• kungen@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Who knows, but are you assuming that the prosecutors are nonpartisan…? And I’m not an expert on US law, but I thought pre-trial stuff is kept as quiet as possible to not impact the jury selection process and such?

    • Narwhalrus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I’m not assuming that all the prosecutors are nonpartisan, but I am assuming that many people would have interacted with this evidence and either tricking all those people or keeping them quiet would be difficult. This is an instance where Occam’s Razor holds true and there most likely isn’t some insidious plot to release altered texts to push an agenda.

      I’m not an expert on US law either, but my intuition is that knowledge of these texts wouldn’t exclude anyone from Jury selection unless this evidence ended up not being usable in court?

    • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      it will be hard to choose a juror, that hasnt heard about Kirk recently, unless your a boomer/retiree or someone very naive that doesnt consume much media, thats how they choose the jurors.

    • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Ideally, but America is one of those stupid places that makes prosecutor an elected office, so they’re always keen to grandstand when the press is biting.