Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I really don't get any of this.

These lawyers and courts are no more privileged to secret data from the NSA, the military, or any of the other classified source today, then they were 1 year ago, 10 years ago, etc.



"The laws of evidence require that prosecutors turn over to the defense any records they have that might help prove a suspect's innocence."

In other words, they were entitled to them 10 years ago, but now that they know they exist they can actually request them.


Those courts and prosecutors have no access to classified datastores of the NSA.

That data is classified and protected by law.

What you are quoting is completely something else, and just references the data the prosecutors have on hand that is gathered and developed as part of the investigation.


> That data is classified and protected by law.

The defense team doesn't need the data, they only need to show that the government has data that it's withholding.

> What you are quoting is completely something else, and just references the data the prosecutors have on hand that is gathered and developed as part of the investigation.

IANAL, but Solove is arguably the nation's top privacy law expert (along with Jeffrey Rosen, who is a professor at the same university) so I'm assuming he knows his stuff.


The data is classified and protected by law, yes, but there are other equally (or more important) laws that say the government is required to hand over all potentially exculpatory evidence to the defendant.

Which law trumps? That's for the courts to decide.


Can't why to see Scalia argue as to why the government needs to put to death people it knows are innocent.


The clever tactic here is that it may not matter if they gain access to the records or not. That's less important than it seems. All they have to do is plant a seed of doubt in the jurors.

That's the step that's going to make this all rather crazy. I could claim my classified phone records put me on the other side of the country, whether it's true or false. It'll still create that doubt, and the gov't will deny the records exist either way.


Only the executive branch is entitled to this data, right?


You have a point. However, the game has changed. Defense attorneys will allege that reasonable doubt could be shown if only they could present as evidence the NSA data most people believe exists. Juries will more likely find for the defendant, then. Or the prosecutors will claim the opposite. The turmoil in courtrooms will fuel a groundswell of support for declassifying the NSA data.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: