Quote from: Blackbird0 on May 28, 2015, 12:14:26 AM

Quote from: tarsua on May 27, 2015, 11:35:59 PM

Quote from: BayAreaCoins on May 27, 2015, 11:27:36 PM

Quote from: Studio60 on May 27, 2015, 09:49:32 PM

Quote from: gentlemand on May 26, 2015, 08:01:33 PM

He probably thought he was invulnerable like everyone else who gets caught. It does boggle the mind a bit. He should've done a runner a long, long time before.

I think you hit the nail on the head. He was way too cocky in his own cleverness. I mean reading the Wired article of the FBI agent's account of events shows he was over confident. On the day of the arrest the agent realized too late he was walking right past Ross looking like a cop, carrying a laptop, and Ross didn't even notice him. I mean, come on.

I still think the feds chose to bust his ass cause Ross was turning into a greedy pig upping the vendor fees yet again. lol

I picked 30... it maybe more than that though.

I imagine they will appeal it.

I'm sure they wont appeal, he has given up on fighting, he wrote a letter to the judge asking for as little time as possible

So ...

This is the procedural phase of a federal prosecution that we call sentencing. The defendant has been found guilty by a jury. The judge then sentences the defendant according to the now-advisory U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. During sentencing, the government and the defense make arguments to the judge tending to aggravate or mitigate the conduct that the defendant committed. It is only after a sentence has been handed down (judgment has been entered) that a defendant can appeal.

So, I fully expect the defendant, Ulbricht, to appeal. And simply because he is arguing for leniency at sentencing does not mean that he is no longer going to appeal. In fact, it is entirely in the normal course of things for a defendant who has lost his trial but still intends to appeal to argue as he has at sentencing.

It was an administrative hearing trial and jury. As you said, Ross can appeal.

Look at the 7th Amendment. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution:

Quote

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Since the verdict can be appealed, it wasn't a common law verdict. The 7th Amendment says that common law jury verdicts can't be appealed.

Certainly the amount of money involved is more than $20. Ross needs to stand up any time during the appeal and require a common law court trial. Things change in common law. They aren't done the same as administrative. In common law, Ross could easily win.