It feels ridiculous to write about "subsequent remedial measures" in the context of impeachment but, well, these types of arguments are thrown out there in bad faith to give Trump supporters something to latch onto, so let's give it a whirl. /1 https://twitter.com/slpng_giants/status/1199554905192701953
He's just wrong. The "subsequent remedial measure" rule has a very narrow purpose: if a defendant fixes something after an accident, the fix can't be used to prove the defendant *admitted* they were negligent.

The fix can be use as evidence for many other purposes, though. /2
He's just wrong. The "subsequent remedial measure" rule has a very narrow purpose: if a defendant fixes something after an accident, the fix can't be used to prove the defendant *admitted* they were negligent.The fix can be use as evidence for many other purposes, though. /2
He's just wrong. The "subsequent remedial measure" rule has a very narrow purpose: if a defendant fixes something after an accident, the fix can't be used to prove the defendant *admitted* they were negligent.The fix can be use as evidence for many other purposes, though. /2
He's just wrong. The "subsequent remedial measure" rule has a very narrow purpose: if a defendant fixes something after an accident, the fix can't be used to prove the defendant *admitted* they were negligent.The fix can be use as evidence for many other purposes, though. /2
SRMs almost never come up in criminal cases. Here's a 2015 district court opinion discussing the issue in a criminal case involving a shipping company dumping oil into the water. As the court notes, even criminal cases that applied the rule found the evidence admissible. /3
SRMs almost never come up in criminal cases. Here's a 2015 district court opinion discussing the issue in a criminal case involving a shipping company dumping oil into the water. As the court notes, even criminal cases that applied the rule found the evidence admissible. /3
SRMs almost never come up in criminal cases. Here's a 2015 district court opinion discussing the issue in a criminal case involving a shipping company dumping oil into the water. As the court notes, even criminal cases that applied the rule found the evidence admissible. /3
SRMs almost never come up in criminal cases. Here's a 2015 district court opinion discussing the issue in a criminal case involving a shipping company dumping oil into the water. As the court notes, even criminal cases that applied the rule found the evidence admissible. /3
Like Popehat says, this isn't typical legal nonsense. It's a real legal concept that is being deliberately misused to confuse people. Don't trust people who abuse their expertise to make arguments like this, they are lying to you. /end https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1199532278117847040
You can follow @MaxKennerly.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
There are a lot of misconceptions about the Turkish diaspora in Germany. Since i just finished writing an essay about this topic I thought it's time to give other people
Read more
Las mejores calculadoras online en 2020A thread http://totumat.com/2020/11/26/las-mejores-calculadoras-online-en-2020/ Cuando se estudian asignaturas que requieren de cálculos complicados, nada mejor que contar con una buena calculadora.
Read more
Mitigating #ClimateChange is as much about taking up new techs as about leaving others behindMost studies focus on #coal's global downfall but another #energy tech decline is loomingRead my new
Read more