4 ms·

> To answer your question Looking forward! > motions by prosecutors Motion ≠ incarceration. So, not an answer (yet?)... Did defendants get incarcerated as a

> To answer your question Looking forward! > motions by prosecutors Motion ≠ incarceration. So, not an answer (yet?)... Did defendants get incarcerated as a result of these motions, or no?

chaps 1mo ago
They did, yes. I hope you have a better day.
- dataflow 1mo ago
  Okay thanks, so here's what I don't understand. When there is video evidence that someone was in their house the whole time, and given that everyone who has used a GPS knows it can easily be inaccurate by 30ft, why in the world would the judge trust the ankle monitor accuracy over video footage they see with their own eyes that directly contradicts it? Something about this just doesn't seem very plausible, especially if this kind of thing is happening more than once in a blue moon. Either the video evidence is not as convincing as we're being led to assume (thus leaving more doubt in the judge's mind than ours, even if the person is innocent), or there should be some other explanation.
  - chaps 1mo ago
    I don't know what to tell you besides yes, it's really that bad. A lot of it is just people passing the buck down the road, a lot of it (at the time) was covid, a lot of it was the difficulty of people on EM to publicly talk about their situation. Defense attorneys just want to get their clients out of jail and a lot of the EM stuff is a distraction to that. It's very much a, "we'll put in a ticket" sort of situation across many moving parts. Lawyers began telling their clients to film themselves in their homes at all times so that they could prove to judges that they were in their homes when the devices went off. That's advice they give because the risks of not doing that are going back into jail. And to prove all that, you still have to go through all that process, filming yourself, etc. It's truly bad.
  - lazyasciiart 29d ago
    Everyone knows video footage can be faked. Why would the judge ever trust video provided by the defendant over serious professional technology like GPS? Might as well just take their word for it! What’s funny here is that you are displaying misplaced trust in the justice system that exactly parallels my hypothetical judge’s misplaced trust in technology.
    - GJim 29d ago
      > Everyone knows video footage can be faked. Everyone also knows GPS can be spoofed. Your point?
      - lazyasciiart 29d ago
        No, most people don't know GPS can be spoofed, or at best think of it as a nation-state level action. I'd be surprised if you got less than 100% of non-tech people saying that if GPS contradicts a video then the video is faked.
        GJim 26d ago
        > No, most people don't know GPS can be spoofed LOL! Everybody who has played Pokemon Go knows it can be spoofed!
        chaps 26d ago
        Since when are Pokemon Go players representative of everyone else? Methinks you should surround yourself with fewer technical people if your goal is to understand what's generally understood about the world.
  - masfuerte 29d ago
    Why did literally hundreds of judges in the UK accept bogus evidence from the Post Office and Fujitsu leading to nearly 900 innocent postmasters being convicted? Because judges are nearly always the kind of people who instinctively trust authority. They wouldn't be judges otherwise. Hope that helps. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal
porksoda 1mo ago
You've kind of spoiled my day with this. Its like an angry chess game when you've got momentum, you POUNCE! But nobody else here appears to have chosen violence. really I get that he "maybe snarked you". But you should be reminded of the beautiful rules of hn discussions.
- dataflow 29d ago
  Thanks for the feedback, but I think you're missing something. This is not about us, it's about everything and everyone else implicated in the discussion. About the fact that we're essentially being demanded to assume - without clear evidence - that the vast majority of those with power over us are categorically incredibly incompetent or malicious. That is not only incredibly insulting toward the good subset of humans who have dedicated and even risked their lives for the public good, but it goes further and sows deep distrust and resentment, continuing to tear apart the very fabric of society. If you/we want to do that, be my guest. It is HN after all. But we damn better be able to justify it with rock-solid evidence, not just go "trust me bro, they're all stupid, they're not techies like us." Throughout this entire chain of comments, there has not been one shred of evidence that this has actually even happened once, never mind that it is a repeating phenomenon as they claimed. All we have been given is repeated attempts to make us believe those claims were true, supported by claims of existence of (not actual) evidence that - even if existent - would not remotely imply the claim is true. If we want to believe things without evidence and damn other who disagree to hell based purely on beliefs, we certainly can - that's what freedom of religion is for. However, I hope the irony isn't lost on anyone that it's quite literally the diametric opposite of what we're expecting from the justice system. Whether the claim is ultimately accurate or not, that is what what should be spoiling your day before anything I wrote. It certainly did mine. It should absolutely spoil your day to watch the integrity of huge swathes of people running your society get smeared without clear evidence, with more nails being hammered into the coffin that is the trust holding your society together. Either you're watching something unjustified, in which case that should make you upset on its own, or it's justified, in which case it's even sadder. Either way, I would think that seeing evidence should be at the bedrock of it all, not the last straw whose demand finally spoils your day.
  - 29d ago

> To answer your question Looking forward! > motions by prosecutors Motion ≠ incarceration. So, not an answer (yet?)... Did defendants get incarcerated as a result of these motions, or no?

chaps 1mo ago

They did, yes. I hope you have a better day.

dataflow 1mo ago
Okay thanks, so here's what I don't understand. When there is video evidence that someone was in their house the whole time, and given that everyone who has used a GPS knows it can easily be inaccurate by 30ft, why in the world would the judge trust the ankle monitor accuracy over video footage they see with their own eyes that directly contradicts it? Something about this just doesn't seem very plausible, especially if this kind of thing is happening more than once in a blue moon. Either the video evidence is not as convincing as we're being led to assume (thus leaving more doubt in the judge's mind than ours, even if the person is innocent), or there should be some other explanation.
- chaps 1mo ago
  I don't know what to tell you besides yes, it's really that bad. A lot of it is just people passing the buck down the road, a lot of it (at the time) was covid, a lot of it was the difficulty of people on EM to publicly talk about their situation. Defense attorneys just want to get their clients out of jail and a lot of the EM stuff is a distraction to that. It's very much a, "we'll put in a ticket" sort of situation across many moving parts. Lawyers began telling their clients to film themselves in their homes at all times so that they could prove to judges that they were in their homes when the devices went off. That's advice they give because the risks of not doing that are going back into jail. And to prove all that, you still have to go through all that process, filming yourself, etc. It's truly bad.
- lazyasciiart 29d ago
  Everyone knows video footage can be faked. Why would the judge ever trust video provided by the defendant over serious professional technology like GPS? Might as well just take their word for it! What’s funny here is that you are displaying misplaced trust in the justice system that exactly parallels my hypothetical judge’s misplaced trust in technology.
  - GJim 29d ago
    > Everyone knows video footage can be faked. Everyone also knows GPS can be spoofed. Your point?
    - lazyasciiart 29d ago
      No, most people don't know GPS can be spoofed, or at best think of it as a nation-state level action. I'd be surprised if you got less than 100% of non-tech people saying that if GPS contradicts a video then the video is faked.
      - GJim 26d ago
        > No, most people don't know GPS can be spoofed LOL! Everybody who has played Pokemon Go knows it can be spoofed!
        chaps 26d ago
        Since when are Pokemon Go players representative of everyone else? Methinks you should surround yourself with fewer technical people if your goal is to understand what's generally understood about the world.
- masfuerte 29d ago
  Why did literally hundreds of judges in the UK accept bogus evidence from the Post Office and Fujitsu leading to nearly 900 innocent postmasters being convicted? Because judges are nearly always the kind of people who instinctively trust authority. They wouldn't be judges otherwise. Hope that helps. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal

porksoda 1mo ago

You've kind of spoiled my day with this. Its like an angry chess game when you've got momentum, you POUNCE! But nobody else here appears to have chosen violence. really I get that he "maybe snarked you". But you should be reminded of the beautiful rules of hn discussions.

dataflow 29d ago
Thanks for the feedback, but I think you're missing something. This is not about us, it's about everything and everyone else implicated in the discussion. About the fact that we're essentially being demanded to assume - without clear evidence - that the vast majority of those with power over us are categorically incredibly incompetent or malicious. That is not only incredibly insulting toward the good subset of humans who have dedicated and even risked their lives for the public good, but it goes further and sows deep distrust and resentment, continuing to tear apart the very fabric of society. If you/we want to do that, be my guest. It is HN after all. But we damn better be able to justify it with rock-solid evidence, not just go "trust me bro, they're all stupid, they're not techies like us." Throughout this entire chain of comments, there has not been one shred of evidence that this has actually even happened once, never mind that it is a repeating phenomenon as they claimed. All we have been given is repeated attempts to make us believe those claims were true, supported by claims of existence of (not actual) evidence that - even if existent - would not remotely imply the claim is true. If we want to believe things without evidence and damn other who disagree to hell based purely on beliefs, we certainly can - that's what freedom of religion is for. However, I hope the irony isn't lost on anyone that it's quite literally the diametric opposite of what we're expecting from the justice system. Whether the claim is ultimately accurate or not, that is what what should be spoiling your day before anything I wrote. It certainly did mine. It should absolutely spoil your day to watch the integrity of huge swathes of people running your society get smeared without clear evidence, with more nails being hammered into the coffin that is the trust holding your society together. Either you're watching something unjustified, in which case that should make you upset on its own, or it's justified, in which case it's even sadder. Either way, I would think that seeing evidence should be at the bedrock of it all, not the last straw whose demand finally spoils your day.
- 29d ago