So it wasn’t an assassination attempt after all.

  • santa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Cannon is a compromised judge. Everything she does in an official capacity is draped in subjectivity.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    this is stupid. I will agree the government has a right to keep things classified but they should be required to drop all charges to do so. Keeping the secrets should mean letting the accused go free.

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      It depends on what secrets are being kept. Here, I would guess that the accused is asking for information relating to secret service deployments, surveillance, and other information on how he was discovered. That information would be useful to future assassins, but doesn’t serve to mitigate his actions or exonerate him.

      Just because the accused asks a question with a classified answer does not mean the accused should go free.

      • HubertManne@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        I mean that does seem relevant to his case if it specifically on what they were doing in realtion to him. I think the idea future assassins would be able to use it to make assasinations easier to be a bit much. They likely could get things like that from books of retired people.

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

          These hearings were specifically for determining whether the information the defendant is requesting is exculpatory, or if the requests are specious.and irrelevant. If the judge had ruled the opposite way, the government would have to decide whether to declassify the information, or drop some or all of the charges.

          It is very likely that if they chose to declassify and publish the information, they would be able to prosecute many additional charges. They have to balance the value of charging every crime committed against the cost of revealing operational information.

    • brendansimms@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      I will agree the government has a right to keep things classified

      Can you explain why you think this? I’m not trying to argue or anything, just interested in others reasoning. For context: I am contemplating the contradictions of a government “of, for and by the people”, is funded by the people, and that is allowed to withhold information from those same people.

      • ikidd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        Say there are analysts/agents preventing cyber-warfare by other countries. Their personal information and methods need to be kept secret to continue being effective when charging foreigners that commit espionage or damaging attacks against domestic targets.

      • HubertManne@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Maybe right is to strong a term as that word should only be used for humans. More that its reasonable that some things need to be classified. Military capability comes to mind as a lot of money can be saved by it not being known how extensive capabilities are.

        • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Well in the end the judge decides if it is related to the case. And the article also said they can withhold info that relates to the case if it doesn’t help the defendant. And again the judge decides. So if the judge was objective this would work. But that particular judges has shown not to be. Yet just because she isn’t completely objective, doesn’t mean he didn’t ask for stuff that wouldn’t help him. In short, I don’t think they should have to spill everything requested, but I don’t really trust them to be a fair judge of what should be released.

  • notsure@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    2 days ago

    …holy fuck, what does it take for people to say, “just becaue you’re rich doesn’t mean you’re immune”…fuck, fuck fuck