zlacker

>>tafda+(OP)
Curiously, the charge he pled guilty to as part of the plea deal has nothing to do with planes. He pled guilty to obstructing a federal investigation (of the crash). Makes sense. Proving his intent w.r.t. the crash back then would be harder than proving that he DID remove the wreck and subsequently destroyed it.

>>dmitry+63
I dunno. I believe the guy is guilty and should be punished for recklessness, etc. but I don’t like it when authorities rely on indirect charges to “get” someone.

Prove the original crime, don’t rely and peripheral procedure like “they lied to a federal agent” (uhh) cop-out. Do your job.

Likewise I’m not don’t of people getting off on “technicalities” (Some more than others)

>>mc32+04
People getting off on technicalities is one of the things that keeps police honest.

>>jkubic+I5
Why? Do police officers get fired or lose money when technicalities free criminals? If so, why couldn't we just keep that part and not release the criminals on the technicality?

>>ALittl+H6
If we didn't let people go on technicalities, then there'd be no consequence for the government violating people's rights in investigations.

>>joseph+R7
My point is that letting a criminal go isn't a consequence. Suppose a police officer, instead of waiting for a warrant that was going to be issued, barges into a suspect's home without a warrant and finds the evidence to convict the suspect.

The officer has done wrong (entering the home without the warrant) and should face some punishment for that. The threat of punishment deters the officer from acting without a warrant.

On the other hand, releasing the criminal, who is actually guilty, is not a real deterrent. What if the officer doesn't particularly care if the suspect gets arrested or not?

It's the threat of consequences to the particular individual that decide their actions - not the threat of conflicts with the purpose of their organization. Put another way, I bet fewer police officers would commit misconduct if the consequences were "you personally go to jail" as opposed to "a criminal is freed and your organization is supposed to do the opposite of that, don't you feel bad?"

>>ALittl+fa
The police are politically powerful and will simply not tolerate that level of accountability. It's hard enough to fire them when they commit outright murder.

Also, the entire institution of police/prosecutors/courts/judges need a disincentive against misconduct not just individuals. Otherwise they can just use a revolving door of disposable/sacrificial cops to violate rights and get convictions.

Allowing convictions to stand in spite of illegal investigation methods makes rules against those methods completely meaningless for defendants.