News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Probably not a good thing.
IANAL, but that's surprising to me. He wasn't read his rights at the time, and there were chain of custory issues
Any lawyers know if it's common for evidence to be allowed in situations like with Luigi?
Some lawyers made a video explaining that if the evidence was likely to have been found in a legal search anyways, it can usually still be admitted. I also ANAL
Doesn't that kind of go directly against the purpose of lawful searches?
It would be expected that he would be read his rights and the bag searched in due course. It wasn’t like they looked in a random person’s bag then decided to arrest him.
If the purpose of lawful searches is to prevent police from harassing just anyone on the off-chance, that purpose is still intact here.
The issue is that a key piece of evidence that should have been a very obvious find at first glance wasn't found at the scene, but only later after the officer had stopped searching the bag and driven to the police station.
You would need to produce reasonable suspicion of tampering with the evidence to have it removed as evidence. Some random local cops in buttfuck nowhere wouldn't need to frame the murder of a New York private healthcare CEO on some schmuck, and there is other related evidence from Luigi's computer and banking records which help legitimize the evidence in the bag.
I thought it was like Uno rules: if someone calls you out before you read them their Miranda Rights, you have to toss all your evidence...
It’s called “inevitable discovery” and is pretty normal.
Heh Anal
Ok, but why start by saying you like it in the butt?
That's a good question.
Curious! Hmmm...
IANAL, but, HINAL.
It’s pertinent information for any exchange.
Are you saying you don't like it in the butt?
You're assuming Bottom, he might be Top.
It depends. It gives the defense a chance to destroy their case in front of a jury.
They now get to show the jury the unlawful search, the turned off body cam during the search, and the broken chain of evidence.
That sounds like reasonable doubt to me.
Pretty sure the files used to print the gun mod are on Luigi's computer, and the cash was probably from his own accounts. We will see, though.
Well that is bullshit, but gives good grounds for an appeal later
It's funny seeing people simultaneously say "these charges are bullshit" and also "jury nullification can free him" because the jury nullification bit acknowledges he would be found guilty with the evidence presented.
So i think it's accurate to say there are some real doubts he did it (eyebrows don't match) There are also some issues with the collection of evidence. Then you have a little bit of memeing.
There's a good chance that the evidence presented could convince a jury he did do it. But they still have the option to nullify.
Honestly I've haven't seen one person state both those views in the same comment. I think you should interpret what you're seeing as people having different opinions to arrive at the same outcome. That outcome being luigi going free
Those were definitely his ridiculous eyebrows lmfao don't lie
Disagree, this may blow your mind but we can draw different conclusions without either of us lying to the other.
Also truthfully I don't care if he did do it. He should go free either way
I think he should go to prison for life, unless proven reformed after a couple of decades. I say this for two reasons: He definitely did the crime, and his freedom is inconsequential to anybody else.