2 ms·
You can forget convincing a judge, by the way. While there is a razor-slim chance that the judge might understand technical matters and wish to let you present
by otakucode 9y ago
You can forget convincing a judge, by the way. While there is a razor-slim chance that the judge might understand technical matters and wish to let you present your case, they can't. The prosecution will accuse the defense of attempting to 'bamboozle' the jury with confusing technical details. This is used in DNA evidence cases to prevent lawyers from pointing out that 1 in 100 DNA tests are in error due to lab errors or sample contamination. The ability to present technical information in a courtroom is basically nil in the USA. The standard used is a 'reasonable person' and it is assumed that no reasonable person has the ability to understand technical nuance. If the police say your IP address did something bad... you're just screwed, as far as I can tell.
- jdavis703 9y agoWhy can't you ask your lawyer to subpoena the records from the ISP? If you're innocent the ISP's records should indicate you've never interacted with the servers you're being accused of accessing. Just alleging that something could be wrong isn't enough, reasonable doubt has to have a boundary line somewhere. Now if there are cases where defendants are prevented from admitting exculpatory evidence that would disprove circumstantial evidence, then that's a separate problem (i.e. when prosecutors hide evidence).
- Chaebixi 9y ago> Just alleging that something could be wrong isn't enough, reasonable doubt has to have a boundary line somewhere. IANAL, but wouldn't a presumption of innocence require the prosecution prove that their evidence is not mistaken?
- nikanj 9y agoThe jury saw it working on CSI. No paid expert witness is ever going to change their idea of how tech works.