lbarnes at san.rr.com
Tue Jul 10 14:04:31 PDT 2001
John Oliver wrote:
> Lan Barnes wrote:
> > mmarion at miguelito.org wrote:
> > >
> > > Ah.. but when the evidence shows that they're guilty beyond the shadow of a
> > > doubt.. but then the evidence is diallowed due to a technicality that really
> > > has nothing to do with it's credibility (like a typo on a warrant, etc) it's
> > > not really the same thing.
> > >
> > Cite a case where a murderer went free because of a typo on a warrant.
> > This "people getting off on technicalities" stuff is mostly urban legend.
> > Evidence that is the product of illegal searches, on the other hand, needs
> > to be excluded, or none of us are safe from the zeal of the police.
> There is a certain amount of discretion a judge has to decide how
> "material" a technicality may be. Evidence obtained during an illegal
> search may be admitted if it can be shown that it would have been
> obtained anyway by legal means. A defense attorney can bring up a
> misspelling on a warrant, and the judge can decide if it's just a
> misspelling or if it's something that may have led to improper action
> (similar names, transposed address digits that could have resulted in
> the wrong house being searched, etc.)
What you say is true (Good JohnO came out, and Bad JohnO stayed home ;)
But neither yoy nor Mike have cited a case where a murderer went free
because of a typo on a warrant.
Lan Barnes lbarnes at san.rr.com
Icon Consulting, Inc 858-273-6677
It's not easy being green.
- Kermit the Frog
- Kermit the Protocol
More information about the KPLUG-Kooler