Wait, isn’t this pretty similar to how the very-obvious rapist Bill Cosby ultimately got off? That strategy… that actually might work, even without jury nullification.
Also I just gotta say… NYC Mayor and “hair and makeup” in the same sentence made me laugh. I know that’s a technical term but, c’mon.
Not quite. The prosecution fucked that up by offering him immunity in exchange for testimony. Under that agreement, Cosby never should have even seen the inside of a jail cell. They absolutely should have not made that deal, but the integrity of the justice system (if such a concept exists) demanded that Cosby be released.
If they can somehow prove that the arrest or search was illegal, that’s a huge deal and will get a ton of evidence tossed or even the whole trial nullified.
If they can somehow prove that the arrest or search was illegal, that’s a huge deal and will get a ton of evidence tossed or even the whole trial nullified.
I can nearly guarantee you that one of the courts, whether the current court or a later appellant court, will weasel their way to saying that the evidence being used would have been found anyway (the second exception), and thus won’t get thrown out even if they admit to the search being illegal.
Wait, isn’t this pretty similar to how the very-obvious rapist Bill Cosby ultimately got off? That strategy… that actually might work, even without jury nullification.
Also I just gotta say… NYC Mayor and “hair and makeup” in the same sentence made me laugh. I know that’s a technical term but, c’mon.
Not quite. The prosecution fucked that up by offering him immunity in exchange for testimony. Under that agreement, Cosby never should have even seen the inside of a jail cell. They absolutely should have not made that deal, but the integrity of the justice system (if such a concept exists) demanded that Cosby be released.
If they can somehow prove that the arrest or search was illegal, that’s a huge deal and will get a ton of evidence tossed or even the whole trial nullified.
I can nearly guarantee you that one of the courts, whether the current court or a later appellant court, will weasel their way to saying that the evidence being used would have been found anyway (the second exception), and thus won’t get thrown out even if they admit to the search being illegal.