Browse reporter-marked sidebars from the Silk Road archive, with links to the exact point in each transcript.
The 20 entries below include every sidebar marked in the court reporter transcripts available to the archive.
Counsel proposed calling juror 3's workplace or texting him, and the clerk confirmed that only his mobile phone had been called.
Court's actionThe court directed its deputy to text juror 3 immediately, stated that proceedings could not begin until all jurors were present, and called for a conference at 10:30.
Counsel discussed Exhibit 118B’s 2015 metadata date and a hearsay objection to its website posts.
Court's actionThe court said it would instruct the jury to consider the posts only as statements appearing on the website, not for their truth.
Counsel discussed a witness’s reported respiratory illness, possible need for breaks, and ability to remain attentive during cross-examination.
Court's actionThe judge said that if the witness felt unwell, the court could take a break and hear another witness in the interim.
Lindsay Lewis reported that she may have inadvertently addressed a woman on the subway who might have been a juror.
Court's actionThe court called a brief recess.
Counsel disputed how far the defense could explore the investigator’s probable-cause assessment concerning Karpeles without eliciting hearsay or confidential-informant information.
Court's actionThe court initially allowed questions about the investigator’s belief and source types, barred communication contents, then broke for the day and deferred further discussion to open court.
Turner began to raise two issues at sidebar.
The prosecutor raised concerns that the defendant's family contact during sidebars was intended to generate sympathy, while defense counsel cited restrictions on family visits.
Court's actionThe judge directed counsel to tell the defendant to face forward while the jury was present; family greetings were acceptable when the jury was absent, provided there was no inappropriate communication.
The reporter noted that pages 594 through 614 were sealed by court order.
The defense and court disputed whether Internet information provided a sufficient foundation for testimony about Barr’s and Karpeles’ computer expertise.
Court's actionThe court barred using the witness’s Internet reading as proof of expertise, permitted reference to information he saw with a caution that its truth was unknown, and allowed further inquiry if counsel established a foundation.
Dratel argued for questioning about the Southern District’s control over the investigation and an invitation to participate in Ulbricht’s arrest, while Turner raised concerns about questions involving Mark Karpeles.
Court's actionThe court ruled the interagency-dispute and arrest-participation questions irrelevant and directed counsel to leave that line of questioning.
Dratel proposed asking what mises.org was and why it was being examined as part of the investigation.
Court's actionThe court permitted the two proposed questions.
The government raised concerns about Ulbricht communicating with family during sidebars in the jury's presence, while defense counsel did not concede an issue.
Court's actionThe court directed Dratel to remind Ulbricht to reserve family communications for when the jury was in the jury room and said its deputy would monitor the issue.
Dratel defended questions about BitTorrent and FBI computer practices as an inquiry into the program’s lack of security.
Court's actionThe court barred general BitTorrent-expertise and FBI-practice questions but allowed inquiry into the witness’s actions and qualifications. Inquiry into whether files reached Ulbricht’s computer through BitTorrent required a good-faith basis and establishing that the computer was running the program.
Counsel disputed whether using a 302 document to question the witness constituted impeachment by a prior inconsistent statement or an improper attempt to refresh recollection.
Court's actionThe court initially permitted showing the document to refresh recollection rather than as a prior inconsistent statement, then said it would review the issue and called a break.
Dratel argued that cross-examination should cover what the agent did not find during Internet research, rather than only findings presented on direct examination.
Court's actionThe court maintained its limits, directed counsel to stay within the investigation and areas searched, allowed questions in uncertain areas, and deferred further record-making until the break.
The court questioned the statistical foundation for drug-weight estimates, while the defense proffered authentication of Defense Exhibit E.
Court's actionThe court permitted the government to try a different exhibit through the witness and clarified that Defense Exhibit E was precluded for relevance, not authentication.
Lewis cited Rules 404(a) and 405 for a community-reputation question, while Turner argued that the question was partly leading.
Court's actionThe court allowed the question under Rule 405 and permitted limited leading with the character witness.
Defense counsel challenged guilt-assuming questions and inquiry into candor when character testimony concerned peacefulness.
Court's actionThe court allowed inquiry into instances of violent conduct and directed counsel to keep questioning of the next witness straightforward.
Dratel clarified that he would read the complaint separately rather than question the witness about it.
Dratel objected to omitted wording in the reasonable-doubt instruction, while the government questioned whether the issue warranted revisiting.
Court's actionThe judge agreed to revisit the reasonable-doubt instruction.
No sidebars match these filters.