zlacker

>>Ozarki+(OP)
I feel torn about this because it seems there was good evidence for attempted murder- and I cannot understand why they never tried him for that (seemingly larger) crime. However, for the crime he was actually found guilty of, the sentence was unfair and unreasonable. It seems they unethically sentenced him for crimes he was not even ever charged with.

I'd also argue he almost certainly saved a huge number of lives with Silk Road: the ability to view eBay style feedback and chemical test results makes buying illegal drugs far safer than buying them on the street. On Silk Road people could buy from a reputable seller with a long history of providing unadulterated products, and could view testimonials from other buyers who had sent the products for chemical analysis.

>>Univer+9S1
What you are saying is nothing short of the manifestation of pure evil.

Innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until a random hunch is resolved.

The federal government has a long history of manufacturing evidence and this is no different.

Again, pure evil what you are saying.

>>kylebe+ks3
What are you talking about? I specifically said it was unethical that they seem to have sentenced him for crimes he was never even tried for- but deserved a fair trial for. You appear to think I was saying the opposite of that?