ST Alpha - "I mean not really? It’s how the system should work. Prosecution deliberately misfiled evidence so the defence couldn’t access it." (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 152

In response to "this is such an embarrassing loophole in the justice system. -- nm" by Max

I mean not really? It’s how the system should work. Prosecution deliberately misfiled evidence so the defence couldn’t access it.

Posted by mafic Jul 12 '24, 17:08

There’s not a reasonable way to go on after that.

Responses:

Shouldn't the system work in a way that any officer of the court - especially a *judge* - can see that you have evidence someone was possibly responsible -- (edited) - Max Jul 12, 17:17 11
- he's not saying "not my job" he's saying "the prosecution screwed up so badly I can't salvage anything." -- nm - mafic Jul 12, 17:32 2
  - I'm not saying salvage anything related to Baldwin, I'm saying what the article lays out makes it sound like Teske should be potentially charged. -- nm - Max Jul 12, 17:37 1
    - Because nobody has heard of him. How are you going to advance your career prosecuting people nobody knows? - the wrong element Jul 12, 20:35
- the problem with Brady material (usually) is it only encompasses evidence that is exculpatory to the defendant. so then prosecutors have to decide - hollywood big shot Jul 12, 17:25 6
  - To reframe what I'm saying above, if it's not the judge's job, why is he suddenly responsible for determining that the bullets are exculpatory -- (edited) - Max Jul 12, 17:49 3
    - Because the judge's job is to rule on questions of law, not prosecute crimes. -- nm* - znufrii Jul 12, 18:19
    - I guess on the procedural question because it’s not the judge’s job to make the decision, but it is the judge’s job to review any decision they make. -- nm - mafic Jul 12, 18:10
    - Best guess is it directly contradicts the prosecution’s story about where they came from, which is part of how they’re framing responsibility. -- nm - mafic Jul 12, 18:07
  - prosecution decided to file the evidence under a different case so the defence would never find it. - mafic Jul 12, 17:36 1
    - By filing it under a different case they didn't have to turn it over to the defense or let them know it even existed. -- nm - . Jul 12, 22:26
- The onus is on the prosecution to play by the rules, which state the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. By playing fast and loose - Will Hunting Jul 12, 17:23

Post a message top

I mean not really? It’s how the system should work. Prosecution deliberately misfiled evidence so the defence couldn’t access it.

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.