3 ms·

What case law allows for the establishment of “evidence” before a crime was alleged? Is it not a catch-22?

• jmyeet 1mo ago
  First, the law applicable here is 18 USC § 2232 [1]: > (a)Destruction or Removal of Property To Prevent Seizure.— > Whoever, before, during, or after any search for or seizure of property by any person authorized to make such search or seizure, knowingly destroys, damages, wastes, disposes of, transfers, or otherwise takes any action, or knowingly attempts to destroy, damage, waste, dispose of, transfer, or otherwise take any action, for the purpose of preventing or impairing the Government’s lawful authority to take such property into its custody or control or to continue holding such property under its lawful custody and control, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. Now what I think you're asking about is "adverse inference". In civil cases, the courts get to assume the evidence lost hurt you. In criminal trials it's a little more complicated but can show up as, for example, jury instructions. The court is allowed to instruct the jury that they can presume that the destroyed evidence was harmful to the defendant. [1]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2232 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2232
  • ImPostingOnHN 1mo ago
    I think the legal question is whether the officers were authorized to make this particular search+seizure without probable cause or even reasonable suspicion.