The founder of the illegal trading platform Silk Road, Ross Ulbricht, is convinced that the rights granted to him yesteryear the Fourth as well as Sixth Amendments to the U.S. of A. Constitution were violated during the investigation as well as the subsequent trial. He is going to challenge a life judgement without the correct to live on released at the U.S. of A. Supreme Court. This is reported yesteryear Reason .
Ulbricht's lawyers believe that the legal doctrine of a 3rd somebody arising inward the representative of Smith v. Maryland (1979) does non justify collecting information close Silk Road founder's online activeness without a courtroom warrant.
Despite the fact that inward 1979 the Supreme Court ruled that the rights of a citizen to protect personal information inward accordance alongside the Fourth Amendment did non apply to information that he voluntarily transferred to a 3rd party. In the representative of Smith, it was close telephone calls, as well as inward the Ulbricht representative - Internet traffic, which is monitored yesteryear network providers.
Leading a failed appeal lawyer Cannon Shenmugam believes that tracking Ulbricht's IP address, every bit good every bit gaining access to his laptop without a courtroom warrant, is an outrageous regime intervention inward the individual life of a citizen that goes beyond the inward a higher house legal doctrine.
In addition, the Appeals Court of the Second Circuit of the U.S. of A. confirmed that roughly facts were non submitted to the jury, indicating a possible violation of the rights granted to Ulbricht yesteryear the Sixth Amendment (right to a fair trial, including a jury trial).
It is worth noting that the footing for such a severe judgement was non the drug trade, but the recognition of Ulbricht guilty of having ordered a serial of murders that had never been committed. In court, it has non been proven that these crimes took place, but this did non deport upon the judge's determination. The lawyers of the founder of Silk Road take in this every bit a violation of the correct to a fair case as well as absurdity
Earlier, the Appeals Court of the minute U.S. of A. district refused to take in Ulbricht's appeal, referring to the legal doctrine of a 3rd party. After that, Ross Ulbricht created a petition calling on the Supreme Court to explicate to the people of the USA how the 1979 precedent was beingness applied inward the weather condition of the electrical flow technological progress.
"If the Court considers that the information on Internet traffic are no dissimilar from the listing of telephone numbers as well as calls inward the Smith representative from the constitutional betoken of view, this is the same every bit maxim that the journeying on horseback is no dissimilar from the flying to the satelite from textile betoken of view, "the petition says.
Recall, inward 2015, the courtroom flora Ross Ulbricht guilty of drug traffic through DarkNet Marketplace Silk Road, conspiracy to carry drugs, hacking figurer networks as well as coin laundering, every bit good every bit inward the leadership of a criminal organization.
As a result, the founder of Silk Road was sentenced to double life imprisonment.
In early on 2016, the lawyers of Ulbricht appealed to the U.S. of A. Court of Appeal, claiming that telephone commutation evidence was hidden during the trial.
