It bothers me that they're selling off his assets when, last I heard at least (and please correct me if I'm wrong), he hadn't even gone to trial yet.
As these assets would otherwise be used to fund his legal defense, and he is, as I understand it, only 'allegedly' guilty, he's being unfairly deprived of a lawful defense.
Beyond that, y'know, there is the possibility that they'll find him innocent, and I don't even know what happens then.
> It bothers me that they're selling off his assets when, last I heard at least (and please correct me if I'm wrong), he hadn't even gone to trial yet.
AFAIK, the bitcoins at issue were those forfeited in a default judgement because no one, including Ulbricht, claimed ownership of them. The coins that Ulbricht did claim ownership of (that were on computer hardware traced to him separate from the Silk Road servers) were not forfeited at that time (and have not been yet, AFAIK.)
> Silk Road is less obvious, but forfeiture and sale of drug dealers' assets is almost standard.
My understanding is that those assets cannot be liquified (at the goverment's profit!) until after the trial takes place and the defendant is convicted.
Otherwise, what happens if the government declares you to be a drug dealer, seizes all your assets and sells them before you're tried, and then you end up being acquitted?
As these assets would otherwise be used to fund his legal defense, and he is, as I understand it, only 'allegedly' guilty, he's being unfairly deprived of a lawful defense.
Beyond that, y'know, there is the possibility that they'll find him innocent, and I don't even know what happens then.