BluesFish
129042
602
42
Defendant didn't realize that his court hearing was being live-streamed, reveals that he's a confidential informant. While he's being held in custody.
Feb 6, 2025 10:53 PM
BluesFish
129042
602
42
Defendant didn't realize that his court hearing was being live-streamed, reveals that he's a confidential informant. While he's being held in custody.
volcabsol
They're gonna let this man get killed in gen pop.
cyberninjaru
The fact that the feds had a narc who is stupid enough to out himself speaks a lot about the feds.
theyallwenttoMexico
Link to YouTube short, https://www.youtube.com/shorts/qp8Mvb1re1k
bitemark
Good thing you decided to post it
zilla365
Let’s make it worse and post it on Imgur for points!!! Weeeee hoooooo!!!!
graceinsheepsclothing
My friend once had a run in with a CI and my friend would get revenge on that fuck if he outed himself on YouTube.
Wolfschwarzmond
Yet another reason all trials should be recorded 100% including sidebars/chambers, but gagged ordered until after the verdict. Yes we need>
Wolfschwarzmond
a 100% transparent justice system, but we don't need the uniformed public sticking their nose in until after its over. How many innocents>
rbudrick
That's not 100% transparent, then.
Wolfschwarzmond
Why not? If the entire record of the all actions are in plain public view after the fact, what's not transparent? Do you really think all the news coverage of a trial during the proceedings in anyway improves our justice system? Does building up the public fury for the purpose of higher ratings, help keep innocents out of jail, and convict the guilty? Does crucifying an innocent man on television lead to a better world?
rbudrick
After the fact is not 100% transparent by definition.
Wolfschwarzmond
have suffered after the court of public opinion decided they knew everything?
mohavewolfpup
Congratulations, you just covered for a kangaroo court
Wolfschwarzmond
Which would be appealed since post verdict 100% of the trial would be released. No turning off the camera, no whispered sidebars, no in chambers agreements, EVERYTHING comes out after the verdict. So no issues with jury contamination/tampering, no false public accusations, like Richard Jewel, just the facts after BLIND justice is done. I'd also go so far as to say ANY legal agreement made after a court case is filed is now public record, so no more sealed settlements against corporations.
Wolfschwarzmond
We get to see HOW the sausage was made AFTER its made. As opposed to now, when the judge can shut off the mics and cameras at will, and settlements are sealed. So if Company A is being sued for poisoning drinking water, we don't know how many times they've been sued for this, or how many times they've settled. It all would be PUBLIC RECORD after the fact, as opposed to now where the Defendant and DA/Plaintiff's counsel meet, agree to something, and no one knows anything
INeverReadTheTOS
Welp, they’re gonna have to fish him out REAL quick, before anyone else can get to him.
normalityimpaired
Depends on how useful he is. Just as likely to cut him loose and move on.
Snooj
"Yeah, sorry, you *were* a federal informant."
Cinnaderps
yeah posting this helps his chances of living. nice job op.
JimmyWalkerTexasRanger
eddbrowne
First words in a restricted call: "this session includes __ & __ & ...". If a video you can also maintain a visible list.
carbonar1
Why the fuck is something like this public? I'm fucking glad I live in a town stuck in the 80's in Australia. Fuck you cunts and your obliviousness to privacy.
carbonar1
Seriously... why am I witness to this shit. I want everyone to be safe and accepted. I want no wars. I want everyone to get along peacefully. I sound like my hippie Mum, but I'm beginning to think the less I know, the better.
rbudrick
That's one way to get out of a shitty job.
twisteddkarma
Ooooops, he ded
Bojovnik84
The one time we really do need to stop working remote and return to the office. Jesus man.
keyblader1985
I was about to say it might not be so bad depending on who sees the video... but damn; it's on YouTube.
WellWellWellLookWhoItIs
Well, if the video made it to here, it probably made it t much worse places for him.
thisistheusernamethatneverendss
It’s on Imgur too
MenloPart
Source?
loma45
/gallery/oops-tTIT8AY
16bitStarbuck
Thanks I was looking all over for it.
loma45
MrGrundySmash
GravyEducation
Enjoy your new life in Utah, sir. Start memorizing the new name now, you need to be able to respond to it like it's your own.
MenloPart
"Ugh, now when I say 'Hello Mr. thompson' and press down on your foot, you smile and nod." "No Problem" "Hello Mr. Thompson"
FoxyEllie
It's harder than it sounds, and I'm a trans woman!
tokenhooker
Lol, this comment is adorable
GravyEducation
You have the opposite problem of somebody in witness protection, if you use your *new* name people will want to hurt you. That started out as a dark joke and just turned into a dark observation. Hugs girl be safe
FoxyEllie
appreciated. It's definitely a concern, which is why my I mainly want to try and find remote work right now
donthaveonebrojustlurk
What do you do
FoxyEllie
I'm currently unemployed, but have self-taught skills in various forms of programming which I am *pretty* sure are good enough for employment, but I haven't yet assembled all that into a resume that sells me. Resume making is not among my skills :D
qhogan11337
He dead, damn he fucked up
AtleastIvegotthatgoingforme0
He used to be a confidential informant.
OhIfIMust
Someone's gonna be needn't a whole lotta snitches soon...
zafner
Did he?
They can't put him back in gen pop. That would kill him. So they have to sequester him somewhere. He can't provide any more Intel for them anyway because people would just lie to him. So he's getting into a much less crowded environment probably. I don't know if it's solitary confinement but it's not going to be gen pop
This is just a theory. Does anybody else have anything to contribute
LordFancypantsicus
You assume they will give a damn about his well being after he is no longer useful to them. They will not.
JustATemp123
If he's useless in a system that, at best, doesn't care about him, he's fucked.
slandr
Here in Canada we call it “pc” or “protected custody”.
Smaller block than general population.
They mix them in with the “mental health risk” crowd for somewhat closer monitoring, and for plausible deniability.
So you never really know if your roommate is schizophrenic/bipolar, or if they are genuine weirdos, unless they tell you.
KrondorMocker
zafner
Legitimate
cepacolusmaximus
I wish that's how it worked
HeresYourSauce
Maybe we shouldn't live stream stuff like this?
pak0chu
This is more VOD than livestream material for sure
marsilies
If it hadn't been a zoom call, it would've been in public court, and he could've still broadcast it. There's a public interest in making court proceedings public, so people can monitor and make sure it's all on the up-and-up. Remember that judge that got pissed an illegal, private meeting he had with a witness was leaked? https://www.billboard.com/pro/young-thug-trial-judge-denies-motion-step-down-secret-meeting/
carbonar1
Makes me fucking sick.
chiefrunswithscissors
And then also massive shouldn't spread it around on other platforms ensuring everybody knows?
BluesFish
First amendment; he just didn't know it was live-streaming. Technology is hard for him, apparently. Also, even in front of stenographers, prosecutors, and other court personnel, why would anyone say this out loud in a crowded room, virtual or not? You never know who knows who.
Kordj
Also maybe don't fucking post it?
brownribbon
Sixth amendment, not first amendment.
CoinedWatcher
Not to take it political, but didn't trump's trial just show that they don't HAVE to be aired for everyone to see? If they blasted that felons trial on TV like OJ or Clinton I feel there's a chance he would have lost.
wadatahmydamie
It was a concession made to the defense. I think the judge made the right call, and America obviously didn’t.
If it had been someone who wasn’t a vile garbage monster on trial, just broadcasting the evidence would have damaged their reputation.
Fascists often hide behind the law.
HeresYourSauce
We don't need to broadcast the cases live to satisfy the freedom of the press. I'd personally be very surprised and annoyed to find out any my zoom/discord/teams meetings were being live streamed.
Courts often need to talk about sensitive topics. They should have been better equipped to handle this one.
theduckening
It's double edged sword. It has served in some cases to show how bad a judge was, public being able to contact legal with additional information when there's been blatant lies being said in court or some bad guy managing to get away with almost no repercussions. That said, everyone should be informed that the case will be streamed or press will be present so that they may be properly counseled.
MichikoTheJungleFox
Trials are usually open to the public as far as I know. You can just go to one and witness what's going on and even share everything you heard. The press is often there and takes notes and often does report everything being said. The only rule in traditional courtrooms as far as I know is no pictures, probably to prevent distraction. So YouTube or not, he really shouldn't be saying stuff like that, since even if it were in-person, any witnesses in the courtroom would've heard it.
HeresYourSauce
That's more or less my understanding too. The press need access as a form of checks and balances.
For a remote trial there would still need to be press access. But that doesn't, and I don't think should, come in the form of a live stream.
Publishing a video after the fact, or allowing press/guests in the zoom call, or both, would allow for that. 1/2
HeresYourSauce
You are right he shouldn't be saying stuff like that. Online or in person he screwed up.
2/2