That spastic has been stinking up the Dabbleverse for years. He's right up there with Vince the Lawyer as far as serial trolls go.
I agree, but to be fair to them this is probably the only exciting court case to ever happen in Spicer, Minnesota that carries outside interest, so I'm not surprised they don't have controls in place.
Courts are, foundationally, public events in the US. The spectacle of a public court is far preferable to the rampant abuse that arises when courts are private.
Sorry, you'll have to forgive my ignorance of how Freedom™ works.
Most jurisdictions in the US simply took more than zero time to understand how the program works, having an admin mute all the callers outright and unmute callers as they’re requested by the courts. So while I’m critical of these outbursts because it potentially harms the flow of content, I’m not sympathetic in the least to the court because this could have been resolved by doing anything other than nothing at all.
I get that, but i'm interested in theoretical. What would happen in a similar situation where the warrant IS faulty, but one of the parties fails to file the motion to suppress? Can they use the argument that the warrant has been tossed in a separate case later in the trial? Or during the appeal?
Not really. Only if they want to talk. There's absolutely no excuse for just letting random retards start screaming and sperging and making animal noises.
tech literacy is contaious & key word no one cares because it court until like animous says happen.
needs to happen or tech support help.
It is not binding precedent because they are separate parties that didn't have the opportunity to litigate the issue before, but the judge may simply use the same reasoning to come to the same conclusion. The other attorney would want to come up with a new argument, especially when it's the same judge.
It's not an issue of precedent. But it's the same Judge being asked to rule on the exact same matter. That he just denied a few weeks ago. He's just going to cut and paste artfully from his prior ruling. There's nothing in any of this that's going to change his mind regarding the validity of a well documented and briefed warrant.
All you have to do is mute observers. If you disrupt court proceedings in person, you get thrown out. Muting observers makes it almost impossible for them to disrupt proceedings.
It appears Ian Hawk is also the retard who disrupted Nick's initial court appearance, per this tweet:
This makes me wonder how much he was buying from the dealer each time. I'm guessing he would've started out small and gradually increased as the habit took over for them.
Because Nick's plug was a distance away, Nick had to be sure to buy in amounts that saved him continual travel. No dealer wants an asshole who buys a gram, and then 2 hours later, wants to meet up, all twitchy, to buy another. No one wants to attract that type of attention.
