• GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 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
      ·
      2 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
        ·
        2 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
          ·
          2 months ago

          Only because the judge chose to dismiss with prejudice.

          • LengAwaits@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 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.