4 ms·
I agree with your comment however I don't think there is a difference, practically, with something being 'legal' and something being 'illegal' but tolerated non
by jonnycowboy 17y ago
I agree with your comment however I don't think there is a difference, practically, with something being 'legal' and something being 'illegal' but tolerated nonetheless. In this case, the FBI acted improperly however with no consequences - nobody will be sued, or go to jail for this. Then what's the difference?
- angelbob 17y agoOne difference is that "illegal but not prosecuted" is still not admissible as evidence in court. I'll bet there are some defendants' lawyers celebrating this ruling right now, because now the FBI is going to have to prove that it got those records legally, and that just got harder.
- GiraffeNecktie 17y agoPublic officials are rarely prosecuted for acting improperly. Usually it's only in cases of personal gain (corruption) or outright criminal behaviour. You don't throw people in jail or chop off their heads simply because they were overzealous and bent/abused/ignored the rules. Hopefully, there are some reprimands and some re-education. Maybe some people need to be fired or demoted, but prosecution is really unnecessary and a collosal waste of resources.