5 ms·

Don't you have a right to meet your accuser, however? I know this typically only applies in court, but encouraging off-the-record communication is basically enc

by rcme 4y ago

Don't you have a right to meet your accuser, however? I know this typically only applies in court, but encouraging off-the-record communication is basically encouraging parallel construction is it not?

jack_pp 4y ago
Not when you're a gangster able and willing to send goons to kill or hospitalize your accuser.
ceejayoz 4y ago
> Don't you have a right to meet your accuser, however? It only applies to those who give testimony against you in court. If an informant's tip leads to enough hard evidence to convict, they may not need to testify and thus are not your accuser; your accuser is whoever's testifying about that evidence (forensic tech, detective, etc.) Anonymous tips are a thing, after all.
noxvilleza 4y ago
That's generally (as in, both in the US [6th amendment] and the UK [Article 6 of the ECHR]) regarding witnesses offering testimony during trials (and the right of the defendant to cross-examine them) - not people giving anonymous tips which might inspire police to do investigations of their own. In the UK, even if a witness is giving direct testimony in a trial there are situations which, for safety reasons, the witness might be allowed to be anonymous: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/witness-protection-and-anonymity https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/witness-protection-and... outlines this.
d1sxeyes 4y ago
Maybe the caller is not accusing anyone of anything. Imagine there's a stabbing. The police show up and immediately start questioning bystanders. No-one wants to talk. A detective hands out business cards, and says 'if you remember anything, then give me a call on my mobile'. On the way home, one of the bystanders sees a bloody cloth next to a public bin a block or two away that looks like the knife might be wrapped up in it. They're scared that it might have been a gangland killing, so they call up and report what they saw in confidence, fearing retribution. The caller's not made any accusation. The physical evidence stands for itself in court. There's no need for an illegal or warrantless search to find the knife, and neither does the tip-off form a basis for creating probable cause for a search. In this case, at the very least I think it is reasonable for the caller to expect a level of privacy, and the police should be obliged to inform the caller that the call is being recorded.

by rcme 4y ago

jack_pp 4y ago

Not when you're a gangster able and willing to send goons to kill or hospitalize your accuser.

ceejayoz 4y ago

> Don't you have a right to meet your accuser, however? It only applies to those who give testimony against you in court. If an informant's tip leads to enough hard evidence to convict, they may not need to testify and thus are not your accuser; your accuser is whoever's testifying about that evidence (forensic tech, detective, etc.) Anonymous tips are a thing, after all.

noxvilleza 4y ago

That's generally (as in, both in the US [6th amendment] and the UK [Article 6 of the ECHR]) regarding witnesses offering testimony during trials (and the right of the defendant to cross-examine them) - not people giving anonymous tips which might inspire police to do investigations of their own. In the UK, even if a witness is giving direct testimony in a trial there are situations which, for safety reasons, the witness might be allowed to be anonymous: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/witness-protection-and-anonymity https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/witness-protection-and... outlines this.

d1sxeyes 4y ago

Maybe the caller is not accusing anyone of anything. Imagine there's a stabbing. The police show up and immediately start questioning bystanders. No-one wants to talk. A detective hands out business cards, and says 'if you remember anything, then give me a call on my mobile'. On the way home, one of the bystanders sees a bloody cloth next to a public bin a block or two away that looks like the knife might be wrapped up in it. They're scared that it might have been a gangland killing, so they call up and report what they saw in confidence, fearing retribution. The caller's not made any accusation. The physical evidence stands for itself in court. There's no need for an illegal or warrantless search to find the knife, and neither does the tip-off form a basis for creating probable cause for a search. In this case, at the very least I think it is reasonable for the caller to expect a level of privacy, and the police should be obliged to inform the caller that the call is being recorded.