• BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    96
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Did you read WHY it was dismissed?

    It was due to the actions of the police and prosecutor withholding evidence improperly.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      55
      ·
      4 months ago

      Even if true, that’s no reason to dismiss with prejudice.

      • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        61
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        If you bring a case against someone in bad faith, you shouldn’t be able to prosecute it again when you get caught. Otherwise there’s no consequence for the state when they don’t play by the rules.

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          35
          ·
          4 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
            ·
            4 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
              ·
              4 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
                ·
                4 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
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Only because the judge chose to dismiss with prejudice.

                  • LengAwaits@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    10
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    4 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
            ·
            4 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
              4 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
                ·
                4 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
              ·
              4 months ago

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

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Yes, I’m very much in favor of those protections if acquitted. Usually, dismissal with prejudice is for whatever the “vexatious litigant” equivalent is for public criminal prosecution. Where there is misconduct on behalf of the prosecutor, the case should be retried fairly.