zlacker

[parent] [thread] 1 comments
1. declan+(OP)[view] [source] 2015-05-29 20:39:36
That court opinion describes a list of alleged chats that the Feds planned to introduce as evidence. It does not say the court accepted that evidence as true in the form of a finding of fact. (Put another way, that document does not say what you says it does, and we all know there are two sides to every story.)

It seems to me that if the Feds were confident about their murder-for-hire claim, they would have charged Ulbricht accordingly. That they chose not to do so indicates they were less than confident, and we should draw our conclusions accordingly.

For all I know he may well have been involved in murder for hire; I haven't paid close enough attention to the case to have an opinion. But I've followed too many hacker cases to accept unrebutted DOJ allegations as gospel truth.

replies(1): >>tptace+51
2. tptace+51[view] [source] 2015-05-29 20:47:57
>>declan+(OP)
The murder-for-hire scheme was "Overt Act" (b) for Count 1 of his "Narcotics Trafficking Conspiracy" charge.

Capone went away for tax evasion, right?

[go to top]