Laut ICE gingen wichtige Beweise im Missbrauchsfall einen Tag nach der Klage bei einem „Systemabsturz“ verloren

    https://www.404media.co/ice-says-critical-evidence-in-broadview-abuse-case-was-lost-in-system-crash-a-day-after-it-was-sued/

    Share.

    25 Kommentare

    1. Any judge will instruct any jury to assume the worst case scenario for the evidence. Assume it is the brick thrown through the window of the house that broke the camel’s back, with a signed confession taped to the brick.

      That’s just stupid. Also, fuck ICE, GOP, and Trump especially.

    2. Pleasant_Expert_1990 on

      Wow the system crashed and the results look like the standard DoD seven pass wipe on a hard drive but it was really a random event ….

    3. Funny thing is that those who work with computers know that computers crashing do not delete videos.

    4. smurfalidocious on

      If the government can’t provide the evidence that should be an immediate ruling against the government.

    5. Like the time Citadel Securities was being looked into and then the warehouse where they stored a ton of documents caught fire while all of the fire prevention systems failed simultaneously.

    6. that’s cool. They are required by law to retain these records, so just bring the I.T. managers up on charges and see how quickly the story changes.

    7. _Dammitman_ on

      I would be willing to bet that system crashes a lot! Matter of fact it stays crashed more than it operates.

    8. psycho_candy0 on

      Thats okay. Failure to maintain ESI (electronically stored information) just means that a judge may instruct a jury to assume the destroyed evidence would have been unfavorable to the party that failed to preserve it. I mean if nothing else, the failure of the administration to effectively preserve evidence is grounds for sanctions.

    9. Ask the IT guy to testify to that and see what he says.

      Because I bet they’ll have a different answer.

    10. This doesn’t exonerate them. It just means they have „less“ proof they could use to show they didn’t abuse.

      Now I get it. Destroy evidence so it can’t be used against you. But they are also defending meaning it’s their burden to prove innocence. The outcome with it without the evidence should be the same. There just won’t be actual footage of the abuse.

    Leave A Reply