The judge has now explained in detail why she comprehensively smacked down the requests, and in doing so has provided a hugely detailed outline of the evidence the Feds hope will put Ulbricht behind bars.
And yet the article doesn't even drop a hint of what the reasons were............. Given the title is that the title is that his defence is essentially sunk, some additional info might have been nice - sure I can click the link and read the ruling, but I thought the whole point was El Reg wanted to keep our eyes on theregister.co.uk (and by extension, the ads).
Biting the hand that feeds IT
