Hacker News Reader

Comment by blackshaw | Hacker News Reader

According to Wikipedia, Ulbricht allegedly tried to hire a hitman to murder at least five people, but this wasn't actually something he was formally charged with at trial.

> Federal prosecutors alleged that Ulbricht had paid $730,000 in murder-for-hire deals targeting at least five people,[27] allegedly because they threatened to reveal Ulbricht's Silk Road enterprise.[36] Prosecutors believe no contracted killing actually occurred.[27] Ulbricht was not charged in his trial in New York federal court with any murder for hire,[27][37] but evidence was introduced at trial supporting the allegations.[27][38] The evidence that Ulbricht had commissioned murders was considered by the judge in sentencing Ulbricht to life, and was a factor in the Second Circuit's decision to affirm the life sentence.[38]

View on HN

"no contracted killing actually occurred"

Isn't it illegal to hire people to kill people even if they aren't actually killed? Like when the police go undercover they don't wait for someone to be killed, they wait for definitive evidence that the hiring person seriously plans to follow through with it I thought.

Yep, that's what Joe Exotic is in jail for.

No killing actually occured because Ulbricht was incompetent at procuring contract killing. Ulbricht was scammed, paying $730K for nothing. But he did have the intention of having the victims killed.

It should be noted that the killing was conspiraed by FBI Agents where some of them also stealed a bunch of bitcoin for their own interest. It's nowhere mentioned cause it would put the Feds in a bad light

Are you suggesting that FBI actually forced him to contract a hitman? My understanding is that FBI set up the bait and this guy eat it hook and all. It is not illegal or even immoral to bait somebody, there was no pressure, FBI presented the opportunity and this guy wanted to have somebody killed.

It's certainly viewed as immoral at the very least in the UK.

"In R v Looseley; Attorney General's Reference (No 3 of 2000) [2002] 1 Cr. App. R. 29, the House of Lords held that although entrapment is not a substantive defence in English law, where an accused can show entrapment, the court may stay the proceedings as an abuse of the court's process or it may exclude evidence pursuant to Section 78 PACE 1984 ...

"Police conduct which brings about state-created crime is unacceptable and improper, and to prosecute in such circumstances would be an affront to the public conscience."

- https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/abuse-process

Entrapment is when you motivate someone to commit a crime that they would not have otherwise committed.

In this case, this guy went looking for a contract killer and the police answered his request.

He would not have committed the crime if the FBI hadn't set up the fake persona that was allegedly going to get caught and get Ulbright arrested and charged with a life sentence.

Lies of the police doesn't constitute entrapment - only forcibly coercion does. Nobody forced Ulbright to hire an assassin - they only lied to him, but his decision stands none the less.

Iirc there was some coercion component to it too. The set up was the hells angels were gonna kill the dude anyways and told him if they didnt most of silkroad probably get caught/deanonymised /arrested. Considering the other claims of potential corruption, id say that classifies as an existential threat scenerio entirely created by law enforcement to coarce him into hiring the assassins as a "now or never, life or death" of ross and his customers situation.

Not anything damning either way, bit definitely food for thought.

I can easily see the fbi agents convincing him that his life was threatened by the 5 guys, offering to kill them, providing a contact for the hitman which is also an undercover fbi agent, then share the $750000

Reply on news.ycombinator.com