true:

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/defense-in-silk-road-trial-lays-out-its-full-alternative-perpetrator-theory
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/is-mark-karpeles-the-man-behind-silk-road-for-ross-ulbricht-it-may-not-matter
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/defense-in-silk-road-trial-says-mt-gox-ceo-was-the-real-dread-pirate-roberts

I think he missed to put Variety Jones as the main suspect for the whole plot.

It's such a strange, eye-opening case. He was certainly set up by the FBI to some degree but he was also guilty of a lot crimes before the FBI had even arrived on the scene. I wish Ross all the best of luck but I don't see him getting out of this one.

I saw that the prosecution is bringing in family members of 'victims' that died after taking drugs from the silk road. That's a very sly move by the prosecution, you can clearly see they are pulling out all the stops to silence him and lock him away for good.

My 2 satoshi's.

The government does not have all the guns.

The government is made up of people. These people can be litigated against and convicted just like any other people... if it is done the right way.

The law, the courts, and the whole foundation of government - Constitution - is set up so that PEOPLE can litigate against other people who do them wrong.

If a government person (say, police officer) does you wrong, who does the wrong? Is it the government, the office of the police officer, or the man who wears the uniform 8 hours a day? It is always the man, no matter whose orders he might be following. Litigate the man for the wrong he does against you.

Litigate him correctly, and you win his bond money in court, and more if the city is behind ordering him to do the wrong.

:)

I already addressed that.

It has nothing to do with you casting your spell correctly - it's a pure cost/benefit calculation on the part of the government.

They will play along with the charade of accountability exactly as long as it's profitable for them to do so.

Wrong. You should absolutely have your spelling correct when you notice a man/woman about the wrongdoing he/she does to you.

You are absolutely correct when you say that it is a pure cost/benefit calculation. It is incorrect when you say "on the part of government." No government person wants to lose his job because he can't be bonded any longer. No government person wants to sit in prison.

The guns are held by government people against other government people, if you litigate the government people correctly. Thus, they are essentially held by the people.

In Ross's case, he should file claims of wrongdoing against the people who took his computer while he was in the library, and all kinds of other things.

If the people who were harmed by the Silk Road don't stand up and file a claim of damage against Ross, it is all hearsay, even if it can be shown. As a man, Ross can beat every government accusation - even if he is entirely guilty regarding some laws or codes - if he stands present, as a man, and there is no man who is accusing him. It's the law. See it broken down here http://voidjudgments.com/.

:)

I already contacted them couple of days ago to inform them of my findings - which seem to be fabricated by the feds.

Thats funny, because the law does not charge the local liquer store for selling booze, that the people drink and then drive and then crash to death.....

True.
BUT, if the feds forged the evidence then he should be home free soon coz you can never know what is real or not.  ;)

I think they made his situation much worse. Like all the killings being related to the agents work.
But framed him? Not really.

That is called entrapment  ;)

Oh:

http://gizmodo.com/silk-road-kingpin-ross-ulbricht-wont-be-getting-a-retri-1700647551

Nice, but we are not talking about a retrial due to the "rogue" agents.
We are talking about a dismiss of all electronic evidence due to them being fabricated.
That means a retrial with whatever else evidience they have, which means jack shit.

If the evidnce given to the court were fabricated, then several heads should fall and it ain't gonna be Ross's.

The Ninth Article to the Bill of Rights (generally called the 9th Amendment) from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#cite_note-1:
Notice the word "retained." Retained means that the people had certain rights before the Constitution was enacted. The 9th Amendment means that the rights that the people had are not diminished by the Constitution. Thus, government (which was set up by the Constitution) has no effect on anyone who stands up as a man - one of the people - because man's rights remain no matter what is written in the Constitution or the laws that come about because of it.

It is man's right to start a Silk Road on the Internet through a Tor .onion domain. It is man's right to sell or otherwise cause drugs to be sold. It is certainly man's right to transfer funds this way and that way. It is man's right to have his privacy, so that if government agents steal his computer, the case against him fails right there.

It is, also, man's right to convict himself of wrongdoing if he so desires. That's what the government is tricking Ross into doing. They are tricking him into convicting himself, because he wouldn't do it if they weren't confusing him all over the place about what the basic law is... the common law of the people.

----------

Regarding what justusranvier said when he said, "It has nothing to do with you casting your spell correctly... ," he is completely wrong. Although we don't use the term "casting your spell" very often today, that's exactly what it is. Let me explain.

Ambiguous words in law weaken it. In court, your words must have a single meaning if you are on the side of government, and if you want them to stand strong. The exception is that you may define the way you use your words, if you want.

It is similar if you are a man presenting your claim. Use 1 or 2-syllable words, because the definitions of such words can't be easily broken by ambiguity.

Casting your spell means to cast (give notice to the world) your spell (you better spell your words correctly, even if there is the ability to, later, claim a spelling error). In other words, you make your claim in a notice to the world using words that are spelled correctly. In ancient times you would have called it casting a spell.

:)

Interesting.....

Still reading the wikipedia article from your link, but I find this VERY interesting!

Prior to the Revolutionary War, this was common knowledge among, like, all the people, even though the Constitution hadn't been brought into existence yet. Why? They needed this info to fight King George legally. It is based on all kinds of other legal documents, going back to the Magna Carta, and including the Northwest Ordinance, and The Articles of Confederation after they were brought into existence.

Everything is based on property rights. There is no other reason for government than to protect the property of the people. That's it, period. In civil law countries, property rights have been corrupted somewhat. But America is a common law country where property rights rule. Government has no other purpose.

What is your property? It is your body, your labor (no taxation allowed), your happiness, your peace.

:)

EDIT: No taxation? Then how would government run? By donation. As soon as people thought that they needed the strength of government, they would donate more. If it were on a person by person basis, people would receive the protection they paid for. If people didn't like what the government was doing, they would stop donating, and government would shrink, until it started doing what was right by the people.

True. But also funny is that in many places a bartender could be charged in that case.  ???

Being charged doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the outcome of the case.

Did the bartender force or trick the people into the bar? Did he force or trick the people into buying too much? Didn't the bartender stop serving the people when he noticed that it was impairing their abilities to simply converse in the bar? Did the bartender introduce into court the warnings against alcohol that were dispersed throughout his establishment?

Many department stores sell hard liquor. Anyone can chug down a couple bottles of Jim Beam, and not be able to drive. It isn't the department store's fault the guy was an idiot.

It's mostly in how you handle it in court.

:)