Despite how many people like to characterize humans as especially aggressive & violent humans are actually one of the least violent* species around. We’re simply better at violence, not more violent.
*I’m excluding predators killing their prey, here
Despite how many people like to characterize humans as especially aggressive & violent humans are actually one of the least violent* species around. We’re simply better at violence, not more violent.
*I’m excluding predators killing their prey, here
On “Frasier” Martin (an ex-cop) says that he witnessed a shooting, arrested the perpetrator, and was in the middle of giving the Miranda warning when the guy broke free and needed to be subdued - resulting in him forgetting to complete the warning - and Martin states that this would have prevented conviction, when in fact it would have only (at worst) resulted in the loss of any confession - and since Martin witnessed the shooting, the loss of the confession would probably not have been a disaster for the prosecution.
That’s why, if you watch those true crime shows anyway, the prosecutor won’t seek an indictment strictly on DNA and tells the cops to go get more evidence. The DA wants to have as iron clad a case as possible before seeking an indictment and arrest.
Well one is a criminal trial and one is a civil matter. Most of the time in a criminal trial DNA will be circumstantial. Which is not a bad thing.
When I was in patrol I never gave anyone their rights. Reading Miranda warnings only has to happen prior to questioning. Most of the time after I would arrest someone I wouldn’t care about asking them anything beyond basic biographical information. If later a detective needed to question him then his rights would be read. If the guy wanted to confess while my car was recording it and there was no prompting from me, great. I was informed that in Great Britain that is not the case, they have to be read their rights as soon as they are arrested. In the US it is only before questioning when the individual is a suspect. The new 21 Jump St got this very wrong too.
Watching Law and Order, I see evidence get excluded at least once per episode.
I read that in reality, only a very small percentage of motions to exclude are granted. Like 2 to 3 percent.
A good enough hacker can just type something at a login screen and get access to any computer network, making the professionals who maintain said network look like idiots.
Children are amazingly good at everything, particularly things old people don’t understand, like computers. Remember Jurassic Park, when the 12 year old girl hacked into the system (which had been intentionally locked out by an expert) just by being precocious?
If you knee some guy, you’ll always hit them in the exact right spot to cause a hernia, no matter what your respective heights are or the angle etc etc.
And in real life, guys who are hit in the nads don’t get for a while. Then they get up very, very slowly and look for ice and advil.
Kudos to Officer and a Gentleman for a realistic treatment of a kick to the boys.
You missed the point. This is not so easy to do, certainly not as TV/movies make it seem.
“This is a UNIX system! I know this!”
Let me help with that rewrite:
“This is an SGI workstation running Fusion on IRIX with no pasword protection whatsoever! Due to the limitless budget of our elementary school combined with their curious strategy of teaching 6th graders to do their homework on state-of-the-art industry-specific machines running niche-market software on open-source operating systems, I know this!”
I’ve seen (and occasionally been the victim) of this enough times to say, yes, it’s quite easy to do. Certainly not so hard as to make it fit for this topic.
If you need a cite outside of my personal testimony, 22 years or so of America’s Funniest Home Videos should suffice.
To be fair, in Law and Order their evidence is usually really shitty.
Hating the show I can’t say for sure, but I got the impression that was mostly videos of people getting hit in the crotch by errantly thrown baseballs/etc, not someone coming up and giving them a knee to the groin.
Sorry, I remain skeptical. If you’re 5’6" and go up and knee a guy 6’4", you’re more likely to connect with his thigh than the family jewels. And probably pay a heavy price for the attempt.
Maybe my candidate should have been how everyone in the movies is about the same height…
In the latest Three Musketeers movie, the Cardinal suggests that the King should castle to get out of check.
This is not allowed in chess!
Also, airships.