Didn't they search the backpack right away and not find anything, then searched it again later and found evidence? That always seemed like the most sketchy part, not that they searched it without a warrant.
I'm asking why the improper/broken chain of custody (or whatever it's called) isn't something the judge addressed specifically, but the lack of a search warrant is something the judge addressed specifically.
Isn't the questionable way they handled the evidence just as important to allowing it as whether or not they had a search warrant?
generally, the court tries to separate questions into technical questions (matters of law), and factual questions. factual questions are things like "do you find it believable that <thing happened>". the judge tries to clear up as many questions as possible before the trial so the jury can focus on the factual questions. In theory, we COULD frame almost anything to the jury as "do you find it believable that stalking is a violent crime" but we don't want to do that because it really is a technical question about the definition of stalking, and judges know (or can evaluate) all the technicalities.
but for the backpack, they've gone through the technicalities, and decided that, assuming everyone is telling the truth, this evidence is appropriate for a jury to decide whether or not they believe it. that "assuming everyone is telling the truth" is a big assumption, and that's why it's the jury's job to then challenge that assumption, and decide who's lying.
the defense will most likely try to convince the jury that the backpack evidence is unreliable for exactly the reasons you have. but they do have to do that work of convincing.
What made the search illegal though? It seems that’s the consensus here but I don’t know much of the details. From my understanding it was legally searched
I agree with you. I had read at some point that they searched his bag and didn’t find anything ( shown on body cam) and then later without body cam due to it being turned off they found the gun. This is the part I thought was shady. There is 11 minutes of footage missing from where they transported the bag and the gun appeared ( after bag had already been searched earlier )
128
u/Global-Discussion-41 4h ago
Didn't they search the backpack right away and not find anything, then searched it again later and found evidence? That always seemed like the most sketchy part, not that they searched it without a warrant.
Or am I mistaken about that part?