No one misuses the tags for posts like tumblr users do. We really said "yeah we know how it's done we're just not gonna do that"
@midnight-revelation caught one
Objection! Your Honour, I move to have those tags stricken from the record as they are unduly prejudical (read: I've been caught red-handed), and pursuant to the Mutuals Communications Privilege procedure‚ @3amthoughts-stuff ‚ being a mutual‚ cannot disclose my tags to the court (Tumblr.com). The jury (Tumblr users) must be instructed to disregard me being exposed.
*gaval bang* OVERRULED
@midnight-revelation are you or are you not one of the user who puts said award winning stories in tags?
Following advice from counsel, I am invoking my fifth amendment right against self incrimination
Very well but this does mean it's now up to the jury to decide whether or not this is adverse inference
In that case, Your Honour, I make a motion for a mistrial on the basis of there being an inherent lack of corpus delicti with respect to the perpetration of writing award winning stories in tags. And thus, the prosecution has failed to meet the burden of proof necessary to show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that I was the one responsible for the stories in the tags.
While it is true an image can be doctored, that cannot be said for this said screenshot. However, if its more evidence you need. Shall we go onto your blog? And view for ourselves your very own tags...
If that's not good enough we can refer to your followers and mutuals alike - those who have agreed - for their statements
Objection on the grounds of violation of legal precedent.
The Supreme Court ruled in Mapp v. The State of Ohio that the 4th and 14th Constitutional Amendments protect U.S. citizens from having illegally seized evidence used against them in the court of law. Even with probable cause, unless you know exactly what you are looking for on my blog— something more specific than just “your tags”— a probative search would simply be a fishing expedition looking for incriminating evidence, which is in direct violation of my 4th Amendment rights, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, web logs, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, which shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall be issued, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or specific things to be seized. Without a more specific request and actual evidence showing that there is, in fact, incriminating tagging present on my blog, this objection has to be sustained. Unless, you're gunning for a mistrial so we can pack it up early...
And as for the statements of my followers and mutuals. You cannot present them OR any tags you may have possibly found by searching my blog, because that is a Brady Violation and is also grounds for a mistrial. During the discovery phase of this trial (the first reblog), you made zero mention of said aforementioned statements from my followers, nor did you make mention of potential tags on my blog other than the alleged “screenshot.” There was no Brady Disclosure of any other evidence, exculpatory or otherwise, other than the lone screenshot which still has yet to be verified as originating from me.
With that all being said, if it pleases the court, I move for the dismissal of this case on grounds of insufficient evidence.
Not so fast...
Attempting to use the 4th ammendment in your favour implies that your so-called "blog" is for strictly private purposes when it is clearly open for the public and not just exclusive to your followers and/or mutuals. And legally speaking anyone who's witnessed your "tags" and refuses to speak is seen as a spoliation of evidence, this will heavily affect them resulting in serious legal consequences I'm sure they'd want to avoid. The specific "tags" being looked for is the aforementioned "award winning tags" are tags others who are inside and outside your mutual/follower circle who have acknowledged it and brought to the public eye in the form of a reblogged screenshot of said tag.
Furthermore, stating that it is fishing for incriminating evidence is nulled considering your own blog being an open source. Your bio also doesn't state anywhere that it's for private use of any kind. And as for your Brady Disclosure...
Mr @midnight-revelation do you remember a previous post consisting of an image of a mother duck with her baby ducks all jumping off from a high place only to be caught by a person who gently set them down? Your tag about the post was captured and reblogged for more people to see and since you did not state that it wasn't to be posted, it's then assumed it could be public. And since this post wasn't searched for but actually by chance a random post on a public dashboard it avoids the Brady Disclosure and "fishing for evidence" and can be used in court as more evidence as well
What say you?
Yes, uh. Permission to approach, Your Honour...
I'd like to call a 25 minute recess.....
Very well.
We shall have a 25 minute recess after which we shall proceed with a final verdict
Your Honour, after googling the list of countries that do not have an extradition treaty with the United States and cross-referencing those places against the list of countries that have lifted their Pandemic Flight Restrictions (and against the amount of money in my bank account), I would like to change my plea of not guilty and enter a new plea of nolo contendre. I humbly throw myself at the mercy of the court and hope that when it comes to sentencing, the court takes into account that the stories I allegedly published in my tags were, in fact, award winning.
Very well.
Jury, given the evidence shown in court today, how do you find this blogger?
"we jury find the defendant guilty of award winning blogs"
Bring in the Dancing Lobsters
Your Honourable @3amthoughtsdemon, I move that you find this juror in contempt of court.
They're not totally wrong however unless to speak a verdict, the juror is to remain silent.
B A R R E D
No dancing lobster for you, juror
