Sort of. In the indictment, under Count One (Narcotics Trafficking Conspiracy), it mentions that “in furtherance of the conspiracy” he “solicited a Silk Road user to execute a murder-for-hire of another Silk Road user” (page 5). I don’t know exactly what that means legally, but it does appear in the list of charges that he was convicted of, for whatever that’s worth.
3 Likes
They didn’t tack on attempted murder charges? That would have been a slam dunk too.
The War on Drugs is a travesty. But…
The US appetite for drugs destroys lives in Central America and elsewhere. By facilitating the sale of imported drugs in the US, he contributed to that destruction.
My personal take is that recreational drugs should be legalized in the US, proper, regulated supply chains should be established, purity and quality should be tightly controlled. But right now, this isn’t the case. Right now, violent criminals are pervasive in the cultivation/creation, supply chain, and distribution. Participating in the trade seems immoral.
I don’t have any thoughts on his sentence, but I don’t think we should pretend his efforts were harmless. Or fruitless. NPR put his net profit at $18 million in Bitcoins.
2 Likes
Here’s a quote from NPR’s article:
Prosecutors say Ulbricht enabled more than 1 million drug deals on the site, which, along with other illicit activity, generated more than $214 million in sales, and earned him about $18 million in bitcoins.
Apparently, conspiracy to traffic in narcotics, hack computers, and launder money, and engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise.
“Make no mistake, Ulbricht was a drug dealer and criminal profiteer who exploited people’s addictions and contributed to the deaths of at least six young people,” Preet Bharara, the United States attorney the Southern District of New York, said in a statement.
This is just a ridiculous statement. Does the same attorney think we should round up the CEO of Anheuser-Busch?
His work wasn’t harmless by any means, and his political statements about it are quite a slippery slope — but life in prison in a case where we don’t even know how the feds obtained control of the marketplace? Even the charges that he placed a hit on someone seem ridiculous because there’s no actual proof that anything took place other than the communication.
Punishment? sure. Life without parole? outrageous.
3 Likes
I do. A federal indictment means that a group of people (federal grand jury) found that the evidence provided by the A.U.S.A. is reasonable enough to go to trial, but by not means is this beyond a reasonable doubt. (Is there enough evidence suggest that this person could have committed the following crimes? Does this mean the person is guilty? Not necessarily.)
All federal indictments must go through a citizen grand jury as per the U.S. Constitution. Grand juries don’t weigh defense arguments; just yea or nay to go to trial. And the threshold is very low.
Please don’t interpret an indictment as the same as guilt.
2 Likes
The sentence is outrageous to me if I look at it in light of how other criminals are sentenced. Looking at it by itself, I don’t have a problem with it.
2 Likes
Thank you. As only a part time internet lawyer (and full time techie that talks to lawyers all the time) you put it much better than I could have.
the main problem is not what he did but how he did it.
after all, there are tacit status quo rules to follow.
1 Like
I think that’s debatable. What isn’t debatable is that what he did deserves a response worse than if he’d committed rape or murder.
1 Like
Knocking this guy down as a “drug kingpin” is like labeling three countries as the Axis of Evil and then only invading the weakest one. What they’re saying is, if you want to be a drug kingpin, you’d better be able to bribe, murder and litigate your way through the US Justice system with the same effectiveness as the actual cartels.
It’s all yours, Senors Zeta, we’ll keep the nerds out of your way.
5 Likes
I don’t think there would be any way to determine that his efforts were harmless (neither, btw, are the efforts of liquor manufacturers and sellers all over the world), which is why very few people are suggesting such a thing.
I don’t think we should pretend his sentence is just or rational.
3 Likes
…or the myth thereof.
2 Likes
Thanks for the compliment!
For what it’s worth, here’s the Sentencing Memorandum prepared by the US Attorney’s Office
Of specific technical interest is this part:
Given the enormous quantities of drugs sold on Silk Road, in combination with other aggravating factors, Ulbricht’s recommended sentence under the United States Sentencing Guidelines is life imprisonment, with a 20-year mandatory minimum due to his conviction for engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Section 848.
And 21 USC 848 reads
(a) Penalties; forfeitures
Any person who engages in a continuing criminal enterprise shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment which may not be less than 20 years and which may be up to life imprisonment, to a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $2,000,000 if the defendant is an individual or $5,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, and to the forfeiture prescribed in section 853 of this title; except that if any person engages in such activity after one or more prior convictions of him under this section have become final, he shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment which may not be less than 30 years and which may be up to life imprisonment, to a fine not to exceed the greater of twice the amount authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $4,000,000 if the defendant is an individual or $10,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, and to the forfeiture prescribed in section 853 of this title.
(b) Life imprisonment for engaging in continuing criminal enterprise
Any person who engages in a continuing criminal enterprise shall be imprisoned for life and fined in accordance with subsection (a) of this section, if—
(1) such person is the principal administrator, organizer, or leader of the enterprise or is one of several such principal administrators, organizers, or leaders; and
(2)
(A) the violation referred to in subsection (c)(1) of this section involved at least 300 times the quantity of a substance described in subsection 841(b)(1)(B) of this title, or
(B) the enterprise, or any other enterprise in which the defendant was the principal or one of several principal administrators, organizers, or leaders, received $10 million dollars in gross receipts during any twelve-month period of its existence for the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a substance described in section 841 (b)(1)(B) of this title.
(c) “Continuing criminal enterprise” defined
For purposes of subsection (a) of this section, a person is engaged in a continuing criminal enterprise if—
(1) he violates any provision of this subchapter or subchapter II of this chapter the punishment for which is a felony, and
(2) such violation is a part of a continuing series of violations of this subchapter or subchapter II of this chapter—
(A) which are undertaken by such person in concert with five or more other persons with respect to whom such person occupies a position of organizer, a supervisory position, or any other position of management, and
(B) from which such person obtains substantial income or resources.
So yeah, that’s why it’s legal to sentence Ulbricht to life in prison, but that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily just to do so.
2 Likes
If I was an educated American going to start a criminal venture, the first thing I’d do is emigrate. Honestly, if Ross would’ve ran Silk Road as a Canadian citizen living in Canada, he’d be out before he was 40.
2 Likes
And what about the banker’s that drove the US economy off a cliff in 2008? Where’s the prison time for those robber barons. Hypocrisy like that will drive a person to drugs.
5 Likes
He could still be charged under US law because the crimes would have been committed in the US – or have you missed the litigation against FIFA, to pick the latest example? It’s enough that some of the wire transfers were transacted through NY-based bank operations; that was sufficient to give the state of New York standing to sue.
I think the idea is that you first get laws passed that make what you do mostly legal. Note I said legal, not moral. Note that I also said mostly.
1 Like
