Hi,

> The Maryland document clearly states it was an undercover FBI agent.
>
Yet it clearly says that the undercover agent arranged the delivery, but
the first person to suggest
torture and then execution was DPR. I still want to believe that that's
not the whole story, on the
other hand, it's a great PR move for influencing the jury.

>From the state point of view, the FBI did their job and after they've
done it, DPR suggested violence.
(of course we view the acts of the FBI as violence, but that's not what
the general public believes
and it serves their narrative pretty well :(.

> In most countries in the world, entrapment is thrown out of court. You
> cannot prosecute someone for a crime which the police entrap you into.
Yet there is nothing to suggest so. In Maryland document, there was even
no indication of threats
from the "victim" about releasing documents. DPR was pissed that they
stole some money and that
they could "sing".

Sort-of prisoner's dilemma, but clearly no direct reaction to any
particular threat.
> They aren't basing their case on attempted murder. So what was the
> purpose of engineering this situation with DPR?
Influence of jury decision and public opinion of course.
> Go and research what DPR is like as a person. Watch his interview
> online where he is talking about true love and his hopes for the
> future of the world. Read some his writings.
His writings are writings of an idealist. We all read it and believed
that it says what we
think. There is always a difference between what someone writes and what
he or she
does. This is not to blame or to praise Ross as a person. DPR was and is
an act.
It may root from his beliefs, but he will be judged as a person based on
his actions,
not based on his beliefs.

We can discuss if the trial is unbiased and serves justice and not only
the state. It will
almost certainly be biased on the state side, because the state sees
drug trade as
something bad and some people including me, most of the vendors and
customers
and himself see it otherwise.

Ross was a real person and they are basing their
case on real person and his mistakes. They are winning the public
opinion part pretty
well. :(
> Interview with DPR (left): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33fxHA-FEYg
>
This is an interview with Ross and I believe these are different
entities. We may discuss
if DPR or Ross was an act, but one of them was.
> By judging DPR, you are buying the picture that has been painted for
> you to slant the public discourse. Remove yourself from that game.
> This moral dilemma is false.
The dilemma is not false.

But I agree we cannot judge DPR because we have no unbiased information
regarding the
case and we don't have any moral authority to judge him.

Where are the victims? Let them speak or show that they are missing.
Otherwise, it's a witch-hunt.


J.