RAILROADED

The Targeting and Caging of Ross Ulbricht

Sign Ross’s petition

Reading guide: The People Involved
Episode 1: Chapters 1-5
Episode 2: Chapters 6-10
Episode 3: Chapters 11-14
Episode 4: Chapters 15-17
Episode 5: Chapters 18-19
Episode 6: Chapters 20-21

Also available on iTunes | Spotify | Stitcher | SoundCloud | TuneIn


“Ross Ulbricht found himself at the intersection of three of the most highly prosecuted areas of law in the United States today: cyber, the drug war and financial regulation. Meaning the Silk Road angered a lot of people in power.”
– Alex Winter, Director of Deep Web


 

The following is based on public information sources, including court filings, transcripts, trial exhibits, affidavits, warrant applications, subpoenas, judicial rulings, investigation reports, press releases, sworn testimony and direct evidence. Some gaps remain due to government protective orders, redactions, sealed records, missing records the court cannot account for, dropped investigations, tampered evidence, communications and other data that remain encrypted, and the fact many of the parties involved have not testified.

Even so, every effort has been made to accurately present the available evidence surrounding the creation, investigation and shutdown of Silk Road, and the prosecution of Ross Ulbricht.

1. Traveling the Silk Road

The Silk Road anonymous market was an e-commerce website similar to Amazon or eBay but with an emphasis on user security and anonymity. It was launched in early February 2011 by Ross Ulbricht and employed two key pieces of technology. One was Tor, a global network of computers that routes internet traffic in a way that is nearly impossible to trace. Tor allowed users to connect to Silk Road without revealing their identity or location and without their internet providers knowing about it.[1-1] The other was the cryptocurrency Bitcoin, which allowed Silk Road users to anonymously pay or be paid for the goods and services listed on the site.[1-2]
Ross, at the time 26 years old, envisioned Silk Road as a “free-market economic experiment,” an open platform driven by its user community.[1-3] He believed that “people should have the right to buy and sell whatever they wanted so long as they weren’t hurting anyone else.”[1-4] The guiding philosophy of the site was that it is no one else’s business who you are or what you’re buying and selling as long as the transaction is voluntary and no third party is harmed. Some things were therefore prohibited, including stolen items, child pornography, counterfeits, and generally anything used to harm or defraud others, but users were not told specifically what to list for sale.[1-5][1-6] Many legal items were sold, such as gold, books, art and clothing.[1-7] However, more and more 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]
Ross Ulbricht
Ross envisioned Silk Road as a free-market economic experiment, an open platform driven by its user community.
A few months after its launch, gawker.com published an article about Silk Road, exposing it to a more general audience.[1-9] Then, in early June 2011, New York Senator Chuck Schumer, a member of the Senate Finance and Banking Committees,[1-10] called for a “crackdown” on Bitcoin, the immediate closure of Silk Road, and the apprehension of those behind it.[1-11] It became known as Schumer’s case.

2. Passing the Torch


“Pay attention if you care about due process, Fourth Amendment protections against illegal searches, the limits of government surveillance and internet freedom.”
– Nick Gillespie, Editor-in-Chief, Reason


With no programming experience or training, Ross’s limited skills were soon inadequate to handle the complexities of Silk Road’s technology, so he turned to a college friend, Richard Bates. Bates had studied computer science and was working for PayPal and eBay, companies that specialized in online payments and e-commerce, expertise suited for Silk Road.[2-1][2-2]

Initially, Ross asked Bates specific questions without revealing the nature of the project, but when Bates insisted, Ross told him about Silk Road. Bates offered him some help but distanced himself, citing concerns over the site being targeted by law enforcement.[2-3]

Richard Bates
(Facebook)
That stranger provided the needed help and eventually took control of the site entirely.
As time went on, Ross became more stressed and overwhelmed by the Silk Road project[2-4][2-5] and turned to an online anonymous stranger he met through the site. “I had discovered a big vulnerability in the way he had configured the main Bitcoin wallet that was being used to process all the deposits and withdrawals on the site,” the stranger stated in a later interview.[2-6] “At first he ignored me, but I persisted and gained his trust by helping him secure the wallet. From there we became close friends working on Silk Road together.”
That stranger provided the needed help and eventually took control of the site entirely. “It was a transition that took some time,” he said, “I was in his corner from early on and eventually it made sense for me to take the reins.” On November 11, 2011, Ross informed Bates of this transition.[2-7] As he told him in an online chat, “glad that’s not my problem anymore.”[2-8]

Then, on February 6, 2012, the new owner of Silk Road announced his screen name as “Dread Pirate Roberts” (DPR), a character from the film The Princess Bride, who passed his name and identity on to his successors.[2-9] By doing so, he became the focal point of the government’s investigation into Silk Road.

3. Targeting Karpeles


“This case is the birth of law as applied to our digital future. Watch it as a spectator at your peril.”
– Scott H. Greenfield, Criminal Defense Attorney


The investigation began when Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agent Jared Der-Yeghiayan (pronounced der-yeh-gan) began to intercept unusual packages at Chicago O’Hare airport in June 2011.[3-1] The packages were unusual, not only because they contained drugs, but because they used sophisticated packaging methods to avoid detection, yet contained only personal use amounts.[3-2] Der-Yeghiayan has never revealed how he first learned about Silk Road nor how he linked these seizures to it, but he eventually made “approximately 50 or more” purchases from the site and tested the purity of the drugs he received.[3-3]
Jared Der-Yeghiayan
(illustration: Susie Cagle)
Having discovered Silk Road, Der-Yeghiayan began digging further. He read all he could find online and discovered that “[it] first became known through an online user by the name of ‘silkroad’…on [bitcointalk.org].”[3-4] The user signed his messages “Silk Road staff” and referenced a website called silkroadmarket.org. This website was not Silk Road itself, which was accessible only through Tor, but rather an ordinary website with information about how to use Tor and access Silk Road.[3-5] When he looked to see who the website was registered with, Der-Yeghiayan found the name and address of his first lead. However, the information was fake and did not show up in any public or law enforcement databases.[3-6] Determined, Der-Yeghiayan kept digging and found that the domain name server that the silkroadmarket.org URL was registered with was called XTA.net. He then found through a subpoena that XTA.net was registered to Mutum Sigillum, a company owned and operated by Mark Karpeles.[3-7]
A Frenchman living in Japan, Karpeles was the owner of Mt. Gox which, as the only major Bitcoin exchange market at the time, handled the vast majority of Bitcoin exchange transactions. As Bitcoin was the only payment method on Silk Road, this piqued Der-Yeghiayan’s interest. Karpeles owned, operated, and administered “hundreds of websites” and was “a self-proclaimed computer hacker.”[3-8] He was also an experienced computer programmer, specializing in Bitcoin and development of e-commerce websites, “[making him] well-suited to operating a…site such as the Silk Road.”[3-9]

Der-Yeghiayan unearthed everything he could about Karpeles and his associates. He learned that Karpeles had acquired Mt. Gox around the time that Silk Road was started. Karpeles “had a strong motive to create a large underground marketplace where bitcoins would be in high demand. The Silk Road…was uniquely suited to his purpose…Because there are few legitimate vendors who accept bitcoins as payment, it is widely believed that the rise of Bitcoin has been driven in large part by their use on Silk Road.”[3-10]

Mark Karpeles
(Reuters)
Der-Yeghiayan had identified multiple accounts belonging to the Silk Road operators that contained bitcoins worth millions of U.S. dollars.

Der-Yeghiayan also managed to turn a confidential informant against Karpeles, someone who had worked for him “within the past two years.” This informant revealed that Karpeles owned and operated “bitcointalk.org—the same discussion forum where Silk Road was first publicized.”[3-11] From visiting the forum Der-Yeghiayan knew “that [it] operate[d] on a software platform known as Simple Machines,” and “that this same software platform [was] used to operate the discussion forums included on the Silk Road.” He noted that “Simple Machine forum software was not widely used by forum administrators. Thus, the fact that the software [was] used to operate both the discussion forum on bitcointalk.org and…on Silk Road indicates that the forums were likely set up by the same administrator—that is, Karpeles.”[3-12]

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.″[3-13] 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.”[3-14]
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.”[3-15]

By April 2012, Der-Yeghiayan had “identified multiple…accounts belonging to the Silk Road operators” that contained bitcoins worth “millions of U.S. dollars” and linked them back to Karpeles and one of his associates, Ashley Barr.[3-16] He had found “strong ties between those controlling the bitcoin markets and those operating the Silk Road.”[3-17] A Canadian with a Computer Science degree, Barr was Karpeles’s “right hand man.” He wrote like DPR and shared “the same viewpoints.”[3-18] For Der-Yeghiayan it clicked: Karpeles was “the mastermind behind keeping [Silk Road] secure and operating” and Barr was the spokesman and “voice” of DPR.[3-19] “We’re going right for the admin and his money,” he wrote in an April 20th email.[3-20]

Ashley Barr
(Reddit)
On July 6, 2012, Der-Yeghiayan summarized his findings and submitted them in a report that could be seen by every HSI office in the country and their coordinating office known as “C3.”[3-21]

4. Fighting for Control


“Ross’s case is so important to our country’s future and the future of Liberty itself. When somebody has been singled out the way Ross has been, to be made an example of, for a purely political case, that’s a serious problem.”
– Jeffrey Tucker, Editorial Director, American Institute for Economic Research


Only a few days after Der-Yeghiayan submitted his report, Michael McFarland, lead Silk Road investigator at HSI Baltimore, submitted a draft proposal to HSI headquarters. In it, he told all offices that he was “the [point of contact] for all domestic Silk Road related investigations.” Seeing that McFarland had developed virtually no information on Silk Road, Der-Yeghiayan “rewrote [the] draft to state that [he was].”[4-1] McFarland then went directly to C3 and “pitched [his] case as the only Silk Road investigation HSI has…and wanted their support.” Looking into it, C3 found that Der-Yeghiayan “had a much longer and…diverse investigation on the Silk Road,” and called Der-Yeghiayan to a meeting to brief them on it.[4-2]

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]
A few weeks later, C3 called both offices to a meeting to settle the turf war between them. After each side presented its case, Debra Note, one of the managers overseeing the meeting, noted the “confusion and odd approach to the HSI Baltimore investigation.” She asked Der-Yeghiayan if McFarland’s investigation was “interfering with [his] case.” He “expressed deep concern for [McFarland’s] tactics and the lack of focus in [his] investigation.”[4-7]
Unbeknownst to Der-Yeghiayan, McFarland intended to co-opt his investigation into Karpeles.
Steven Snyder
(Twitter)
By the end of September 2012, a new agency—Baltimore’s Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA)—had also gotten involved. Der-Yeghiayan pulled up their records and found that they “mirrored exactly” his. Upset, he asked McFarland if he had shared his investigation with the DEA and the rest of the Baltimore task force.[4-8] McFarland said he had, having disregarded Der-Yeghiayan’s request not to. Der-Yeghiayan expressed “serious concern” but was brushed off.[4-9]

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 SS 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


“This case isn’t about Silk Road, it is about the future of Internet freedom, autonomy, and privacy.”
– Carla Gericke, Candidate for New Hampshire Senate


It was later discovered that McFarland had leaked investigation details to two Baltimore agents who, using theft, extortion and other means, had enriched themselves through their involvement in Silk Road. These agents “sought deliberately to undermine the integrity of the ongoing…investigation.”[5-1] One was DEA agent Carl Mark Force. The other was Secret Service agent Shaun Bridges, who was on a “joint-duty assignment with the National Security Agency [NSA]” at the time.[5-2]

Seven months into his Silk Road investigation, Bridges “went rogue” as McFarland would later call it, and secretly seized $2 million from Karpeles’s Wells Fargo account, which Karpeles was using in the operation of Mt. Gox.[5-3] Bridges did this to alert Karpeles that “the U.S. government had him on its radar”[5-4] and “the walls were closing in on them,” so they could avoid prosecution.[5-5] It is still unknown what involvement Bridges had with Karpeles in the preceding months, but Bridges issued “this seizure warrant…because he didn’t want a criminal case to proceed.” If the U.S. government obtained Mt. Gox records, “they might see his…name on them” and discover his misdeeds. Not surprisingly, two days before he seized Karpeles’s money, “he made sure to get his own money out.”[5-6]

Neither Der-Yeghiayan nor McFarland knew of the seizure because Bridges, in order to execute it, “went behind their back” to Richard Kay, an Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) not associated with the Silk Road investigation.[5-7]

Force and Bridges also went after the bitcoins on Silk Road, but did so in secret so they could keep the money for themselves. According to Force, he pretended to be a drug smuggler for a cartel, gained DPR’s confidence and asked him to coordinate a large sale with one of Silk Road’s top cocaine vendors, a user going by the name “googleyed.” Allegedly, DPR tasked Curtis Green, one of his staff members, with setting up the deal. When approached by Green, googleyed was suspicious of Force’s offer and declined. Green agreed to accept delivery instead and gave Force his home address. There, a SWAT team arrested him once the package was delivered.[5-8][5-9]

Carl Mark Force
(Twitter)
Shaun Bridges
(Forbes)
Curtis Green
(Ars Technica)
Once in custody, Green was interrogated by Force, Bridges and the rest of the Baltimore Silk Road task force and gave them his administrative login.[5-10] Bridges pressured Green to show him how to exploit Silk Road’s system, including how to change passwords and take over accounts. Soon after gaining access to the site, Bridges left the interrogation. He used his new knowledge to hijack and empty the accounts of top Silk Road vendors and move the funds to Karpeles’s Bitcoin exchange, Mt. Gox.[5-11]

However, Bridges did not move the bitcoins directly from Silk Road. He first moved the funds to Green’s Silk Road administrative account. Bridges didn’t simply transfer “21,000 bitcoins out to steal them, he transferred them to…Green’s account…because he wanted to have a suspect. He wanted…Silk Road vendors and users to know ‘Here’s the person who stole my…bitcoins. It’s Curtis Green’.”[5-12]

As Green would later testify: “He set me up to take the fall.” He wanted to “make sure that it was me that did it. So he was “very calculated. It was very well thought out, in my opinion.”[5-13]
Bridges’s plan worked. When it was discovered that the bitcoins were stolen, Green was “immediately accused.” During the interrogation, Justin Herring, the Baltimore AUSA overseeing McFarland, screamed at Green, “Come on! We know you stole it! We know you did it!”

Green then got pulled aside by an agent, who coaxed him to confess: “Come on. They’re the bad guys,” he told him.

“I…I wish I could,” Green kept saying. “It doesn’t make sense for me to steal the money, the bitcoins. If I was that type of person, why would I steal it the night that I am in front of 15 agents? I…wouldn’t I have done it the week before in the comfort of my home?” He couldn’t believe they were accusing him. “It made no…sense to me whatsoever…it blew my mind.”

Justin Herring
(Linkedin)
His interrogators threatened to tear up Green’s cooperation agreement and send him to prison. “We don’t think you’re telling the truth,” Herring told him, “and since you lied to us, we’re going to take that away.” Green, a father and grandfather, “begged them for a lie detector test,” but Force “kiboshed [that] every time.”[5-14]
Bridges used his new knowledge to hijack and empty the accounts of top Silk Road vendors and move the funds to Karpeles’s Bitcoin exchange, Mt. Gox.
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


"This case is also very much about the future of privacy and surveillance, and sets some dangerous precedents for those who want to open digital marketplaces or use digital currencies."
- Stephen Duke, Students for Liberty, North American Events Manager


By this time, Der-Yeghiayan’s investigation was derailed, leaving him with no seizures and Karpeles scrambling to escape the government’s pursuit. 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]

All the Baltimore attendees remained silent, despite knowing that a meeting had just taken place with Karpeles’s attorneys.

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]

Christopher Tarbell
(Youtube)

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 the 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


"The Silk Road and case of Ross Ulbricht speak to some of the most important and contentious issues of our day: citizen's rights in the digital age, government surveillance and overreach, and the often extreme and unfair sentences in cyber-related criminal cases."
- Alex Winter, director of Deep Web


With the Silk Road server location in hand, there was “a lot of pressure” from the “U.S. Attorney’s Office” to find DPR and take down the site.[7-1] Der-Yeghiayan redoubled his efforts, knowing he’d lose Karpeles if he did not arrest him before the site was taken down. To this end, he and another HSI agent created a new identity on the Silk Road forum named “mr.wonderful.” Mr.wonderful then approached the forum administrators who regularly spoke with DPR in an attempt to turn them into informants. One admin, "cirrus," was “compromised by [mr.wonderful]” and recruited to cooperate “against the site and DPR.”[7-2]

Eventually, Der-Yeghiayan took over the cirrus account. As DPR’s employee, he interacted with him daily, in search of any clue he could use to expose him. Once again, Der-Yeghiayan mistakenly entrusted his colleagues in Baltimore with knowledge of this operation and one of them took advantage of it with a scheme of their own.[7-3] It remains unknown if this person was Force, Bridges, Kay, several working together, or someone else entirely, but whoever it was created an account named “notwonderful” and contacted DPR.

In the following months, notwonderful sold DPR intimate details pertaining to the investigation.

Notwonderful told DPR “he could provide real-time information and analysis regarding the federal investigation of [Silk Road] and DPR.”[7-4] In the following months, notwonderful sold DPR intimate details pertaining to the investigation, including details of Der-Yeghiayan’s mr.wonderful operation. “There is a fixation on somehow penetrating or compromising your moderators” through “bribing or threatening [them] into providing access to a staff account,” he told DPR.[7-5] “They seem to be under pressure to get someone of great importance to show a win for USA.”[7-6] Notwonderful outlined the agencies going after DPR:

“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 Setup


"Ross Ulbricht was framed. The Feds who framed him broke a lot of laws and made a complicated mess."
- Catherine Fitts, Assistant Secretary of Housing under President George H.W. Bush


Eventually, Herring informed Der-Yeghiayan about the meeting Kay had with Karpeles’s attorneys and the plans to meet with Karpeles himself. Once again Der-Yeghiayan told Herring that he did not want him to pursue Karpeles or meet with him, that it would damage his ongoing investigation.[8-1] But by now Der-Yeghiayan had lost control, and Karpeles was already working closely with Baltimore. Kay “changed the meeting location to Guam,” widely known as an NSA stronghold.[8-2] Der-Yeghiayan “continued to express deep concern over this meeting and its effect on [his] investigation against [Karpeles],” but “Herring did not appear concerned or willing to stop [it].”[8-3]

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]

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.

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 DPR 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]

Gary Alford
(BBC)
Ross was the perfect fall guy because, after all, Silk Road was his idea, and he trusted DPR enough to hand his creation off to him early on.

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. However, it would have been simple for Karpeles, or anyone else with high level access to bitcointalk.org, to plant this information.

Alford’s official story defies belief. 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


"The government can use an email address or phone number, without a warrant, to get an IP address to go into the database and 'scarf up' everything about the user."
- William Binney, former high-level NSA official turned whistleblower


Serrin Turner
(Youtube)

Just ten days before his arrest, Secret Service and FBI agents, and Turner, the New York prosecutor, used a combination of technologies to intercept and collect Ross’s internet traffic information. These technologies fall under two categories: pen registers and trap-and-trace devices, which collect outgoing and incoming data respectively. Together, they are known as a “pen-trap.”

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. (An IP address is a unique number used on the Internet that allows data to be routed between connected devices).[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.

"Something as socially, politically, and personally important as website browsing history requires updated consideration of privacy rights by this Court before the government is given license to search it without probable cause," the National Lawyers Guild wrote to the Supreme Court, challenging this violation in Ross's case.[9-6]

In that traffic, he discovered the MAC address of Ross’s laptop and attached a pen-trap to it, giving him the ability to geolocate Ross and collect all his internet traffic information, regardless of where he went.

The Cato Institute and Reason Foundation argued that, "The government’s warrantless collection of the IP addresses a citizen visits is analogous to a government agent peering through the window to monitor which books a person pulls from their shelf."[9-7] This power "effectively gives the government a blank check to conduct a dragnet search of Internet activity."[9-8]

With Ross’s internet data, 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.[9-9]

10. New York Takes Over


"The government did not produce a single witness to testify firsthand that Ulbricht authored any of the communications attributed to DPR. It was all digital, created and transmitted on an anonymous, untraceable internet network."
- Joshua Dratel, criminal defense attorney


Der-Yeghiayan, still the most senior and experienced Silk Road investigator, was not convinced that Ross was DPR. Despite Alford’s story, he continued to believe Karpeles was behind Silk Road. After two years and "thousands" of hours of investigation, time was running out to indict him before the site was taken down and Ross given the blame.[10-1] Der-Yeghiayan submitted an affidavit attached to a search warrant for Karpeles’s email accounts so he could gather the evidence he needed to convict him.

With Ross’s arrest imminent, Der-Yeghiayan realized that if he’d have anything to show for his years of work, he had to cooperate with the prosecution led by Preetinder Bharara.

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 led by Preetinder Bharara, U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York, who was recommended for his powerful job by Schumer and was his Chief Counsel for nearly five years.[10-5][10-6]

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 [Bharara].” 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 [Bharara] 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—[Bharara] 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 [Bharara] 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]

Chuck Schumer
(NNWO)
Preetinder Bharara
(Bloomberg)

11. The Arrest


"The prosecution’s forensic evidence was below amateur level. The tools used were bad choices, and when the metadata...are exactly the same for every file, it’s inescapably clear that they’ve been altered. To then submit them as evidence is laughable… or would be if so much wasn’t at stake."
- Paul Rosenberg, Author, Engineer, Consultant to NASA and U.S. Military


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 Bharara and Turner needed to make a case against Ross was on his laptop, including a Bitcoin wallet with over 144,000 bitcoins.[11-1]

On October 1, 2013, the day of his arrest, Ross was in his local library downloading The Colbert Report.[11-2] Plainclothes agents were watching him, and Der-Yeghiayan was across the street in a cafe, logged on as cirrus. Der-Yeghiayan “initiated a chat” to DPR’s account, which popped up on Ross’s screen, now that he had access to it.[11-3] Der-Yeghiayan needed Ross to log onto DPR’s Silk Road account so the arrest team could claim that he was DPR at the time of his arrest. To do this, he messaged that he was having difficulty with the admin tool he used to remove inappropriate flagged listings on Silk Road.

Undercover agents immediately created a diversion while others tore Ross’s laptop from him and handcuffed him.

In response, Ross logged in and waited for the page to load as it bounced through the Tor network. Having little knowledge of the inner workings of DPR’s enterprise, Ross messaged cirrus, “You did Bitcoin exchange before you started working for me, right?,”[11-4][11-5] something the real DPR would have known, having chatted and worked with cirrus for many months. Once Ross logged in, undercover agents immediately created a diversion, while others tore Ross’s laptop from him and handcuffed him.

Thomas Kiernan
(Kurtis Productions, CNBC)

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]

Christopher Beeson
(Linkedin)

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]

All evidence used against Ross from the laptop was a screenshot of a copy of a “copy” that never matched the original.

How true the "copy” Beeson extracted was to the original Kiernan seized is unknowable. Nor can it be known what exactly Kiernan did with the laptop before handing it over to Beeson or what data was lost when Beeson crashed the computer. It is indisputable, however, that the laptop was not handled professionally. Both agents ignored “order of volatility” guidelines,[11-32] overwrote data unnecessarily,[11-33] and used obsolete and unreliable methods.[11-34] Files used in the government's case against Ross were modified as much as "six hours after [his] arrest."[11-35] Not one photo taken by Kiernan or Beeson to document their work showed the correct time.[11-36][11-37] Yet, all this evidence was admissible at trial.

12. Deleting Evidence


"If this back-up of the forum database had not been found; if log-ins made by DPR after Ross’s arrest were not discovered, no one would be the wiser. This begs the question: how much more is there?"
- Lyn Ulbricht, Ross Ulbricht's mother


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]

The conversation was originally in evidence in several locations. One was the live version on the Silk Road forum, while three others were in backups of the live version that Tarbell made copies of. However, “the dialogue…[could not] be found anywhere in any of these four locations.” All traces of it had been deleted. Miraculously, a fifth copy of the conversation was overlooked by whomever removed the others. It was buried in the four terabytes of evidence dumped on Ross and his legal team. This copy “appear[ed] to be created manually by [a Silk Road] user with administrative privileges…and saved in his home folder on the [Silk Road forum] server.” Whoever tried to cover notwonderful’s tracks didn’t delete this obscure copy and “failed to eliminate all evidence of those communications.”[12-2]

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.

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


"The case comes in, it’s a big splash, it’s all over the news. Almost a year later, these big mean offensive counts get dropped, it’s not a front page story anymore. It’s somewhere in the recesses of the paper. It’s just not a big deal. At that point people already associate the case with murder-for-hire. No prosecutor would ever say that’s what they’re doing, but as a long-term criminal defense attorney, this happens all the time."
- Jay Leiderman, Criminal Defense Attorney


Ross hired New York attorney, Joshua Dratel, to defend him. His first courtroom appearance in New York was presided over by magistrate Judge Kevin Fox, to determine if Ross would be granted bail. Turner, appointed by Bharara as lead prosecutor, claimed at the hearing that Ross was behind the murder-for-hire plot involving Green and brought up information from the laptop about five other murder-for-hire attempts. Dratel was ambushed late the night before with this allegation, giving him no time to consult with Ross or prepare a defense. After using them to deprive Ross of bail, Turner dropped these allegations and never brought them to trial. Turner also asserted, without evidence, that Ross might have bitcoins stashed away somewhere that he could use to fund an escape. Despite 70 letters to the court attesting that Ross was not a danger or flight risk; $1 million in pledges from many friends and family, including their homes and life savings; and the fact that Ross was a first-time offender,[13-1] Judge Fox denied his Eighth Amendment right to bail.[13-2]

Judge Kevin Fox
Illustration: Telegraph.co.uk
Prior to this case, no internet service provider had been criminally charged for permitting content or even hosting websites that tolerate or even promote illegal activity.

With Ross secure in prison custody, Turner’s first communication with him was a threat. He told Ross that if he didn’t plead guilty to the charges he was arrested for, which would force him to spend a minimum of ten years in prison, then Turner would add the kingpin charge, raising the minimum to twenty years.[13-3] Either way, Turner said he would recommend that the judge sentence Ross to life in prison without parole. The judge was Katherine Forrest, District Court Judge in the Southern District of New York, who had been officially recommended to the bench by Schumer.[13-4] Ross refused to cooperate with Turner and was indicted on February 4, 2014, beginning the long, arduous process of defending himself against the federal government from within a Bureau of Prisons detention center.

From the outset, Ross and Dratel challenged Bharara’s case on legal grounds. The charges were: conspiring to distribute narcotics and fake identifications, hack computers, launder money, and 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 Force and Bridges staged with Green or the others used to deny Ross bail.[13-6][13-7] The District of Maryland did include Green in a separate indictment, but dismissed it in its entirety nearly five years later.[13-8][13-9]

Dratel argued that these charges have never "been used to prosecute the conduct alleged against [Ross]—that he operated a website through which other persons—sellers and purchasers—committed illegal activity.”[13-10] 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]

Judge Katherine Forrest
(Law.com)

In fact, prior to this 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]

Judge Forrest apparently cared little about this double standard. She accommodated Turner, who argued that “the federal criminal laws are expansive and adaptable, and readily reach…conduct online to the same extent as if it occurred on the street.”[13-17] She acknowledged that “Silk Road was nothing more than code…until third parties agreed to use it.”[13-18] Yet, despite the fact that it was not, she declared that “Silk Road was specifically and intentionally designed for the purpose of facilitating unlawful transactions.”[13-19] By saying this, she equated privacy and anonymity with all things illegal. To make Silk Road illegal as a whole, and not just the specific illegal transactions that occurred on the site, it had to be characterized as a vast criminal enterprise with Ross at the top.

"If I’m selling drugs to one person using my AT&T phone, does that make every other drug seller on AT&T a co-conspirator of mine? Does that make AT&T a co-conspirator? No.”

In her ruling, 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. “Co-conspirators may not know each other’s identity” she continued,[13-21] and the fact that Silk Road was automated “does not preclude the formation” of a conspiracy. “There is no requirement that any words be exchanged at all.”[13-22]

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.” Analogizing a website host with a mafia boss, she said Ross acted as a “sort of godfather.”[13-23]

Joshua Dratel
(Linkedin)

In court, Dratel argued that companies like AT&T are in the same position. They know “people are using [their network] for drug deals, they’re texting, they’re making calls, I know that, it’s foreseeable to me. If I’m selling drugs to one person using my AT&T phone, does that make every other drug seller on AT&T a co-conspirator of mine? Does that make AT&T a co-conspirator? No.”[13-24]

Ross made several other arguments, clearly showing that the government’s charges could not be applied to the alleged conduct and violated his constitutional rights.[13-25] In spite of this, Judge Forrest allowed the prosecution to proceed, denying the motion “in its entirety.”[13-26]

14. Finding the Servers


"We have become overly aggressive with...our criminal justice system in the U.S. We imprison more people, and apply longer sentences, than any country on the face of the planet. People like Ross should be afforded the opportunity of redemption as soon as possible. For Ross that is now."
- Neill Franklin, Executive Director, Law Enforcement Action Partnership and 34-year police veteran


Ross also challenged the government’s investigation itself. All the subpoenas and warrants used Tarbell's seizure of the Silk Road server as their starting point for probable cause. If the seizure had been done illegally, all subsequent evidence, including the information on the laptop, would be suppressed and the government’s case would fall apart. Ross filed a motion to suppress the evidence unless Tarbell could explain how he found the server.[14-1]

"We believe the FBI is using parallel construction, creating a plausible story of how they found the server to satisfy the courts, but a story that isn’t true."

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]

The experts suspected another explanation: “Many of us believe it wasn’t the FBI who discovered the hidden Silk Road server, but the NSA…We believe the FBI is using parallel construction…creating a plausible story of how they found the server to satisfy the courts, but a story that isn’t true,” Graham said. “I am a foremost…expert on this sort of thing. I think Christopher Tarbell is lying.”[14-7]

"Given the massive breadth of the NSA’s dragnet electronic surveillance,” Dratel later argued to the court, “This case is a prime candidate for parallel construction, particularly in light of Silk Road’s exclusive operation on the Internet, and its use of both the Tor network and Bitcoin...as well as the intensity of the government’s multi-year investigation aimed at finding the identity of those operating the website.”[14-8]

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 Turner or not, he 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] Turner 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]

Turner reiterated Tarbell’s explanation which, despite widespread expert skepticism, did satisfy the court. Judge Forrest denied the defense’s Motion to Suppress Evidence and refused to allow an evidentiary hearing to determine the truth.[14-12]

Edward Snowden revealed that the NSA had “worked urgently to target Bitcoin users” in the months leading up to Ross’s arrest.

More than three years later, Edward Snowden revealed that the NSA had “worked urgently to target Bitcoin users” in the months leading up to Ross’s arrest. They used a “program code-named OAKSTAR, a collection of covert corporate partnerships enabling the agency to monitor communications...along fiber optic cables that undergird the internet.” A classified March 8, 2013 NSA memo stated they were using these capabilities in their mission of looking at “cyber targets that utilize online e-currency.” It is hard to imagine a higher priority government target using Bitcoin in 2013 than Silk Road and DPR.[14-13]

It is hard to imagine a higher priority government target using Bitcoin in 2013 than Silk Road and DPR.

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…is 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


"It is obvious the government is more interested in protecting its unfairly obtained conviction of Mr. Ulbricht than investigating fully or effectively the misconduct of its corrupt agents. This is a continuing travesty of justice."
- Joshua Dratel, Criminal Defense Attorney


Once Ross was arrested and the Silk Road website seized, Force and Bridges were under pressure. If it were discovered that they sold inside information to DPR, extorted and threatened him, broke into the site through Green’s accounts, and used that access to steal funds, they would both be sent to prison.

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]

Kathryn Haun
(Coindesk)

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]

Even more outrageous, Turner hid Bridges’s involvement entirely from both Judge Forrest and Dratel.

The corruption threatened Bharara’s and Turner’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]

Even more outrageous, Turner hid Bridges’s involvement entirely from both Judge Forrest and Dratel. They did not know he existed. Having alerted Karpeles that the "U.S. government had him on its radar"[15-9] and having infiltrated Silk Road, Bridges was ostensibly too entwined with Karpeles for Turner to risk revealing his corruption, even though he was required by law to reveal anything that might be helpful to Ross.[15-10]

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 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]

Timothy Howard
(Linkedin)

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] Dratel 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


"The trial was conducted in a manner apparently designed to secure a guilty verdict. Some of the judge's decisions were baffling to any neutral observer."
- Robert Murphy, Senior Fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute


A couple of months before trial began, Schumer publicly convicted Ross in an open letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, tainting him in the minds of potential New York jurors. “The Silk Road was shut down by the [FBI],” he wrote, “and I am pleased that the DOJ is currently prosecuting its operator and holding him accountable.”[16-1] This was despite the foundational tenet of our justice system that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty.

Judge Forrest influenced the jurors further, before trial, 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]

Judge Forrest actively concealed from the public and Ross the fact that an anonymous jury had been empaneled.

Then, with the jury selected, the judge went further and intervened on behalf of the government, telling the jurors that “all of the evidence that you are going to need to render a verdict will be received into evidence at this trial."[16-3] Of course, “there is only one party with the burden of proof at trial, and that is the government.” So, when the judge “told the jury they would receive all the evidence they needed, [she] vouched for the strength and sufficiency of the government’s evidence."[16-4]

Around this time, protesters began to demonstrate outside the courthouse, carrying signs reading "Life for a website?," ‘Web hosting is not a crime” and other slogans. People also distributed pamphlets informing jurors of their rights, responsibilities and authority. Judge Forrest took exception to this and threatened to sequester the jury and implement “additional procedures” unless the demonstrators desisted by the next morning. Dratel argued that this would hurt Ross because it would send jurors the message that Ross was a danger to them. He also argued that Ross had no control over citizens exercising their right to free speech.[16-5] However, the judge did not relent and, not wanting to harm Ross, the demonstrators reluctantly disbanded.

As trial began, 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.

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, Turner 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 the 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 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 (an NSA stronghold[16-15]), 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]

When trial reconvened, the judge had performed a complete about face. 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.

“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 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]

An interview, in which DPR said he took over the site from its previous owner early on, was banned from being mentioned to the 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 an alternate perpetrator 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 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]

At every turn, Turner convinced Judge Forrest to suppress anything that could lead to revealing the truth about Force and Karpeles.

However, Dratel had other questions for Der-Yeghiayan. Before trial, Turner 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 a 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]

At every turn, Turner convinced Judge Forrest to suppress anything that could lead to revealing the truth about Force and Karpeles. This included the conversation between notwonderful and DPR. Despite Turner including it in his initial exhibit list, he had it blocked too, realizing that it would hurt his case by showing that DPR was tipped off by corrupt law enforcement.[16-40]

17. How Many DPRs?


“Everybody says there were multiple DPRs. Absolutely. I was DPR once. So if I was, who else was?”
- Curtis Green, former Silk Road admin


"It is common knowledge that there was more than one DPR. Anyone who even remotely followed the trial could see that the jury was aggressively obstructed from knowing this and many other material facts.”
- Will Pangman, Bitcoin and Blockchain Consultant


In addition to preventing any mention of Karpeles, Force, Bridges, or anyone from Baltimore, Turner 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?” Dratel 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?”

"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.

Turner revealed to Judge Forrest and Dratel that Jones had in fact communicated with more than one person acting as DPR. In October 2012, “Jones and [DPR] had agreed upon a handshake,” a unique question and response that only they would know.[17-4][17-5] If Jones doubted that he was talking to the same DPR, he could ask the secret question to determine if DPR knew the response. Just weeks before Ross was arrested, Jones asked DPR the question: a book recommendation. The same DPR would have known the correct response (anything by Rothbard), but this DPR was “unable to provide [it].” He told Jones what his first job was on Silk Road instead (moderator of the DPR book club on the Silk Road forum), but this was public knowledge that anyone could know, especially someone who had been around the site for any length of time.

Andrew Jones
(trial exhibit 256)

As noted earlier, Turner’s case hinged on the content of the files they found on Ross’s laptop. There were thousands of pages of chat logs on it, including the chat between DPR and Jones from 2012 when they initially set up the handshake.[17-6] If Ross had actually been DPR, and if it was Ross chatting with Jones just before his arrest, not only would he have known the handshake, but he would have known that he kept chat logs of all his conversations.[17-7] He could have easily and quickly searched for the book recommendation prompt and offered the correct response. The fact that DPR did not know the handshake demonstrated that “there was more than one DPR, that DPR’s identity changed over time, and that there was a change very close in time to [Ross]’s arrest—all supporting [Ross]’s defense that he had been framed by the genuine DPR.”[17-8]

Rather than allow the jury to hear this evidence, Turner removed Jones from his witness list.[17-9] Dratel called him to the stand instead, but Jones invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, even though he was cooperating with the government and had told them about the failed handshake in the first place.[17-10]

Turner revealed to Judge Forrest and Dratel that Jones had in fact communicated with more than one person acting as DPR.

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]

In desperation, Dratel tried to expose the political connection between Schumer, Judge Forrest and Bharara.[17-13] He began by asking IRS agent Alford (who claimed to have found Ross’s email address) about the “open letter from…Schumer…asking that Silk Road be shut down.”[17-14] Before Alford could answer, Turner objected, and Judge Forrest sustained the objection. Dratel argued that the question was relevant because the letter put “pressure on law enforcement” to shut down Silk Road.[17-15]

“It makes it something they want to do as quickly as possible; yet two and-a-half years later…Silk Road is still operating. For three months the government can pull the plug at any moment. There is tremendous motivation…to find a suspect as quickly as possible and arrest them, regardless of the merits.”[17-16]

At this, Judge Forrest became hostile:

“You've got a view…that is, frankly, rather extraordinary for a person who is I know as intellectual as you. I can’t decide if you actually believe that you’re right or whether or not you are just taking the position as a zealous advocate.”[17-17]

No further mention of Schumer was made.

In desperation, Dratel tried to expose the political connection between Schumer, Judge Forrest and Bharara.

18. Selling the Story


“The prosecutors in the Silk Road trial have no clue how Bitcoin works, or are intentionally lying about it.”
– Roger Ver, CEO of bitcoin.com


At this point in the trial, Howard took over and methodically presented the jury with segments of files from Ross’s laptop, implying that, because they were on his computer, Ross had written or produced every one of them. In addition, he referenced many personal details of Ross’s life, such as a journal entry that talked about both his book business and Silk Road,[18-1] “evidence matching [Ross]’s actual travel history with DPR’s travel plans,”[18-2] and an email Ross sent to a friend that appeared in one of the chat logs.[18-3] These snippets were integrated here and there within the laptop material, which Howard tied back to Ross through his seized email and Facebook accounts.

Then, Howard 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 whole thing. This was despite a disclaimer Turner 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 objected that the presentation would prejudice the jury against Ross, but Judge Forrest allowed it anyway.[18-5]

Ilhwan Yum
(Kurtis Productions, CNBC)
In addition, Turner 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 and produced a “voluminous spreadsheet and an extraordinarily complex analysis of millions of Bitcoin addresses and sophisticated computer software.”[18-8]

Turner hid this until the last possible moment when, on January 25 at 10:17 PM, he 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.

“There’s no analysis of anything going out,” he later told the jury. “There’s no evidence of anything going out. Where is the money? Now, that 556,000 bitcoins that are unaccounted for, if you look at…that would be worth at the time of [Ross’s] arrest about $85 million. By November 22, 2013, six weeks later, they were worth a thousand dollars a bitcoin. Do you know what that comes to? $556 million. Would you spend 144,000 bitcoins, $19 million, to get $556 million? Would that be a sacrifice worth making, to put that on someone’s wallet, if you could get away with the rest of it?”[18-11]

Yum also testified that there was “a transaction of 195,000 bitcoins” after Ross was arrested that was quickly broken up into three smaller amounts.[18-12]

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

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.

“Would you spend 144,000 bitcoins, $19 million, to get $556 million? Would that be a sacrifice worth making…if you could get away with the rest of it?”
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.

Turner had used the same tactic when calling Alford to the stand and on other occasions throughout trial, eliciting an outburst from Dratel:

“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]

Andreas Antonopoulos
To challenge Yum’s testimony Dratel tried to bring in expert witness Andreas Antonopoulos, a “best-selling author, speaker, educator and one of the world’s foremost Bitcoin…experts.”[18-16]

Antonopoulos’s testimony would have “explained to the jury a number of technically complex and abstract concepts involving Bitcoin, and countered certain aspects of Yum’s testimony, particularly the massive spreadsheet accompanying [it].” It would have highlighted “defects in Yum’s forensic analysis of Bitcoin addresses” and defined principles of “ownership, control, and access related to Bitcoin and Bitcoin wallets, in counterpoint to the flawed conclusions in Yum’s testimony, as well as Yum’s inaccurate definition of important terminology and description of Bitcoin mechanics.”[18-17]

Dratel also attempted to bring in expert witness Steven Bellovin, Computer Science professor at Columbia University and leading expert on computer networking and internet security.[18-18]

Bellovin’s testimony “would have addressed a number of technical computer and internet-related issues which the defense was prevented from addressing during cross-examination. Those matters included general principles of internet security and vulnerabilities, PHP computer programming, forensic memory analysis, general issues related to linux-based operating systems, and principles of public key cryptography. Each of these issues was significantly implicated in the testimony of government witnesses, as well as in the evidence related to the government’s forensic examination and analysis of [Ross]’s laptop.”[18-19]

Steven Bellovin
(Columbia)
Aside from Bates’s testimony, the government’s entire case against Ross relied on the digital evidence on his laptop and the tenuous connections they made online between his name and information associated with Silk Road.[18-20] In fact, Bates’s testimony contradicted the government’s narrative because he confirmed that Ross had passed Silk Road on to someone else in 2011.[18-21] The government’s attempt to refute this relied on just a few lines from one of the chat logs on the laptop.[18-22] Bellovin’s testimony would have shown that this digital evidence was unreliable, that it could have been doctored and planted without a trace. He would have explained to the jury how “vulnerabilities inherent to the internet and digital data, such as fabrication and manipulation of files and metadata, and hacking,” rendered the evidence against Ross “inauthentic, unattributable to him” and “ultimately unreliable.”[18-23]
“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.”
Instead of presenting the facts and proving his case, Turner once again succeeded in having the judge gag Dratel by preventing him from calling either Bellovin or Antonopolous to the stand. She ruled that “it would be…unfair to make the government prepare to cross-examine expert witnesses on short notice.”[18-24]

In fact, Judge Forrest’s decision was “entirely asymmetrical.” She had told Dratel in front of the jury, “you need to call a witness to make the points you want to make,” once again putting the burden of proof on the defense.[18-25]

“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]
He dramatically pointed at Ross in front of the jury and accused him of trying to have people killed.
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 in detail, 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.

The jury had no idea how easy it would have been to manipulate and place those files.
Deprived of the backstory detailing how McFarland, 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. 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.
Turner told the jury “there were no little elves that put all of that evidence on [Ross’s] computer.”[18-35] Yet, as he knew all along, “there were indeed two ‘little elves’—law enforcement agents investigating the Silk Road website—operating secretly, illegally, corruptly, and brazenly, even inside the Silk Road website itself.”[18-36] Howard said that Ross’s defense was “not supported by actual evidence,” even though he knew there was a mountain of evidence involving Karpeles, Force, Bridges, Kay, McFarland, and Jones, plus Bellovin’s and Antonopoulos’s blocked testimony.[18-37] He dramatically pointed at Ross in front of the jury and accused him of trying to have people killed.[18-38]

It took slightly over three hours for the jury to deliberate while Ross sat in a cell awaiting his fate. He was found guilty on all counts, including the kingpin charge with its mandatory twenty-year sentence.[18-39]

19. Double Life for a Website


“A life sentence is just a death penalty in disguise.” – Pope Francis


Prior to sentencing, one hundred people who know Ross personally wrote to Judge Forrest, pleading with her to give Ross the shortest sentence possible.[19-1] According to her, they were “powerful, moving and revealing testaments to [Ross’s character].”[19-2] She told Ross that the letters were “written by a vast, broad array of people which are a statement that is extraordinary for you because they are…from every phase of your life…They reveal a man who was loved, has built enduring and significant relationships over a lifetime and maintained them. The letters reveal you as intelligent, that you displayed great kindness to many people, that people believed in you when you were younger and believe in you still. The letters that your supporters wrote express experiencing great pain at your incarceration and concern for your future.”[19-3]
Yet, the judge said she was “confused by the letters that showed [Ross] to be a different man” than Turner 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. “There is no reason to make a choice between these two people that I see…on display—the [Ross] who is the leader of the criminal enterprise and the [Ross] who is known and loved.”[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]

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.
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]

Ultimately, the judge agreed with Turner’s depiction of Ross as a ruthless kingpin and a threat to her way of life. “In the world that you created over time, democracy that we had set up with our founding fathers that provide for the passage of laws and the enforcement of those laws through our democratic process did not exist,” she said. “It wasn’t about democracy.”[19-8]

“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.”
“You sought…to put yourself above the law,” she continued. You asserted that you “were better than the laws of this country.” She 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.”[19-9]

“I make this judgement mindful of…the needs for the severest possible penalty to be imposed,” Judge Forrest stated before issuing her sentence. “There must be no doubt that lawlessness will not be tolerated.”[19-10]

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.”[19-11]

Then, after she rejected being called an oppressor, Judge Forrest gave Ross two life sentences plus 40 years in prison without the possibility of parole, for all non-violent charges. This is “far harsher than typical sentences for drug trafficking,” and given Ross’s “youth and absence of criminal history, the life sentence is particularly shocking.”[19-12]

Then, after she rejected being called an oppressor, Judge Forrest gave Ross two consecutive life sentences plus 40 years in prison without the possibility of parole, for all non-violent charges.
In violation of the First Amendment, Judge Forrest 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.”[19-13] 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.”[19-14]

The judge wanted anyone who might believe in the same philosophy to “understand very clearly and without equivocation that if you break the law in this way there will be very, very severe consequences.” Those considering “stepping into [Ross’s] shoes, carrying some flag, some misguided flag, or doing something similar,” should be put in prison until the day of their death.[19-15]

Yet, neither the First Amendment nor the sentencing statutes and guidelines permit a person’s “creed,” their personal beliefs, to be considered at sentencing.[19-16]
Given the judge’s rhetoric, “there is strong reason for concern that [Ross] was punished for the political views he held,”[19-17] and to send a message to would-be copy cats.[19-18] Her attempt at deterrence failed, however. Following Ross’s sentencing, anonymous online markets similar to Silk Road proliferated.[19-19] Some of these were also shut down by the government, including Silk Road 2.0, an even bigger replica of Silk Road.[19-20] However, in contrast to Ross’s sentence, its operator spent just 13 days in jail and was never prosecuted.[19-21]

To justify giving Ross “the harshest punishment our legal system allows short of death,”[19-22] Judge Forrest held Ross accountable “for acts that a jury did not find him responsible for,” in violation of the Sixth Amendment.[19-23] Turner “was allowed to game the system” by leaving out the murders-for-hire and other allegations, yet then use “those claimed crimes at sentencing as though they had been facts found by a jury.”[19-24]

Those considering “stepping into Ross’s shoes, carrying…some misguided flag, or doing something similar,” should be put in prison until the day of their death.
One of those other allegations was that six people overdosed from drugs bought on Silk Road. Grieving family members were allowed to testify despite there being “insufficient information to attribute any of the deaths to drugs purchased from Silk Road vendors.”[19-25] According to Appellate Judge Gerard Lynch, this created “an enormous emotional overload” and “put an extraordinary thumb on the scale that shouldn’t be there.”[19-26]
“I don’t believe Ross is dangerous or that it is in his character to order a hit on anyone. He should never have gotten that horrible sentence.”
Judge Forrest “accepted the government’s claims—despite serious factual disputes over the reliability of that evidence.”[19-27] Even Curtis Green, one of the alleged victims, doesn’t believe the government.

“Ross Ulbricht got a raw deal,” he tweeted. “There is so much more to the Silk Road story than people know, and I can’t yet talk about. I don’t believe Ross is dangerous or that it is in his character to order a hit on anyone. He should never have gotten that horrible sentence.”[19-28]

20. Exposing the Corruption


“Ulbricht’s life sentence won’t deter others from giving Americans access to the drugs they want. It won’t ‘protect’ society. It won’t ‘serve justice’ in some moral or cosmic sense. It will just waste another life behind bars and cost non-incarcerated taxpayers about $2 million over Ulbricht’s 50-year remaining life expectancy.”
– Henry Blodget, CEO of Business Insider


As Dratel predicted, Haun waited seven weeks after Ross’s trial before indicting Force and Bridges for corruption. This was the first time that anyone outside of her inner circle learned about Bridges.[20-1] Even more of Force’s misconduct was divulged, “shedding light on his capacity for fraud, deception, forgery, abuse of his government authority and access—including predatory and retaliatory conduct and false accusations against innocent persons—and inventing complex, layered cover stories to conceal his misdeeds.”[20-2]

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]

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]
It became clear that Force and Bridges were masters of deception.
It became clear that Force and Bridges were masters of deception. Not only did they set up Green to take the fall for their theft from Silk Road, but Haun revealed that they had “’papered up’ the seizure of the digital currency portion of” yet another victim’s accounts “in such a way that [Force]…would be covered in the event anyone ever asked any questions about his conduct.” It was an attempt to give himself “plausible deniability.”[20-8]
“The full nature of Force and Bridge’s misconduct has yet to be disclosed, as the government quickly reached plea agreements with both, resolving their cases without any additional disclosure to the public.”[20-9] They were never required to decrypt the encrypted conversations they had with DPR, nor were they required to turn over their laptops, email accounts, and other digital information that might reveal the depth of their involvement. As Haun admitted, “there are a lot of unanswered questions.”[20-10]
“The full nature of Force and Bridge’s misconduct has yet to be disclosed, as the government quickly reached plea agreements with both.”
Bridges attempted unsuccessfully to minimize the damage. One of his Secret Service colleagues testified before the grand jury on his case. She had done “FinCEN searches for him” to see if any reports “had been issued with his name.” He “met with her before and after her testimony” to make sure their stories matched up.[20-11] However, Haun discovered this and used it against him.

Bridges even got married in an attempt to hide the full extent of his corruption. Ariana Esposito was “subpoenaed to the grand jury” to testify against him, but she asked for “a week reprieve because of a scheduling issue…In the intervening weekend, she married Bridges and then invoked spousal immunity.”[20-12] Haun would never discover what Esposito was hiding.

Knowing his arrest was imminent, Bridges prepared to escape. He requested to be allowed to turn himself in to the prison instead of being arrested, but Haun opposed and was given the green light to take Bridges into custody. They found him in his home with “passports,…documents pertaining to offshore companies based in Belize, Mauritius, and Nevis, and a bulletproof vest.” There were also documents relating to Esposito’s “attempts to obtain citizenship in another country…and a MacBook with the serial number scratched off.”[20-13][20-14]

“Since people almost never flee without some access to money overseas,” Dratel commented, “Bridges’s plans, and the foreign corporations, begs the question whether we know the full range of his and Force’s illegal activity in connection with the Silk Road site. The government has clearly been more interested in suppressing such disclosure than getting to the bottom of it.”

Shaun Bridges captured by
security cameras.
(Ars Technica)
Ultimately, both Force and Bridges pled guilty and asked for mercy from their judges.[20-15][20-16] Force was sentenced to 6 ½ years, Bridges to six years.[20-17][20-18] However, Bridges got two years stacked on top of his sentence when, two years into his sentence, he tried to move and launder 1,606 stolen bitcoins that Haun had failed to find.[20-19] He took the digital keys he needed to access them from the Secret Service before his arrest. The bitcoins had originally been stolen by Force, but Bridges then laundered them through several bitcoin companies overseas and ultimately sent them to his own wallet.[20-20]
Roger Clark
In addition to the corruption perpetrated by Force and Bridges, a more sinister and violent element was at play in the Silk Road case but had escaped Haun’s notice. When Ross was arrested and Silk Road taken offline, Roger Clark, whom the government believed was a “senior adviser” to DPR, was just returning to his home in Thailand.[20-21] Clark revealed that, six months later, a “rogue, highly placed member of the FBI” anonymously contacted him online.[20-22]

The agent insisted on being called Chrysippus, after a Greek Stoic philosopher. He told Clark “the name was *very* important to him,” Clark recounted, “and he’d get pissed when I wouldn’t use it.” He said he had stolen a Bitcoin wallet from the evidence in the Silk Road case that had “well over 300,000″ bitcoins in it. However, the wallet was encrypted so he needed the password to get the funds. He speculated that either Clark or Ross had the password, or each had half of it.

According to Clark, Chrysippus had a “long-term well thought out plan to get access to” the wallet. He told Clark that “the odds were…[Ross] was going to be sentenced to between forty years and life.” Chrysippus would wait for Ross to be transferred out of the New York detention center to a penitentiary where he was going to “work on getting people inside the facility…to arrange it so he could communicate with Ross.” He would then get Clark to somehow convince Ross to give up the pass-phrase he believed Ross had.
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.”

“He would kidnap Ross’s sister, or mother, or ideally both. Get a video capable phone in front of Ross, and he’d give up that…pass phrase, or he would have them tortured until he did.”
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.”

Even with proof that Chrysippus was a high-level FBI agent, Clark didn’t trust him and wasn’t going to go along with his plan. “I was for the first time really worried that [he] was going to try and force me to do his bidding, or kill me.” Clark heard about “four men moving about the island, asking about [him],” so he fled Thailand. When he told Chrysippus that he had evaded his men, he “went mental and started going on about his backup plan,” Clark said. “He would kidnap [Ross’s] sister, or mother, or ideally both. Get a video capable phone in front of [Ross], and he’d give up that…pass phrase, [or he] would have them tortured until he did. I had his bonafides by now and knew him well enough to know he was serious about this.”

On May 11, 2015, just weeks before Ross was sentenced, Clark emailed Turner showing him the inside information on Force and Bridges that Chrysippus had given him and asked for a meeting. He tracked the email and saw that Turner had read it, but he never got a response. Clark then tried to track down Chrysippus himself, to stop him, but toward the end of May he decided Chysippus would, in fact, go through with his plan. “I concentrated on the ‘I convince Ross to give me the pass-phrase’ version, but he was still going to plan the kidnappings.”

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.

With Clark’s story public, many on the internet speculated on the identity of Chrysippus.
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.”
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


“I stand with Ross because in a free society, peaceful people shouldn’t be in prison.”
– Tom Woods, bestselling author, historian


Given the rampant corruption by Force and Bridges, Judge Forrest’s “abuse of discretion”[21-1] at Ross’s trial and the draconian life sentence, many believed that Ross’s conviction and sentence would not be upheld by the higher courts. Numerous other cases that Bridges was only peripherally involved in, compared to Ross’s, were being thrown out. As Haun put it, “the number of cases that…Bridges contaminated, not just existing criminal cases but also investigations across the country that his conduct has led to have to be shut down, is truly staggering.”[21-2] Even another Silk Road defendant, considered the biggest seller of methamphetamine on the site, had his sentence cut from six years to three years because of Bridges’s corruption.[21-3]
Dratel appealed to a Second Circuit panel consisting of Judges Jon Newman, Gerard Lynch and Christopher Droney.[21-4] He argued that Ross “was not Dread Pirate Roberts,” that “government investigators and persons directly involved with the site concluded [that] there were multiple DPR’s over the course of Silk Road’s existence, and that DPR framed [Ross].”[21-5] He told them that Judge Forrest had blocked evidence that Force (and Bridges, who Turner hid until after trial) had infiltrated “the internal operations of Silk Road’s website and communications and financial platforms.”[21-6] He told them about how Judge Forrest had suppressed Karpeles’s involvement; Jones’s statement proving that “over time there was more than one DPR”;  and Bellovin’s and Antonopoulos’s expert testimony. Dratel argued that Judge Forrest’s rulings “eviscerated [Ross]’s defense and denied him a fair trial” and asked them to right this wrong.[21-7] He also re-raised the Fourth Amendment issues Judge Forrest had denied regarding pen-traps and overly broad warrants[21-8] and challenged Ross’s life sentence.[21-9]
Judge Gerard Lynch
(American Law Institute)
Despite all this, the Second Circuit judges denied Ross’s appeal in its entirety.
“He appeared to contest the legitimacy of the laws he violated,” Judge Lynch wrote, which was enough to give Judge Forrest the power to condemn a young man to die in prison.
Judge Lynch wrote the opinion. He accepted Turner’s false excuse that Force and Bridges needed to be kept secret, stating that “there was no need for disclosure.”[21-10] He said that keeping the investigation into Force “under seal” did not “result in any injustice.”[21-11] He defended Judge Forrest, saying that forcing Ross’s trial forward instead of waiting the seven weeks for Force and Bridges to be indicted “was not irrational or arbitrary.”[21-12]

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.”[21-13]

He went on to say that “reasonable people may and do disagree about the social utility of harsh sentences for the distribution of their sale and use at all. It is very possible that, at some future point, we will come to regard these policies as tragic mistakes and adopt less punitive and more effective methods of reducing the incidence and costs of drug use. At this point in our history however, the democratically-elected representatives of the people have opted for a policy of prohibition, backed by severe punishment. That policy results in the routine incarceration of many traffickers for extended periods of time.”[21-14]

As they had Judge Forrest, the political beliefs she attributed to Ross troubled Judge Lynch: “Ulbricht believes that drug use should be legalized,” he wrote.[21-15] “He appeared to contest the legitimacy of the laws he violated,” which was enough to give Judge Forrest the “power to condemn a young man to die in prison.”[21-16]

He is confined to a maximum security federal prison in Florence, CO, where he lives with the realities of a violent and hostile environment every day.
Kannon Shanmugan
(Williams and Connolly)

Ross is doing just that: serving what the ACLU has called “a living death” sentence.[21-17] He is confined to a maximum security federal prison in Florence, CO, where he lives with the realities of a violent and hostile environment every day.[21-18]

Ross, represented by Kannon Shanmugam of Williams and Connolly LLP, petitioned the Supreme Court to rule on constitutional violations in the investigation and at sentencing.[21-19] The petition was supported by 21 groups from both sides of the political spectrum.[21-20] It argued that the government should not be able to collect our internet traffic information without a warrant and that a judge cannot sentence someone based on crimes he wasn’t convicted of by a jury.

The petition was denied without comment on June 28, 2018, finalizing Ross’s conviction and life sentence.[21-21] On July 20, 2018, the District of Maryland dismissed “with prejudice” the five-year-old, unprosecuted indictment containing the only charged of planned violence.[21-22][21-23] These charges can never be re-filed.

Even in the face of his excessive sentence, Ross clings to the hope of reuniting with his family, and dreams of a future where he can use his education, knowledge and skills to contribute to his community and society as a whole.


The information presented above is based solely on the public record and should not be attributed to Ross Ulbricht, Lyn Ulbricht, or anyone connected with freeross.org.


From the Ulbricht family:
Ross was misused by the U.S. justice system, by those who took an oath to act with honor, integrity and support the Constitution. Instead, they won their trophy at the expense of a young man’s life. This cannot stand. Now Ross needs mercy from the President.
Please help us free Ross!

Sign Ross’s petition for clemency.

References

1. Traveling the Silk Road

2. Passing the Torch

3. Targeting Karpeles

4. Fighting for Control

5. Going Rogue

6. Thwarting Der-yeghiayan

7. Being Wonderful

8. The Setup

9. Closing In

10. New York Takes over

11. The Arrest

12. Deleting Evidence

13. Fighting for Freedom

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

16. Eviscerating the Defense

17. How Many DPRs?

18. Selling the Story

19. Double Life for a Website

20. Exposing the Corruption

21. Seeking Justice