General Zod wrote:Thank you for demonstrating that you're too dumb to actually understand the legal system. Any evidence obtained illegally cannot be used in court. Ergo if hackers managed to acquire this evidence via illegal methods, it can't be used against Palin even if there were clear indications of wrongdoing. There may be some sort of provisions that will allow the courts to use those emails anyway, but if they've truly been hacked it makes any kind of legitimate prosecution that much more difficult, and undermines the credibility of the investigation.
He's probably just thinking of a legal system that makes sense rather than the US legal system which rewards clever ways of hiding evidence. We've had the whole "fruits of a poisonous tree" argument out a few times on this board. Frankly if the evidence can be shown to be real, who the fuck in a sane system cares how it ended up there?
Do note this is distinct from forced confessions etc. since they are inherently unprovable.
As a counter-argument, what is the point of having laws against unreasonable search and seizure to protect the rights of the accused, when the police can violate those laws and still have the evidence they illegally obtain used against you in court?
Now, that having been said, this so called "tainted" evidence does not matter in this case because it is A) not a legal proceeding and B) was done by agents not acting under the authority or request of law enforcement.-
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/ Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences
There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.
there's a few more, but they're not as interesting as these ones.
Saying smaller engines are better is like saying you don't want huge muscles because you wouldn't fit through the door. So what? You can bench 500. Fuck doors. - MadCat360
General Zod wrote:
Ignoring that, the images look horribly pixelated.
Where? They look fine to me.
The "from" and "too" lines look a bit on the fuzzy side. Ignoring that, Yahoo's inbox no longer looks like that, and hasn't for several months. Which is another thing making it suspicious. If this was in fact a "recent" hack, I'd expect the inbox to look like this, since Yahoo automatically upgraded the appearance and functionality of everyone's accounts some time ago. So yeah, smells like a shop.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
General Zod wrote:
Ignoring that, the images look horribly pixelated.
Where? They look fine to me.
The "from" and "too" lines look a bit on the fuzzy side. Ignoring that, Yahoo's inbox no longer looks like that, and hasn't for several months. Which is another thing making it suspicious. If this was in fact a "recent" hack, I'd expect the inbox to look like this, since Yahoo automatically upgraded the appearance and functionality of everyone's accounts some time ago. So yeah, smells like a shop.
Actually, all yahoo users have the option of keeping the old look. I know I did.
"We are imperfect reflections of the universe around us. We cannot change the past, we can only learn from it, try to create a future in which such errors do not reoccur. Sadly, we are still working on that last part." , Gkar aka Andreas Katsulas: May 18, 1946 - February 13, 2006 R.I.P.
Of course I'm not saying it isn't a shop. Given the /b/ origins it's more than likely.
"We are imperfect reflections of the universe around us. We cannot change the past, we can only learn from it, try to create a future in which such errors do not reoccur. Sadly, we are still working on that last part." , Gkar aka Andreas Katsulas: May 18, 1946 - February 13, 2006 R.I.P.
Alyrium Denryle wrote:As a counter-argument, what is the point of having laws against unreasonable search and seizure to protect the rights of the accused, when the police can violate those laws and still have the evidence they illegally obtain used against you in court?
Because if the evidence exists, then you know what, you're fucking guilty. Duh.
Why should you help people get away with a crime for which evidence of guilt exists because someone fucked up the paperwork. You reprimand the person that didnt follow the proper rules, but you dont discard the evidence.
The only reason to discard evidence would be if it was of questionable providence. IE, it cannot be shown to be real. This is different from the poisonous tree bullshit.
"Prodesse Non Nocere." "It's all about popularity really, if your invisible friend that tells you to invade places is called Napoleon, you're a loony, if he's called Jesus then you're the president." "I'd drive more people insane, but I'd have to double back and pick them up first..." "All it takes for bullshit to thrive is for rational men to do nothing." - Kevin Farrell, B.A. Journalism. BOTM - EBC - Horseman - G&C - Vampire
Keevan_Colton wrote:
Because if the evidence exists, then you know what, you're fucking guilty. Duh.
Why should you help people get away with a crime for which evidence of guilt exists because someone fucked up the paperwork. You reprimand the person that didnt follow the proper rules, but you dont discard the evidence.
The only reason to discard evidence would be if it was of questionable providence. IE, it cannot be shown to be real. This is different from the poisonous tree bullshit.
Because it's totally not like anyone's ever planted false evidence before to score a conviction or anything.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
Keevan_Colton wrote:
Because if the evidence exists, then you know what, you're fucking guilty. Duh.
Why should you help people get away with a crime for which evidence of guilt exists because someone fucked up the paperwork. You reprimand the person that didnt follow the proper rules, but you dont discard the evidence.
The only reason to discard evidence would be if it was of questionable providence. IE, it cannot be shown to be real. This is different from the poisonous tree bullshit.
Because it's totally not like anyone's ever planted false evidence before to score a conviction or anything.
Perhaps you're not grasping this, the rules apply to evidence that can be shown to be real, but which wasn't found in the right way. Not evidence that is planted...it could literally be a video of the criminal dismembering people (in Michigan for 10 years in jail perhaps...) and if it wasnt found with all the right paperwork filled out to look for it in the right way it would be inadmissable in the US legal system.
"Prodesse Non Nocere." "It's all about popularity really, if your invisible friend that tells you to invade places is called Napoleon, you're a loony, if he's called Jesus then you're the president." "I'd drive more people insane, but I'd have to double back and pick them up first..." "All it takes for bullshit to thrive is for rational men to do nothing." - Kevin Farrell, B.A. Journalism. BOTM - EBC - Horseman - G&C - Vampire
Keevan_Colton wrote:
Perhaps you're not grasping this, the rules apply to evidence that can be shown to be real, but which wasn't found in the right way. Not evidence that is planted...it could literally be a video of the criminal dismembering people (in Michigan for 10 years in jail perhaps...) and if it wasnt found with all the right paperwork filled out to look for it in the right way it would be inadmissable in the US legal system.
You're talking about some kind of magic silver bullet that puts the nail in the prosecutor's case. This doesn't happen in reality nearly as much as you'd think, which is why procedure is important. To, you know, prevent evidence contamination or outright forgery.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
Keevan seems pretty naive, or perhaps where he lives there's less self-centred assholes than over here. The fact of the matter is that there are plenty of prosecutors, police officers, and DAs who are either corrupt, or simply don't give two shits about the truth so long as they get a conviction. That's just the way it is. Knowing this, there need to be stringent standards of evidence gathering which must be adhered to at all times and for all evidence to minimize the number of false convictions. The number of criminals who walk will also increase, because the cops can make silly mistakes that will render the evidence they have collected inadmissible, but I consider an acceptable trade-off.
Of course, there are considerable problems with the American criminal justice system, but I dare say that the fact that there needs to be a whole fucking lot of paper-work filled out to submit evidence to court is not one them. Indeed, in some cases there needs to be more paperwork, like that bill Obama got passed in the Illinois legislature that demands interrogations be recorded in capital cases.
Alyrium Denryle wrote:As a counter-argument, what is the point of having laws against unreasonable search and seizure to protect the rights of the accused, when the police can violate those laws and still have the evidence they illegally obtain used against you in court?
Because if the evidence exists, then you know what, you're fucking guilty. Duh.
Why should you help people get away with a crime for which evidence of guilt exists because someone fucked up the paperwork. You reprimand the person that didnt follow the proper rules, but you dont discard the evidence.
The only reason to discard evidence would be if it was of questionable providence. IE, it cannot be shown to be real. This is different from the poisonous tree bullshit.
Then the legal protections afforded by the rules become meaningless. The police can come into my home capriciously on a fishing expedition, and find the one little thing I do illegally..
Do you give a shit about the abuses and persecution that will lead to?
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/ Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences
There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.
A big part of it is the way that American Legal systems are set up as competitions, instead of a system to find the truth. Thus both prosecutor and defense are wriggling around so much to try to "Win" the case. In a legal system more concerned with just outcomes than with verdicts a looser procedure is quite allowable, as abuse of procedure will bring charges of its own. Such is impossible within American legal culture at the moment though, for the reasons AD put forth. The police can fish, then the prosecutor is gonna take it and run it in like a touchdown in the superbowl.
Its a farce, but one us Americans have to live with and try to work around, because major legal reform isn't coming anytime soon.
A teenage girl is just a teenage boy who can get laid.
-GTO
We're not just doing this for money; we're doing this for a shitload of money!
Adrian Laguna wrote:Keevan seems pretty naive, or perhaps where he lives there's less self-centred assholes than over here. The fact of the matter is that there are plenty of prosecutors, police officers, and DAs who are either corrupt, or simply don't give two shits about the truth so long as they get a conviction. That's just the way it is. Knowing this, there need to be stringent standards of evidence gathering which must be adhered to at all times and for all evidence to minimize the number of false convictions. The number of criminals who walk will also increase, because the cops can make silly mistakes that will render the evidence they have collected inadmissible, but I consider an acceptable trade-off.
Those standards themselves rely heavily upon police telling the truth, about how they collected evidence in the first place. In reality, if evidence rules become too onerous, police will lie and collude more, because they can convince themselves that they are doing nothing wrong; after all, they're only compensating for an absurdly rigged system.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Keevan_Colton wrote:
Because if the evidence exists, then you know what, you're fucking guilty. Duh.
Why should you help people get away with a crime for which evidence of guilt exists because someone fucked up the paperwork. You reprimand the person that didnt follow the proper rules, but you dont discard the evidence.
The only reason to discard evidence would be if it was of questionable providence. IE, it cannot be shown to be real. This is different from the poisonous tree bullshit.
Because it's totally not like anyone's ever planted false evidence before to score a conviction or anything.
Perhaps you're not grasping this, the rules apply to evidence that can be shown to be real, but which wasn't found in the right way. Not evidence that is planted...it could literally be a video of the criminal dismembering people (in Michigan for 10 years in jail perhaps...) and if it wasnt found with all the right paperwork filled out to look for it in the right way it would be inadmissable in the US legal system.
Keevan might want to look up that quaint little phrase in the Constitution called "due process."
Alyrium Denryle wrote:
Then the legal protections afforded by the rules become meaningless. The police can come into my home capriciously on a fishing expedition, and find the one little thing I do illegally..
Do you give a shit about the abuses and persecution that will lead to?
Yes, because that is totally how it is in the rest of the world.
Obtaining evidence unlawfully can be punished (i.e. the individual that committed the illegal act to obtain the evidence is punished) without declaring the evidence void.
If at first you don't succeed, maybe failure is your style
Economic Left/Right: 0.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03
Thus Aristotle laid it down that a heavy object falls faster then a light one does.
The important thing about this idea is not that he was wrong, but that it never occurred to Aristotle to check it.
Alyrium Denryle wrote:
Then the legal protections afforded by the rules become meaningless. The police can come into my home capriciously on a fishing expedition, and find the one little thing I do illegally..
Do you give a shit about the abuses and persecution that will lead to?
Yes, because that is totally how it is in the rest of the world.
Obtaining evidence unlawfully can be punished (i.e. the individual that committed the illegal act to obtain the evidence is punished) without declaring the evidence void.
I await your expert legal opinion citing various foreign constitutions, statutory law, case law, and executive regulations and comparing them to the relevant US law, and proceeding to explain how exactly the US legal system is too lenient on criminals and how protections afforded defendants should be loosened.
Cecelia5578 wrote:Keevan might want to look up that quaint little phrase in the Constitution called "due process."
Nothing about the concept of due process necessarily requires that we pretend real evidence doesn't exist if it was collected in a manner we find offensive. That is something found in many legal codes and which the Americans in particular cherish, but it is not implicit in the concept of due process.
RAR, Internet tough on criminals tough guy!
RAR, another American Internet slug assuming everyone in the world has the same cultural priorities!
It's not about being "tough on criminals", moron. You can't distill every crime-related idea into either "soft on crime" or "tough on crime"; that is brain-dead Republitard thinking.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
haard wrote:Yes, because that is totally how it is in the rest of the world.
Obtaining evidence unlawfully can be punished (i.e. the individual that committed the illegal act to obtain the evidence is punished) without declaring the evidence void.
I await your expert legal opinion citing various foreign constitutions, statutory law, case law, and executive regulations and comparing them to the relevant US law, and proceeding to explain how exactly the US legal system is too lenient on criminals and how protections afforded defendants should be loosened.
Don't be a fucking idiot. Why does he need to provide all of this evidence to back up the simple statement that there are alternate ways of punishing police for violating peoples' rights, other than pretending that real evidence does not exist because it was collected in a manner which offends you?
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Cecelia5578 wrote:Keevan might want to look up that quaint little phrase in the Constitution called "due process."
RAR, Internet tough on criminals tough guy!
Welcome to the internet, I'm here complaining about the toilet paper substitute that is your constitution. Guess what, I ain't american and I dont give a shit what your constitution says about how things should be...
If you had a greater ability at reading than a retarded four year old then you might even have noticed that I was actually complaining about the constitution and it's derived legal procedures.
DH is right that it's more a problem with the entire nature of the american legal system from the ground up in terms of structure. Winning regardless of the truth is at the heart of it, so of course cheating and "rules lawyering" to borrow from games is pervasive. Loopholes are the law of the land, which isn't how it really ought to be...but it's also what the holy an inerrant constitution says so it's beyond question. *insert angelic chorus*
Is internet tough guy the latest insult you heard? It's hardly even relevant here, I'm not talking about shit like rubbing folk down with sandpaper, dipping them in honey and feeding them to the fireants. I'm talking about the absurdity of particular aspects of the US legal system. Cruel and Unusual punishment is a whole other topic shitforbrains.
"Prodesse Non Nocere." "It's all about popularity really, if your invisible friend that tells you to invade places is called Napoleon, you're a loony, if he's called Jesus then you're the president." "I'd drive more people insane, but I'd have to double back and pick them up first..." "All it takes for bullshit to thrive is for rational men to do nothing." - Kevin Farrell, B.A. Journalism. BOTM - EBC - Horseman - G&C - Vampire
