Ross Ulbricht: FBI Didn't Have Search Warrant, Violated Fourth Amendment

[ForgottenPassword]

Go Dread Pirate Roberts. I so hope he gets away with this. Would he also be able to recover the auctioned Bitcoins if he does?

Thats actually quite interesting because the 30,000 BTC that was sold was seized from the Silk Road server which they are alleging LE had no search warrant for. The problem is Ross never put in a claim to say he is the owner of those BTC, so unless he or someone else comes forward to say they belong to them they'll get to keep the proceeds from that auction.

The BTC seized on his actual laptop (100,000+ BTC) is being battled out right now. Ross is claiming they are the proceeds of Bitcoin trading. If he can prove he is the rightful owner and they were obtained legitimately he will get to keep them. He needs to have proof and it's unlikely that he does but how do we know, maybe they were actually from Bitcoin trading. I've read the affidavit and while it's obvious the FBI are not telling us all the facts they haven't come forward yet with a whole lot of proof to backup their claims that he is DPR and ran Silk Road etc. It's possible they don't have any hard evidence at all although I doubt that very much as they have a 99% conviction rate.

[1714797182]

1714797182

[1714797182]

1714797182

[1714797182]

1714797182

[1714797182]

1714797182

[LouReed]

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

They don't need a search warrant for Iceland, Iceland cooperates with the U.S. as part of a treaty. It was very likely they just let them take it, it was probably Iceland that had the search warrant then gave it over to the U.S. Its not like the U.S. would just show up outta nowhere in Iceland and start "stealing servers" from some guy who hosts the servers. I mean c'mon.

CRITICAL THINKING....


Who cares about Ross he is a scum bag and hurt bitcoin, as my constructive post states he is a destructive character!

Damn bro! Why didn't I think of that!!?? Moreover, why the hell didn't Ross' attorney think of that? I wonder how he became one of the top attorneys in the country when he can't even think of something sooo simple?

If I'm ever in legal trouble, I'll be sure to pm you straight away for legal advice! 

[CreationLayer]

A bunch of noise for their newest hire. Stall the case like sabu.

Just like the anonymous sabu got hired by the FIB

Someone like this doesn't just go down without having some of his information encrypted.

Surely he can cut a deal, and they are putting pressure on the guy to release more of what he knows.

They'd rather hire him then throw him in jail, that's what happens.

Also, the datacenter in Iceland doesn't have to require a warrant to see customer property. You would have to look at that companies specific policies. I doubt, with a little pressure, they wouldn't budge. Other hosting companies have done the same.

[coynbyer123]

The rights enumerated therein are not privilege granted by nature of geography. They are inalienable rights, endowed by the creator.

u just make stuff up?

is just amendment to constitution.

just prevents united states laws that try to restrict right.

has no effect outside.

text only says:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

nothing about "inalienable" or "endowed by the creator".

[counter]

If they broke the law to catch him I hope he's set free and even recovers the funds they stole.  Can't be picking and choosing who goes to jail outside of the legal system we have in place, simple as that.

[jbreher]

They don't need a search warrant for Iceland

How 'bout some critical thinking?

The 4th Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights. The rights enumerated therein are not privilege granted by nature of geography. They are inalienable rights, endowed by the creator. If the right applies to any human within the boundary of the USA, it applies to all humans anywhere.

way to not quote the rest. gg.

Go ahead and quote the rest if you want. Doesn't change a thing. Whether or not Iceland gave their assent to the US to rifle thorough a 'person, house, papers, or effects' does not abrogate the universal right to be free from such usurpations.

[redHeadBlunder]

They don't need a search warrant for Iceland

How 'bout some critical thinking?

The 4th Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights. The rights enumerated therein are not privilege granted by nature of geography. They are inalienable rights, endowed by the creator. If the right applies to any human within the boundary of the USA, it applies to all humans anywhere.

That is not 100% true. Constitutional rights only apply to US citizens regardless of where in the world they are. The constitution does not grant any rights to anyone who is not a US citizen.

[jbreher]

The rights enumerated therein are not privilege granted by nature of geography. They are inalienable rights, endowed by the creator.

u just make stuff up?

is just amendment to constitution.

just prevents united states laws that try to restrict right.

has no effect outside.

text only says:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

nothing about "inalienable" or "endowed by the creator".

Ever read the preamble? The Declaration of Independence? The Federalist Papers? The Anti-Federalist Papers? Maybe these foundational texts are too archaic for your tastes. How 'bout the Heller decision (2008) where the Supremes declare that the rights enumerated in the BoR are indeed rights that predate, and are superior to, any possible foundation of the good ol' US of A?

You're out in the weeds on this one.

[jbreher]

That is not 100% true. Constitutional rights only apply to US citizens regardless of where in the world they are. The constitution does not grant any rights to anyone who is not a US citizen.

Absolute twaddle. There is no such thing as 'Constitutional Rights', as the rights enumerated in the BoR predate the Constitution. This makes them superior to any governmental division or jurisdiction. As explained in the DoI, they are inalienable, and exist as granted by the creator.

[BIGbangTheory]

That is not 100% true. Constitutional rights only apply to US citizens regardless of where in the world they are. The constitution does not grant any rights to anyone who is not a US citizen.

Absolute twaddle. There is no such thing as 'Constitutional Rights', as the rights enumerated in the BoR predate the Constitution. This makes them superior to any governmental division or jurisdiction. As explained in the DoI, they are inalienable, and exist as granted by the creator.

What are you on, because I want some?

The constitution is the law of the land and is superior then any other laws in the US.

[coynbyer123]

Ever read the preamble?

yes

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America"

not say "rights" or "unalienable"

The Declaration of Independence?

yes

is propoganda doc intended to keep other from assist UK

The Federalist Papers?

yes

The Anti-Federalist Papers?

fancy word for poorly defined collection

read some

probably not all that you think i should

Maybe these foundational texts are too archaic for your tastes.

no

just not relevant to this thread

How 'bout the Heller decision (2008) where the Supremes declare that the rights enumerated in the BoR are indeed rights that predate, and are superior to, any possible foundation of the good ol' US of A?

read it

maybe i miss that part

link to where decision say amendment 4 "predate, and are superior to, any possible foundation of the good ol' US of A"?

You're out in the weeds on this one.

maybe so

maybe u like to ignore how world is and choose to see it how u want it

As explained in the DoI, they are inalienable, and exist as granted by the creator.

only 3 unalienable rights explained in "DoI"

"Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

dont say "search and seizure without warrant"

[CreationLayer]

They don't need a search warrant for Iceland

How 'bout some critical thinking?

The 4th Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights. The rights enumerated therein are not privilege granted by nature of geography. They are inalienable rights, endowed by the creator. If the right applies to any human within the boundary of the USA, it applies to all humans anywhere.

way to not quote the rest. gg.

Go ahead and quote the rest if you want. Doesn't change a thing. Whether or not Iceland gave their assent to the US to rifle thorough a 'person, house, papers, or effects' does not abrogate the universal right to be free from such usurpations.

It is up to the data center whether or not they wish to comply as it's their hardware and their physical space. You would have to read the policy of the data center in question. If the server was inside his house/apartment it would be a different question.

[Harley997]

There will be no chance at all that the charger will be dropped, you can't blame them for trying though. I really hope Ross comes out on top on this one though, he has a strong case.

[bitsmichel]

There will be no chance at all that the charger will be dropped, you can't blame them for trying though. I really hope Ross comes out on top on this one though, he has a strong case.

The media attention on this case is so large that there won't be a chance for a fair trial. I think Ross will figure it out the best way to deal with it though.

If they broke the law to catch him I hope he's set free and even recovers the funds they stole.  Can't be picking and choosing who goes to jail outside of the legal system we have in place, simple as that.

His BTC were auctioned even before the trial is finished. Personally I don't think he can be held responsible for running a web server, in the same way that Google cannot be held responsible for what videos people put on YouTube.

[Harley997]

There will be no chance at all that the charger will be dropped, you can't blame them for trying though. I really hope Ross comes out on top on this one though, he has a strong case.

The media attention on this case is so large that there won't be a chance for a fair trial. I think Ross will figure it out the best way to deal with it though.

If they broke the law to catch him I hope he's set free and even recovers the funds they stole.  Can't be picking and choosing who goes to jail outside of the legal system we have in place, simple as that.

His BTC were auctioned even before the trial is finished. Personally I don't think he can be held responsible for running a web server, in the same way that Google cannot be held responsible for what videos people put on YouTube.

I agree with you there, but his bitcoins were not auctioned off. The BTC that was auctioned off was the 30k BTC that was recovered from the actual Silk Road wallets. The FBI still cannot get access the 600,000 bitcoin's which Ross is using what the call a "Brain Wallet" which in order to retrieve the bitcoins the FBI first must solve a "question" and an "answer" for example, if I had a brain wallet I would chose something like Answer: How many bananas are there in 5 apples" and my answer would be "London underground" something really random like that someone would never guess.

[Bit_Happy]

Individual rights are an outdated concept from a more simple, safer time in history.
^^ "As seen on TV" ^^ 

[Jamie_Boulder]

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

Doesn't mean people should give up......fight for what you believe in.

That being said IMO he deserves to be behind bars but not for the amount of time he's facing - it could well be argued that he saved more lives then he ruined simply due to the drop in drug related violence that's all to common IRL.

[LouReed]

The motion isn't really to actually just throw out the case/dismiss the charges. It is actually an attempt to learn how the Government located the servers in the first place, and to determine IF that was done legally. If it was not done legally, then they are asking that the evidence be thrown out due to the "Fruit of the poisonous tree" meaning that if they hadn't found the servers, he would not have been caught (at least not when he was anyway).

This REALLY is the big question here, the biggest part of which is, why the hell are they in fact taking soooo damn long to show how they did it?? Most people take silence as an indicator of guilt, and if they did do everything "by the book" then why the hell not just say how it was done??

1. The Government’s Location of the Silk Road Servers
As set forth ante, all of the searches and seizures conducted pursuant to warrants and/or
orders were based on the initial ability of the government to locate the Silk Road Servers, obtain
the ESI on them, and perform extensive forensic analysis of that ESI. Thus, all subsequent
searches and seizures are invalid if that initial locating the Silk Road Servers, obtaining their ESI,
and gaining real-time continued access to those servers, was accomplished unlawfully.

a. Discovery of the Means By Which the Government Located the Servers

A definitive answer as to whether the government gained access to the Silk Road servers
lawfully or unlawfully is not possible at this stage because the government has not disclosed how
it located the Silk Road Servers. However, it is apparent that the government did not seek or
obtain a warrant to acquire the ESI on those servers, as the subsequent warrant applications note
that the ESI was provided in response to a request pursuant to a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty
(hereinafter “MLAT”).
As a result, Mr. Ulbricht seeks discovery of the means and methods employed by the
government to locate the Silk Road Servers, and the contents of the MLAT request(s). Those
discovery demands are set forth post, in POINT II, at 60.
The discovery demanded is essential to determine whether the entire series of warrants
and/or orders are infected by the government’s access to the Silk Road Servers, which included
not only their ESI, but also an ability to monitor activity on those servers continuously and in
real-time.

[Bit_Happy]

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.

I wouldn't call an unconstitutional search to be a technicality and I would hope no judge wouldn't either.  That being said we don't really know how strong the claim of a 4th amendment violation is.  A judge may disagree and allow the evidence to be presented.

The motion isn't really to actually just throw out the case/dismiss the charges. It is actually an attempt to learn how the Government located the servers in the first place, and to determine IF that was done legally. If it was not done legally, then they are asking that the evidence be thrown out....

Why do so many people call this a "technicality"?
Vital, primary freedoms are of supreme importance, not a technicality.

[btcxyzzz]

Message to anyone against Mr. Ross: YOU'RE SUCH A CATTLE! FUCK OFF.