News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Judge Rejects Defense That FBI Illegally Hacked Silk Road... by pbhjpbhj on Friday October 10, 2014 @10:25PM (#8441016)
>The judge can't rule based on the fact that the FBI will eventually prove that Ulbrircht. //

But don't they need to do this at some point in order to get a conviction - if this server is that used to run Silk Road and they want to prove that he ran the Silk Road then it seems like a necessary step. At the point of them making this claim surely the judge has to say "if this evidence proves the defendant owned the server then you've infringed his rights under the Fourth Amendment and the evidence must be discounted"?

Re:Judge Rejects Defense That FBI Illegally Hacked Silk Road... by rtkwe on Friday October 10, 2014 @10:42PM (#8441040)
Yes, but at this point there's no proof that the server belongs to him so the judge can't throw it out because he has no standing to challenge it's admissibility in the trial. I don't think that this precludes it from being thrown out on appeal or later in the trial but the motion to dismiss before the judge couldn't go through. What the judge ruled right now is just about the pretrial motions to dismiss. I'm not well versed enough in the legal system to say if this is prejudicial against it later being found to have violated his 4th amendment rights, judges can strike evidence from the record at later points though.
Re:Judge Rejects Defense That FBI Illegally Hacked Silk Road... by Rapzid on Saturday October 11, 2014 @01:48AM (#8441407)
Or no. If they can prove that was the silk road server, illegal activities were being facilitated by it, and DPR was accessing and managing it then I don't see them needing to prove he owned it(which it seems he didn't because it was leased).