Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
I confused about how she has a case...
But earlier, it reads that she was sued by the RIAA and vindicated...
It doesn't say WHY she was vindicated...
If she was vindicated BECAUSE it was found that the RIAA used "illegal investigative practices", then the allegation wouldn't be an allegation...it would be a fact...There would already be court documents on it...
|
There are different levels of requirements for different angles of the case.
Evidence can be thrown out for breach of civil rights, but a later court action may find that the means of the civil rights breach was not egregious (or possibly not intended) enough to warrant a counter-suit.
(e.g. It could have been an honest mistake. If the police "invaded the privacy" of the wrong citizen due to a clerical error on a perfectly good warrant, the cops should be held blameless and not liable for a counter-suit.)
It's possible that the RIAA did involve in some illicit action, but it may not be "improper" enough to warrant awarding her money.
If the earlier case was voided and lost because of RIAA investigative practices, then I'm sure that will be helpful in the counter-suit.