3 ms·

>One way to do that is to force you to defend yourself in court against a lie accusation This is pretty easy to defend as the burden of proof is entirely on th

>One way to do that is to force you to defend yourself in court against a lie accusation This is pretty easy to defend as the burden of proof is entirely on the FBI. >At which point, the FBI wouldn't pull this shit anyway. Exactly. However, everyone here seems to be quite worked up over these synthetic hypotheticals.

fweespeech 11y ago
> Exactly. However, everyone here seems to be quite worked up over these synthetic hypotheticals. So you have a habit of recording all your conversations with full knowledge of the legal notification laws? That is what "incontrovertible" evidence would require. Fyi, its not a synthetic hypothetical. I debated explaining but honestly, I don't really expect you to believe me and I don't care at this point. > This is pretty easy to defend as the burden of proof is entirely on the FBI. In theory, yes. However, 5 figures in legal bills are the end result unless you have a literal recording of the conversation whose authenticity can't be questioned.
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  I do try to mentally record my conversations. I've found that very few other people seem to. Try asking someone what they just said some time, or asking them what you just said. I doubt they will give you a verbatim recording. Don't lie; ask questions whose answers contradict established theory.
  - fweespeech 11y ago
    Lol. Good luck with that being an effective defense that costs you $0. You'd need to record it on a machine of some kind. Which has legal consequences, notification requirements, etc.
    - jsprogrammer 11y ago
      The FBI would be recording and I would have access to those recordings. Miranda right #1 I believe.
      - fweespeech 11y ago
        Look, I've accepted nothing I can say will convince you. But, if you think that is how it works, good luck.
        jsprogrammer 11y ago
        You think the FBI can introduce evidence against you, that you cannot examine?
        fweespeech 11y ago
        You really are trying to be dense and I'm done wasting my time.

fweespeech 11y ago

> Exactly. However, everyone here seems to be quite worked up over these synthetic hypotheticals. So you have a habit of recording all your conversations with full knowledge of the legal notification laws? That is what "incontrovertible" evidence would require. Fyi, its not a synthetic hypothetical. I debated explaining but honestly, I don't really expect you to believe me and I don't care at this point. > This is pretty easy to defend as the burden of proof is entirely on the FBI. In theory, yes. However, 5 figures in legal bills are the end result unless you have a literal recording of the conversation whose authenticity can't be questioned.

jsprogrammer 11y ago
I do try to mentally record my conversations. I've found that very few other people seem to. Try asking someone what they just said some time, or asking them what you just said. I doubt they will give you a verbatim recording. Don't lie; ask questions whose answers contradict established theory.
- fweespeech 11y ago
  Lol. Good luck with that being an effective defense that costs you $0. You'd need to record it on a machine of some kind. Which has legal consequences, notification requirements, etc.
  - jsprogrammer 11y ago
    The FBI would be recording and I would have access to those recordings. Miranda right #1 I believe.
    - fweespeech 11y ago
      Look, I've accepted nothing I can say will convince you. But, if you think that is how it works, good luck.
      - jsprogrammer 11y ago
        You think the FBI can introduce evidence against you, that you cannot examine?
        fweespeech 11y ago
        You really are trying to be dense and I'm done wasting my time.