48
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Guntrigger@sopuli.xyz 11 points 5 months ago

I've read this whole article and I still don't understand why the ammo is important?

Yeah, it is bad that the prosecution did not disclose it, but it was a manilla envelope of loose rounds handed over by a friend of the father of the armourer, who has already been convicted of manslaughter. I can see why they would deem it not to be relevant evidence.

How could it possibly help the defence (other than this exact situation where it got the case thrown out)?

Also why would it not just be a mistrial, rather than the case being thrown out to never be tried again?

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

Because Hollywood elites... someone paid off the prosecutor and the case gets tossed.

[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 5 points 5 months ago

You're getting downvoted, but one does have to ask why a prosecuter would do something like this knowing it would get the case thrown out.

[-] Blu@sopuli.xyz 4 points 5 months ago

I don't think she planned on getting caught. This was a once in a lifetime case for her. Securing a conviction would elevate her career substantially. It's not unprecedented for prosecutors to engage in this kind of misconduct.

That said, most Brady violations are from incompetence rather than malice. Tons of evidence--not just exculpatory--has been lost by poorly trained or lazy investigators.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2024
48 points (100.0% liked)

New York Times gift articles

614 readers
138 users here now

Share your New York Times gift articles links here.

Rules:

Info:

Tip:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS