Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by baddox | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

baddox

That is, presumably, something that the grand jury considered.

View on HN

maybe she had an attorney chosen by Uber?

She can choose her own attorney.

but did she...maybe Uber said.. here, take this free attorney

Its unethical for a lawyer to do things not in their client's best interests, and even if Uber is paying for the lawyer, their client is who they are representing.

And _surely_ Uber would never do or encourage anything unethical.

Oh, right...

Ethics violations are a big deal for attorneys, if a complaint is sustained against them with the bar association, they can loose their ability to practice law.

In theory, yes. In practice an attorney has to be intelligent enough to recognize the conflict of interest, and many of them aren't.

mmm yeah with their expert witness that can make up stuff on the spot

lets just acknowledge inefficiencies in the system

So you’re positing that the expert witness committed perjury and that Uber secretly told the driver that it was okay for her not to pay attention to what the car was doing?

Miscarriage of justice possible, perjury not necessarily.

I don't even know if an expert witness was there, thats how grand juries work.

And that a corporation didn't tell a full truth and threw an "maybe employee" under the bus? Not really that much to "posit".

Ironically also trending on HN at time of writing: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24488350

I thought it was very interesting that the police chief came out immediately blaming the pedestrian and saying the crash was unavoidable.

When I saw the dashcam footage, I just thought to myself, I probably would have avoided that, had I been driving.

I've watched my own dashcam footage before and people on the periphery come out less visible than in reality because the headlights blow out the video - the camera has less dynamic range than our eyes.

I acknowledge inefficiencies in the system but I also suspect that grand juries usually consider the most basic relevant facts of the case.

Grand juries consider the local laws as worded and the instructions they are given by the state which can be plain wrong, it is inherently imbalanced and is a common area of review when looking at miscarriages of justice.

Also trending on HN today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24488350

Reply on news.ycombinator.com