ZH version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
75% Positive
Analyzed from 872 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#police#https#law#jury#grand#more#camera#com#org#property

Discussion (18 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
Basically jury nullification
https://futurism.com/future-society/grand-jury-ohio-flock-al...
Whereas what you're thinking of is "we the jury think the defendant did, indeed, break the law. But we think the law sucks, so 'not guilty'."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification
It sounds like the police and district attorney [0] are playing fast and loose with the charges, blending issues of intent (to get a camera) and fact (not dealing much actual damage.)
[0] AFAICT this is Oviedo, Florida, part of Seminole County, so part of the 18th judicial circuit and therefore the prosecutor who approved these charges is William Scheiner.
In this case they might need to prove that the man did not know the camera was a decoy, otherwise it's just misdemeanor vandalism or less. Proving a negative in a criminal case is hard and when it's about a person's mental state it might be literally impossible. We'll see.
Next step would be for citizens to build profiles on their local police departments and law enforcement in general if the adversarial relationship continues, as law enforcement officers appear to be disproportionally predisposed to committing crimes. I have a thesis on why those attracted to these jobs are more likely to be criminals, but will save that for another thread. “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime." Put them under the microscope, like they wish to do to the public. The panopticon works both ways. Fundamentally, you have to build systems to make law enforcement allergic to treating their local citizens like this. They have forgotten who they are supposed to protect and serve. Remind them, while remaining firmly within the legal framework. Or, just take the ALPRs down. That is a choice. Eventually, supporters of ALPRs will be voted out, but it might take a while (election cycles).
The IJ Database of ALPR Abuse - https://ij.org/the-ij-database-of-alpr-abuse/ (173 incidents documented, as of this comment)
Resource spotlight: Data projects tracking police misconduct, use of force, and employment histories - https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2026/01/26/police_miscondu... - January 26th, 2026
Study finds police officers arrested 1,100 times per year, or 3 per day, nationwide - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/06/22... | https://archive.today/uS3yR - June 23rd, 2016
Police Integrity Lost: A Study of Law Enforcement Officers Arrested - https://web.archive.org/web/20260610154033/https://www.ojp.g...
(and lets not forget our forum favorite on the topic of police misconduct, the Marion County Record, with damages exceeding $4M for the police misconduct that occurred)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49281087
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45915211
This is a device that tracks, stalks, and investigates individuals without their consent. Additionally, these are contracts that were entered into and that are forced upon people. People's resistance to these have been punished aggressively. (From the video of the public council meetings I've seen).
In addition these devices are setup to enforce state laws outside of where the law is relivant at. (I.e. a woman has been tracked outside of the state to evaluate compliance with abortion law in texas).
To me this shows it's a breakdown of the agreement of law between the citizens and the government.
Resistance to legal police work should be punished severely.
That seems at-odds with the article's aside that:
> The operation is reminiscent of Amazon “package sting” operations that several police departments attempted several years ago, in which empty Amazon boxes were placed on people’s porches while police officers watched. Those sting operations resulted in zero known arrests.