←back to thread

291 points dataflow | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.24s | source
Show context
femiagbabiaka ◴[] No.44605114[source]
How many rights will we be asked to give up in order to squash anti-war sentiment?
replies(8): >>44605211 #>>44605300 #>>44605796 #>>44605993 #>>44606143 #>>44606147 #>>44606330 #>>44607026 #
stefan_ ◴[] No.44606143[source]
This guy was accused of hurling a rock at a protester, it seems we are trying to defend the right to peaceful protest?

Like, this guy was identified off video of him throwing a rock at a protester that hit them in the face. By all accounts this is someone who is trying to violently suppress peoples rights. That he got off on police misconduct in the investigation is a loss to society, no matter how many waxing words try to twist him into being a "protester violated in his rights".

replies(5): >>44606407 #>>44606443 #>>44607092 #>>44607497 #>>44611925 #
thisislife2 ◴[] No.44606443[source]
That's a separate issue. The US is an exception where evidence that is collected illegally (see 'fruit of the poisonous tree' - https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree ) is not allowed in court. Thus, US law enforcements have come up with many creative means (like Parallel Construction - https://restorethe4th.com/our-new-brief-on-parallel-construc... ) to hide the fact that evidence was collected illegally. If you want justice to be done in the US, you want US law enforcement to comply with the law. Otherwise it could result in a miscarriage of justice - the guilty may escape because of police misconduct or innocents may be persecuted by the violation of their rights. This loophole used seems to be the grey area of the law. But loopholes too are slippery slopes in the law and shouldn't exist.
replies(2): >>44607185 #>>44608528 #
1. singleshot_ ◴[] No.44608528[source]
Worth remembering:

Saying that fruit of the poisonous tree is not admissible is a vast understatement of the complexity of this area of law.