data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8453a/8453a0a945f401f580503e67b4afbc0051e94374" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cfd2a/cfd2a1dbdaa2a4665edc5da6ca698927da8c09c6" alt=""
This is misinformation.
Forrest also considered heart-rending testimony from two parents of Silk Road customers who died after consuming drugs. Prior to sentencing, the defense submitted a report from a forensic pathologist who detailed the lack of evidence to support the contention that drugs purchased on Silk Road caused those deaths or four others cited by the government. But Forrest deemed those incidents relevant because she concluded, based on “a preponderance of the evidence,” that “the deaths, in some way, [were] related to Silk Road.”
Edit:
Page 33 off the appeal shows what breakfastmtn said to be accurate. https://web.archive.org/web/20221213001237if_/https://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/ULBRICHT-ca2-20170531.pdf
Thank you for following up with that
Si vis pacem, para bellum