Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I was falsely arrested

iwasfalselyarrested.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–108 of 108 posts

Re: I was falsely arrested

#101

Post by golergka »

brazzledazzle wrote: post #81
golergka wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If that shot of the person's face is from a video of the incident that person is not him. Yes, but as far as we know, it's just a picture on the internet.

Is this healthy skepticism you're displaying? I regret that I'm bringing your motivations into question but given that we know his case was dropped because witnesses recanted after seeing said photo of the surveillance video I'm not entirely sure why you're pressing this.

Because we hear only one, clearly biased side of the argument, and the most critical piece of evidence isn't available.

Re: I was falsely arrested

#102

Post by golergka »

brazzledazzle wrote: post #84
golergka wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should have make myself more clear. You see, I understand that. What I also understand is that it is the _only_ video we actually have chance to see.

And as I stated in another comment which you didn't address in your reply: >...the only thing worth questioning here is if that shot is in fact real–something that could only be evaluated if they released the tape. But since they're not exactly going out of their way to do that I can only assume that it would be against their interests. The police and prosecution have the latitude to release that video and could cert…

This is only reasonable if we go with the assumption that release of evidence is a routine police procedure which is followed in cases like this, which, from the law enforcement standpoint, seems like typical and didn't receive any kind of special attention.

In other words, you think that they didn't release the video because they have something to prove. I think that they didn't bother because they have couple overworked clerks and hundred cases just like this — regardless of whether the video proves innocence or guilt. I honestly don't see this case as important enough for any officials involved to have any special motives or do anything other than bare minimum required.

Re: I was falsely arrested

#103

Post by golergka »

throw_this_away wrote: post #87
benbenolson wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes I really wonder about how some commenters on Hacker News extrapolate things like this. My guess is that someone feels badly for the wrongly accused (which is quite understandable), and wants to do anything in his/her power to defend him, like bringing down comments like yours that may reveal any wrongdoing or mistakes on the website creator's part.

Why do I need to defend the author? He hasn't done anything that needs defending... I'm merely pointing out that the original comment is automatically assuming that the author's story is untrue. And that the comment makes a clear call for more proof.

> I'm merely pointing out that the original comment is automatically assuming that the author's story is untrue. And that the comment makes a clear call for more proof.

Of course I do, because this is the default attitude one should have when approaching such stories on the internet.

This whole story could be complete fiction that never took place from the beginning to the end, unless you actually make an effort to locate and probably contact (since I don't think they would bother to publish any involved materials) the officials and departments involved. Have you?

This web-page is literally the only source we have. How the hell are we supposed to trust it by default?

Re: I was falsely arrested

#104

Post by Shaanie »

Nadya wrote: post #77
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many guilty people would you set free to avoid imprisoning an innocent person? You said 10. But probably some of those 10 will be repeat offenders. So how many innocent people will you see murdered in order to avoid imprisoning an innocent person? That's a different question, isn't it? I think this gets to the question of "beneficial for society as a whole". If you stick some plausible values on this (say we're t…

>How many guilty people would you set free to avoid imprisoning an innocent person? You said 10. All of them. With the difference in terminology: They are not being "set free" after being "knowingly guilty" but "remaining free" after "uncertain evidence". >But probably some of those 10 will be repeat offenders. So how many innocent people will you see murdered in order to avoid imprisoning an innocent person? That's…

>Would you serve a lifetime prison sentence for a crime you did not commit?

The thing is, if you let a serial killer off the hook because you didn't actually catch him red-handed (though the other evidence is very reliable) then you're killing innocents by inaction.

Therefore, we can reframe your question as: "Would you let you and your family get murdered by a repeat offender to ensure that no innocents are imprisoned?"

As long as there are prisoners, there will be some amount of innocents imprisoned, simply because it's almost impossible (entire impossible?) to prove that someone did something to a 100% certainty. By setting such insane standards you're killing way more innocents than the amount you'd falsely imprison.

Re: I was falsely arrested

#105

Post by throw_this_away »

golergka wrote: post #98
throw_this_away wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said "Everybody here in the comments seem to take the story on face value.". You're implying that we shouldn't take the story at face value OR that the author is being dishonest about his experience. Then you say, "Meanwhile, the only video attached to the post is pixelated to the highest degree, and you certainly can't see facial features on it. Am I missing something here?" A clear call for proof.

You are correct, this is call for proof. It seems that in your worldview, one either believes the author, or calls him a liar. But in real life, the third option is actually more optimal in majority of cases. This third option is doubt.

By definition, if you doubt someone's story, then you don't believe them. It's fairly simple, but if you would prefer to pretend that you didn't say what you said, that's certainly your right.

Re: I was falsely arrested

#106

Post by xyzzyz »

beat wrote: post #46
xyzzyz wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In both of the cases you mention (someone was found guilty or charges were dropped) it seems pretty obvious that the arrest was wrongful, and a jailed person should be compensated. Can you come up with non-trivial example?

Guilty verdicts are difficult in American law. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is hard to achieve, even when the accused is guilty. "Probable cause" is all that is needed for arrest, a much lower standard.

If there's a probable cause for someone to be arrested, but they're not convicted after all, they _are_ innocent. I still don't understand what's tricky about that.

Re: I was falsely arrested

#107

Post by brazzledazzle »

golergka wrote: post #102
brazzledazzle wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And as I stated in another comment which you didn't address in your reply: >...the only thing worth questioning here is if that shot is in fact real–something that could only be evaluated if they released the tape. But since they're not exactly going out of their way to do that I can only assume that it would be against their interests. The police and prosecution have the latitude to release that video and could cert…

This is only reasonable if we go with the assumption that release of evidence is a routine police procedure which is followed in cases like this, which, from the law enforcement standpoint, seems like typical and didn't receive any kind of special attention. In other words, you think that they didn't release the video because they have something to prove. I think that they didn't bother because they have couple overw…

>In other words, you think that they didn't release the video because they have something to prove.

Really what I'm saying is that if I'm going to try to extrapolate something more from the information presented that would be the direction, not "Can we be sure he hasn't faked this picture?". My point is that you're speculating that someone is guilty despite a strong piece of neutral information: the DA dropped the case and he was released from jail.

Sure, it's possible the attorney faked the picture and it's all bullshit, but there's nothing to demonstrate that as being likely besides your own biases.

Re: I was falsely arrested

#108

Post by brazzledazzle »

golergka wrote: post #101
brazzledazzle wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this healthy skepticism you're displaying? I regret that I'm bringing your motivations into question but given that we know his case was dropped because witnesses recanted after seeing said photo of the surveillance video I'm not entirely sure why you're pressing this.

Because we hear only one, clearly biased side of the argument, and the most critical piece of evidence isn't available.

Actually the most critical piece of information is that the case was dropped and he was released from jail. Given that the US legal system hinges on a presumption of innocence this is the key indicator for us. We're forming an opinion of this city's police department and DA, not deciding their fate. If/When the police or prosecution release the tape we can change our conclusions appropriately. If they consider this to be a serious PR issue they might just do that.

To draw the photo taken by his attorney into question relies on assuming his guilt, his attorney's misconduct and the prosecutor taking that misconduct without putting up a fight. Occam's razor and all that.

Post reply on HN