• heartSagan5@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 hours ago

    On the subject of Flock…

    These are “autonomous deputies?” But uh, where is every single warrant for every plate they catch on a car? The plate may be public property, but the vehicle is not. Sure, maybe a bank has a lien due to a loan, but it’s still private property. This is some serious 4th Amendment violation because I have seen 0 warrant for any of these unwarranted searches.

    • KingGimpicus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      They dont need a warrant for a plate that is visible from public. If your car was locked up in a garage, that would be a different story. Taking your car out in public is the same as taking your face out in public legally speaking.

    • heartSagan5@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Also, these cameras are subject to angular resolution. The “AI” is hallucinating if it “sees every plate” because some are blurry nonsense, even to a human.

      • Haley@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Nah, destroying those mass surveillance cameras is a public duty. One I don’t have the cojones to do, but a public duty nonetheless.

  • COASTER1921@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I imagine all cases prosecuted for destruction of networked Flock and Axios cameras are going to struggle to get through a jury. It’s a clear privacy violation and everyone knows it.

    • blargh513@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      15 hours ago

      While you are right, there are almost no laws in the US that protect privacy. Short of being in your own home with the blinds down, there is next to nothing working in your favor. The assumption is that you’re in “public” or clear view of the public, thusly, screw you.

      Your pool? Clear view from the road. That douchenozzle with a drone, probably not breaking the law when he takes a video flying over. “Oh, I was looking at my own roof” or some bullshit.

      There should be privacy laws. The world has changed so much, but most laws are stuck in the stone age and now sold to the highest bidder who actively monetizes the complete lack of privacy laws.

      In the US, you can look up TONS of details about anyone’s house. From the sale price, the tax history, tons of details about it and even photos of the inside. In what normal world does that make sense?! Your employer sells your salary data to ADP who then sells it to any number of others. What the actual fuck?! Nobody asked for this, it’s opt-out only but the opt out expires. I did it a few years ago, and it’s back on again.

      If privacy were not important, then there should not be bathroom doors.

      • KingGimpicus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        There are plenty of privacy laws, but the catch is that you have to make an effort to create privacy. Putting your blinds down creates privacy. Building a roof over your pool and walls around your yard create privacy. There is just no expectation of privacy in public, and technically anything that can be seen from public is “in plain view”. Protecting your privacy is not a function of the state unless you had an expectation of privacy through explicit disclaimer or honest effort.

      • LordCrom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        But if you are in public and i follow you nonstop, keeping track of where and when you go…well you would say i was stalking you. Why is it bad for me but ok for a network of cameras.

        We need 1 good lawyer to argue this case.

        • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Companies are trying to prevent people switching jobs to get raises by creating a central database of all employees and their salaries. That way, when you try to find a new job they can pull up your salary history and not accidentally give you a 40% bump when your desperation factor clearly shows you’ll settle for 10%.

          I assume adp is just one of those companies doing this, and you opt out by not participating in the economy.

  • Space_Cowboy92@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    16 hours ago

    FlockHopper is a great way to see where they’re going up around you. You know, for avoiding them and NOTHING ELSE.

  • boaratio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    20 hours ago

    I looked online, and I’m kind of disappointed that there aren’t any nearby where I live. I want to do my part!

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      20 hours ago

      That case is way too political. Common sense has gone out of the window there.

      Every time they ever move him around every cop in the area always seems to need to be involved. It’s not like he’s accused of slaughtering an entire precinct with nothing but his bare hands or anything, supposedly he shot one person with a gun that he obviously no longer has. I’m really not sure why they treat him as Hannibal lecter.

      • deliriousdreams@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        19 hours ago

        To convince the public he’s guilty. It’s one of the ways they skew the narrative.

        Remember in the movie “SWAT” where that monster guy who entered the country illegal to kill the one guy and then offered money to get him out? That’s Hollywood doing their part to put the idea in our minds that this kind of thing is warranted.

        People do want to help Luigi and that scares the shit out of them too. They expected people’s moral compass to make them side with the CEO he shot. But that’s not what happened. The general public is very much pro Luigi.

        • irish_link@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          16 hours ago

          The comic of all the insurance claims denied and labeling it “legal murder” does a good job explaining why the moral compass is with Luigi. Everyone knows a friend or friend of a friend who has been denied a claim that could help.

      • SpookyBogMonster@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        20 hours ago

        I’m really not sure why they treat him as Hannibal lecter

        Because he has the audacity to kill a capitalist, instead of a fellow poor

    • nkat2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Good point. If I’m not mistaken, court juries can still pass a jury nullification for Luigi Mangione, right?

  • culprit@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    251
    ·
    1 day ago

    Jury Nullification is like the secret code of the US justice system.That’s why most of the people that work for the system absolutely despised the whole idea.

      • culprit@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Basically a jury can legally decide to nullify by declaring “not guilty” regardless of the facts or the judge’s instructions, etc. This is why even mentioning jury nullification during a trial can really upset the judge and the prosecution. It is supposed to be something every jury is aware of, but that is usually not actually the case.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

    • TeaWithDani@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      In a sense, its the system functioning as it should. If you have a healthy democratic society with good principals, juries should acquit people for things that may be crimes but are perfectly reasonable and justified.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 day ago

      Though this happened with the grand jury, which only needs a majority vote (sometimes a supermajority). It means a lot of people chose to nullify or didn’t trust the prosecution to give a fair trial.

    • Jake Farm@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      The us justice system is already fucked up and makes a joke of the term justice.

      • greyscale@lemmy.grey.ooo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        22 hours ago

        I mean, if it wasn’t packaged up in the American flag and pax americana, your nations actions would be that of clearly terrorist nation.

        I don’t expect the taliban to have a working legal/justice system either.

      • NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        18 hours ago

        This is really true. Pick a blog, video, or what ever lawyer you want making comment on the state of the federal justice system right now. It’s a mess and a shit show.

          • NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            12 hours ago

            It is so much worse now. Look at the former career employees that abandoned ship. Or the current head prosecutor.

            It is so much worse.

        • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          17 hours ago

          The 5-4 and Strict Scrutiny podcasts are fucking infuriating to listen to. The hypocrisy and self contradiction in Supreme Court and some circuit court decisions is insane.

      • bedwyr@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Common Law is better than codified law. That’s the only reason we have juries and don’t just let judges decide the fate of the accused. Can you imagine, in this country, judges the sole decider of your case?

        The reason that the UK and US have had such cuntish law enforcement is not because of english common law. It should be noted the UK cancelled some of common law’s basic tenants, like the right to a jury trial, not only afforded to indictable offenses, any crime with less than 3 years imprisonment is decided by their famously haughty aristocratic judges now.

        • Zagorath@quokk.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Jury vs judge trial is a separate axis from common law vs civil law. You can have common law (where decisions of higher courts are deemed binding on lower courts) even if lower courts are all judge-only trials. You can have trials decided by a jury where every decision made by a judge is ultimately answerable only to written statute, with prior judicial judgments being at best persuasive.

          • bedwyr@piefed.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 day ago

            Yeah, first the Tories maybe 5-7 years back or so cancelled juries for crimes with less than 1 year imprisonment, then Starmer’s labour party just upped it to all crimes less than 3 years.

            In the late 19th century they also passed a law where if they thought jury tampering was going to happen they could just do it with a judge, idk how often they have used it though.

      • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        They would have to get rid of juries altogether.

        Given that our current legal system was created as a direct reaction to star chambers and baked into the constitution, they have an uphill climb, at the least.

        • AmyAye@nord.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          21 hours ago

          They don’t care about the constitution man.

          Trump will do an executive order, it’ll get tonthe Supreme.Cpurt, and they will just kneelnon it for “time to think about it.” And that will be it, its “the law” now.

          • arrow74@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            18 hours ago

            Why do people keep pretending the Supreme Court always agrees with Trump. They’ve struck him down often and seem to be taking a very strict constitutionalist view. Most recent example would be the whole birthright citizenship ruling.

            Obviously this court is terrible for many reasons, they gutted the voting rights act and ended Roe. But they’re not getting rid of juries their record is clear there

          • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            The Supreme Court isn’t going to curb its own power for Trump. Even with three of them permanently hanging off his dick, they’ve shut down literally everything he’s done that could affect them personally.

      • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        they will give him a secret trial, or disappear to one of thier concentration camps in the south, which would mostly be texas, and the msms will never ever report on a citizen getting detained, at least not a white one.

  • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    1 day ago

    That whole “a good prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich” was when you could pull your jurors out of a citizen pool that didn’t walk in already believing you were lying through your fucking teeth.

    But then they pulled the mask off, and let us all see how they are using the courts for vindictive prosecution and political harassment.

    Looks like the ham sammich days are ending, lol.

    • bedwyr@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I just heard about a prosecutor that didn’t get all of his indictments and then sent the jurors that voted against him home and replaced them. That and other stuff, they aren’t even pretending to follow the rules, they think everything is more openly corrupt than it is yet.

      But anyway, the courts threw out like 200 indictments because this prick prosecutor didn’t think he had to follow the rules/didn’t know or care what the rules were.

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 day ago

        The Department of Justice has been doing stuff like that a lot since the Trump administration, to the point that they lost presumption of regularity (the assumption in advance that state actors are being honest and following the rules in good faith). There were so many prosecutions that were clearly directed by the White House and were vindictive persecutions of political enemies that the judges just stopped believing anyone from DoJ.

        It didn’t help that all the honest prosecutors in DoJ resigned when they were ordered to do something unlawful, resulting in massive brain drain. All the rehires are unskilled if not incompetent, and sometimes they issue legal statements that sound like a Truth Social post.

      • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 day ago

        Holy shit. That’s some arrogance right there, thinking no one would ever know or find out. Grand juries are secret, but they’re not THAT secret.

        they think everything is more openly corrupt than it is yet.

        You nailed it.

        • SolSerkonos@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          15 hours ago

          IIRC that instance was so egregious the lawyer that did it’s boss intervened and scrapped the entire grand jury to start over.

        • bedwyr@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          I called this decline into insanity and fascism back in the mid 90s. Also nailed global warming in 2000 or so, and called the nsa’s bullshit years before snowden to name a few.

          I am only right on the bad predictions, my good predictions are a shitshow.

          • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            You should bet on stuff you don’t like. Then if you win it’s like an insurance payout. Your prediction skills will make money for you, and you might create incentives for other people to reduce bad things.

          • nobodysreadingthis@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            I didn’t get it that far back. I blame Pokémon. Except global warming. I was just kind of raised with it as a fact.

            • HubertManne@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 hours ago

              whats funny is I help found an environmental group in college and did a lot of recycling things and it took the gore movie for it to get on my radar.

                • HubertManne@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 hours ago

                  yeah I keep imagining how different things would be if we had 8 years of gore instead of bush in the first 8 years of the millenium. we got screwed on that hanging chad.