this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2026
478 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

85870 readers
3728 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

The President doing illegal things has no bearing on the admissibility of evidence.

The judge decides what is allowed to be used at trial. If the prosecution ignore the judge and presents it anyway then the judge rules the case a mistrial. If the judge allows it then the court of appeal would overturn the ruling.

This doesn't stop them from illegally obtaining the evidence, but it provides the ruling that prevents it from being used at trial.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world -3 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Are you actually saying that there are no corrupt judges in Trump's pocket? If so, you are truly thinking innocently.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Are you asking for help understating what I wrote? Or do you think that sarcastically attacking strawmen of your own creation is an argument?

Corrupt judges and bad decisions are why courts of appeal exist. These courts use multiple judges chosen at random specifically to prevent the kind of collusive behaviour that you're implying.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world -1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Are you asking me to explain why things are not always hunky dory? Just like the mob, people can be sniffed or snuffed out and blackmailed. Corruption will never be prevented when it comes to the higher ups in charge.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, if the world were a John Grisham novel, some nefarious group could blackmail multiple judges across all levels of the appellate provesd, rig the system to ensure they're all assigned the case (by blackmailing the clerk of clurt) in order to ensure that they would have a chance to show illegally obtained location evidence to the jury, all 12 of whom are also blackmailed (why not?) to prove a person's phone was at a specific location.

Do you have any other fantasy scenarios that need co-signing?

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world -1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

What kind of evidence are you talking about here? I am talking about one simple judge. How else do you think Epstein got away with shit for so long??

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 3 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I'm talking about the location evidence that is the topic of the Supreme Court ruling linked in the OP of this thread where you're crafting your bad faith arguments.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world -1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

It seems we just had a misunderstanding, I was talking about Trump's evidence. We should start over, lol. Too much Hennessy.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Lol

I argue in multiple tabs and sometimes get them mixed up as well. 🫡

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago

Yea, I done fucked up again lol.