drpvn

drpvn t1_j16v0kj wrote

It is different but why should the cop be allowed to lie? The lie that he’s not undercover may lead others to make incriminating statements that are later used against them in court, just as statements in an interrogation are.

Edit: just got a 14-day ban for my initial comment on this thread.

2

drpvn t1_j16t3qt wrote

Many years ago I had a super shady contractor walk off the job and demand more money to continue. He threatened me by saying he was married to a relative of Joe Crowley and that the Crowleys ran Queens and would make my life very difficult. I was so pissed off that I surreptitiously recorded him (love that one-party consent rule in NY) and spent the weekend drafting (1) a 50 page complaint that detailed everything he said and (2) a settlement agreement in which I agreed to let him out of the contract in exchange for not having to pay him $30k I owed him. I told him if he didn’t sign the agreement I’d file the complaint on Tuesday. He signed. And I also kept his tools. Asshole.

74

drpvn t1_j16oqkx wrote

A suspect in a burglary is being interrogated by police. He's waived his Miranda rights because he's very stupid. He denies any involvement in the burglary. The police tell him, look, buddy, the surveillance camera got you on tape as clear as day. Stop wasting everyone's time and confess and maybe this will go easier for you. The suspect confesses. But the police lied: there was no surveillance tape. Should the confession be tossed out because the police didn't tell the truth?

0

drpvn t1_j168con wrote

> Meanwhile, the early legal marijuana that’s harvested may not be what New Yorkers are used to getting from other legal states or the black market, especially in these early growing seasons. Most of what the Long Island farmer and others statewide have reared this year is biomass — plants that aren’t considered attractive enough or potent enough to be sold as smokable flower in the contemporary market.

😂

79

drpvn t1_j14p7zu wrote

I’m not a mind reader. My issue with honoring these five guys in particular—and there’s a gigantic difference between, on the one hand, apologizing to them on behalf of the city and state, paying them compensation, and condemning the miscarriage of justice that happened, and, on the other hand, honoring them—is that all the information I have strongly suggests that these guys were absolute pieces of shit, at least as teenagers.

What Trump voters think about this just doesn’t enter into my mind at all. Not every issue needs to be a fight among two warring factions for control over an overarching narrative. But that’s just me.

If Mark Wahlberg were unjustly convicted of rape and then exonerated, I would still think he was a piece of shit.

Taking a step back, though, this debate shouldn’t really be about these guys in particular. The gate doesn’t honor them specifically. It’s about people who have been exonerated. But it’s hard to separate them from the larger issue given that they always show up as the poster boys.

5