this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
180 points (98.9% liked)

World News

32682 readers
1406 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] SpicyAnt@mander.xyz 12 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I have seen this repeated multiple times on Lemmy. When I look this up, I find:

So, the charges are dismissed with prejudice, the DEA agent imprisoned for corruption, the alleged victim testifies in his favor. What makes the other narrative compelling? I see people citing the court document in which the claims were made..... But what is the value of that document if the result was a dismissal with prejudice? Shouldn't that support the innocence narrative?

I am genuinely curious. I'm not necessarily advocating his innocence, I want to understand what other people know that makes them so convinced that he is guilty of this.

[โ€“] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 9 points 5 hours ago

Just to note, charges dismissed with prejudice means that the prosecution can't correct the errors and re-file the case. It's usually done when the judge has pretty compelling evidence that the charges are garbage, or there's really egregious prosecutorial misconduct.