7 ms·

In some countries it is illegal to provide false information to the court, especially so if you're a government agent. How is this "parallel but fake" evidence

by praptak 12y ago

In some countries it is illegal to provide false information to the court, especially so if you're a government agent. How is this "parallel but fake" evidence even legal?

eloisius 12y ago
Probably because the evidence is factually correct. What they are concealing is how they got it.
- talmand 12y ago
  Which goes against any full disclosure laws that may exist in those jurisdictions.
merpnderp 12y ago
Because being pulled over for an illegal lane change is acceptable to the courts. Knowing to follow someone down the highway until they make an illegal lane change, because you received intelligence from DEA/NSA electronic surveillance not approved by the courts, is not acceptable to the courts.
- LLWM 12y ago
  And that is only a problem because the enforcement capacity does not exist to pull over every person who makes an illegal lane change. The solution is, as always, more surveillance.
unabridged 12y ago
I don't think they are providing fake evidence as much as just not disclosing everything. "The DEA told me to watch for his car and pull him over for a traffic violation. I noticed the suspect change lanes without signal and I pulled him over." They just leave out the first sentence. The problem is when they don't disclose properly the worst case scenario (for the government) is just a mistrial or acquittal. In cases where the defense suspects parallel construction, they need to put the officers on the stand and ask them straight out "did you receive any information from a federal government agency about the defendant?". Make them either give it up or perjure themselves.
- gknoy 12y ago
  ... and even then, you're betting that they will choose not to perjure themself if they had received such information. How is one to prove that they received it?
  - unabridged 12y ago
    The Feds keep records of everything, who knows what might be leaked or be FOIAed or released in some other trial. It can't hurt to ask, if it convinces one cop not to lie its worth it.

by praptak 12y ago

In some countries it is illegal to provide false information to the court, especially so if you're a government agent. How is this "parallel but fake" evidence even legal?

eloisius 12y ago

Probably because the evidence is factually correct. What they are concealing is how they got it.

talmand 12y ago
Which goes against any full disclosure laws that may exist in those jurisdictions.

merpnderp 12y ago

Because being pulled over for an illegal lane change is acceptable to the courts. Knowing to follow someone down the highway until they make an illegal lane change, because you received intelligence from DEA/NSA electronic surveillance not approved by the courts, is not acceptable to the courts.

LLWM 12y ago
And that is only a problem because the enforcement capacity does not exist to pull over every person who makes an illegal lane change. The solution is, as always, more surveillance.

unabridged 12y ago

I don't think they are providing fake evidence as much as just not disclosing everything. "The DEA told me to watch for his car and pull him over for a traffic violation. I noticed the suspect change lanes without signal and I pulled him over." They just leave out the first sentence. The problem is when they don't disclose properly the worst case scenario (for the government) is just a mistrial or acquittal. In cases where the defense suspects parallel construction, they need to put the officers on the stand and ask them straight out "did you receive any information from a federal government agency about the defendant?". Make them either give it up or perjure themselves.

gknoy 12y ago
... and even then, you're betting that they will choose not to perjure themself if they had received such information. How is one to prove that they received it?
- unabridged 12y ago
  The Feds keep records of everything, who knows what might be leaked or be FOIAed or released in some other trial. It can't hurt to ask, if it convinces one cop not to lie its worth it.