The Constitution needs to be mirrored in all Western Nations otherwise Tyranny is guaranteed.
Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional
171–180 of 208 posts
Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not only that, when they lie in conversations/interrogations, they can lie about what the law is , as well as what official acts can/will undertake. To me there is a fundamental difference between lies like: 1. "Your buddy in the next room already ratted you out." 2. "Sign this admission and you'll only get 6 months, tops. If you don't, we can seize your house and your mother will be living on the streets. "
Never talk to the police. Let your lawyers do the talking.
Im sorry but Ive got to talk to them to take the fucking piss out of them.
My interview tapes are hilarious.
Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional
#173The Constitution needs to be mirrored in all Western Nations otherwise Tyranny is guaranteed.
[deleted]
Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That is not the fault of the police, and there is no reason to punish them for it. It's not punishing the police. It's not allowing them to use evidence that they shouldn't have been allowed to gather. Fining them, firing them, and/or jailing them for breaking the law; those would be ways of punishing them. That's not what is being discussed here. Admittedly, we pretty much _never_ punish police no matter what they…
They were allowed to gather the evidence - they had a warrant from a judge. The judge erred, not the police.
Explain again why the police is "punished" if someone isn’t detained in court?
Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is obviously a line between what is and is not a permissible search somewhere and it's virtually inevitable that judicial rulings will from time to time err on both sides of that line (and they do). Punishing judges for ruling in ways which are later overturned would destroy rule of law at a fundamental level.
> Punishing judges for ruling in ways which are later overturned would destroy rule of law at a fundamental level. Not where people's most fundamental rights are concerned. What it would do is cause judges to err on the side of caution before making a ruling that would violate the constitution which is exactly what we want judges to do.
That's obviously unworkable if you consider that even the Supreme Court's interpretation of fundamental rights can change over time. If a future Supreme Court overturns a prior Supreme Court decision in a way that expands a particular right, do we punish all the judges who followed the previous precedent? If we do, then we have a judicial system that encourages individual judges to ignore the Supreme Court, which doesn't seem like a good setup.
But more fundamentally, the system you're proposing doesn't just incentivize judges to err on the side of caution, it incentivizes them to never rule in favor of the government and just punt the decision to the next level. If the cost of ever being overturned on appeal in favor of an individual's rights is losing their job, while there is no corresponding downside of ruling the other way, there's basically no reason to ever risk granting a warrant, for example.
Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
This x 1000. A friend was a career LAPD detective, and he gave me the talk. He said because I’m a nice guy I might try to help the police by explaining what I saw in detail. He was adamant that I never ever do that, because in the absence of someone to pin it on, they would find a way to pin it on me. He saw it as literally their job. No matter what, even if you are just standing there when something happens, don’t t…
I've told this story on here before. When I was 16 or 17, the place I was working got robbed. The guy just opened the register while I was fixing part of the greenhouse building. The police showed up and took my statement, in which I said I didn't hear a car, so I assume he just ran off. They took me in about two weeks later for an official statement. Then told me I had to take a polygraph because my stories didn't m…
Did you take the polygraph?
Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional
#177"It's unconstitutional and illegal, but you're not being held accountable and you can still use the data." Yeah that tracks.
It is not reasonable to hold someone accountable for doing something illegal in 2020 that was only determined to be illegal in 2025. The police officers applied to a judge for a warrant. The judge gave them the warrant. Now another judge says that the warrant should not have been issued in the first place. How is that the police's fault? How would you hold them accountable?
If a warrant is later found unconstitutional, that means it was always legally invalid, not newly illegal in 2025.
Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional
#178Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
They all get paid from my pay check. They work for the government. Level doesn’t matter. They protect their own.
> Level doesn’t matter This level of civic and legal ignorance is a large part of why our country is in the mess that it is.
Yes, thank you. It is my fault. Glad someone is calling it out!
Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really we should be punishing the judge who approved it in the first place. A judge that violates the rights of the people shouldn't be allowed to be a judge.
There is obviously a line between what is and is not a permissible search somewhere and it's virtually inevitable that judicial rulings will from time to time err on both sides of that line (and they do). Punishing judges for ruling in ways which are later overturned would destroy rule of law at a fundamental level.
The Rule of Law is already being broken by a judge saying the law doesn't matter when it is convenient to getting a conviction, meanwhile for normal citizens ignorance of the law is not a defense.