4 ms·

Gurbaksh Chahal hates it if you talk about his domestic violence convictions. https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gurbaksh+chahal https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gurbaksh+chaha

Gurbaksh Chahal hates it if you talk about his domestic violence convictions. https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gurbaksh+chahal https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gurbaksh+chahal

add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
Wow. Imagine peddling this AI generated shit not being the worst thing about someone.
- rideontime 2y ago
  I suppose it's only fair to post his "reply," if only to laugh at it. https://trimfeed.com/tech/kashmir-hill-new-york-times-obsession-anatomy-of-hit-piece-4749053 https://trimfeed.com/tech/kashmir-hill-new-york-times-obsess...
  - ryandrake 2y ago
    What a clown. The attacked journalist was well within her right to respond ala Edward R. Murrow, when he responded to Senator Joe McCarthy's equally clownish rant: "Last week, Senator McCarthy appeared on this program to correct any errors he might have thought we made in our report of March 9th. Since he made no reference to any statements of fact that we made, we must conclude that he found no errors of fact."[1] 1: https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/edwardrmurrowtomccarthy.htm https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/edwardrmurrowtomcc...
- nacs 2y ago
  It's mentioned in the linked article -- he was caught on video hitting and kicking a woman 117 times but because the video was gathered without getting a warrant, it wasn't admissible in court and he got away with a misdemeanor charge. He then went to beat another woman and got a year long jail sentence. A real piece of work.
  - jajko 2y ago
    What s the general motivation in democracies to completely ignore blatant evidence of a serious crime unless ie consent or warrant is given? Where is the threshold, ie for murder this sort of evidence should be OK no? Manslaughter? I guess anything flies for terrorism these days. Ie if he kicked her to death, I can't imagine judge ignoring video evidence and letting him go.
    - infecto 2y ago
      Ideally it keeps checks and balances in place. If the evidence was admissible then there is a lack of balance, police would have a lot of incentive to search private property all the time to catch someone in a crime.
    - dahart 2y ago
      Nobody wants to ignore valid evidence of criminal guilt. In the US, the motivation is to uphold your constitutional fourth amendment rights, and implicitly to protect you against police and government abuse, of which there is a long and sordid history. It’s a tradeoff, and while it can lead to a few criminals getting away with things, it can also prevent sending innocent people to prison for life, or to the electric chair. There are a bunch of exceptions to the exclusionary rule [2], and courts do not necessarily apply the rule indiscriminately. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule#Limitations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule#Limitations [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United...
    - ecshafer 2y ago
      The general motivation is the existence of rights. We are born with god-given inalienable rights, constitutions exist to protect those rights from the government. Part of this, is that the government can't illegally infringe upon those rights. If they think that we are doing X they need a warrant to search our property. Where is the threshold is actually an interesting question. Since if for example the man killed the woman, but the video was illegally taken then it would be inadmissable. BUT police are known to construct cases around illegal evidence called parallel construction. So for example the police get an illegal video, they look for evidence find that a woman is missing, get a warrant to then find the video. Where is the threshold I think the US has shown that the threshold is national security. No issues drone striking someone in a foreign country.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
infecto 2y ago
I usually don't like threads that go slightly off topic but I especially hate garbage humans that commit DV. Gurbaksh Chahal is truly a garbage human being, incredibly what he created at an early age but a garbage human being for being women multiple times.

Gurbaksh Chahal hates it if you talk about his domestic violence convictions. https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gurbaksh+chahal https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gurbaksh+chahal

add-sub-mul-div 2y ago

Wow. Imagine peddling this AI generated shit not being the worst thing about someone.

rideontime 2y ago
I suppose it's only fair to post his "reply," if only to laugh at it. https://trimfeed.com/tech/kashmir-hill-new-york-times-obsession-anatomy-of-hit-piece-4749053 https://trimfeed.com/tech/kashmir-hill-new-york-times-obsess...
- ryandrake 2y ago
  What a clown. The attacked journalist was well within her right to respond ala Edward R. Murrow, when he responded to Senator Joe McCarthy's equally clownish rant: "Last week, Senator McCarthy appeared on this program to correct any errors he might have thought we made in our report of March 9th. Since he made no reference to any statements of fact that we made, we must conclude that he found no errors of fact."[1] 1: https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/edwardrmurrowtomccarthy.htm https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/edwardrmurrowtomcc...
nacs 2y ago
It's mentioned in the linked article -- he was caught on video hitting and kicking a woman 117 times but because the video was gathered without getting a warrant, it wasn't admissible in court and he got away with a misdemeanor charge. He then went to beat another woman and got a year long jail sentence. A real piece of work.
- jajko 2y ago
  What s the general motivation in democracies to completely ignore blatant evidence of a serious crime unless ie consent or warrant is given? Where is the threshold, ie for murder this sort of evidence should be OK no? Manslaughter? I guess anything flies for terrorism these days. Ie if he kicked her to death, I can't imagine judge ignoring video evidence and letting him go.
  - infecto 2y ago
    Ideally it keeps checks and balances in place. If the evidence was admissible then there is a lack of balance, police would have a lot of incentive to search private property all the time to catch someone in a crime.
  - dahart 2y ago
    Nobody wants to ignore valid evidence of criminal guilt. In the US, the motivation is to uphold your constitutional fourth amendment rights, and implicitly to protect you against police and government abuse, of which there is a long and sordid history. It’s a tradeoff, and while it can lead to a few criminals getting away with things, it can also prevent sending innocent people to prison for life, or to the electric chair. There are a bunch of exceptions to the exclusionary rule [2], and courts do not necessarily apply the rule indiscriminately. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule#Limitations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusionary_rule#Limitations [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United...
  - ecshafer 2y ago
    The general motivation is the existence of rights. We are born with god-given inalienable rights, constitutions exist to protect those rights from the government. Part of this, is that the government can't illegally infringe upon those rights. If they think that we are doing X they need a warrant to search our property. Where is the threshold is actually an interesting question. Since if for example the man killed the woman, but the video was illegally taken then it would be inadmissable. BUT police are known to construct cases around illegal evidence called parallel construction. So for example the police get an illegal video, they look for evidence find that a woman is missing, get a warrant to then find the video. Where is the threshold I think the US has shown that the threshold is national security. No issues drone striking someone in a foreign country.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

infecto 2y ago

I usually don't like threads that go slightly off topic but I especially hate garbage humans that commit DV. Gurbaksh Chahal is truly a garbage human being, incredibly what he created at an early age but a garbage human being for being women multiple times.