Cop 2: So uh … What do we do with the fluffy?
Cop 1:
1 Like
I hope the double entendre was intentional
2 Likes
Except fluffies are far from objective. There is more than one reason why, for example, child witnesses are considered problematic, & were such a large part of witchcraft trials. & those reasons would be even more relevant for fluffies, especially as they are not considered legal entities of their own.
Which leads to situations were someone will “know” a crime happened, through fluffy sources, but will not be able to use that as anything but negligible evidence in court. Cue motivation for vigilantism that people seem to be so enamoured of.
1 Like
Which one?
They can still be used to get search warrants. That’s enough to get a case rolling.
In that case, it is far too easy to get a search warrant 
Only if sketties are used to force a false confession.
1 Like
There are more forceful options available in the case of fluffies. The classic Greek & Roman custom of torturing an accused citizens slave first, to establish guilt, comes to mind 
1 Like
Pretty sure they just disposed of vital evidence but why bring reason to this retarded shit
2 Likes
Well, if the evidence is not permissible in court, it might be the for the best. The important thing is that they have a lead in their investigation.
2 Likes
I love the fluffy’s face in the first panel. Just amazing
3 Likes
Parawehw Cunstwutuhn
They’ll just use it as an excuse for how they found the other evidence without explaining the illegal means that they used to even know to look.
2 Likes