- fallon ash. Rant of the day. : comments.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
||
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24 |
25
|
26
|
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
nothing to see here
So I suppose in terms of an investigation it would be helpful - but it would be pretty flimsly evidence in court.
SVU used to be pretty good on their evidence law - I still say my awesome mark for evidence was because I watched so much L & O. :)
nothing to see here
I think what really bothers me is that they never say 'possibly'. They always state with utter certainty that 'IT IS LIKE THIS'. I think the quote went "Who wears their watch on the right wrist? Left-handed people do." I would have been so much more ok with it if they said 'left-handed people might', or something like that. It's all well and good to use any evidence you have, but to treat them like facts when they're merely possibilities annoys the hell out of me. It feels like just another 'look at us how clever we are, we know everything'.
('Alleged/potential/possible' are som of my favourite words. My favourite high school English teacher would instantly fail essays if they claimed facts without proper grounds to do so. I grew up wanting to be like her. :P )
nothing to see here
Wearing a watch on the right hand sounds like grounds for bringing them in for questioning to determine first if they are left-handed, but not arrest them for murder.
Ha ha! You can get an arrest warrant for looking at someone funny over here! Seriously!
Okay, that's harsh. But JPs (justices of the peace - non-legally qualified mostly) can give out search warrants in the state of western australia (can't speak for the other states) so the ol' watch on the left arm things isn't a stretch at all.
The state of New York might be different. Crazy as it sounds, police powers in New York probably aren't as exstensive as they are over here. That pesky bill of rights just gets in the way... But it can be quite a personal thing from judge to judge and can depend a lot on how the cops present the evidence (i do recommendations for environmental notices that are based on similar standards of proof and it's quite interesting how different investigators - who are mostly ex-cops - will present different arguments).
Still, I'm with you. If it had been me issuing a warrant, I would have been highly skeptical and would have said, "so what else have you got?"
nothing to see here
Anyway, dude, so interesting to hear about how it actually works somewhere. I'll admit that I really shouldn't be going on about how they get warrants because I know nothing about it. I've learned it all from crime shows where the lawyers keep going 'no, you need more, you'll never get a judge to sign a warrant based on that flimsy piece of evidence'. I should learn not to do that, but regardless of how much I complain about inaccuracies, there's still a part of me that watches the procedurals and assumes that reality works something like that.