Why would anyone *disagree* with this sentence, unless someone thinks having peo...

valar_m · on May 30, 2015

Because that's not what he was charged with?

mikeash · on May 30, 2015

Yes, it was.

valar_m · on June 1, 2015

No, it was not.

mikeash · on June 1, 2015

Yes, it was: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9627200

Or if you want to go straight to the source, see item 10b on page 5 of: http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usao-sdny/legacy/...

As far as I can tell, the only reason people are saying he wasn't convicted of murder for hire is because the top-level charge is "conspiracy" or somesuch, with "murder for hire" as one of the specific conspiracy items, and they haven't dug down.