[2016-09-16] ‘Keys to the Kingdom’: Ulbricht Defense Slams Court in Latest Brief

[tyz]

‘Keys to the Kingdom’: Ulbricht Defense Slams Court in Latest Brief

The defense team for Ross Ulbricht recently filed a reply brief in the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, in addition to the original appeal. Both Ulbricht’s family and defense attorney Joshua Dratel believe the Silk Road founder received an unfair trial for multiple reasons.

https://news.bitcoin.com/ulbrichts-defense-files-reply-brief/

[fancy_pants]

It appears that some cops fabricated evidence to cover up their theft of bitcoins. Then different cops submitted that evidence to trial with some help from the judge to make sure the evidence couldn't be questioned.  Not one of the justice system's prouder moments.

I wonder when Oliver Stone will get around to this story.

[BurtW]

It appears that some cops fabricated evidence to cover up their theft of bitcoins. Then different cops submitted that evidence to trial with some help from the judge to make sure the evidence couldn't be questioned.  Not one of the justice system's prouder moments.

I wonder when Oliver Stone will get around to this story.

I heard there is a book and story in the works about Curtis Green.  Remember him?  Edit:  Curtis believes that Ross hired a federal undercover agent AND a second backup assassin to have Curtis killed.

[fancy_pants]

It appears that some cops fabricated evidence to cover up their theft of bitcoins. Then different cops submitted that evidence to trial with some help from the judge to make sure the evidence couldn't be questioned.  Not one of the justice system's prouder moments.

I wonder when Oliver Stone will get around to this story.

I heard there is a book and story in the works about Curtis Green.  Remember him?  Ross hired a federal undercover agent AND a second backup assassin to have Curtis killed.

Why wasn't Ross ever indicted for hiring these hitmen?  Is it because the hitmen story is complete bullshit and the bullshit evidence would have to enter the court record?

[Carlton Banks]

I heard there is a book and story in the works about Curtis Green.  Remember him?  Ross hired a federal undercover agent AND a second backup assassin to have Curtis killed.

Why wasn't Ross ever indicted for hiring these hitmen?  Is it because the hitmen story is complete bullshit and the bullshit evidence would have to enter the court record?

Indeed. Seems a little strange that the only genuinely immoral act that Ulbricht was accused of lacked any compelling evidence. It's equally likely that Ross' assertion that he had handed the Dread Pirate account over to other admins (who we now know were FBI agents), and that they arranged the murder; both to handle a real problem (shut Green's mouth) and to smear Ross later on. Either is possible on the strength of available evidence.

@Burt: your reputation might not stand up too well in Bitcoin if you repeat the unfounded allegations of others like that in future.

I'm not saying I know Ross wasn't involved. I don't. But neither do you: you have the say-so of Federal officials and no evidence. I would like to think that your experience at the hands of Federal officials would have taught you to treat their assertions with care, given their behaviour towards you, your family and assets in a similarly politicised case.

[BurtW]

I have talked to Curtis Green.  Have you?  He seems to think there is a lot of truth to the tale.  I think he would know since it happened to him.

I think it would be great to have a movie about both of them and the entire Silk Road story.

[fancy_pants]

I have talked to Curtis Green.  Have you?  He seems to think there is a lot of truth to the tale.  I think he would know since it happened to him.

I think it would be great to have a movie about both of them and the entire Silk Road story.

I haven't talked to Curtis Green.  I have talked to Ross Ulbricht a few times and he seems way too grounded and mellow to put a hit out on someone.  Due to life circumstance,  I've met more than one convicted murderer and I have the opinion that murderers are typically a bit unhinged.   As for Ross Ulbricht, I think he got framed on the murder part, but a court case with evidence that takes a jury beyond a shadow of a doubt would convince me otherwise.  Until he is convicted of murder, the guy got two life sentences so that the U.S. Marshall could confiscate his fortune.  Perhaps a movie would help get some balance ...

[Carlton Banks]

I have talked to Curtis Green.  Have you?  He seems to think there is a lot of truth to the tale.  I think he would know since it happened to him.

Well, it's just possible that Curtis Green has his own biases. If Curtis told you something the public isn't prior to, it's still not a good idea to make strong assertions of guilt pertaining to a serious (landmark) legal case. At the least, Curtis Green could end up in trouble over that. If he didn't, my point stands: the evidence to condemn Ulbricht does not exist or is otherwise unavailable at this point.

Edit: and this is a story that's coming out of Green's intentions to publish his experiences with the Silk Road as a book. Unless it's a really fascinating story, fascinating elements may work their way into it.

I think it would be great to have a movie about both of them and the entire Silk Road story.

Maybe. I'd not consider any Hollywood production free from political influence; just about every "re-telling of a real political story" has been heavily propagandised. An independent film could do it some justice, perhaps, depends on who's involved. Who, out of all the various IRL protagonists, the producers could get to endorse such a movie would be interesting.

[gentlemand]

I think poor old Ross's conviction was so politically charged there'd have to be some type of miracle to gain a neutral reassessment. Perhaps it'll come a few years down the line. Right now daddy government is still feeling vengeful.

As for Ross Ulbricht, I think he got framed on the murder part

This didn't come up in his trial at all and he wasn't convicted of anything related to it. They had all the ammo they wanted just on the drugs bit. The hit bit is rather confusing overall but I wasn't there so won't declare anything.

[BurtW]

I have talked to Curtis Green.  Have you?  He seems to think there is a lot of truth to the tale.  I think he would know since it happened to him.

I think it would be great to have a movie about both of them and the entire Silk Road story.

I haven't talked to Curtis Green.  I have talked to Ross Ulbricht a few times and he seems way too grounded and mellow to put a hit out on someone.  Due to life circumstance,  I've met more than one convicted murderer and I have the opinion that murderers are typically a bit unhinged.   As for Ross Ulbricht, I think he got framed on the murder part, but a court case with evidence that takes a jury beyond a shadow of a doubt would convince me otherwise.  Until he is convicted of murder, the guy got two life sentences so that the U.S. Marshall could confiscate his fortune.  Perhaps a movie would help get some balance ...

In my dealings with Curtis he also seems very straight forward, grounded, and honest also, so, what I can say for sure is that Curtis Green strongly believes that there was a hit (or hits) taken out on his life.

Having been falsely accused, having seen some of the "evidence" that appeared in my own discovery ("he was too calm when we arrested him", "he had cash in his safe", "he had an account on silk road" - I never did, "his wife said she was no longer an attorney" - she told them multiple times she is an active attorney, etc.), having seen statements like "there are few legitimate uses for Bitcoins" used in the sealed search warrants in my own case I am acutely aware of how far the DOJ and Homeland Security will go to confiscate property to fund their operations.

So I will certainly retract my earlier statement that "Ross took out the hit(s) on Curtis" and replace it with the statement above.

[Hazir]

It appears that some cops fabricated evidence to cover up their theft of bitcoins. Then different cops submitted that evidence to trial with some help from the judge to make sure the evidence couldn't be questioned.  Not one of the justice system's prouder moments.

I wonder when Oliver Stone will get around to this story.

Since we now have Stone's latest movie about Snowden completed there is always a possibility of new blockbuster.
After all bitcoin seems to be really in vogue topic right now. The problem is, however, that Ulbricht's case is not so one sided and not finished yet.
He might be framed by cops, displayed as scapegoat but he also was not purely altruistic character like Snowden.

[Carlton Banks]

Since we now have Stone's latest movie about Snowden completed there is always a possibility of new blockbuster.
After all bitcoin seems to be really in vogue topic right now. The problem is, however, that Ulbricht's case is not so one sided and not finished yet.
He might be framed by cops, displayed as scapegoat but he also was not purely altruistic character like Snowden.

You see, the Snowden movie is exactly what I'm talking about vis a vis Hollywood propaganda reinforcing BS media stories.

The story presented by Edward Snowden is not credible. He slipped through far too many nets whilst simultaneously behaving far too conspicuously, and has a history of working for multiple US alphabet agencies (like a modern day Lee Harvey Oswald, Oliver Stone should be abundantly aware of that particular irony). And I'm not sure if many people notice the glaring problem with his so-called moral stance: Snowden is on record saying that he's on board with totalitarian surveilllance society, he just believes that the public should be informed that's what's going on.

It's far more credible that Snowden is the US's way of announcing the all-pervasive surveillance dragnet that's been in place since the internet ever existed. So, altruist? No.

[BurtW]

Oliver Stone is a big deal, big budget, mass market, truth is "whatever sells", make money kind of guy.

That is why I would hope that the movie about Silk Road, Ross, Curtis and the nefarious agents would be more on the lines of a low budget, balanced, as truthful as possible, possibly somewhat boring documentary.  Oliver Stone is the last person I would want to be involved.

PS:  if anyone is thinking of doing this our, much less interesting, story is also available as filler, background, etc.

[Sithara007]

There is no point in going for appeals. Ross Ulbricht is never going to walk free, as the Wall Street criminals want to make an example out of him. He challenged the existing monetary and financial systems, and he is going to suffer for that. And regarding those fake attempted murder charges.... only retarded people are going to believe in all that BS.

[fancy_pants]

I think poor old Ross's conviction was so politically charged there'd have to be some type of miracle to gain a neutral reassessment. Perhaps it'll come a few years down the line. Right now daddy government is still feeling vengeful.

As for Ross Ulbricht, I think he got framed on the murder part

This didn't come up in his trial at all and he wasn't convicted of anything related to it. They had all the ammo they wanted just on the drugs bit. The hit bit is rather confusing overall but I wasn't there so won't declare anything.

It's not that confusing, and no they didn't have everything they needed on drug charges alone.  The murder allegations were used to get the judge to deny bail and to sway public opinion against the defendant Ross Ulbricht.  Here's a primer:  http://www.dailydot.com/crime/silk-road-murder-charges-ross-ulbricht/

On the other side,  when Ross tried to bring in Andreas Antonopoulos to surface the possibility that the police had the means and motive to frame Ross, the judge wouldn't allow the testimony.   

2 + 2 = 4


 

[fancy_pants]

I have talked to Curtis Green.  Have you?  He seems to think there is a lot of truth to the tale.  I think he would know since it happened to him.

I think it would be great to have a movie about both of them and the entire Silk Road story.

I haven't talked to Curtis Green.  I have talked to Ross Ulbricht a few times and he seems way too grounded and mellow to put a hit out on someone.  Due to life circumstance,  I've met more than one convicted murderer and I have the opinion that murderers are typically a bit unhinged.   As for Ross Ulbricht, I think he got framed on the murder part, but a court case with evidence that takes a jury beyond a shadow of a doubt would convince me otherwise.  Until he is convicted of murder, the guy got two life sentences so that the U.S. Marshall could confiscate his fortune.  Perhaps a movie would help get some balance ...

In my dealings with Curtis he also seems very straight forward, grounded, and honest also, so, what I can say for sure is that Curtis Green strongly believes that there was a hit (or hits) taken out on his life.

Having been falsely accused, having seen some of the "evidence" that appeared in my own discovery ("he was too calm when we arrested him", "he had cash in his safe", "he had an account on silk road" - I never did, "his wife said she was no longer an attorney" - she told them multiple times she is an active attorney, etc.), having seen statements like "there are few legitimate uses for Bitcoins" used in the sealed search warrants in my own case I am acutely aware of how far the DOJ and Homeland Security will go to confiscate property to fund their operations.

So I will certainly retract my earlier statement that "Ross took out the hit(s) on Curtis" and replace it with the statement above.

Thanks for that.

[yayayo]

[...]

It's far more credible that Snowden is the US's way of announcing the all-pervasive surveillance dragnet that's been in place since the internet ever existed. So, altruist? No.

Although everything is possible, I'm not so sure about that, simply because it involves a whole lot of complex dependencies and there would have been an easier way to make this announcement (for example via wikileaks). Especially the motive behind making such an announcement voluntarily remains unclear.

In the Ulbricht case I'm pretty sure that they wanted to make an example out of him. That doesn't mean that he will never be released, it just might take a few decades (which is sad enough). It's clear that the trail doesn't live up to constitutional standards. But the same way I do not fully trust in the whole investigation that lead to conviction and the statements of Curtis Green I must admit that I also have problems with fully trusting Ross Ulbricht.

In my opinion, the truth in this case has not yet been fully revealed and there may be another twist or two to the whole story.

ya.ya.yo!

[Carlton Banks]

[...]

It's far more credible that Snowden is the US's way of announcing the all-pervasive surveillance dragnet that's been in place since the internet ever existed. So, altruist? No.

Although everything is possible, I'm not so sure about that, simply because it involves a whole lot of complex dependencies and there would have been an easier way to make this announcement (for example via wikileaks). Especially the motive behind making such an announcement voluntarily remains unclear.

Well, Snowden's version of events is not plausible, so reading between the lines is necessary if you're interested in the truth.

I think the point of Snowden (and the reason why a simpler route of using Wikileaks didn't occur) is as a Plato's Cave styled rhetorical narrative. The idea would be to introduce (with huge drama and journalistic attention, just so everyone hears about it) to the wider public to a new archetype: digital rights hero/villain, hence simultaneously fostering both hero and villain narratives, depending on which side of personal freedom one's politics resides in (another establishment classic, divide and conquer dialectic). This would help to ensure that the possibility of real whistleblowers with less politically convenient ideas about the surveillance culture never step forward "because someone else is doing it". It's a public relations classic: bad stories should be front-runned and controlled as much as possible by their subject, "get out in front of a bad story" is the short hand.

And that sort of perception management should concern every single Bitcoin user out there: you are a future target of where this new cultural phenomenon is going to be pushed to. The public are being trained to condemn future Snowden-types, where before they had little to no opinion, or considered nerdy types as non-threats. Information and it's perception are becoming highly sophisticated weapons of totalitarianism,