What does the police wanting to arrest the right person have to do with the urgency standard? Whether the case is at all time sensitive or not there is still going to be the risk of arresting the wrong person. If they had arrested the wrong person, the damage would have been the same regardless of when they did it.
CS:. Enabling crazy April frist tricks since 1996.
Something is wrong here, but I can’t put my finger on it…
This is the second comics that I visited today which is doing April Fools stuff. Awesome!
.ƚƨ1 ɘʜƚ no ob oƚ ƚnuƚƨ ɿɘvɒɘlɔ yɿɒv A !ǫniƚiɿw-ɿoɿɿim ɘʜƚ bɘyoႱnɘ yllɒɘɿ I yɒƨ oƚ ƚƨuႱ
I almost didn’t get this, because I was reading in a mirror.
Wouldn’t “no time to lose” mean something like the emergency exceptions in the Search and Seizure chaper, where you need to identify the perp right now because there is an immediate danger to everyone else? “Get the memory while it’s still fresh” doesn’t seem like enough justification.
Oh, and happy All Fools Day!
Yeah, if Pi’s reasoning holds up, then there requirements become effectively toothless because EVERY situation would be an emergency under those standards. I suspect the argument is being made so it can be smacked down (pedagogy!)
Also, Pi continues her streak of unabashed nerd-ery. Nice watch!
But do we want prosecutors with Imperial sympathies?
˙ǝuop llǝM ˙ʇᴉ ǝʞᴉl I ˙ǝɔᴉu ʎɹǝʌ ‘sǝʎ ɥO
Good thing that I’m dyslexic and don’t really worry about which direction everything goes…
If not wanting the memory to be any less fresh qualifies as urgency, then having showups “widely condemned” is irrelevant, because the witnesses memory is always getting less fresh, and the showup is always faster, no?