Railroaded:

The Real Story of Silk Road

1. Traveling the Silk Road

However, vendors realized that the site’s anonymity made it a safe platform for selling illegal drugs, the most common transactions being for personal use amounts of cannabis.[1-8] A few months after its launch, gawker.com published an article about Silk Road, exposing it to a more general audience.[1-9]

2. Passing the Torch

3. Targeting Karpeles

As Der-Yeghiayan connected the dots, he found another indication of what looked like Karpeles’s involvement. One of Karpeles’s websites, tuxtelecom.com, included “a tutorial…constructed using ‘Mediawiki’ and a specific version of this software, version 1.17.″[3-14] He also found that “silkroadmarket.org…and…Silk Road…also contain[ed] pages constructed using…the same version of the same software used to create the ‘wiki’ page on…tuxtelecom.com.” He reviewed the Mediawiki website and found that “the Mediawiki software [was] regularly updated and…many versions have been released over time. Thus, the fact that the exact same version of the software was used to create the ‘wiki’ page on tuxtelecom, silkroadmarket.org and…Silk Road…indicates, again, that the same administrator—Karpeles—was responsible for creating all three of these sites.”[3-15]

In fact, Karpeles had moved both silkroadmarket.org and tuxtelecom.com “repeatedly and simultaneously…to different IP addresses.” This showed that “Karpeles controlled the [websites] and that he hosted them both at IP addresses he controlled.”[3-16]

4. Fighting for Control

At the meeting, Der-Yeghiayan told them that he had tracked down the Silk Road administrator, Mark Karpeles. Unbeknownst to Der-Yeghiayan, McFarland intended to co-opt his investigation into Karpeles and had informed C3 of his plans to “travel to [a] foreign country to interview [him].”[4-3]

In early August, Der-Yeghiayan wrote McFarland outlining the “large list of information” leading him to Karpeles and Barr as the ones behind Silk Road and DPR.[4-4] Because Der-Yeghiayan knew that pursuing Karpeles and Barr without tipping them off would be extremely difficult, he told McFarland “not to share the information with the rest of [his]…task force.”[4-5] He “didn’t want anybody reaching out to Karpeles” because he was “worried that if someone…did something, that Karpeles might find out.” He warned McFarland that Karpeles “closely monitors…all of his websites,” which “appeared to be fronts” that he “is actively tracking.” And “if someone went on and wasn’t sufficiently disguised, then [Karpeles] might recognize it as law enforcement,” and it would tip him or someone he works with off to the investigation.[4-6]

The following day, Steven Snyder, HSI Baltimore’s Certified Undercover (CUC) program manager, told Der-Yeghiayan that McFarland was once again trying to monopolize the Silk Road investigation, this time by registering it in Baltimore’s CUC program. Snyder refused to allow this “because it was clear to him that [McFarland] was copying [Der-Yeghiayan’s] case, and there could only be one CUC program over the target website.”[4-10] Yet, within a few weeks, Snyder reversed his decision and approved McFarland’s as the sole investigation, even though McFarland had been dropped by C3 from the CUC program the previous month.[4-11]

At this point, McFarland began demanding all Der-Yeghiayan’s information on Karpeles, saying they were “trying to work him.” Der-Yeghiayan refused, telling McFarland “to not work [Karpeles] independent of HSI Chicago.”[4-12] By October, Der-Yeghiayan discovered that McFarland had “shared all of HSI Chicago’s information on Karpeles with members of [his] task force,” including an “IRS agent, DEA agent and [Secret Service] agent.” Further, McFarland had “issued multiple subpoenas…and had actively worked [Karpeles] to include a type of surveillance,” all without Der-Yeghiayan’s knowledge.[4-13]

5. Going Rogue

According to the government, Force and Bridges also duped DPR into believing that Green was behind the theft. Allegedly, DPR then went to Force, still thinking he had cartel connections, and asked him to track Green down and retrieve the vendors’ money. Force agreed and, with Green already in custody, played along and pretended to catch Green and kill him.[5-15]

It is unknown, however, if DPR was actually involved at all because the evidence for this entire incident came from Force himself after he and Bridges had infiltrated Silk Road. They had the ability to fabricate the whole thing. “When I saw the [murder-for-hire] transcripts,” Green said in a later interview, they were “[in line with Force’s] narrative, exactly what he portrayed. So was it there or did they put it there? I don’t know.”[5-16]

Force and Bridges went on to extort DPR on other occasions, using pieces of Der-Yeghiayan’s investigation as leverage, along with threats of exposure and death. In one instance, they messaged DPR using the name “DeathFromAbove” and told him they had identified him and were going to take revenge for having Green killed. Eventually, they settled for extorting him.[5-17]

Another time, under the name “French Maid,” the two corrupt agents tried to sell DPR “information concerning the government’s investigation into the Silk Road.” Force, out of habit, signed one of his messages with his first name “Carl.” To cover this up, he later said his name was “Carla Sophia,” a Silk Road user with “many girlfriends and boyfriends on the site.”[5-18]

These and other schemes netted the pair at least 23,984 bitcoins, although it is unknown how many remain hidden.[5-19][5-20]

6. Thwarting Der-Yeghiayan

By this time, Der-Yeghiayan’s investigation was derailed, leaving him with no seizures and Karpeles scrambling to escape. However, Der-Yeghiayan was sure he had his man and continued to doggedly pursue him.

On May 17, 2013, a conference call occurred among Der-Yeghiayan and AUSA Krickbaum from Chicago, McFarland and AUSA Herring from Baltimore, and AUSA Kay (who had helped Bridges go rogue and seize Karpeles’s money). During the call, Kay stated he was “trying to work on an interview with [Karpeles].” Krickbaum asked “what the purpose of the interview was.” Kay replied that he “wanted to know more about [Karpeles]’s money business and…to ask him directly about his knowledge of Silk Road.” Der-Yeghiayan “expressed serious concern over that approach and…[over] Kay using [his] information developed on [Karpeles] for [his] own use.” Kay agreed to “hold off for several months…while [Der-Yeghiayan] prepare[d] [his] indictment.”[6-1]

Even with Kay's assurance, Der-Yeghiayan was worried that he would go behind his back again and expressed this to McFarland. McFarland reassured him that “he had complete control over…Kay and he was the one to decide whether or not [Karpeles] would be interviewed,” that “he would honor…Der-Yeghiayan’s request to not pursue or interview [Karpeles].”[6-2]

On another conference call two months later, “Der-Yeghiayan specifically asked…Herring if there were any developments with [Karpeles] and…Kay, specifically if there were any more talks about meetings.” Herring said, “there was not.”[6-3]

Once again, Der-Yeghiayan’s trust in his colleagues was misplaced. Unknown to him, they were working out their own deal with Karpeles. In fact, on July 8th, the day before telling Der-Yeghiayan there would be no meeting, “Herring was notified by…Kay that a face-to-face meeting was going to take place between him and [Karpeles]’s attorney.” Neither Kay nor Herring notified Der-Yeghiayan or told him about the meeting when he specifically asked.[6-4]

Two days later, “Kay met in person with [Karpeles]’s attorneys.” During the meeting, Karpeles’s lawyers “brought up Silk Road and stated that [Karpeles] was willing to tell them who [he] suspects is currently running the website in order to relieve [him] of any potential charges.” Kay then proceeded to arrange a meeting overseas with Karpeles himself. That same evening, Der-Yeghiayan met with McFarland and Herring in preparation for a coordination meeting the next day, yet still neither mentioned the meeting planned with Karpeles or his lawyers.[6-5]

At the coordination meeting, yet another law enforcement office was brought in: FBI New York, represented by their lead investigator Christopher W. Tarbell and Southern District of New York AUSA Serrin Turner, along with “multiple DOJ...and CCSIP attorneys.”[6-6] Tarbell brought an important piece of the government’s investigation to the table: the location of the server hosting Silk Road. It was in Iceland and Tarbell said he was seeking a copy of it from the Reykjavik Metropolitan Police.[6-7] Force and Bridges now had "reason to fear that any communications between [themselves] and DPR would be accessible to [Tarbell]."[6-8]

Der-Yeghiayan briefed his entire case to the group and once again identified Karpeles as their “main target” and the man behind DPR and Silk Road. The CCSIP attorney overseeing the meeting asked if “any other office had any case on [Karpeles].” All the Baltimore attendees, including McFarland, Herring, Herring’s supervisor, and Bridges, “all remained silent,” despite knowing that a meeting had just taken place with Karpeles’s attorneys the day before. The CCSIP attorney went on to say that, “since the information [Der-Yeghiayan] shared was brought in good faith, that no other office should attempt to pursue [Karpeles].”[6-9]

7. Being Wonderful

“I’m trying to warn you. The DEA, ICE, POSTAL INSPECTOR, NSI, FBI, CIA, NSA are itching to get credit for your arrest.”[7-7]

DPR paid notwonderful in bitcoins every week for ongoing updates on the investigation.[7-8]

8. The Secret Meeting

Unbeknownst to Der-Yeghiayan, his colleagues in Baltimore and New York had already determined that Karpeles would not be the target. Force and Bridges learned in advance that “law enforcement intended to make an arrest of DPR…, thereby giving [them] ample time to work [him].” This allowed DPR to “formulate and implement…an escape plan that…incriminated [Ross].”[8-4][8-5] Exactly what Karpeles told Kay remains unknown, but it is established that he offered Kay someone to target as DPR instead of himself in exchange for legal immunity.[8-6]

Ross was the “perfect fall guy because, after all, Silk Road was his idea,”[8-7] and he trusted DPR enough to hand his creation off to him early on.[8-8][8-9]

It would take just over two months after Karpeles met with Kay for the government to apprehend Ross.[8-10] As stated in court documents, "with pressure mounting toward the end of 2013—because the government had access to Silk Road’s...servers…but permitted the site to continue operating...—[they] seized on [Ross] as DPR, thereby letting [Karpeles] escape justice and leave [Ross] as the wrongfully prosecuted culprit.” Just as Bridges had set up Green to take the fall for his theft, Ross was set up to take the fall for the entire operation of Silk Road. DPR, who “purchased and was leaked information about the government’s investigation of Silk Road, framed [Ross] to absorb the consequences.”[8-11]

In order to issue subpoenas and warrants and ultimately indict Ross, the government had to provide an explanation of why he was running Silk Road and how they found him. Known as parallel construction, this is a tactic used by law enforcement “as a means of disguising how an investigation began.”[8-12]

In Ross’s case, the government’s explanation was that a forum post containing Ross’s email address was suddenly discovered on Karpeles’s website, bitcointalk.org, by IRS agent Gary Alford, using a simple date restricted Google search. Despite Der-Yeghiayan’s tireless and lengthy Silk Road investigation and his finding that the first posting about Silk Road appeared on Karpeles’s forum on March 1, 2011 by a user named "silkroad," Alford claimed he found evidence of an even earlier post, dated January 29, 2011 by a user named "altoid."[8-13]

However, Alford couldn’t have found this earlier post because it didn’t exist. Rather, he testified that he found a quote of this post within another user’s post talking about Silk Road. Alford then said he found a subsequent post by altoid dated October 11, 2011 that appeared to be a help wanted ad for a Bitcoin startup company that listed the contact information “rossulbricht at gmail dot com.[8-14] According to the government's version of events, this post is what led them to suspect that Ross was behind Silk Road.

Finding Ross's email address this way was like finding a needle in a haystack the size of the internet. It was a task that scores of investigative journalists, extortionists, hackers, and numerous law enforcement agencies had tried and failed at for years.[8-15] On the other hand, if he was provided with the information in advance, it would have been like finding the needle with a high-powered magnet.

With Ross’s email address in hand and an explanation linking it to Silk Road, all that remained was tracking down his physical location.

9. Closing In

Turner first collected, without a warrant, all outgoing data from Ross’s email address in search of the Internet Protocol (IP) addresses being used to access the account.[9-1] Turner discovered one particular IP address being serviced by Comcast. He subpoenaed Comcast to reveal the home address of the subscriber, which turned out to be a row house in South San Francisco where Ross was renting a room.[9-2]

Having physically located Ross with nothing more than his email address, Turner then remotely attached a pen-trap to the wireless router in Ross’s living room.[9-3] This pen-trap collected all internet traffic traveling through Ross’s home router. In that traffic, he discovered the MAC address of Ross’s laptop and attached a pen-trap to it, too. This gave him the ability to geolocate Ross and collect all his internet traffic information, regardless of where he went.[9-4]

Turner never obtained a warrant for any of these searches and seizures. Alford’s story was not nearly enough to establish probable cause, the standard necessary for securing one. Instead, Turner relied on the Third-Party Doctrine, an outdated legal theory established in 1979 that says that individuals relinquish their privacy rights to the phone numbers they dial because they have voluntarily given them to the telephone company.[9-5] According to Turner, government agents can secretly rummage through everyone’s internet traffic information without restraint, just as he did to Ross, because it is sent through an internet service provider, or third party.

With Ross’s internet data from the days prior to his arrest, Turner was able to gather enough circumstantial evidence to suggest that Ross was logging on and off at times similar to when DPR was logging on and off. This was enough to secure an arrest warrant.[9-6]

10. New York Takes Over

He swore under oath: “I believe that Karpeles has been involved in establishing and operating the Silk Road website.” He has “participated in a conspiracy to distribute narcotics…in violation…of United States Code." Further, “by operating…Mt. Gox, while knowing that a large volume of its business derives from narcotics trafficking activity conducted through Silk Road, Karpeles has violated U.S. money-laundering laws.”[10-2] I believe that “the [email] accounts will contain communications between Karpeles and the co-conspirators involved with him in committing the subject offenses.”[10-3] Turner would go on to seal Der-Yeghiayan’s warrant against public scrutiny stating that, if made public, it would alert Karpeles to “law enforcement interest” and that “notification of the existence of this order will seriously jeopardize [the] investigation.”[10-4]

Ultimately, none of Der-Yeghiayan’s efforts mattered. By the end of September 2013, with Ross’s arrest imminent, he realized that if he’d have anything to show for his years of work, he had to cooperate with the prosecution.

As Der-Yeghiayan told his supervisor at Homeland Security, Philip Osborn, “I think there’s room to avoid the drama by instead of dwelling on the past,…talking about how to make HSI in general walk away from this without looking like complete fools.” Baltimore can “easily erase a lot of the damage they’ve done by cooperating with [New York].” They can have “sloppy seconds on [Ross] for their murder for hire. They can also have some info on other Bitcoin companies that [Karpeles] might name as shady after we get done with him. That’s the best that can be given and they should consider themselves lucky for getting anything close to that. Or we can just stall, and Baltimore gets nothing and we contributed to [Karpeles and Barr] getting away. We’ll get no HSI banner on the site and will probably get no cooperation from [New York] with any information related to [Karpeles]. If [Ross] names [Karpeles] in the interview and we didn’t help them get [Karpeles and Barr] when we had the chance—[New York] will leave us out of it and tie him into their conspiracy. We will then be left dealing with…Baltimore’s tears. I think it’s important we help them have a ‘come to Jesus’ moment otherwise our agency loses as a whole. It’s a simple sell if they know the alternative is they will be left with absolutely nothing—no matter how much they whine and complain to HSI HQ, it won’t stop [New York] prosecuting all of them without any of us.”[10-7]

Der-Yeghiayan’s investigation of Karpeles had finally ground to a halt. He would never get to examine “any of…Karpeles’s electronic devices, or servers, or any of his other email accounts.”[10-8]

11. The Arrest

By this time, DPR had convinced Ross to get involved with Silk Road again and given him access to some of the DPR accounts, along with many of the files, software, and records being used to run it. Everything the New York prosecution needed to make a case against Ross was on his laptop, including a shared Bitcoin wallet with over 144,000 bitcoins.[11-1]

At the arrest scene was FBI agent Thomas Kiernan. He was the first to take possession of the laptop and immediately started punching commands into the computer.[11-6] He plugged his USB drive in and began copying files without producing digital fingerprints,[11-7] which are unique snippets of data that would have ensured the copies matched the originals.[11-8] By doing so, he overwrote some of the metadata for those files unnecessarily.[11-9]

Kiernan “triaged” the laptop in the library for one or three hours (depending on when he was asked),[11-10][11-11] then he “transported” it to Ross’s house about eight blocks away.[11-12] All that time, Kiernan was in sole possession of the laptop with nothing more than a few photos from his phone to document what he did with it.

At Ross's house, agents found two USB drives with Silk Road files on them and a crumpled piece of paper with notes about Silk Road's vendor review system.[11-13] At this point, Kiernan turned the laptop over to Christopher Beeson of RCFL, a private contractor in San Francisco.[11-14] Beeson also overwrote metadata by creating tar archives (similar to zip files) of commonly used directories on the laptop.[11-15] He later admitted he was not familiar with the Guidelines for Evidence Collection and Archiving which clearly states not to run programs like tar that modify metadata.[11-16][11-17] During the tar process, Beeson was stopped by a failure[11-18] he was never able to determine the cause of, nor could he confirm he had properly copied the files.[11-19][11-20]

By this time it was almost 8pm. Beeson stopped what he was doing and attempted to make a copy of the laptop’s hard drive using “dd,” a “powerful tool” colloquially referred to as “disk destroyer” because, if misused, it can cause irreparable harm to the data being manipulated.[11-21] He ran dd several times while trying to generate a digital fingerprint, but it "kept failing."[11-22] Eventually, Beeson just skipped the fingerprinting altogether and made a “copy” that didn’t match the original.[11-23]

Der-Yeghiayan reviewed this “copy” all that night and into the next morning and continued to find evidence of Karpeles’s “involvement and associations to Silk Road.” “[Karpeles] is purging everything after [Ross’s] arrest,” he wrote to Alford and Turner. “I know he was initially involved.”[11-24][11-25] Der-Yeghiayan continued to submit reports to them on Karpeles’s finances and communications, but to no avail. In fact, the government continued working with Karpeles after Ross’s arrest, as Der-Yeghiayan learned that even more “information was passed from [Karpeles] to Baltimore.”[11-26]

On October 3rd, two days after the laptop was initially seized, Beeson turned his attention to the data in the laptop's RAM.[11-27] What happened to the computer over those two days remains unknown, but again there were problems.[11-28] First, Kiernan and Beeson had overwritten or modified the data with all they had done up to that point. Also, Beeson wasn’t "quite sure how to do [the] RAM capture” and had to ask for assistance and look up documentation.[11-29][11-30] He tried anyway and “crashed the computer,” losing unknown information and locking the laptop behind encryption.[11-31]

The Silk Road website was taken down on October 1, 2013, and the New York prosecution ensured that Ross would be prosecuted in New York instead of California where he lived and was arrested.[11-42] Ross spent the next six weeks in solitary confinement, first in San Francisco and then in New York, while the government combed through the data Kiernan and Beeson had collected.

12. Deleting Evidence

Sometime after his arrest, and possibly weeks prior, one or more of the few people with access to the evidence in Ross’s case would come very close to removing any trace of the conversation between notwonderful and DPR. That conversation made clear that someone from the Baltimore office was selling DPR information about the government’s investigation. This could have been whoever was behind the notwonderful account, trying to protect themselves, or anyone with high-level access and a vested interest in seeing Ross convicted. The revelation that DPR was being helped by law enforcement could potentially unravel the entire case.[12-1]

However, even this copy was incomplete because it didn’t contain any of the communications between notwonderful and DPR after it was created in mid-August 2013—even though payments continued until Silk Road was shut down in early October.[12-3] It will never be known what information was sold to DPR in those crucial six weeks leading up to Ross’s arrest.

DPR made a critical mistake around this time. While Ross was still in solitary confinement, locked in a monitored cell with no access to the outside world, let alone the internet, DPR continued to log into his account on the Silk Road forum, which was still running until late November after the takedown of Silk Road itself. This is irrefutable evidence that Ross was not the only person with access to DPR’s accounts.[12-4]

13. Fighting for Freedom

From the outset, Ross and his attorney, Dratel, challenged the prosecutors’ case on legal grounds. The charges against Ross were: aiding and abetting the distribution of narcotics over the internet, conspiracy to hack computers, launder money and traffic fraudulent IDs, as well as the promised kingpin charge, typically reserved for drug lords sitting at the apex of a large organization they control with violence.[13-5] Conspicuously absent from the New York indictment was any charge relating to either the murder plot that corrupt agents Force and Bridges staged with Curtis Green or the others used to deny Ross bail.[13-6][13-7] The District of Maryland—where Force and Bridges worked from—did include the allegation of murder-for-hire with Green in a separate indictment, but never prosecuted it and dismissed it in its entirety nearly five years later.[13-8][13-9]

Ross’s attorney argued that the charges brought against Ross were never intended to be or had never been used “to prosecute the conduct alleged” against him, that “he operated a website through which other persons—sellers and purchasers—committed illegal activity.”[13-10] Indeed, Congress passed a law to protect providers of “interactive computer services” so they may “operate without fear of civil liability for the content posted by others.” Congress wanted a “free-wheeling internet” that has “flourished, to the benefit of all...with a minimum of government regulation.”[13-11] The law is broadly worded, with a provider needing only to show that “the information…was provided by a third-party” to qualify for immunity.

This is precisely what Silk Road accomplished by design. It was an open platform, like many other e-commerce websites, with decisions about what to sell, at what price, and to whom, left up to the users. This was exemplified by the fact that much more than drugs, fake ids, and hacking software were available on the site. Items exchanged included jewelry, writing services, food, antibiotics, and other legal items.[13-12][13-13]

In fact, prior to Ross's case, no internet service provider had been criminally charged for “permitting content or even hosting websites that tolerate or even promote illegal activity.”[13-14] Google is the most common defendant in lawsuits where this law has been invoked, and “other major ISP’s and browsers have also regularly availed themselves” of this immunity.[13-15] With “the lack of a single prosecution” of a provider hosting “illegal conduct,” Ross’s case constitutes “arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.” Indeed, “the gulf between civil immunity enjoyed by all other…providers and the criminal liability and potential punishment [Ross] faces is incalculably vast.”[13-16]

In her ruling in response to Ross's Motion to dismiss the indictment, Judge Forrest falsely claimed that Ross “posted a sign on a (worldwide) bulletin board” that said “I have created an anonymous, untraceable way to traffic narcotics,"[13-20] a statement Ross never posted. She called the website a vast conspiracy saying that because each time someone “signs up and agrees to [Ross’s] standing offer…he or she may become a co-conspirator” and that Ross’s “alleged co-conspirators are several thousand drug dealers” on Silk Road,[13-21] even though he did not know them nor told them what to do.

The judge also falsely claimed that Ross designed, launched and operated Silk Road “for the specific purpose of facilitating narcotics transactions that he [knew would] occur.” She chose to ignore Ross’s well-known libertarian views and interest for free markets and individual liberty. Instead, she analogized a website host with a mafia boss, saying Ross acted as a “sort of godfather.”[13-22]

14. Finding the Servers

Tarbell claimed, under oath, that by “examining the individual packets of data being sent back from the [Silk Road] website, [he] noticed that the headers of some of the packets reflected a certain IP address.” When he “typed the…IP address into an ordinary (non-Tor) web browser, a part of the Silk Road login screen (the CAPTCHA prompt) appeared,” thus confirming that the IP address in the headers was the IP address of the Silk Road.[14-2] Tarbell’s explanation was closely scrutinized because Tor is supposed to prevent exactly what he claimed he did. Cyber security experts worldwide, including Robert Graham of Errata Security, Brian Krebs of Krebs on Security, and Nicolas Weaver, researcher at ICSI and Berkeley, were highly skeptical.

“I find it surprising that when given a chance to provide a cogent, on the record explanation for how they discovered the server, they instead produced a statement that has been shown inconsistent with reality, and that they knew would be inconsistent with reality,” Weaver said.[14-3]

Tarbell responded that he didn’t record or save any of his work, violating “the most rudimentary standards of computer forensic analysis.”[14-4] “The details are vague," Graham noted. "It is impossible for anybody with technical skills (such as myself) to figure out what he did.” And the “second problem is that some of the details are impossible, such as seeing the IP address in the packet headers.” Furthermore, “he saved none of the forensics data. You’d have thought that, had this been real, he would have at least captured packet logs or even screenshots of what he did.”[14-5]

Weaver explained exactly why Tarbell’s story didn’t make sense: “The server logs which the FBI provides as evidence show that, no, what happened is the FBI didn’t see a leakage coming from that IP. What happened is they contacted that IP directly and got a PHPMyAdmin page.” But how did they know to contact that IP address in the first place? “The CAPTCHA couldn’t leak in that configuration, and the IP [Tarbell] visited wasn’t providing the CAPTCHA, but instead a PHPMyadmin interface. Thus, the leaky CAPTCHA story is full of holes.”[14-6]

According to Reuters, who first revealed the NSA’s practice of parallel construction just two months before Ross’s arrest, law enforcement agents receiving illegal information from the agency “have been directed to conceal how such investigations truly begin—not only from defense lawyers, but also sometimes from prosecutors and judges.”[14-9]

Whether the truth was concealed from the prosecution or not, they shot down the idea that the NSA was involved: “[Ulbricht] offers no evidence of governmental misconduct to support this sweeping claim. Instead, [he] conjures up a bogeyman—the [NSA]—which [he] suspects...was responsible for locating the Silk Road server.”[14-10] The prosecution called Dratel’s search for how the servers were actually found “a pointless fishing expedition aimed at vindicating his misguided conjecture about the NSA being the shadowy hand behind the Government’s investigation.”[14-11]

In addition, Turner lied to the court about how the government seized the server once Tarbell “found” it. He told the magistrate judge who signed off on the warrants that the U.S. government has a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) with Iceland, where the server was located, thus giving him the legal authority to seize it. However, Turner later admitted that this “is not technically correct, as the United States does not have an MLAT with Iceland.”[14-14] The legal basis for the warrant appears to have been unimportant to Judge Forrest. She ruled that the defense's Motion to suppress the evidence was “DENIED.”[14-15]

In the same pre-trial ruling, Judge Forrest rejected several other challenges to the investigation. Ross asserted his Fourth Amendment right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures, saying Turner violated his rights when he tracked him down and, using pen-traps, gathered all his internet traffic information without a warrant.[14-16] Turner also violated Ross’s rights when he did eventually obtain warrants, by sweeping up every scrap of information about Ross and his life, going back over a decade, from his laptop and email and Facebook accounts. His entire digital life was the government’s to examine, despite the Fourth Amendment requiring the government to identify in advance the particular items they seek.[14-17]

At Turner’s insistence, Judge Forrest also explicitly forbade Dratel from conveying to the jury the political and philosophical motivations behind Silk Road, as some jurors might sympathize with those views. The jury was also not to know that Ross could be imprisoned for life if found guilty, in case they found this excessive.[14-18][14-19] Also, at Turner's behest, the judge forbade Ross to acknowledge or smile at his family in the jury's presence, threatening "increasingly necessary measures" should he disobey.[14-20]

In the wake of Judge Forrest’s rulings, the path was cleared for the government to bring Ross to trial.

15. The Cover-Up

In April 2014, Force started using Tor to connect to Bitstamp, a Bitcoin exchange similar to Mt. Gox. As part of their fraud and theft prevention procedures, Bitstamp inquired as to why he was using Tor to access their site. “I utilize Tor for privacy,” Force told them. “Don’t particularly want NSA looking over my shoulder :)” Bitstamp's management found Force's reply "strange" and froze his account immediately.[15-1] A few days later Force got help from Bridges, who convinced Bitstamp to unfreeze Force's account, allowing him to make additional transfers. Force then emailed Bitstamp and asked them to delete "all transaction history associated with his account,"[15-2] but it was already too late. California AUSA Kathryn Haun opened an official investigation into both Force and Bridges that same day.[15-3]

By early May, Force resigned from the DEA and quickly began hiding the money he’d extorted and stolen. He wired “$235,000 to an offshore account in Panama” just a few days “after learning of the government’s investigation.”[15-4] By the end of May, he had legal representation and attended an official interview where he was interrogated by Haun. Bridges was also interviewed with his lawyer and a “high-level superior from the U.S. Secret Service” multiple times.[15-5] Bridges and Force “intentionally misled and lied” to Haun about their relationship to each other and their involvement with DPR, Silk Road and Bitcoin.[15-6][15-7]

The corruption threatened the New York prosecution's case against Ross. If a jury were to learn the extent of Force’s and Bridges’s involvement in undermining and corrupting the investigation, it would cast strong doubt on their version of events. Ultimately, Turner revealed to the defense that Force was under investigation but argued to Judge Forrest that no mention of him be made to the jury. Turner’s disclosure was “functionally the same as no disclosure at all” because Ross and Dratel could not use it at trial.[15-8]

On December 15, 2014, a few weeks before trial began, Judge Forrest held a hearing to get to the bottom of this issue.[15-11] However, she sealed it off from the public. No reporters were allowed to observe, and Ross’s family was forbidden to attend.[15-12] At the hearing, Turner was joined by his co-counsel Timothy Howard. They argued that the investigation into Force's corruption must be kept secret. If Force were to discover that he was a suspect, he might flee, hide money or destroy evidence.[15-13] Of course, Force had already known for eight months that Haun had him under investigation and Turner knew that. The only reason for “maintaining secrecy was to deprive [Ross] of the use of the information.”[15-14]

“The government misled the court,” Dratel, Ross's attorney, said later at a press conference. "[The agents] knew exactly what they were being investigated for, so the notion that keeping it secret was essential to the investigation, or even helpful to the investigation, was simply not true.”[15-15]

This was not the only falsehood that Turner put forth in court. Judge Forrest also asked him how deeply Force had penetrated Silk Road when he and Bridges took over Green’s admin account.

“Could he have faked being someone else?” the judge asked.

“No, you can’t do that, no,” Turner replied.[15-16]

But that’s exactly what did happen. Bridges had taken over the accounts of vendors, effectively becoming them online, all while pretending to be Green.

“He didn’t receive root administrative privileges. He didn’t have privileges to do anything on the site,” Howard went on to say.

“What was the list of what [Green] could do?”, she then asked.

“He had the ability to reset passwords…and PIN numbers.”

“And if he could reset passwords and PIN numbers…could he have utilized their accounts…could he have reset any…password?”

“That’s something we would have to confirm and look at,” Howard equivocated.[15-17]

Of course, if Force could reset passwords and PINs, he could take over accounts (as he did with the vendors he stole from). In fact, with Green’s “administrator” privileges, Force “could have reset the PIN on DPR’s account and usurped control of it,” even “without DPR losing access.” He could have “changed anything in the Silk Road database, including message texts in the Forum or Market,” all without "the government’s knowledge of what precisely [he] did.”[15-18]

Turner was determined to keep this information from leaving the sealed hearing or being argued before the jury. He told Judge Forrest “deliberate and calculated” lies and she ultimately ruled in favor of the government.[15-19]

“This is tactical at this point," Dratel erupted. "It’s designed to keep this information from our use at trial that’s going to come in three weeks, so that they can publicize it two months down the road when they indict this guy, and we are prohibited from using it in defense…it’s just a violation."[15-20]

It would, in fact, be just seven weeks after Ross’s trial that Force and Bridges were indicted and their corrupt activity on the Silk Road site publicly revealed.[15-21][15-22] Ross’s legal team asked that the trial be pushed back “until the government had completed its…investigation of Force,”[15-23] which would defeat Turner’s intention of keeping Force out of Ross’s trial. Judge Forrest denied that, too.[15-24]

16. Eviscerating the Defense

Before Ross's trial started, Judge Forrest influenced the jurors by anonymizing them: hiding their names from the public and from Ross. This is a rare and extreme measure that communicates to jurors that they must be protected from a dangerous defendant. Consequently, they are prejudiced against him before they even enter the courtroom. By law, the judge may make this decision only after she “considers the arguments of the counsel,” offers the jurors an “explanation...that does not cast the defendant in an unfavorable light,” and makes her ruling on the record. Judge Forrest did none of this and actively “concealed from the public and [Ross] the fact that an anonymous jury had been empaneled.[16-2]

As trial began in January 2015, Howard laid the government's case out to the jury in opening arguments. He had to convince them that Ross had not only created Silk Road but operated it continuously until it was finally taken down two and a half years later. Ross had to be the only person behind the DPR accounts and responsible for all the drugs and other contraband sold on the site. Howard also had to convince the jury that all the Silk Road files on Ross’s laptop were his, that they had not been tampered with or planted there.

Turner called Der-Yeghiayan to the stand as the government's first witness. Der-Yeghiayan outlined a sanitized version of his investigation, never mentioning Karpeles and focusing on his role as "cirrus" during Ross’s arrest.[16-6] However, Turner’s presentation wasn’t meeting Judge Forrest’s standards. At a break, she told Turner that Der-Yeghiayan had described Tor in a way that was just “mumbo jumbo to most people on the jury right now...there is still room for clarity."[16-7] Turner applied her coaching and “began the second day of testimony by having [Der-Yeghiayan] re-explain what the Tor network was, how it worked, and what it allowed for, complete with a demonstration.”[16-8] This intervention by the judge had a “clearly perceptible effect on the quality and clarity of [Turner’s] presentation of evidence from that point forward in the trial."[16-9]

The rules of criminal law require the government to provide certain information to the defendant before trial begins, such as notes and communications the government’s witnesses had made during the course of their investigation. Less than two weeks before trial began, the prosecution dumped on Ross and Dratel 5,000 pages of records pertaining to Der-Yeghiayan alone.[16-10] Buried in this mountain of material was the defense’s first glimpse into Der-Yeghiayan’s investigation of Karpeles and how McFarland and the rest of the Baltimore office had undermined it and allowed Karpeles to slip away.

During cross-examination, Dratel brought up Karpeles and started to explore how Der-Yeghiayan had targeted him:[16-11]

“You wanted to know what was going on with Baltimore,” he said to Der-Yeghiayan. “You wanted to know what was going on with the meeting with Karpeles’s attorneys, you wanted to know what was out there because you had your own parallel, independent investigation of him going on that would be completely wiped out by what Baltimore was doing?”

“Yes,” Der-Yeghiayan replied. “And we had verbal agreements with the attorneys in that district also about that.”

“And so, in the course of this and in pursuing your investigation, you learned that Karpeles’s lawyers had made that offer to the government?” Dratel asked next.

But before he could clarify to Ross's jury that Karpeles had offered someone else to target as DPR instead of himself—before he could ask whose name was given, or if that name was Ross Ulbricht—Turner leaped up and began to repeatedly object.[16-12] Rather than follow the usual protocol and call a private sidebar, Judge Forrest dismissed the jury early and then asked Dratel where his questions were leading.[16-13]

“They were going to meet with Karpeles,” Dratel explained, “and this meeting was supposed to be in Guam, and I don’t know whether this meeting ever occurred."[16-14]

At the mention of Guam, Turner launched into a prolonged argument as to why Karpeles should not be discussed.[16-16] However, the judge did not see a legal justification for this:

“We can all agree it’s obviously highly relevant, right?” she said. “If the lead investigator believed…in August 2013 that somebody else might be a candidate.”[16-17]

Turner would not relent, but the judge could not justify sustaining his objections:

“I’m going to allow [Dratel] to ask what was the basis for [Der-Yeghiayan’s] view that somebody else was an appropriate target," she said. "That strikes me as in the heartland of the defense.”[16-18]

Turner then argued that Der-Yeghiayan’s investigation, based on government evidence, was “irrelevant.”

“I don’t think it’s irrelevant,” Judge Forrest retorted, “because if he pursued a target…and it wasn’t [Ross], I think that’s directly relevant. They’re trying to raise reasonable doubt as to whether or not [Ross] is the real DPR. How else do you do it?”[16-19]

“I mean, I haven’t even looked at the document extensively," Turner replied. "I haven’t had a chance to talk to the witness about it. I haven’t had a chance...”[16-20]

"You can’t talk to the witness about it, anyway, during the pendency of an examination,” she interrupted.[16-21] “And this is an issue which, in light of the defendant’s interest in this, we’ll hold it open until Tuesday morning.”[16-22]

In papers filed over the weekend, Turner admitted that the meeting with Kay had indeed occurred. However, he claimed that it wasn't Ross's name given, but the name of someone else entirely.[16-23] When trial reconvened the following Tuesday, the judge had “performed a complete about face.”[16-24] She now ruled that any cross-examination about whether or not Der-Yeghiayan suspected Karpeles, or found probable cause to believe he was DPR, was “off limits.”[16-25]

A 2012 exclusive interview with Forbes, in which DPR said he took over the site from its previous owner early on, was banned from being mentioned to Ross's jury.[16-26] This was despite Der-Yeghiayan's belief that it was Karpeles speaking as DPR.[16-27][16-28] Dratel was not permitted to ask about how Karpeles gave Kay someone else to target just before Ross was arrested.[16-29] Essentially, all further testimony regarding any individual other than Ross running Silk Road was now found to be “irrelevant.”[16-30]

Judge Forrest went further and struck all Der-Yeghiayan’s testimony about Karpeles from the record, preventing it from being built upon with further questioning or used in closing arguments.[16-31] She instructed the jury to “disregard” it.[16-32]

“I’m not sure I can proceed,” Dratel, Ross's attorney, pleaded. “Now I have to go back and reconstruct all of this material…I’d like a break until tomorrow.”[16-33]

“No,” replied the judge. “I’m done with this issue. I’m not suggesting you should like it or agree with it, but it’s how we’re going to proceed.”[16-34]

She then called in the jury and Dratel did his best to reintroduce as much as he could of Karpeles’s involvement but to no avail. Turner objected to virtually every question (100 times to be exact), and Judge Forrest sustained most of them.[16-35]

However, Dratel had other questions for Der-Yeghiayan. Before trial, the prosecution was required to provide to Ross and his defense all the evidence he had seized or collected in the course of the government's investigation. It amounted to approximately four terabytes of information (equivalent to two billion typed pages[16-36]).

Despite having just a few months to comb through it, Ross and his team uncovered the conversation between DPR and Force acting as “DeathFromAbove.”

When Dratel began questioning Der-Yeghiayan about this at trial, Turner was initially taken off guard, as he didn’t know about the existence of Force’s alias DeathFromAbove.[16-37] Once he realized that Dratel’s questions were leading to Force, Turner objected and got Judge Forrest to prevent Dratel from “cross-examining [Der-Yeghiayan] with respect to…communications between DPR and…DeathFromAbove.”[16-38]

Turner immediately informed Haun of this new revelation about Force’s alias. She retraced Dratel’s steps and confirmed that Force was indeed behind the DeathFromAbove account. Turner “used [Dratel’s] cross-examination of…Der-Yeghiayan to continue [his] investigation of Force,” then blocked it from being used at Ross’s trial during the course of the trial itself![16-39]

17. How Many DPRs?

In addition to preventing any mention of Der-Yeghiayan’s investigation of Karpeles and Barr, and any mention of corrupt federal agents Force, Bridges, or anyone from Baltimore, the prosecution worked to maintain the narrative that Ross controlled Silk Road from the day he launched it until his arrest, and that he alone was behind the DPR accounts. This was despite the fact that the government’s lead investigator, Der-Yeghiayan, believed there were multiple DPRs and revealed this at trial under oath.[17-1]

“You yourself thought that DPR changed over time, didn’t you?” Ross's attorney asked him. “You told people inside your organization, [HSI]…that DPR had changed in April of 2013?”[17-2]

"I’m not sure if the April I was referring to was 2012 or 2013,″ Der-Yeghiayan hedged, “I think it was April 2012."

“But the email [was written] August of 2013, right?,” Dratel continued.

"August, yes.”

“And when you said it changed in April, you didn’t say April a year ago, you [just] said April, right?”

“Yes.”

“Have you taken any acting courses?” Dratel asked, ironically.[17-3]

Beyond Der-Yeghiayan’s beliefs about when DPR changed, there was concrete evidence supporting the fact that different people were behind the DPR accounts at various times. Andrew Jones, one of DPR’s employees who was in custody, admitted this to Turner.

Knowing how important Jones’s testimony was to Ross, Turner used it to lure Dratel into giving him a “significant concession" in exchange for letting Dratel use it at trial without calling Jones to the stand. Then, “the night before [Dratel] sought to finalize and introduce [it], [Turner] reneged at 11:00 pm.”[17-11] Dratel asked Judge Forrest to intervene, but she “denied the application to introduce Jones’s statement.”[17-12]

18. Selling the Story

Then, the prosecutors presented an exhibit to the jury that mashed together various communications. They made it appear DPR had ordered a hit on someone trying to blackmail Silk Road users, again implying that it was Ross behind the plot. This was despite a disclaimer Turner later issued to the jury:

“Now, to be clear, the defendant has not been charged for these attempted murders here,” Turner said. “You’re not required to make any findings about them. And the government does not contend that those murders actually occurred.”[18-4]

Dratel, Ross’s attorney, objected that discussing unproven and uncharged allegations would prejudice the jury against Ross, but Judge Forrest allowed it anyway.[18-5]

In addition, two days earlier, Turner had called FBI agent Ilhwan Yum to the stand. Yum had worked with Tarbell to locate and make copies of the Silk Road servers in Iceland. Both had left the FBI together after Ross’s arrest and joined FTI Consulting, a private contractor to whom the government paid $55,000 for Yum’s testimony.[18-6][18-7] Mid-trial, Yum analyzed the Bitcoin wallet seized from Ross’s laptop, which the government alleged Ross was the only one with access to. He produced a “voluminous spreadsheet and an extraordinarily complex analysis of millions of Bitcoin addresses and sophisticated computer software.”[18-8]

The prosecution hid this until the last possible moment when, on January 25 at 10:17 PM, they began handing the material over to Dratel.[18-9] Given its volume and complexity, it was impossible to check and analyze Yum’s work by the time he took the stand on January 30. Dratel asked for “a brief adjournment so that a proper cross-examination could be prepared on the material underlying Yum’s testimony.” Judge Forrest refused and forced Dratel to proceed on the spot.[18-10]

Despite the extremely short notice, Dratel was able to establish through his cross-examination of Yum that 700,254 bitcoins came into the Bitcoin wallet they found on Ross’s laptop, yet just over 144,000 remained.

“Whose bitcoins are those? Dratel asked. “[They are] DPR’s. Not [Ross’s].”[18-13]

The government never proved that the Bitcoin wallet seized on Ross’s laptop was the only copy in existence. Indeed, it is known by cryptocurrency users that multiple individuals can have access to the same Bitcoin wallet by sharing the same key and each having a copy of the wallet installed on their computer.

As the defense anticipated, Turner never called Tarbell to testify at Ross’s trial to be questioned about how he found the Silk Road server in Iceland. Dratel asked Yum instead, in an attempt to connect him from a Silk Road backup server in Philadelphia to the one in Iceland that Tarbell claimed he found. If he could get Yum to reveal how he found the Philadelphia server’s IP address from the Icelandic server, it would open the door to further questioning about how the Icelandic server was actually found.

However, Yum shielded himself:

“I was brought onto the case around that time, and received an IP address,” he said. “And my…the investigative team, before I joined, they were the ones who did the analysis, so I can’t speak to what allowed me to receive that IP address, but I received that IP address. Nothing else.”[18-14]

Dratel could not probe deeper because Turner could object that Yum didn’t have direct knowledge and whatever he said would be speculation or hearsay.

“Then I would move to strike all of Agent Alford’s testimony, with the exception of what he actually did on the Internet, because everything else is hearsay, everything else is beyond his knowledge, everything else is fed to him so he can testify to that and then not be cross-examined. That’s what’s happening here.”[18-15]

“I am moving for a mistrial,” Dratel said in outrage once the jury had left. “It’s not my burden. I have no burden. You put the burden on me.”

“The motion for mistrial is denied,” the judge replied.[18-26]

Yet, when it came time for Dratel to call his witnesses, she prevented them from testifying.[18-27]

Unlike Dratel, Turner was permitted to “elicit testimony for which cross-examination was precluded, and include complex, lengthy summary exhibits created mid-trial” while Dratel was “not permitted to confront them at all.”[18-28] In contrast to the “inflexible standard imposed on [Ross], [Turner] was permitted to elicit Yum’s testimony,” and when Dratel “sought to call Antonopoulos for the purpose of countering [it],” his testimony was precluded completely. Thus, it was the defense that was subject to “trial by ambush.”[18-29]

Finally, having his expert Bitcoin and technical witnesses prevented from testifying, Dratel called to the stand four character witnesses, people who had known Ross personally—some since childhood—who attested to Ross’s good and peaceful nature.[18-30][18-31] However, for the jury, who had heard Turner demonize Ross throughout trial, this was not enough.

In closing arguments, Turner and Howard summarized their narrative and dismissed the few arguments Dratel was permitted to make. The jury had no way to know that Dratel was hamstrung by the court’s rulings or that they had been spoon-fed Turner’s story throughout trial.

Howard dismissed what little the jury heard about Karpeles, saying his only connection to Silk Road was that he ran the hosting company for silkroadmarket.org. However, he then dismissed even that connection. Because the registration information for that website was among the Silk Road files on Ross’s laptop, Howard accused Ross of registering it, implying to the jury that Karpeles was an innocent bystander.[18-32]

Every piece of evidence supporting the idea that Ross never handed Silk Road off—that he operated it the whole time and was the only DPR—was digital data seized from his laptop at his arrest. Turner and Howard went through it again, focusing on a few text files and spreadsheets where details from Ross’s life were mixed in with records of Silk Road operations.

The text files consisted of one document called log.txt that appeared to be a log of DPR’s Silk Road operation for much of 2013, and the chat logs mentioned earlier that recorded DPR’s private chats with other Silk Road administrators.[18-33] There were also three text files that seemed to have been written in 2010, 2011 and January 2012. Despite the prosecution making much of these and referring to them as Ross’s journal, this unattributed material totaled less than six pages, or 46 kilobytes.[18-34] All of it was digital which, as Bellovin would have explained, could easily have been tampered with and planted.

Deprived of the backstory detailing how corrupt agents Force and Bridges sabotaged Der-Yeghiayan’s investigation of Karpeles, how they secretly infiltrated Silk Road through Green’s account, and how Karpeles worked with AUSA Kay to target someone shortly before Ross’s arrest, there was no reason for the jury to think that Ross could have been set up to take the fall for everything. There was no reason for them to consider that his personal information might have been incorporated into those files and planted on his laptop.

Without Bellovin’s expert testimony, the digital evidence appeared strong. The jury had no idea how easy it would have been to manipulate and place those files, or that the prosecutors’ narrative wasn’t the only possible one. They did not consider that Ross could have come to trust DPR and share details of his life with him and that someone acting as DPR could have used that information. Nor did they consider that someone in the government could have used their access to Ross’s email and Facebook accounts to gather and plant those details.

19. Double Life for a Website

Yet, the judge said she was “confused by the letters that showed [Ross] to be a different man” than the prosecutors made him out to be.[19-4]

“Frankly, I can’t make a judgment about which of you to know, which of you to rely on, and which of you to believe,” she said at sentencing.[19-5]

Judge Forrest was articulating the very defense Dratel had attempted to put forth: that there wasn’t more than one Ross, a flesh and blood man who had sat before her for three weeks; there was more than one DPR, a digital persona that was designed to be passed on and used by multiple people. Instead the judge concluded that Ross is just “very, very complex.”[19-6]

In a letter addressed to the court, Ross tried to explain his intentions in creating Silk Road and where things went wrong:

“Silk Road was supposed to be about giving people the freedom to make their own choices, to pursue their own happiness however they individually saw fit…I do not and never have advocated the abuse of drugs. I learned from Silk Road that, when you give people freedom, you don’t know what they’ll do with it. While I still don’t think people should be denied the right to make this decision for themselves, I never sought to create a site that would provide another avenue for people to feed their addictions.”[19-7]

Judge Forrest also referenced anonymous online posts by DPR, attributing them to Ross personally, saying “there are posts which discuss the laws as the oppressor and that each transaction is a victory over the oppressor. This is deeply troubling and terribly misguided and also very dangerous.”[19-8]Before issuing her sentence, the judge stated: “I make this judgement mindful of…the needs for the severest possible penalty to be imposed.”[19-9] Fortunately for Ross, the death penalty was not within the judge’s power to give in this case.

Ross pleaded for mercy:

“I will not lose my love for humanity during my years of imprisonment, and upon my release I will do what I can to make up for not being there for the people I love…If I do make it out of prison, decades from now, I won’t be the same man, and the world won’t be the same place…I’ll be an old man, at least 50, with the additional wear and tear prison life brings. I will know firsthand the heavy price of breaking the law and will know better than anyone that it is not worth it… I’ve had my youth, and I know you must take my middle years, but please leave me my old age. Please leave a small light at the end of the tunnel, and a chance to redeem myself in the free world before I meet my maker.”[19-10]

Judge Forrest gave Ross two life sentences plus 40 years in prison without the possibility of parole, for all non-violent charges.

In violation of the First Amendment, she based this sentence, in part, on what she perceived were Ross’s political and philosophical views. “The reasons that you started Silk Road were philosophical,” she said, “and I don’t know that it is a philosophy left behind.”[19-11] Perhaps if Ross was somehow able to “convince [her] that he had abandoned his dangerous ideas” she “may have spared [him] from a life sentence.”[19-12]

Yet, neither the First Amendment nor the sentencing statutes and guidelines permit a person’s “creed,” their personal beliefs, to be considered at sentencing.[19-13]

One of those other allegations was that six people overdosed from drugs allegedly bought on Silk Road. While no victim was named at Ross’s trial, two grieving family members were allowed to make impact statements testify during Ross’s sentencing hearing months later, despite there being “insufficient information to attribute any of the deaths to drugs purchased from Silk Road vendors.”[19-23] A detailed forensic pathology report also concluded that no cause of death could be scientifically determined nor linked to Silk Road.[19-24] Later, Ross’s Appellate Judge Gerard Lynch would write that this these impact statements created “an enormous emotional overload” and “put an extraordinary thumb on the scale that shouldn’t be there.”[19-25]

20. Exposing the Corruption

It was revealed that Force and Bridges “worked in concert” with one another.[20-3] Bridges’s specialty was in “computer forensics and anonymity software derived from Tor.” He was “the Task Force’s subject matter expert in Bitcoin.”[20-4] Force was therefore “assisted in his illegal, unauthorized infiltration and manipulation of the Silk Road website by a computer forensics agent with expertise in anonymity and Bitcoin.”[20-5]

According to the criminal complaint against them, the agents “engaged in a series of complex transactions between various Bitcoin accounts” and received “several large international and domestic wire…transfers through [late 2013 and early 2014].”[20-6] All deposits after October 1, 2013 were made when Ross was in prison, “begging the question of the source of those funds.”[20-7]

Clark was skeptical, so to prove that he was as deep inside the investigation as he claimed, Chrysippus began feeding him tidbits of information that only an insider would know. These culminated in late October 2014 when he revealed that Force and Bridges were being investigated for corruption and gave Clark “lots of details” about the “current state of the grand jury investigation into them.”

However, as covered previously, Turner kept Force’s involvement under seal and out of Ross’s trial and hid Bridges’s existence entirely. Chrysippus became frustrated that his proof was taking so long to be revealed and Clark “teased him unmercifully” about it, which “made him…livid.” Chrysippus wrote long rants, assuring Clark that “Force and…Bridges were going to be arrested any…day.”

Then one day, Crysippus did something new. He signed off on one of his frustrated rants with the initials “cwt,” with two dashes before it: “--cwt.”

Clark waited until they were chatting in real-time and confronted him with the slip-up. Chrysippus became “flustered” and tried to change the subject, but Clark kept “bringing it back around.” Eventually Chrysippus claimed cwt stood for “carat, as in the unit for measuring the weight of diamonds.” From then on, despite the pride he held for the name Chryssipus, he now insisted on being called “Diamond.”

When the corruption of Force and Bridges was finally revealed, Chryssipus (now Diamond) was ecstatic. “He kept wanting me to follow this link, or that link, or read this article,” Clark posted. “I…allowed him to send me a few snippets of articles and court filings and whatnot, that confirmed the details of what he had been telling me. Later I did a bit of digging around on my own and discovered that, for all his hubris, Chrysippus managed to leave out one of Force’s major [mistakes].”

As previously mentioned, Force had signed a message to DPR—presumably out of habit—with his first name, Carl, while posing as French Maid. “Little bells went off in my head,” Clark said. “I could see Diamond, as Chryssipus, doing the exact same thing when he was all excited and pissed off I wasn’t taking him seriously. No doubt in my mind now. Chrysippus was going to figure in who Diamond was, and so will --cwt. Diamond was just a quick response to the situation, and he insisted on using it exclusively now.”

Desperate, on September 27, 2015, Clark went public with the entire story, posting a synopsis along with proof of the emails he sent Turner.[20-23] “Someone has to make sure he doesn’t succeed in kidnapping Ross’s sister and/or his mother,” Clark wrote, “and it would be kind of swell of them to make sure Ross doesn’t come to any harm…as well.”

Once again, Clark emailed Turner, even though Chrysippus had threatened his life if he had “any dealings with the U.S. justice system in any form.” Again the email was read, and again Turner ignored him.

Dratel immediately wrote Turner about the threat to Ross’s family. Turner did not confirm or deny Clark’s information.[20-24] Dratel immediately wrote Turner about the threat to Ross’s family. Turner did not confirm or deny Clark’s information.[20-24] With Clark’s story public, many on the internet speculated on the rogue FBI agent’s identity. They noticed that, despite being the name of an ancient Greek stoic, Chrysippus sounds a lot like the modern name “Chris.” They also pointed out that Chris Tarbell’s middle name is William, so his initials are “cwt.”[20-25][20-26]

21. Seeking Justice

Judge Lynch acknowledged Ross’s defense that “Silk Road reduced the harms associated with the drug trade in several ways. For example,…that trafficking in drugs over the Internet reduced violence associated with hand-to-hand transactions and the societal stigma of drug use, and Silk Road’s vendor rating system ensured that customers had access to better quality drugs and more information about the drugs that they were purchasing.”[21-12]

Even in the face of his overly harsh sentence, Ross clings to the hope of reuniting with his loved ones, and dreams of a future where he can start a family with his fiancée, and use his knowledge and skills to contribute to society.

***

UPDATE: On January 21, 2025, after having served over 11 years in prison, Ross received a full and unconditional pardon and was freed by President Trump.

14. Finding the Servers

• ▲[14-1] - Memorandum of Law in support of Ross’s Pre-Trial Motions to Suppress Evidence, Order Production of Discovery, for a Bill of Particulars, and to Strike Surplusage, August 1st, 2014
• ▲[14-2] - Declaration of Christopher Tarbell (paragraph 8)
• ▲[14-3] - Brian Krebs's article, October 2, 2014 ("Silk Road Lawyers Poke Holes in FBI’s Story")
• ▲[14-4] - Declaration of Joshua Horrowitz (page 2)
• ▲[14-5] - Robert Graham's article, October 3, 2014 ("Reading the Silk Road configuration")
• ▲[14-6] - Brian Krebs's article, October 2, 2014 ("Silk Road Lawyers Poke Holes in FBI’s Story")
• ▲[14-7] - Robert Graham's article, October 3,2014 ("Reading the Silk Road configuration")
• ▲[14-8] - Memorandum of Law in support of Ross’s Pre-Trial Motions to Suppress Evidence, Order Production of Discovery, for a Bill of Particulars, and to Strike Surplusage, August 1st, 2014 (page 32)
• ▲[14-9] - Reuters article, August 5, 2013 ("Exclusive: U.S. directs agents to cover up program used to investigate Americans")
• ▲[14-10] - Memorandum of Law in opposition to Ross's Motion to Suppress Evidence, Obtain Discovery and a Bill of Oarticulars, and Strike Surplusage (page 1)
• ▲[14-11] - Memorandum of Law in opposition to Ross's Motion to Suppress Evidence, Obtain Discovery and a Bill of Oarticulars, and Strike Surplusage (page 2)
• ▲[14-12] - Judge Forrest's Opinion and Order in response to the Defense's Motion to Suppress Certain Evidence, July 9, 2014 (page 38)
• ▲[14-13] - The Intercept article, March 20, 2018 ("The NSA Worked To 'Track Down' Bitcoin Users, Snowden Documents Reveal")
• ▲[14-14] - Memorandum of law in opposition to Ross's Motion to Suppress Evidence, Obtain Discovery and a Bill of Oarticulars, and Strike Surplusage (page 3)
• ▲[14-15] - Judge Forrest's Opinion and Order in response to the Defense's Motion to Suppress Certain Evidence, July 9, 2014 (page 38)
• ▲[14-16] - Memorandum of Law in support of Ross's Pre-Trial Motions to Suppress Evidence, Order production of Discovery, for a Bill of Particulars, and to Strike Surplusage, August 1st, 2014 (page 37)
• ▲[14-17] - Memorandum of Law in support of Ross’s Pre-Trial Motions to Suppress Evidence, Order Production of Discovery, for a Bill of Particulars, and to Strike Surplusage, August 1st, 2014 (page 48)
• ▲[14-18] - Government's Pre-Trial Motions in Limine, December 9, 2014 (page 28)
• ▲[14-19] - DailyDot article, December 16, 2014 ("Silk Road prosecutors want to ban Ross Ulbricht’s libertarian politics in court")
• ▲[14-20] - Trial transcript, day 6 (pages 1015-1016)

15. The Cover-Up

• ▲[15-1] - Force/Bridges criminal complaint (page 37-38)
• ▲[15-2] - Force/Bridges criminal complaint (page 37-38)
• ▲[15-3] - Letter from Serrin Turner to Judge Forrest, March 31, 2015 (appeal appendix page A650)
• ▲[15-4] - Force/Bridges criminal complaint (page 4)
• ▲[15-5] - Ross's appeal brief (page 33)
• ▲[15-6] - Carl Mark Force's plea agreement (page 8)
• ▲[15-7] - Force/Bridges criminal complaint (pages 47-48)
• ▲[15-8] - Ross's appeal brief (page 26)
• ▲[15-9] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 497)
• ▲[15-10] - Ross's appeal brief (page 18)
• ▲[15-11] - Ross's appeal brief (page 11)
• ▲[15-12] - Pre-trial transcript, December 15, 2014 (page 25)
• ▲[15-13] - Pre-trial transcript, December 15, 2014 (page 26)
• ▲[15-14] - Reply Memorandum of Law in support of Ross's Post-Trial Motions (page 2)
• ▲[15-15] - The New Radical documentary, 2017 (unpublished cut)
• ▲[15-16] - Pre-trial transcript, December 15, 2014 (pages 31)
• ▲[15-17] - Pre-trial transcript, December 15, 2014 (pages 40-41)
• ▲[15-18] - Reply Memorandum of Law in support of Ross's Post-Trial Motions (pages 3, 36)
• ▲[15-19] - Ross's appeal brief (page 21)
• ▲[15-20] - Pre-trial transcript, December 15, 2014 (page 54)
• ▲[15-21] - Forbes article, March 31, 2015 ("Criminal Charges Against Agents Reveal Staggering Corruption in the Silk Road Investigation")
• ▲[15-22] - Force/Bridges criminal complaint
• ▲[15-23] - Letter from Joshua Dratel to Judge Forrest, December 30, 2014 (appeal appendix page A701)
• ▲[15-24] - Letter from Serrin Turner to Judge Forrest, December 31, 2014 (appeal appendix page A706)

• ▲[16-2] - Memorandum of Law in support of Ross's Motion for Recusal (page 3)
• ▲[16-3] - Trial transcript, day 1 (page 17, sealed by order of the court)
• ▲[16-4] - Memorandum of Law in support of Motion for Recusal (page 6)
• ▲[16-5] - Trial transcript, day 1 (pages 115-117)
• ▲[16-6] - Trial transcript, day 2 (page 210)
• ▲[16-7] - Trial transcript, day 2 (page 127)
• ▲[16-8] - Memorandum of Law in support of Ross's Motion for Recusal (page 7)
• ▲[16-9] - Memorandum of Law in support of Ross's Motion for Recusal (page 8)
• ▲[16-10] - Ross's appeal brief (page 61)
• ▲[16-11] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 509)
• ▲[16-12] - Trial transcript, day 3 (pages 508-510)
• ▲[16-13] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 510)
• ▲[16-14] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 514)
• ▲[16-16] - Trial transcript, day 3 (pages 514-519)
• ▲[16-17] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 531)
• ▲[16-18] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 532)
• ▲[16-19] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 554)
• ▲[16-20] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 519)
• ▲[16-21] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 519)
• ▲[16-22] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 521)
• ▲[16-23] - Letter from Serrin Turner to Judge Katherine Forrest, January 19, 2015 (Appeal appendix page A307)
• ▲[16-24] - Ross's appeal brief (page 64)
• ▲[16-25] - Trial transcript, day 4 (page 579)
• ▲[16-26] - Wired article, January 20, 2015 ("Prosecutors Won't Let A Jury See My Interview With Silk Road's Dread Pirate Roberts")
• ▲[16-27] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 546)
• ▲[16-28] - Excerpt from Jared Der-Yeghiayan's email, 3500 material (exhibit 1 from Declaration of Joshua Dratel in Support of Ross's Post-Trial Motions, 3505-2954, page 3)
• ▲[16-29] - Trial transcript, day 4 (page 580)
• ▲[16-30] - Trial transcript, day 4 (page 723)
• ▲[16-31] - Trial transcript, day 4 (pages 642-647)
• ▲[16-32] - Trial transcript, day 5 (page 971)
• ▲[16-33] - Trial transcript, day 4 (page 648)
• ▲[16-34] - Trial transcript, day 4 (pages 648-649)
• ▲[16-35] - Trial transcript, day 4 (pages 617-729)
• ▲[16-36] - Infographic from Berkeley University ("Data Size Matters")
• ▲[16-37] - Trial transcript, day 4 (page 677)
• ▲[16-38] - Ross's appeal brief (page 28)
• ▲[16-39] - Ross's appeal brief (page 29)
• ▲[16-40] - Trial transcript, day 11 (pages 2117-2120)

17. How Many DPRs?

• ▲[17-1] - Free Ross Proof of Multiple DPRs page
• ▲[17-2] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 426)
• ▲[17-3] - Trial transcript, day 3 (page 428)
• ▲[17-4] - Letter from Serrin Turner to Joshua Dratel (appeal appendix page A398)
• ▲[17-5] - Trial transcript, day 10 (page 1857)
• ▲[17-6] - Letter from Serrin Turner to Joshua Dratel (appeal appendix page A398)
• ▲[17-7] - Trial transcript, day 11 (page 2130)
• ▲[17-8] - Ross's appeal brief (page 91)
• ▲[17-9] - Trial transcript, day 10 (page 1855)
• ▲[17-10] - Trial transcript, day 10 (page 1856)
• ▲[17-11] - Ross's appeal brief (page 91)
• ▲[17-12] - Ross's appeal brief (page 92)

18. Selling the Story

• ▲[18-1] - Trial transcript, day 11 (page 2130)
• ▲[18-2] - Appeal Court opinion (page 14)
• ▲[18-3] - Trial transcript, day 7 (page 1302)
• ▲[18-4] - Trial transcript, day 11 (pages 2159-2160)
• ▲[18-5] - Notice of Motion in support of Ross's Motions in Limine, December 10, 2014
• ▲[18-6] - Trial transcript, day 9 (page 1746)
• ▲[18-7] - Trial transcript, day 9 (page 1745)
• ▲[18-8] - Ross's appeal brief (page 82)
• ▲[18-9] - Ross's appeal brief (page 82)
• ▲[18-10] - Ross's appeal brief (page 83)
• ▲[18-11] - Trial transcript, day 11 (pages 2219-2220)
• ▲[18-12] - Trial transcript, day 9 (page 1745)
• ▲[18-13] - Trial transcript, day 11 (page 2220)
• ▲[18-14] - Trial transcript, day 9 (page 1740)
• ▲[18-15] - Trial transcript, day 8 (page 1421)
• ▲[18-16] - Biography of Andreas Antonopoulos
• ▲[18-17] - Ross's appeal brief (pages 78-79)
• ▲[18-18] - Wikipedia page ("Steven M. Bellovin")
• ▲[18-19] - Ross's appeal brief (page 78)
• ▲[18-20] - Trial transcript, day 11 (page 2204)
• ▲[18-21] - Trial transcript, day 6 (page 1139)
• ▲[18-22] - Trial transcript, day 6 (page 1191)
• ▲[18-23] - Ross's appeal brief (page 5)
• ▲[18-24] - Ross's appeal brief (page 81)
• ▲[18-25] - Trial transcript, day 6 (page 1067)
• ▲[18-26] - Trial transcript, day 6 (page 1120)
• ▲[18-27] - Ross's appeal brief (page 80)
• ▲[18-28] - Ross's appeal brief (page 80)
• ▲[18-29] - Ross's appeal brief (page 83)
• ▲[18-30] - Trial transcript, day 10 (pages 2001-2021)
• ▲[18-31] - Trial transcript, day 11 (pages 2098-2105)
• ▲[18-32] - Trial transcript, day 11 (page 2134)
• ▲[18-33] - Trial transcript, day 11 (page 2129)
• ▲[18-34] - Text files (government's appeal appendix pages SA26-SA36)
• ▲[18-35] - Trial transcript, day 11 (page 2166)
• ▲[18-36] - Ross's appeal brief (page 49)
• ▲[18-37] - Trial transcript, day 11 (page 2228)
• ▲[18-38] - Trial transcript, day 11 (page 2159)
• ▲[18-39] - Trial transcript, day 12 (page 2334)

• ▲[19-1] - 100 letters in support of Ross
• ▲[19-2] - Petition for Panel Rehearing or Rehearing en Banc (page 9)
• ▲[19-3] - Ross's sentencing transcript (appeal appendix page A1534)
• ▲[19-4] - Petition for Panel Rehearing or Rehearing en Banc (page 9)
• ▲[19-5] - Ross's sentencing transcript (appeal appendix page A1535)
• ▲[19-6] - Ross's sentencing transcript (appeal appendix page A1535)
• ▲[19-7] - Ross's sentencing letter addressed to Judge Forrest, May 22, 2015 (page 1)
• ▲[19-8] - Ross's sentencing transcript (appeal appendix page A1516)
• ▲[19-9] - Ross's sentencing transcript (appeal appendix page A1541)
• ▲[19-10] - Ross's sentencing letter addressed to Judge Forrest, May 22, 2015 (page 2)
• ▲[19-11] - Ross's sentencing transcript (appeal appendix page A1534)
• ▲[19-12] - Petition for Panel Rehearing or Rehearing en Banc (page 3)
• ▲[19-13] - Petition for Panel Rehearing or Rehearing en Banc (page 4)
• ▲[19-14] - Supreme Court amicus brief from National Lawyers Guild + 7 other amici (page 21)
• ▲[19-15] - Forbes article, October 23, 2017 ("The Role of Publicity in Sentencing")
• ▲[19-16] - Forbes article, August 11, 2016 ("Illicit Online Drug Sales Triple In Absence Of Silk Road")
• ▲[19-17] - Department of Justice press release, November 6, 2014 (“Operator of Silk Road 2.0 Website Charged in Manhattan Federal Court”)
• ▲[19-18] - Bitcoin.com article, June 1, 2019 (“Plea Bargain Means Silk Road 2 Admin Will Likely See No Prison Time”)
• ▲[19-19] - Bitcoin.com article, April 12,2019 (“Silk Road 2 Founder Finally Sentenced 5 Years After His Arrest”)
• ▲[19-20] - Supreme Court amicus brief from Drug Policy Alliance & Law Enforcement Action Partnership (page 3)
• ▲[19-21] - Supreme Court amicus brief from Drug Policy Alliance & Law Enforcement Action Partnership (page 3)
• ▲[19-22] - Supreme Court amicus brief from Downsize DC Foundation + 5 other amici (page 23)
• ▲[19-23] - Supreme Court amicus brief from National Lawyers Guild + 7 other amici (page 15)
• ▲[19-24] – Pathology report from Mark L. Taff, MD (page 10)
• ▲[19-24] - Supreme Court amicus brief from National Lawyers Guild + 7 other amici (page 15)
• ▲[19-25] - Supreme Court amicus brief from National Lawyers Guild + 7 other amici (page 19)
• ▲[19-26] - Tweet from Curtis Green, December, 17, 2017

• ▲[20-1] - Ross's appeal brief (page 18)
• ▲[20-2] - Ross's appeal brief (page 35)
• ▲[20-3] - Ross's appeal brief (pages 34-35)
• ▲[20-4] - Force/Bridges criminal complaint (pages 40)
• ▲[20-5] - Ross's appeal brief (pages 34-35)
• ▲[20-6] - Force/Bridges criminal complaint (pages 4, 7)
• ▲[20-7] - Reply Memorandum of Law in support of Ross's Post-Trial Motions (page 32)
• ▲[20-8] - Ross's appeal brief (page 36)
• ▲[20-9] - Ross's appeal brief (page 23)
• ▲[20-10] - Shaun Bridges's sentencing transcript (page 16)
• ▲[20-11] - Shaun Bridges's sentencing transcript (page 11)
• ▲[20-12] - Shaun Bridges's sentencing transcript (page 33)
• ▲[20-13] - U.S.'s Motion to Terminate Shaun Bridges Motion for Self-Surrender and Motion to Unseal Arrest Warrant and [Proposed] Order (page 2)
• ▲[20-14] - Coindesk article, February 1, 2016 ("Corrupt Silk Road Agent Arrested in Alleged Attempt to Flee Country")
• ▲[20-15] - Carl Mark Force's plea agreement
• ▲[20-16] - Shaun Bridges's sentencing transcript
• ▲[20-17] - NakedSecurity article, October 21, 2015 ("Corrupt ex-DEA agent Carl Force gets 6 years for extorting Silk Road")
• ▲[20-18] - ArsTechnica article, December 7, 2015 ("Judge sets 71-month sentence for former Secret Service agent who plundered Silk Road")
• ▲[20-19] - Reuters article, November 7, 2017 ("Ex-agent in Silk Road probe gets more prison time for bitcoin theft")
• ▲[20-20] - ArsTechnica article, August 15, 2017 ("Secret Service agent, corrupted by Silk Road case, cops to second heist")
• ▲[20-21] - Department of Justice press release, December 4, 2015 ("Manhattan U.S. Attorney Announces Arrest And Unsealing Of Charges Against Senior Adviser To The Operator Of The 'Silk Road' Website")
• ▲[20-22] - Original post from Plural of Mongoose, September 27, 2015
• ▲[20-23] - Original post from Plural of Mongoose, September 27, 2015
• ▲[20-24] - Letter from Joshua Dratel to Judge Forrest, October 2, 2015
• ▲[20-25] - Signature from Christopher W. Tarbell on a search warrant, July 12, 2011
• ▲[20-26] - Public resume from Christopher W. Tarbell

21. Seeking Justice

• ▲[21-1] – Ross's appeal brief (page 3)
• ▲[21-2] – Shaun Bridges's sentencing transcript (pages 20-21)
• ▲[21-3] – The Oregonian article, November 5, 2015 (“Global meth dealer from Vancouver gets lighter sentence because of U.S. agents’ ‘Silk Road’ corruption”)
• ▲[21-4] – Ross's appeal brief (page 4)
• ▲[21-5] – Ross's appeal brief (page 5)
• ▲[21-6] – Ross's appeal brief (page 6)
• ▲[21-7] – Ross's appeal brief (page 98)
• ▲[21-8] – Ross's appeal brief (page 125)
• ▲[21-9] – Appeal Court opinion (page 71)
• ▲[21-10] – Appeal Court opinion (page 71)
• ▲[21-11] – Appeal Court opinion (page 75)
• ▲[21-12] – Appeal Court opinion (pages 119-120)
• ▲[21-13] – Appeal Court opinion (page 120)
• ▲[21-14] – ACLU report ("A Living Death: Life Without Parole For Non-Violent Offenses")
• ▲[21-15] – Wikipedia page ("United States Penitentiary, Florence High")
• ▲[21-16] – Supreme Court petition
• ▲[21-17] –  Free Ross Supreme Court page
• ▲[21-18] –  Supreme Court orders, June 28, 2018 (page 5)
• ▲[21-19] – Motion to Dismiss Indictment and Superseding Indictment, July 20, 2018
• ▲[21-20] – Reason article, July, 25, 2018 (“Ross Ulbricht’s Murder-for-Hire Charges Dropped by U.S. Attorney”)