This is complicated to me because the libertarian view is that people should be allowed to do whatever they want (such as having a market to buy and sell anything between willing participants) as long as they don't intentionally harm others.
But the government alleged he tried to intentionally harm others with contracts to kill so it's difficult to know if he should be free or not. The government didn't try to prove that maybe because they didn't have enough proof or they had enough other crimes to easily convict him
Yep, I agree. We don't know for sure if Ross paid other people to commit murder or not. This is a red line, but the trial and investigation was so corrupt that we will never know the truth.