Description

Lyn Ulbricht is the mother of Ross Ulbricht, the creator of the Silk Road website. Ross was convicted of seven felony counts in February. Deeply involved with her son’s defense, Lyn has worked to bring awareness to the case through http://www.freeross.org/, media interviews, public appearances and other efforts. Since Ross was arrested, she has witnessed how the government prosecutes citizens; suppresses evidence; and violates the Constitution. She believes it is a story that needs to be told.

See More See Less

Subscribe

Leave us a review, comment or subscribe!

Meet the hosts

Hey! My name is Tatiana Moroz. I am a passionate singer-songwriter heavily involved in the Libertarian and Bitcoin movement. I have created the first ever artist cryptocurrency Tatiana Coin and also founded an activist talent agency called Same Side Entertainment. I recently launched Crypto Media Hub which is an advertising network for the Bitcoin world and beyond. It's free for advertisers and we work with almost every major media outlet in the space including Bitcoin Magazine, YBitcoin, Bitcoinist, Brave New Coin, Let's Talk Bitcoin, Coin Telegraph and many more.

discussions

  • Ross Ulbricht convicted of running Silk Road  What is the next step? Surely Ross will appeal, on what grounds? And what about the charges of murder for hire?

    Jump to Discussion Post 1 reply
  • It has often been said that truth is stranger than fiction. It also often precedes fiction. In the hit TV series, L A Law, there was a story arc involving Abby Perkins, played by Michelle Greene, where she demonstrates a skill in criminal defense work and in a series of trials, juries bring in not guilty verdicts in cases against drug dealers. She has a conversation with Jimmy Smits’ character, Victor Sifuentas, where she worries about what she is doing; getting guilty people off. Sifuentes, who has also done some defense work, assures Abby that her work is necessary because it stands between us and a police state. (With that, I agree completely.) He cautions her though, to make sure that she protects herself by dotting her is and crossing her ts because if she continues with her success, they, meaning the government, will be coming after her. Sure enough, the government tries to take her down in a sting and setup operation. Such actions by our government should seem repulsive to us as Americans. It runs against our grain because we believe that it is the defense’s job to force a full examination of all the evidence against an accused. All Americans accept this as the price of our assumption of innocence. It also runs against our grain because we believe that in justice, as in life & sports, you have to accept defeat. To act otherwise is known as being a sore head. We tend to root for the Davids against the Goliaths. Americans are committed to playing as hard as we can by pre-set rules but we are also committed to accepting the outcome. Our government operates without such constraints. Our American government is not committed to acting in an American way! In the annals of American organized crime, few figures loom larger than Silvestri Patrone. There have been more famous figures, Al Capone, Charles ‘Lucky’ Luciano, Carlo Gambino, Joey Gallo & John Gotti but in all inner circles, Silvestri Patrone was known and respected. During the 1970s & into the 1980s, Patrone faced a series of highly publicized indictments. He turned to a newly minted attorney, Gerald Calvecchio, for his defense. In the equally high profile subsequent trials, the juries found Patrone not guilty. So, what did the government do? Did they just accept that they had not prepared their case well enough? Did they accept that Calvecchio had done his job well, as is the mandate he operates under? Of course not! Why they set him up with a plant, an ostensible client who was wired and coached him in what to say to coax an answer out of him that they could bring to a grand jury for an indictment, which they did. The grand jury system has become a sick joke; the joke about indicting a ham sandwich. Originally created to prevent malicious prosecutions by crazed & vengeful government, they have become tools of harassment. All that is necessary for an indictment is for a majority of the jurors, often 12 out of 23, to agree that a criminal charge is justified and it has become a one man show with the prosecutor being able to get an indictment of anyone for something. And if by some chance the grand jurors decline to indict, why all the prosecutor has to do is claim he has new evidence and convene another and then another and then another… Anyone care to give odds on the chances that eventually, a grand jury will indict? Well, indict Calvecchio they did. It went to trial and there was a hung jury. The government retried him but the next jury brought back a not guilty verdict. But why did he have to through it in the first place? The moral of the story is that you must never do anything to upset the government. It has the resources to destroy anyone and it will at the right provocation and the right provocation has included political actions. This is not may seem like a small matter but don’t forget this is just the tip of the iceberg of what government can do to anyone. That includes you. It is not paranoid to think that. It is reality.

    Jump to Discussion Post 0 replies