Hacker News Reader

In the context of Criminal Procedure and Rules of Evidence, the prosecution has to turn over all evidence (including mitigating evidence) in discovery and failure to do so means: a. It doesn’t exist, b. If it does the prosecution is risking mistrial; their career/disbarment; and over turning convictions going back in time.

View on HN

https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/01/09/dark-side/secret-origi...

You're not wrong, but you're also significantly overstating the risks to prosecutors. Prosecutors are rarely punished for misconduct. http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-lying-prosecutor...

Indeed it’s so common there’s an accepted term for burying your poison vine: parallel construction.

This. It has become the norm. I suppose that it's justified by outrage over the sorts of crime involved. But with SOD and Stingrays, we're talking about widespread subversion of federal agencies, state police and prosecutors, and probably at least some judges. It has indeed been a criminal conspiracy. Not that anyone will ever be prosecuted for it.

I don't know about the US but in the UK there has just been a major and sadly underreported scandal with police failing to disclose evidence to defence solicitors.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com