Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

350

How is this legal?

http://origin.bnn.ca/ghislaine-maxwell-s-fate-in-hands-of-home-health-aide-city-worker-jurors-1.1688603

What better way to let the jury know they are being watched?

How is this legal? http://origin.bnn.ca/ghislaine-maxwell-s-fate-in-hands-of-home-health-aide-city-worker-jurors-1.1688603 What better way to let the jury know they are being watched?

(post is archived)

[–] • 10 pts

The justice system can't handle a case like this. No way this case stays clean.

[–] • 1 pt

Just like my ass. Inevitably dirty.

[–] • 1 pt

It already isn't. The prosecutor is Comey's daughter, or some shit. The judge is a kike who was given a huge promotion right before the start of the trial.

[–] • 4 pts

The initial comment from their privacy policy; “At Bell, we value the trust you place in us when sharing your personal information. We make every effort to be transparent about what information we collect, why we collect it, what we do with it and with whom we might share it.”

I couldn’t find a way to comment or email a response to their story and tell them their privacy policy isn’t worth even one sheckle.

[–] • 3 pts

Even the Jury is going to be jews lol.

[–] • 4 pts

"Wait, so you are saying all the girls were goy?"

[–] • 3 pts

A man, 35, who graduated from college in 2008 with a finance degree and has been living in Manhattan for the past 10 years. He works as an executive assistant at a private company within the financial industry.

A wizard at coordinating dry cleaning and, boy, does he tie a double Windsor with the perfect dimple... Dubious heterosexuality.

[–] • 2 pts

Wow, that is way more specific than simply saying what line of work they are in. Sketchy AF.

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

It’s also an unnecessary amount of information. Almost as if having the information was the point of writing the article.

I’m probably just being paranoid, I hang out here too much I guess, but it feels like a threat.

[–] • 2 pts

No I don't think it's a paranoid thought. If I was on that jury having this out there would not make me comfortable at all. I don't see why this information needs to be released. Give the public the gender/age/race at most.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Another way to look at it is if you can't verify that the jury are real people, how do you know the whole thing isn't a setup? How do you know they're not bought and paid for? How do you know they're not FBI employees?

[–] • 0 pt

This isn't doxxing

[–] • 7 pts

Not exactly but if autists can find a flag from a video against a blue sky, this is enough information to dox them properly. Some of that is enough to suspect someone of being a juror if you knew one of those people.

[–] • 1 pt

Wouldn’t take much to suspect. If you work with someone that fits one of these descriptions and they’re suddenly missing from work for jury duty, you’ll know it’s them, and probably tell people.

[–] • 3 pts

Yes it is. This would not be tolerated in any other case. What it really achieves is to offer plausible deniability for how the details got out, so if some guy just happens to threaten the jurors he's not connected to the defence, he just read about them in the papers and recognised that one guy.

[–] • 1 pt

This.

Do we know each other?

[–] • 2 pts

Outside of here? I have no idea.

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

It is more than enough to start running ads to mindfuck them.

[–] • 1 pt

Releasing personal details in a public forum isn't doxing?

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

I would imagine the argument is whether or not this is enough information to find out who they are exactly.

And I don’t know the answer to that so I’m staying out of it.

But it’s clear the media knows who these people are to a great degree, might be watching their families, and could easily give that information to someone who needs it.

That’s not necessarily unusual but this does feel like a threat, letting the jurors know “we can get to your family.” Perhaps I’m just being paranoid but that is one way to interpret the media coming out with an article that strangely focuses on the personal lives of the jurors