rut roh

[Hypoxia]

https://claytoonz.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/cjones01272018.jpg?w=620

 

[OldJourno]

Discovery can be a bitch.

I'm no expert on this, but doesn't discovery work both ways?

 

[Hypoxia]

I'm no expert on this, but doesn't discovery work both ways?

No expert here either but it SEEMS like prosecution discovery looks for evidence of wrong-doing while defense discovery looks for exculpatory evidence of no wrong-doing, or lacking that, try to discredit the prosecution's evidence. That's tough because it means proving a negative. Try to prove Tromp ISN'T a crook. Rotsa ruck.

 

[richard_daily]

Claimant or defendant?

Defendant.

 

[Not Normal]

Get a large. This will be a long movie.

A horror film

 

[Liar]

I'm no expert on this, but doesn't discovery work both ways?

I've seen some crooning in the furthest wingnut twittersphere that this is gonna prove that the real Russia conspirators were the DNC, that Comey is a Democrat and that California don't exist. Also, from the same people, something about Seth Rich, Vince Foster and pizza. And probably Soros. Just because.

 

[HisArpy]

No expert here either but it SEEMS like prosecution discovery looks for evidence of wrong-doing while defense discovery looks for exculpatory evidence of no wrong-doing, or lacking that, try to discredit the prosecution's evidence. That's tough because it means proving a negative. Try to prove Tromp ISN'T a crook. Rotsa ruck.

It's a CIVIL suit, not a criminal prosecution. The standards are different and the discovery and litigation tools more abundant and useful.

For ex: Discovery works both ways. The DNC might have to provide access to it's servers so the RNC and WIKILEAKS experts can see who hacked it. While they're in there, they can look at ANYTHING for clues about whether it was an inside job.

Do you really think Wikileaks won't publish any sordid stuff they find on the server? There's bound to be LOT'S of interesting stuff on there. Like donor lists and contribution amounts. Potentially embarrassing or even shady things too. The courts can order Wikileaks to keep it mum, but remember, it's Wikileaks which doesn't care about stuff like that. Not that the DNC has a prayer of serving Assange with the suit anyway. Which is the only saving grace they have for keeping their private stuff private. Well, that and Bleachbit.

They're suing RUSSIA for heaven's sake. Good luck getting any discovery out of there. And, if the DNC does get stuff, good luck with the credibility and veracity of it.

Whoever thought of this crazy scheme needs to be locked up for the good of the planet.

 

[FGB]

I'm no expert on this, but doesn't discovery work both ways?

When one goes fishing one should remember that the fish hook cares not what it gets stuck in or whom...and a treble hook is downright dangerous.

 

[richard_daily]

When one goes fishing one should remember that the fish hook cares not what it gets stuck in or whom...and a treble hook is downright dangerous.

Trump knows this, painfully.

 

[HisArpy]

Trump knows this, painfully.

THIS is why this suit is such a stupid idea. Not a clue on how quickly things can go sideways in directions no one even thought of at the time because the mere thought that Trump might be involved shuts down their brain completely.

Wasn't it Donna Brazil who published a book saying that Hillary basically "owned" the DNC? Hmmm, I wonder if there's a possibility...? No, certainly not. WE KNOW Hillary is above reproach and ALWAYS kept her server secure. Yet, maybe she has physical files...

A discovery response of "the information requested doesn't exist because it was either lost or destroyed" isn't going to cut it. The mere fact that it was "lost or destroyed" is enough to cost the DNC this case.