this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2026
496 points (96.3% liked)
Technology
80916 readers
3555 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Doesn't mean they can't use it for parallel construction
Does Dutch/EU law have that?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
It's not a law but a practice that cops do in order to use dubiously acquired evidence to build a case against someone.
Yes but that doesn't answer the question of whether it's an accepted practice in the EU. I'm also not so sure it isn't somehow codified into law, in the US there's precedents supporting it but IDK about other countries.
The point is that it skirts the law. You can't really make it illegal because it is a way of subverting legality. If they legally obtain the evidence then it's legally obtained. If they happened to get to that point through extra-legal means that doesn't really matter, as long as the end result is legal. Maybe you could argue in court that they only got there because of extra-legal actions, but they can argue the opposite. If this helps them look in the right spot for illegal actions, who's to say that them looking there couldn't have happened purely by chance?
You really can make it illegal if there's the political will to do so, but it's a hot potato, so the likelihood of of the practice being formally reigned in is unlikely. You make fruit of the poisonous tree absolute and create laws that make illegal search or seizure kill investigations without the possibility of future charges for a given criminal act.
Obviously that would also have practical drawbacks as well, but it is certainly legally possible.
It basically means dodging legal restrictions on investigation by using illegal (or at least inadmissible) means to obtain evidence, and once the police have it, they look for legal ways to get that same information.
So everywhere "has it", the question is whether they use it. I don't know if there's reason to believe that EU police forces use such methods more or less than their US counterparts.
I know what it is, but that doesn't mean it's an accepted practice in the EU. I don;t really know much about how their law works, which is why I asked about it.
It's not an acceptable practice anywhere, but it happens all the time
It definitely is a legally acceptable practice in the US, but I can't speak to other countries.