• catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    35
    ·
    5 months ago

    True, but the mechanism for that should be consequences for the prosecutors themselves, not bypassing justice and absolving the accused.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      If it hadn’t been detected, a potentially innocent person goes to jail.

      (I’m aware someone died, but the case wasn’t over yet)

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        Right. They should resolve the issue with the evidence and retry the case fairly.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          The prosecution is an entity. They can’t bring the case again.

          • catloaf@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            5 months ago

            Only because the judge chose to dismiss with prejudice.

            • LengAwaits@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              The state government’s own prosecutor, and perhaps even law enforcement, have intentionally withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense. How do you perceive that the right move is to give them another chance to frame the defendant? Why would they want to hide evidence if they had a solid case? We’re literally talking about a conspiracy here, one tied to law enforcement and the state government. How do you figure that a fair trial can be held at this point?

              The prosecutor may very well be disbarred, here, and I would not be at all surprised if this withholding of evidence causes the armorer’s case to be overturned, as the evidence was relevant to (and withheld from) that case, while it was actively being tried. There will likely be civil lawsuits brought against the state over this.

              I am not a lawyer, and neither are you from what I can tell, so maybe it would be best to read what actual lawyers have to say about the matter before sharing your opinions. That’s what I did. Highly recommend.

    • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not that I agree with you, but what’s your idea of the prosecutor’s consequence? A fine? Firing? Disbarment?

      • Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Tbh, they should get disbarred as well. If playing dirty just turns into a stroke of luck for the accused and nothing more, it doesn’t really do much to stop the prosecution from doing it again. They get paid to play dirty and just move on to the next one when caught.

        • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Exactly where I was going with my question. There would need to be steep penalties for being caught trying to undermine the process. Even if they had made an honest mistake, I feel the individuals holding the power of a prosecutor should be expected to held to a higher standard, and therefore higher consequence.

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’m not familiar with how discipline for a prosecutor works, but I assume there is some process.