3 ms·
Although the outcome here seems good the opposite could have very easily been the case. There's a reason why "due process" is treated as a sacred principle in d
by brunorsini 13y ago
Although the outcome here seems good the opposite could have very easily been the case. There's a reason why "due process" is treated as a sacred principle in democratic countries. From Wikipedia:
When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due-process violation, which offends against the rule of law. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process_of_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process_of_law)
- smsm42 13y agoFor police to lie to a suspect - or anybody else - is not against the law and AFAIK does not violate "due process". Giving false testimony however - which two girlfriends were about to do - is a crime, called perjury. So the prosecutor actually prevented two crimes from being committed.
- amirmc 13y ago"So the prosecutor actually prevented two crimes from being committed." Do we really know that? It caused the women to "go crazy", perhaps crazy enough to want to hurt the boyfriend, which they could do by withdrawing their alibi. We simply can't know from the info in the article.