upvote
From reading more into the case, it seems the issue may be related to how her lawyer handled the case.

They probably did “identity challenge” arguing that she is not the right person. But from Tennessee’s perspective, she was considered the correct person to be arrested, so there was no “mistaken identity” in their system. In other words, North Dakota Wanted person x and here is person x.

Once a judge in North Dakota reviewed the full evidence (and found that person they issued warrant for arrest is not one they want), the case was dismissed.

reply
Yes but a judge issued the warrant in the first place.

Cops did not do a proper investigation and the judge green-lighted it.

It is all on the JUDGE or possibly a magistrate who approved a faulty warrant.

The judge failed the poor woman. FIRE him.

Then sue Clearview for big bucks.

reply
The judge likely issued the warrant based on the detective’s sworn testimony. In most cases, a judge does not have the ability or detailed knowledge to independently verify whether the detective completed all necessary checks.

This situation likely resulted from either sloppy investigative work or an honest mistake: the detective believed her booking photo matched the individual captured on camera.

Her booking photo from a prior arrest can be found here: https://mugshots.com/US-States/Tennessee/Carter-County-TN/An...

Do we have recording of the suspect they used for the match?

reply
There's a screenshot from a security camera with the _actual_ suspect in the article that was posted to HN last week.

https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/north-dakota/ai-error-...

reply
what's with the weird obsession all over the thread that it is the JUDGE who is the only person at fault here?
reply
Because the police or the prosecutor or whatever can ask for whatever they want, but it's up to the judge to refuse their stupid claims. Though the others should get some blame too.
reply
Especially considering the judge is the only person involved in this who is completely immune from being sued.
reply
deleted
reply
It’s the same poster, I assumed they were ai at first but the account is from 2017.

Some people are just weird

reply
[deleted]
reply
This isn’t how it works, you can invoke your right to a speedy trial at any point you want. You can spend 2 months waiting and then invoke it if you want.

The timer starts from when you invoke it, though.

The 2 issues, which she may be caught in, are that it’s “speedy” from the perspective of a court, and that it really means “free from undue delays”.

There is no general definition of a speedy trial, but I think the shortest period any state defines is a month (with some states considering several months to still be “speedy”).

A trial can still be speedy even past that window if the prosecution can make a case that they genuinely need more time (like waiting for lab tests to come back).

It’s basically only ever not speedy if the prosecution is just not doing anything.

reply
You get charged with something and if you want to have the trial right now, before you have any idea what's going on, then you can insist, which basically nobody does because it's pretty crazy to go in blind

Actually most criminal defense attorneys recommend not waiving your speedy trial rights. Yes, the defense goes in blind. But so does the prosecution, and they're the ones that have to make a case.

The usual result for defendants that don't waive their speedy trial rights is an acquittal if the case goes to trial (between 50-60%), which doesn't sound like a lot but prosecutors are expected to win >90% of their trials. Additionally, in many counties they don't have sufficient courtrooms to handle all the criminal trials within the speedy trial timeframe, so if the trial date comes and a courtroom is not available the case is dismissed with prejudice. Nonviolent misdeameanors are the lowest priority for a courtroom (and by that I mean even family law cases have priority over nonviolent misdos in most counties), so those cases are frequently dismissed a day or two before the trial date. Consequently, most prosecutors will offer better and better plea bargains as the trial date approaches.

This is even more true for murders, which is why murder suspects don't usually get charged for a year or two after the crime.

reply
Apparently I set up a unit test for Cunningham's Law today.
reply