Well, that’s not quite what happened. There is evidence he ordered the hit and paid for it. The tainted cop tricked Ulbricht into thinking that the killing took place.
Well due to double jeopardy he can’t be tried again for the crime he’s already been acquitted for due to lack of evidence and police corruption, but you’re free to lick any boot you wish, and judge people based on all the untrue lies directly from the police you want to, it’s understandable!
I’m assuming you also believe police like Derek Chauvin then, since he was also convicted and convicted corrupt cops are somehow trustworthy to you? No? Well by all means believe these corrupt cops and not those corrupt cops, corrupt cops can be right twice a day or whatever, even when they’re stealing millions of dollars of bitcoin from the guy they’re fabricating evidence against, that doesn’t mean that the fabricated evidence is fabricated!
Why is there no “jerk off with eye roll” emoji? The world needs it.
No no, you misunderstand the circumstances. He wasn’t pardoned for the “murder for hire” charges, those got dropped. Years ago actually, quietly, after they were used to unfairly influence the case he was convicted in which the charges were “engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, conspiracy to distribute narcotics, conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to traffic fraudulent identity documents, and conspiracy to commit computer hacking.” For those charges he was convicted on all counts and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, but after that case ended the other case with the murder for hire charges was dropped for lack of evidence and police corruption in the case (and the cops themselves were actually convicted.) He can’t have been pardoned for a crime which he was never convicted in the first place. Not only that but the charges were dropped “with prejudice,” which means the court has looked at the merits of the case and made a final determination that the case should not move forward. The prosecutor is barred from refiling the charges at any future point.
The Jan 6th guys however were convicted of their charges, just as Ross was convicted of “engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, conspiracy to distribute narcotics, conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to traffic fraudulent identity documents, and conspiracy to commit computer hacking” and so basically “no they were convicted, Ross wasn’t but was overcharged for other crimes which he was convicted for.”
Look at it this way, if I’m a cop, and I just know you committed a murder, I’m damn sure of it, but I have no real evidence except for some stuff I fabricated, and then you get arrested for selling weed, I don’t think it should be legal for me to put you away for life for the charge of selling weed “because I toootally know you did that murder I don’t have evidence for.” Basically that’s what happened to Ross boiled down.
You may think someone deserves to die in prison for “engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, conspiracy to distribute narcotics, conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to traffic fraudulent identity documents, and conspiracy to commit computer hacking,” but I don’t, call me a progressive idk.
No no more like the boot licking you’re doing to the corrupt cops that were actually convicted for being corrupt. Wild choice but it’s yours to make. Meanwhile I’m “bootlicking” for that super dangerous…checks notes…webdev. Real scary guy that one.
I’m talking about your defense of convicted corrupt cops. Camera or not they were sent to prison and yet here you are parroting their lies, why?
“Innocent until proven guilty” doesn’t exonerate a person from personal judgement based on facts simply because they have not been convicted in a court of law.
Edit -
Also, just because a case has been dropped doesn’t mean they weren’t guilty. Based on evidence, it’s more than reasonable to state he attempted to have someone assassinated.
You’re also going to need to provide more supporting information than a single article that’s a clear opinion piece written by a business that is biased towards supporting Ulbricht. You also share this bias being an apparent libertarian yourself, which could imply you cherry-picked this article.
Not that I can’t change my mind, but that one link ain’t gonna do it.
Yes, the allegations of a drug dealer who was himself caught are very reliable indeed, even though the case was dismissed due to lack of evidence and the agents charged with corruption involved with the case, we should believe the corrupt cops and cornered rat over the other guy and he should rot in prison forever for the thing that was dismissed due to lack of evidence and corruption, JUSTICE!
Btw, while this source backs your claim (that I never disputed) that he wasaccused of these crimes, you’re gonna hate this part:
The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah when I said it (among other places.) Interestingly enough the whole “proven guilty” part is the bit that never happened.
I never claimed he was proven guilty or convicted. I’m only stating there is valid evidence that he paid for an assassination.
You say the case was dismissed due to a lack of evidence, but I’ve seen no proof that was the actual reason for dismissal. Also “not enough evidence” doesn’t invalidate existing evidence, it just means there is not enough that meets very specific requirements for a conviction, not that a person could not logically conclude an event happened as a matter of personal opinion.
Again, “innocent until proven guilty” does not mean a person can’t be personally judged by individuals, as a matter of personal opinion, for that person’s actions simply because a court of law had not convicted him of it. Especially if there is evidence of those actions.
For example, it’s clearly obvious that OJ Simpson murdered his wife and another person. But he was not convicted of it.
Evidence was tainted/fabricated by a crooked cop and Ulbricht was never convicted of it.
Well, that’s not quite what happened. There is evidence he ordered the hit and paid for it. The tainted cop tricked Ulbricht into thinking that the killing took place.
Source:
Page 19 under heading “2. Murders Commissioned by Dread Pirate Roberts”
But then again
https://reason.com/2018/07/25/ross-ulbrichts-murder-for-hire-charges-d/
Innocent until proven guilty.
By that logic, trump is “innocent” of treason.
Just because it hasn’t been proven yet, doesn’t mean the accused didn’t do it. We are not judges, we don’t have to be impartial.
According to the state, he is absolutely innocent.
Gotta remember there are at least two definitions of “justice”: the state’s version and common sense. They are almost never the same.
Well due to double jeopardy he can’t be tried again for the crime he’s already been acquitted for due to lack of evidence and police corruption, but you’re free to lick any boot you wish, and judge people based on all the untrue lies directly from the police you want to, it’s understandable!
I’m assuming you also believe police like Derek Chauvin then, since he was also convicted and convicted corrupt cops are somehow trustworthy to you? No? Well by all means believe these corrupt cops and not those corrupt cops, corrupt cops can be right twice a day or whatever, even when they’re stealing millions of dollars of bitcoin from the guy they’re fabricating evidence against, that doesn’t mean that the fabricated evidence is fabricated!
Why is there no “jerk off with eye roll” emoji? The world needs it.
Jan 6 insurrectionists got pardoned. Do you think they are “innocent”?
Fucking no, they are still traitors.
So… like bootlicking your daddy trump and his illegitimate pardons?
???
Dude mudered an innocent black man on camera? What are you talking about?
No no, you misunderstand the circumstances. He wasn’t pardoned for the “murder for hire” charges, those got dropped. Years ago actually, quietly, after they were used to unfairly influence the case he was convicted in which the charges were “engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, conspiracy to distribute narcotics, conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to traffic fraudulent identity documents, and conspiracy to commit computer hacking.” For those charges he was convicted on all counts and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, but after that case ended the other case with the murder for hire charges was dropped for lack of evidence and police corruption in the case (and the cops themselves were actually convicted.) He can’t have been pardoned for a crime which he was never convicted in the first place. Not only that but the charges were dropped “with prejudice,” which means the court has looked at the merits of the case and made a final determination that the case should not move forward. The prosecutor is barred from refiling the charges at any future point.
The Jan 6th guys however were convicted of their charges, just as Ross was convicted of “engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, conspiracy to distribute narcotics, conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to traffic fraudulent identity documents, and conspiracy to commit computer hacking” and so basically “no they were convicted, Ross wasn’t but was overcharged for other crimes which he was convicted for.”
Look at it this way, if I’m a cop, and I just know you committed a murder, I’m damn sure of it, but I have no real evidence except for some stuff I fabricated, and then you get arrested for selling weed, I don’t think it should be legal for me to put you away for life for the charge of selling weed “because I toootally know you did that murder I don’t have evidence for.” Basically that’s what happened to Ross boiled down.
You may think someone deserves to die in prison for “engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, conspiracy to distribute narcotics, conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to traffic fraudulent identity documents, and conspiracy to commit computer hacking,” but I don’t, call me a progressive idk.
No no more like the boot licking you’re doing to the corrupt cops that were actually convicted for being corrupt. Wild choice but it’s yours to make. Meanwhile I’m “bootlicking” for that super dangerous…checks notes…webdev. Real scary guy that one.
I’m talking about your defense of convicted corrupt cops. Camera or not they were sent to prison and yet here you are parroting their lies, why?
“Innocent until proven guilty” doesn’t exonerate a person from personal judgement based on facts simply because they have not been convicted in a court of law.
Edit -
Also, just because a case has been dropped doesn’t mean they weren’t guilty. Based on evidence, it’s more than reasonable to state he attempted to have someone assassinated.
You’re also going to need to provide more supporting information than a single article that’s a clear opinion piece written by a business that is biased towards supporting Ulbricht. You also share this bias being an apparent libertarian yourself, which could imply you cherry-picked this article.
Not that I can’t change my mind, but that one link ain’t gonna do it.
Removed by mod
There is evidence, though. I provided a reputable source that states such. So, you’re just misrepresenting my point.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/silk-road-drug-vendor-who-claimed-commit-murders-hire-silk-road-founder-ross-ulbricht
Yes, the allegations of a drug dealer who was himself caught are very reliable indeed, even though the case was dismissed due to lack of evidence and the agents charged with corruption involved with the case, we should believe the corrupt cops and cornered rat over the other guy and he should rot in prison forever for the thing that was dismissed due to lack of evidence and corruption, JUSTICE!
Btw, while this source backs your claim (that I never disputed) that he was accused of these crimes, you’re gonna hate this part:
Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah when I said it (among other places.) Interestingly enough the whole “proven guilty” part is the bit that never happened.
I never claimed he was proven guilty or convicted. I’m only stating there is valid evidence that he paid for an assassination.
You say the case was dismissed due to a lack of evidence, but I’ve seen no proof that was the actual reason for dismissal. Also “not enough evidence” doesn’t invalidate existing evidence, it just means there is not enough that meets very specific requirements for a conviction, not that a person could not logically conclude an event happened as a matter of personal opinion.
Again, “innocent until proven guilty” does not mean a person can’t be personally judged by individuals, as a matter of personal opinion, for that person’s actions simply because a court of law had not convicted him of it. Especially if there is evidence of those actions.
For example, it’s clearly obvious that OJ Simpson murdered his wife and another person. But he was not convicted of it.
Removed by mod