4 ms·
>Apple then told the Suffolk County prosecutor "that the video evidence of the impostor, which would have completely exculpated Ousmane Bah, had been routinely
by belltaco 5y ago
>Apple then told the Suffolk County prosecutor "that the video evidence of the impostor, which would have completely exculpated Ousmane Bah, had been routinely deleted."
Why would anyone routinely delete evidence of crime instead of making a copy of it before it was deleted? What's the point of having surveillance equipment and footage if it's just routinely deleted even if there was a theft?
>The video from an October 2018 theft misattributed to Bah in Rockaway, New Jersey, was also deleted.
Oh wow, again?
>And as it turned out, the video of the Boston incident turned up eventually – Bah's attorneys found it during the discovery process. It showed the impostor, not Bah.
They should open a criminal investigation into what happened with the video. Intentionally accusing someone they know to be innocent, taking their time and freedom is completely inexcusable.
- pessimizer 5y agoBusinesses (at least in the US) try to write the shortest possible data retention policies possible so that evidence is hopefully deleted before any litigation begins. If you had a written policy and you hadn't received a court order before deleting, you've won.
- ashtonkem 5y agoI think there should be a carve out for evidence provided to the state or the defense. If you provide a sworn statement that evidence exists and then destroy it before the court is done with it, you should face contempt of court charges.
- tomxor 5y ago> Why would anyone routinely delete evidence of crime instead of making a copy of it before it was deleted? (speculation) because the prosecutors preferred to ruin an innocent man's life over appearing incompetent... it technically risks evidence tampering, but they can probably just argue it back to incompetence so they have nothing to lose.
- rtpg 5y agoThe beauty of an adversarial system, where the prosecution's goal is to win, not to find the truth.
- amelius 5y agoMaking videos is so cheap and simple now, that not having video material should be reason to dismiss a case entirely. It's the retailer's responsibility to collect proof and present it when asked.
- webinvest 5y agoMore than just dismissal of the case. Compensation or punitive actions.