|
|
|
|
|
by tptacek
3310 days ago
|
|
No, the opposite is true. As the appeals decision points out multiple times, Ulbricht was startlingly casual both about hte decision to order people killed and in his reaction to evidence that the killings had occurred. His ostensible hired assassin informed Ulbricht that he could have a target killed, but that he couldn't attmept to recover Ulbricht's funds unless he also paid for the assassination of several of the target's associates --- people Ulbricht had no ostensible connection to at all. Ulbricht essentially said "fuck it, whatever you think will help recover some of my funds" and paid for additional gratuitous killings. Importantly: this case had apparently nothing at all to do with Force, who was involved in a different murder-for-hire scheme, one for which Ulbricht could still stand trial (but probably won't, since his life sentence is now overwhelmingly likely to stand). |
|
I'm arguing that he was initially shocked by the idea of killing people. But I don't disagree that he later became comfortable with the idea.