• disregardable@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    let us see them and decide ourselves if that conclusion is reasonable.

    Non-lawyers have zero capacity to do that, though. There’s a big difference between what any one person wants the law to be and what it actually is.

    • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m sure we can find few lawyers outside of DOJ.

      Besides, lawyers exist because courts have strict requirements regarding interpretation of a law in order to sentence someone.

      You don’t need to study law to be able to tell that somebody did something heinous or not.

      • disregardable@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        You don’t need to study law to be able to tell that somebody did something heinous or not.

        A lot of heinous things aren’t necessarily against the law. For example, there’s an email in the file from a law professor advising him on legally trafficking minors to states with lower ages of consent.

        • HasturInYellow@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Cool. Don’t care. In the wood chipper. As with anyone in the files. We can sift through the ashes afterwards to determine guilt.

        • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          A lot of heinous things aren’t necessarily against the law. For example, there’s an email in the file from a law professor that’s against the law.