The Untold Story is that the victim of Ross Ulbricht is a non-existent ghost created by the people who control the biggest gun, and all of the little cowards who pretend that it is honorable to support those who control the biggest gun.

I have a huge problem with this book despite the fact that it is a very well written and exciting story. The writers' abilities are not in dispute here but instead, the fact that I believe he has jumped the gun. Ross Ulbricht his family and supporters still vehemently deny these charges and having this book out there as if it is completely factual can affect what happens to Ross from here on in. I do not know if he is guilty or not but what I do know is that if it was such an open and shut case there would have been no need for coverups and falsification of evidence from within the authorities prosecuting him. I feel this issue brings up a pertinant question being: When does exercising your right to free speech breach anothers' right to be given a fair hearing. Afterall, if you are convicted based on not only evidence but the opinions of a panel of your peers and how they interpret and are presented with that evidence, wouldn't it be feasible to assume that this kind of book put out before all appeals have been exhausted, could colour the final outcome negatively in some way? If he is in fact innoccent, is it fair that his story be put out for people to form opinions about it without all the information? And more importantly is it right to profit off anothers misery in this way when, it is yet to be determined that he is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt?