I’d say if you gave false testimony in your previous case and it was shown that you did this, then I think that your credibility could be questioned in a court of law. However, I would say that cops shouldn’t execute you for shoplifting and use your previous incarceration as justification for your murder.
15 Likes
It depends on what the crime was you served time for, wouldn’t you agree? If you committed perjury for lying about a murder, then you wouldn’t be too credible. If you were jailed for civil disobedience, you would more credible.
17 Likes
Yes I would 100% agree.
Yeah, that was my point. That is wrong, full stop.
Saying a witness is not credible in a fraud case due to having an obscenity charge on their record is also wrong.
This particular witness is not credible, for reasons other than her criminal record; but the existence thereof certainly doesn’t help.
15 Likes
Just the liquid. Right?
oh yeah, she is a crack pot for sure. not arguing that point.
1 Like
I think there’s a lot of conflating going on. IANAL, so hopefully I’m not contributing to that. Starting with your unarmed black man with a history of smoking pot. Previous crimes shouldn’t be brought up during the trial—only in sentencing. In my limited experience prosecutors try (and sometimes “accidentally”) to slip those things in but they’re negotiated over with the defense and judge. I think a lot of people here would agree the current sentencing process isn’t great.
Here we’re talking about a witness. Jailhouse snitches (is there a better term for these people?) are notoriously untrustworthy because of bad incentives. Often in a criminal organization, the best witnesses come with baggage. So history and character come up, but it’s a precarious subject.
This isn’t a courtroom, but I do appreciate trying to be better about how we discuss things.
3 Likes
Computer crime laws are often badly written and over-broad, drafted and sponsored as they are by politicians who often don’t understand technology at all. That doesn’t mean that they don’t sometimes legitimately catch people using computers to commit actual crimes.
Without the details, it’s hard to reach a judgment at the moment, even if her current role as an eager “witness” for a grifter’s case and her seeming willingness to take the stand while hammered indicates that she has a shady and unreliable character.
12 Likes
Don’t give them oxygen please.
9 Likes
Meth-inks too many drugs mixed with alcohol will have that effect.
1 Like
If the crime you committed directly spoke to your credibility.
Most forms of computer crime involve some form of fraud and deception. The original obscenity end of it indicates something involving sexualized media, that end of the computer crimes encompasses things like childporn, revenge porn and blackmail.
I’m sure we’ll get some info on what exact acts she was charged over soon enough. But unless it was something like accidentally coming across bestiality porn while browsing 8kun for Q-anon purposes it sounds like the exact sort of thing that means “not-credible”.
the fact that you brought up race here is just … odd. police are killing americans who are black and brown in disproportionate numbers because of pre-conceptions about race, not actual criminality.
so there’s no correlation at all between this situation and your hypothetical. ( not a single person is questioning her veracity because she’s white. )
other people have already pointed this out to you, but it just should go without saying there’s no comparison here. and it’s just… exceedingly worrisome your comparison framed that way at all.
10 Likes
So she was propositioning teenagers online or something?
Doing something online which rises to the level of conviction on obscenity charges requires a lot of effort. Usually something to do with minors and something sexual.
Trump’s other star witnesses, Jesse Morgan, has a YouTube channel chronicling his troubles with a ghost that has been following his family.
FYI that video was removed or changed so that the link just takes you to his testimony and leaves people like me puzzled about the whole ghost thing.
1 Like
Eventually, we’ll learn more about what the obscenity charges were about. I’m sure there’s a good story there.
The first thought I had was how she spells her name with 2 ll and 2 ss - but then swiftly realized this was her parent’s crime…
Not necessarily; people can legally change their names.
4 Likes
Or she was photoshopping the faces of folks she didn’t like into porn and posting it maliciously, then extorting them for $ to remove it. Stuff like that is quite popular in Chan culture.
3 Likes
I’ve enjoyed watching Kate McKinnon’s new SNL character as much as the next person but one does need to stop linking to the Daily Heil.
9 Likes
It’s particularly gross because Carone is involved in a massive effort to discount and invalidate the votes of non-whites (and women). To the benefit of a man who has celebrated police murders as well as promised and instigated more of them.
Obscenity is a weird one, and it’s a very hard charge to make because it’s such a vague, bad statute.
But from what I understand an obscenity charge requires some public display, act or media/depiction be involved.
Propositioning a minor would probably fall under various charges involving enticing a minor to a sexual act, sexual exploitation of a minor, or trafficking statutes around enticing a minor to cross jurisdictions for sexual purposes. That sort of thing.
There’s more specific things that apply in these situations. And even for the stuff where obscenity might apply, it’s avoided. It’s easier to make a specific case than deal with obscenity.
Just to make it less creepy that I know this. I know a lot of people in victims advocacy and legal angles dealing with the exploitation of children, human trafficking, and online ends of it.
I’m not sure why anyone would risk using an obscenity charge given that it’s unreliable. I could see either using a scary charge to pressure some one into pleading to the more appropriate charge. Or it being something really weird where it was the only thing that fit.
The obscenity thing probably means it was sexual in nature, possibly scatological or involving depictions of death. And the computer crime charge means it happened online to some extent.
Best case scenario (assuming it’s valid) I could see harassing some one online with pictures of dead animals being charged this way. But in that charges around harassment, threats and stalking probably apply and carry larger penalties.
There have been attempts to go after hate speech, especially Holocaust Denial along these lines. Under the argument that publishing (or throwing at people) images of Nazi atrocities with intent to provoke is inherently obscene.
So there’s a number of things that it could be. But some of those things are a bit more likely. (It’s the dirty ones).
2 Likes
