Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

He did attempt to hire hitmen to murder several people, although he was not charged for doing so in this trial.


> He did attempt to hire hitmen to murder several people, although he was not charged for doing so in this trial.

The viral spread of this narrative is exactly what the government counted on in this case.

The problem: it's not true.


Why do you think it's not true?

Remember that until the trial began, his defenders kept on saying he wasn't DPR and had nothing to do with Silk Road (including his mother), and then the defense admitted it in the beginning of the trial.


The BTC payments to the supposed assassins were also sourced directly to Ulbricht's wallet, so if you're going to indulge in counterfactuals about the "hit man" story, they need to revolve around Ulbricht twice staging elaborate hits in order to... what? What's the thing a staged assassination could cover up that's worse than an assassination?


The evidence is incredibly flimsy and has changed throughout.

The most significant reason I believe these charges aren't true is that the government essentially revealed its hand in trumpeting them so loudly at the bail proceeding and in public at that time, without yet charging him (the narrative is laid out here: http://www.dailydot.com/crime/silk-road-murder-charges-ross-...).

To me, I now need to see overwhelming evidence in order to buy this. And that does not exist, or at least hasn't been presented yet. So now, we have to look at what evidence does exist: the ludicrous alleged email exchange (here: http://www.wired.com/2015/02/read-transcript-silk-roads-boss...).

I don't know about you, but this seems flatly unbelievable to me. And even if the dialogue weren't so Hollywood, let's not forget that the alleged victims don't even exist.

And most importantly, if this is the only evidence, the government was obligated to say so a long time ago rather than the song and dance that occurred during the bail proceeding.


The dailydot says he was never charged for murder, which isn't true; http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/02/04/383870485/ros... says that he's pending trial in Baltimore.

Also, the government thinks he didn't actually get people killed, but that he was tricked into thinking that he had.

Why would Ross admit to founding Silk Road if it wasn't true?

This wasn't the only evidence; there were large bitcoin payments directly from Ross's wallet, as well as journal entries. Ross is a known liar, as he claimed not to be the founder of Silk Road before admitting he was, so I don't trust what he says.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: