5 ms·

You should still record anyway. Use it in the court of public opinion.

by R0b0t1 5y ago

Loughla 5y ago
Except if the recording is illegal, it can be used, in some states, against you criminally and civilly. I was just having this conversation. You can be sued and/or jailed if you record someone without their consent in a two party consent state. Not saying it's right or wrong, but it exists and is something to think about.
- xyzzy21 5y ago
  Again, sure technically, but it also Streisands everything about it. The cost-benefit for prosecutors and the other party isn't a slam dunk! Personally I'd absolutely do it and take the gamble. But I'm risk-thriving (hence started several companies, enjoy international travel, etc.)
  - osense 5y ago
    Great, so instead of being able to count on the justice system we're basicall back to mob justice?
    - mcguire 5y ago
      We like to think of it as democracy in action.
      - UnpossibleJim 5y ago
        So the Salem witch trials were "democracy in action"?
        Retric 5y ago
        Yep. Democracy isn’t perfect it’s just one compromise among many.
        UnpossibleJim 5y ago
        So better that more innocents be punished than risk any guilty going free? Truly, your love of the strictest "definition" of democracy is baffling, though I think most would vote against you.
        mcguire 5y ago
        I'm not sure how you get "punishing innocents" from publishing a very incriminating recording even though making such a recording is illegal.
        UnpossibleJim 5y ago
        You literally called the Salem witch trials democracy in action, and don't understand how I got to punishing the innocent?
        Retric 5y ago
        No, Democracy gets it wrong in both directions with more of the guilty set free and more of the innocent sent to prison at least compared to a hypothetical ideal system.
        mcguire 5y ago
        The Salem witch trials were under the justice system.
        UnpossibleJim 5y ago
        No shit. I was totally wrong. I picked a horrible example, lol. Thanks =)
    - R0b0t1 5y ago
      Mob justice can be true justice. As in this case precisely, there was proof that a court refused to listen to. At some point you need to worry about deep fakes, etc, but there's still cases where the accused more or less says they are guilty and flips the court off and everybody acts like nothing can be done about it.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    >Personally I'd absolutely do it and take the gamble. But I'm risk-thriving (hence started several companies, enjoy international travel, etc.) I did not think I would ever see someone comparing starting businesses and international travel with committing clear misdemeanors and possible felonies and opening oneself up to civil suits.
    - bsanr 5y ago
      That sounds like a description of every American civil rights activist ever.
- R0b0t1 5y ago
  The main concern (and it's not much of a concern) is that you are charged with wiretapping or the equivalent. The penalties for this are not necessarily severe. Refuse to plea and force a trial. If the recording is not tampered with it's unlikely a civil case will get anywhere. If someone is actually a rapist and got off on a technicality it's your moral imperative to do something, no? Stand up to unjust laws. Evil prospers because idiots like you do nothing.
  - Loughla 5y ago
    >idiots like you do nothing. That seems unnecessary ad hominem. Just completely uncalled for. Also, you're assigning a values judgment to my statements that I genuinely thought I was clear about when I said "Not saying it's right or wrong, but it exists and is something to think about." You have no idea what my stance is on literally anything. Trying to be superior to someone who has given you nothing to feel superior about seems sort of hateful? Facts are facts, and consequences are consequences, regardless of right or wrong. That was my meaning. Agree with the outcomes or not, believe me or don't. That doesn't matter. >If the recording is not tampered with it's unlikely a civil case will get anywhere. How do you figure? If it is a surreptitious recording without consent, the person who was recorded has a pretty clear line to a civil case.
  - sterlind 5y ago
    it's a stretch, but the judge could bar revealing the motive for recording, or playing clips that reveal the nature of what was recorded, in order to keep the jurors from learning that it was child rape and nullifying the charge. in practice it's unlikely though. also wait, were criminal charges brought against the rape victim for recording? did some prosecutor decide to actively assist further ruining the victim's life? civil I can understand, but what a scumbag for not exercising prosecutorial discretion if so.
UnpossibleJim 5y ago
https://youtu.be/lSM-9RBk3HQ https://youtu.be/lSM-9RBk3HQ Or just make a deepfake of anyone you want saying anything you want and try them in the court of public opinion. Mob justice is a poor form of investigation.
- R0b0t1 5y ago
  Courts in the US often do nothing, so mob justice is all you have. This is a separate issue that will need to be addressed. It will soon be possible to claim any video or audio evidence is faked. I don't know what happens then, but building off of what happens now, each piece of evidence is just weighting the scales one direction.
  - UnpossibleJim 5y ago
    We have more options than mob justice. Who told you that, that was our only option? Once you resort to mib justice, their verdicts can't just be "taken back". I'll give you a link to Emmett Till, and that's what mob justice brings. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_Till https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_Till
    - R0b0t1 5y ago
      I live in the US. Courts in the US are often useless. If you have a high profile case you might get justice but usually nothing happens. I'm definitely aware of what can happen. I don't know how often it does. But if you restrict yourself to forcing justice only when you aren't acting on a hunch you're probably doing the best for yourself you can, because the alternative is usually nothing.
      - UnpossibleJim 5y ago
        I live in the US as well and you're arguing for a medieval form of justice. You think we should go back to conviction on a "hunch" and feelings. Have we fallen so far that I have to argue for the merits of a justice system based on evidence in a technical forum? Education and critical thought should be inextricably linked.

You should still record anyway. Use it in the court of public opinion.

by R0b0t1 5y ago

You should still record anyway. Use it in the court of public opinion.

Except if the recording is illegal, it can be used, in some states, against you criminally and civilly. I was just having this conversation. You can be sued and/or jailed if you record someone without their consent in a two party consent state. Not saying it's right or wrong, but it exists and is something to think about.

xyzzy21 5y ago
Again, sure technically, but it also Streisands everything about it. The cost-benefit for prosecutors and the other party isn't a slam dunk! Personally I'd absolutely do it and take the gamble. But I'm risk-thriving (hence started several companies, enjoy international travel, etc.)
- osense 5y ago
  Great, so instead of being able to count on the justice system we're basicall back to mob justice?
  - mcguire 5y ago
    We like to think of it as democracy in action.
    - UnpossibleJim 5y ago
      So the Salem witch trials were "democracy in action"?
      - Retric 5y ago
        Yep. Democracy isn’t perfect it’s just one compromise among many.
        UnpossibleJim 5y ago
        So better that more innocents be punished than risk any guilty going free? Truly, your love of the strictest "definition" of democracy is baffling, though I think most would vote against you.
        mcguire 5y ago
        I'm not sure how you get "punishing innocents" from publishing a very incriminating recording even though making such a recording is illegal.
        UnpossibleJim 5y ago
        You literally called the Salem witch trials democracy in action, and don't understand how I got to punishing the innocent?
        Retric 5y ago
        No, Democracy gets it wrong in both directions with more of the guilty set free and more of the innocent sent to prison at least compared to a hypothetical ideal system.
      - mcguire 5y ago
        The Salem witch trials were under the justice system.
        UnpossibleJim 5y ago
        No shit. I was totally wrong. I picked a horrible example, lol. Thanks =)
  - R0b0t1 5y ago
    Mob justice can be true justice. As in this case precisely, there was proof that a court refused to listen to. At some point you need to worry about deep fakes, etc, but there's still cases where the accused more or less says they are guilty and flips the court off and everybody acts like nothing can be done about it.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  >Personally I'd absolutely do it and take the gamble. But I'm risk-thriving (hence started several companies, enjoy international travel, etc.) I did not think I would ever see someone comparing starting businesses and international travel with committing clear misdemeanors and possible felonies and opening oneself up to civil suits.
  - bsanr 5y ago
    That sounds like a description of every American civil rights activist ever.
R0b0t1 5y ago
The main concern (and it's not much of a concern) is that you are charged with wiretapping or the equivalent. The penalties for this are not necessarily severe. Refuse to plea and force a trial. If the recording is not tampered with it's unlikely a civil case will get anywhere. If someone is actually a rapist and got off on a technicality it's your moral imperative to do something, no? Stand up to unjust laws. Evil prospers because idiots like you do nothing.
- Loughla 5y ago
  >idiots like you do nothing. That seems unnecessary ad hominem. Just completely uncalled for. Also, you're assigning a values judgment to my statements that I genuinely thought I was clear about when I said "Not saying it's right or wrong, but it exists and is something to think about." You have no idea what my stance is on literally anything. Trying to be superior to someone who has given you nothing to feel superior about seems sort of hateful? Facts are facts, and consequences are consequences, regardless of right or wrong. That was my meaning. Agree with the outcomes or not, believe me or don't. That doesn't matter. >If the recording is not tampered with it's unlikely a civil case will get anywhere. How do you figure? If it is a surreptitious recording without consent, the person who was recorded has a pretty clear line to a civil case.
- sterlind 5y ago
  it's a stretch, but the judge could bar revealing the motive for recording, or playing clips that reveal the nature of what was recorded, in order to keep the jurors from learning that it was child rape and nullifying the charge. in practice it's unlikely though. also wait, were criminal charges brought against the rape victim for recording? did some prosecutor decide to actively assist further ruining the victim's life? civil I can understand, but what a scumbag for not exercising prosecutorial discretion if so.

UnpossibleJim 5y ago

https://youtu.be/lSM-9RBk3HQ https://youtu.be/lSM-9RBk3HQ Or just make a deepfake of anyone you want saying anything you want and try them in the court of public opinion. Mob justice is a poor form of investigation.

R0b0t1 5y ago
Courts in the US often do nothing, so mob justice is all you have. This is a separate issue that will need to be addressed. It will soon be possible to claim any video or audio evidence is faked. I don't know what happens then, but building off of what happens now, each piece of evidence is just weighting the scales one direction.
- UnpossibleJim 5y ago
  We have more options than mob justice. Who told you that, that was our only option? Once you resort to mib justice, their verdicts can't just be "taken back". I'll give you a link to Emmett Till, and that's what mob justice brings. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_Till https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_Till
  - R0b0t1 5y ago
    I live in the US. Courts in the US are often useless. If you have a high profile case you might get justice but usually nothing happens. I'm definitely aware of what can happen. I don't know how often it does. But if you restrict yourself to forcing justice only when you aren't acting on a hunch you're probably doing the best for yourself you can, because the alternative is usually nothing.
    - UnpossibleJim 5y ago
      I live in the US as well and you're arguing for a medieval form of justice. You think we should go back to conviction on a "hunch" and feelings. Have we fallen so far that I have to argue for the merits of a justice system based on evidence in a technical forum? Education and critical thought should be inextricably linked.