• ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Well due to double jeopardy he can’t be tried again for the crime he’s already been acquitted for due to lack of evidence and police corruption, but you’re free to lick any boot you wish, and judge people based on all the untrue lies directly from the police you want to, it’s understandable!

              I’m assuming you also believe police like Derek Chauvin then, since he was also convicted and convicted corrupt cops are somehow trustworthy to you? No? Well by all means believe these corrupt cops and not those corrupt cops, corrupt cops can be right twice a day or whatever, even when they’re stealing millions of dollars of bitcoin from the guy they’re fabricating evidence against, that doesn’t mean that the fabricated evidence is fabricated!

              Why is there no “jerk off with eye roll” emoji? The world needs it.

          • go $fsck yourself@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            “Innocent until proven guilty” doesn’t exonerate a person from personal judgement based on facts simply because they have not been convicted in a court of law.

            Edit -

            Also, just because a case has been dropped doesn’t mean they weren’t guilty. Based on evidence, it’s more than reasonable to state he attempted to have someone assassinated.

            You’re also going to need to provide more supporting information than a single article that’s a clear opinion piece written by a business that is biased towards supporting Ulbricht. You also share this bias being an apparent libertarian yourself, which could imply you cherry-picked this article.

            Not that I can’t change my mind, but that one link ain’t gonna do it.

            • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yes yes “even though there was no evidence and those cops were convicted of corruption I’ve decided to believe them because I like police when they go after those bad bad webdevs.”

              Whatever my dude. I’ve provided an article that cites sources and you’ve provided “nuh uh” as a rebuttal. I do not care about you and never will, be as dumb as you want it’s a free country.

              • go $fsck yourself@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                There is evidence, though. I provided a reputable source that states such. So, you’re just misrepresenting my point.

                The government also presented evidence that DPR commissioned the murders of five people to protect Silk Road’s anonymity

                • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/silk-road-drug-vendor-who-claimed-commit-murders-hire-silk-road-founder-ross-ulbricht

                  Yes, the allegations of a drug dealer who was himself caught are very reliable indeed, even though the case was dismissed due to lack of evidence and the agents charged with corruption involved with the case, we should believe the corrupt cops and cornered rat over the other guy and he should rot in prison forever for the thing that was dismissed due to lack of evidence and corruption, JUSTICE!

                  Btw, while this source backs your claim (that I never disputed) that he was accused of these crimes, you’re gonna hate this part:

                  The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

                  Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah when I said it (among other places.) Interestingly enough the whole “proven guilty” part is the bit that never happened.

                  • go $fsck yourself@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    I never claimed he was proven guilty or convicted. I’m only stating there is valid evidence that he paid for an assassination.

                    You say the case was dismissed due to a lack of evidence, but I’ve seen no proof that was the actual reason for dismissal. Also “not enough evidence” doesn’t invalidate existing evidence, it just means there is not enough that meets very specific requirements for a conviction, not that a person could not logically conclude an event happened as a matter of personal opinion.

                    Again, “innocent until proven guilty” does not mean a person can’t be personally judged by individuals, as a matter of personal opinion, for that person’s actions simply because a court of law had not convicted him of it. Especially if there is evidence of those actions.

                    For example, it’s clearly obvious that OJ Simpson murdered his wife and another person. But he was not convicted of it.