• she/her

41, queer trans furry trash, actual professional deer, perpetually tired // mostly 18+ but let’s say entirely 18+ to be safe


bsky
deergrace.bsky.social

makyo
@makyo

What a delightful read~ Particularly silly excerpts:


deergrace
@deergrace

What is fascinatingly kind of glossed over in this otherwise-punchy decision - but much is certainly implied by the Crown entirely declining to cross-examine (because in the assessment of counsel appearing, it would not serve the public interest to do so) and recommending acquittal - is exactly how and why, under the described circumstances, either of the two hybrid charges proceeded to trial at all. Police and the Crown deserve at least as much raking over the coals here as the asshole neighbour himself, but… 🤔


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @deergrace's post:

Huh. This is just a super rough guess, but an extremely persistent complainant who was competent enough to only send evidence that didn't completely crater his story until a trial date got set or something?

But yeah. It's. Holy hell, this happened in a province where the Crown has to approve charges, too.

Which I think is, like, a consequence flowing from the elaborate performance art of law? It's overwhelmingly rare that I ever see police or counsel decisions outside the courtroom really being factored into reported decisions. Almost as if the entire preparatory process is a black box which only becomes open to scrutiny when it directly bears on someone's legal rights.

And clearly, an acquittal after years of legal trouble is functionally identical to the charges never having been laid, Right™?