Random Esquire

The New York Times has added a new blog: Freakonomics. Dubner and Levitt write some very interesting pieces, not the least of which was Levitt’s entry entitled “If You Were a Terrorist, How Would You Attack?” Levitt was the same guy who postulated that legalizing abortion decreased the crime rate.

Pictures of odd sea dwelling creatures. Hmm. I think my second grade teacher looked a little like this lumpfish.

This artist, Phil Hansen, is pretty interesting. The video is worth the watch. Fascinating to see all the layers of paint he peeled off his stomach.

Some interesting ice cream flavors. Can anyone debunk some of these? Is anyone actually eating Fried Pork Rind Ice Cream? (number 74) Err, okay, just checked it out…apparently they are.

Refer businesses to Google and make $$.

The Sneeze is asking which breakfast cereal mascot you’d take on a road trip.

Nerd fight at Comic Con.

People eat lampreys?? If one of those sucked its mouth to me, I’d lose it.

I am a little ashamed to say that I have never read The Woman in White but this article has me convinced I should.

My apologies for the delay, here is the answer to your Tainted Fruit question:

Police suspect King Kong of stealing the radio antenna from the top of a skyscraper. They conduct an illegal search of Kong’s house, where they find a newspaper clipping about the theft of a shipment of bananas from the Havana Banana Company. They go away and investigate that crime and find evidence sufficient to arrest Kong, even though they’d had no reason to suspect him before the illegal search. At his trial, Kong claims the evidence used against him is “tainted fruit” of the illegal search and should be excluded. Is he correct?

Answer:   No.  When police discover evidence of an entirely unrelated crime as the independent result of their unlawful conduct, the new evidence will not be considered tainted as long as the police’s unlawful investigative intent did not “extend to the additional evidence.”  Here, the police has no idea of Kong’s involvement in the banana heist, and their unlawful intent in conducting the search did not extend to that crime.  Even though they may not have been led to Kong except for the unlawful search, the taint on the newspaper clipping will be considered purged, and it (and evidence derived from it) will be admissible.