Does anyone know how the courts rendered these verdicts?
Courts are supposed to be a level of protection.
If they can't show motivation, point to actual dates and quantities of money stolen, a bank account or purchase it showed up in, all the usual standards of evidence to make an actual criminal case...
...how does this progress from an accusation to beyond reasonable doubt?
Software is buggy. Since when does a court accept the uncorroborated report of software, without any other corroborating evidence, and sentence someone?
This boggles my mind, and seems to go against fundamental legal principles.
Is this going to result in some sort of legal reform? The root cause here isn't a software bug, it's a legal system bug.
Courts are supposed to be a level of protection.
If they can't show motivation, point to actual dates and quantities of money stolen, a bank account or purchase it showed up in, all the usual standards of evidence to make an actual criminal case...
...how does this progress from an accusation to beyond reasonable doubt?
Software is buggy. Since when does a court accept the uncorroborated report of software, without any other corroborating evidence, and sentence someone?
This boggles my mind, and seems to go against fundamental legal principles.
Is this going to result in some sort of legal reform? The root cause here isn't a software bug, it's a legal system bug.