There’s no reason to blindly believe every report of crime. In this case there probably wasn’t sufficient evidence on the victim’s side that any crime had happened.
They charged him without any evidence. They were harrassing an activist. It wasn't incompetence.
[Edit: the article didn't say they charged him; I was wrong]
Well, that's how it looks to me, on the basis of a single report in a tech journal with a sort-of tabloid outlook. Maybe there will be more information in coming days.
A British term, means formally charged with an offence. Police compile evidence and/or arrest a person. If the Police think there is enough of a case, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decide if there is enough evidence to support a 'charge'
There is no reason to take the guy into custard for downloading a file, he didn't do anything violent, and should be allowed to stay home as long as he cooperates with the investigation.
Cooperative people accused of non-violent crimes should NEVER be taken into custody until proven guilty in a court with fair trial.
>Cooperative people accused of non-violent crimes should NEVER be taken into custody until proven guilty in a court with fair trial.
Uh, so if someone set fire to a bunch of homes in a neighborhood, and there's video of them doing it, but they did it knowing the homes were empty, they should just be left free until the trial is over? I'm sorry but I feel like a lot of online comments on criminal justice are very shortsighted
A quick google search indicates arson is considered a violent crime in the US even though it is a property crime. I assume because of the high potential of injury or death. I do however agree with you that there are some property or financial crimes in which arresting a suspect would be warranted, especially if they had incentive to flee or intimidate potential witnesses.
Financial crimes, no. Holding them hostage isn't useful or productive. As long as they are cooperative with investigation, let them be until a verdict is reached.
It's too easy for governments to accuse people on a whim of financial "crimes" that aren't really crimes. That sets a very bad precedent for misuse of power. Next thing you know they'll be randomly arresting people from their bedroom for suspected tax evasion instead of auditing them. Not good for those who did follow the rules.
There are real crimes, yes, but there is too much grey area and there is no danger to people or property to let financial crime suspects be at home.