Fruit of the poison tree is a legal standard, evidence gathered illegally can’t be admissible as actual evidence and any decisions made on the basis of that evidence have to be overturned and re-tried. In the strict interpretation of the standard that would include evidence used as probable cause for a warrant. Such as the open-ended warrant the Bush Administration and the Blair Administration wrote for themselves to search Iraq for alleged WMDs. The evidence was manufactured and so flimsy in its essence that it wouldn’t possibly stand any kind of judicial scrutiny. Like the “bloody glove” from the OJ Simpson case. While the LA Defective Detective, Mark Furman, who introduced it as evidence has never admitted it as such, the demonstration of OJ putting his massive paw into the glove and it ripping shows that it WAS faked. The explanation Det. Alibi Ike offered, “leather shrinks when it’s wet” isn’t true either. Leather stretches when it’s wet, and returns to its original size when it’s dried. Anybody who has made traditional snowshoes knows that. Stone Age logic defeats Techno Age illogic brilliantly.
Fruit of the poison tree comes in because evidence obtained illegally is automatically suspect and rightly so. A police officer who has a grudge against black men who have money, for instance, and believes that all black men are inherently dangerous and violent, gives himself a motive to introduce fake evidence in court and has the means to do so. The potential for abuse is so great that such evidence is tainted from the beginning and is so close to an absolute wrong that the probability of it being faked has to be considered with more weight than any possibility of it not being faked.
Anecdotal evidence on the level of “he said-she said” is more accurate, more amenable to deductive logic.
The prosecutor in the OJ case was seeking the death of one person.
The prosecution in the “case” against the nation of Iraq not only sought the deaths of, but actively promoted and caused the deaths of, Thousands, hundreds of thousands and probably more than a million human beings. Based on obviously faked evidence. Those who demand a long recount of each detail that demonstrates how faked the evidence was, how flawed the data were, take on the distinct aroma of stalling. The evidence has been counted and recounted for 8 years
It’s been proven as thoroughly as the “theory” of Gravity and the “theory” of Relativity.
Stalling for time only re-introduces the Garbage In data, and will produce data which is Garbage Out. It allows for more GIGO factors, like the “fighting for freedom” falsehood to be introduced as though it were fact. When a computer data analysis program consistently puts forth flawed results, the code and the data entered is examined until the flawed data, the Garbage In, are identified, isolated and removed from further consideration. It’s the only way to eliminate Garbage Out data.
Building case for further war based not only on the flawed data which were already proven wrong, but fresh Garbage In such as “well, we have to finish it with a victory for our side because we started it”, the only accurate part of that data chain is the notion that they actually did start it. The rest of it is pure Garbage In and will only result in Garbage Out.
Take out the “therefore we must win it” part and you start to place the data analysis back on a factual basis.
Pick out each such incidence of Garbage In and discard it. The “he said-she said” anecdotal evidence, because it can be readily dissected, points to the weak points, the “markers” inherent in flawed data. Especially when the “he said” part directly contradicts earlier instances of “he said”. Detective Furman had earlier made remarks that he considered black men to be dangerous and inherently criminal. first instance of “he said”. The new instance of “he said” in the trial, that he didn’t make any decisions based on the race of the suspect, is so remarkably different from the earlier instance that the data are properly flagged for removal.
In analysis of crashed programs, suspicious code isn’t actually removed, it’s
##commented out, every line beginning
##with the comment is ignored by the program while it’s running.
##Thus if the flagged data aren’t what caused the crash they can
##be uncommented later.
##The debugger can be set with a few lines of code which
##automatically flag/unflag each “parent” process
##and each derivative “child” process from the code
##until the code runs smoothly.
##depending on the size of the code and the amount of the
##data, the analysis could take a few seconds or a few days.
The human “computer” processes data much faster, but with a greater chance of flawed data being entered, like the “Fighting for Freedom” or “the policeman is always right” dogma.
Meanwhile the destructive manipulation of such data is killing people daily.
