You said: “So what does this do for the validity of the case...? ... The roots of the tree may be poisoned, but the fruit was not.”
The “tree” refers to the good faith legal actions of the prosecutor, and not to the person making the allegations. The prosecutor investigated the complaint in good faith and obtained a properly executed warrant, based on what she understood to be true at the time. She did nothing illegal. The fact that the complainant lied does not change the legality of the search.
Common examples of “poisoned trees” would be warrantless searches, or searches based on a warrant which was procured as the result of a prosecutor who knowingly lied to the judge.
The “tree” refers to the good faith legal actions of the prosecutor, and not to the person making the allegations. The prosecutor investigated the complaint in good faith and obtained a properly executed warrant, based on what she understood to be true at the time. She did nothing illegal. The fact that the complainant lied does not change the legality of the search.
Common examples of “poisoned trees” would be warrantless searches, or searches based on a warrant which was procured as the result of a prosecutor who knowingly lied to the judge.
I have tried and tried to explain that to several of the FLDS supporters here and it just seems beyond their ability to understand, that and the difference between criminal and civil.
Good Job!