I am bipolar and I was mad at my husband for being a complete jerk.My neighbor called the cops when she heard a loud tumble on my staircase and when the police officer showed up I told them that I was pregnant and that my husband had pushed me down the stairs and that i was pregnant.None of that was true so I had made a false statement. The false statement went to the superior court and I am supposed to testify that this stuff had happend to me tomorrow.I have a 2 year old son and my husband and I are currently seperated.Whats going to happen to me and am I going to loose my son?I made a false statement and it went to court..I have a 2 yr old son..am I going to loose him?
no, the two incidents are not related. Just like out right lying has nothing to do with bipolar.I made a false statement and it went to court..I have a 2 yr old son..am I going to loose him?
you could TRY to drop the charges, but if the state picked them up, you may have trouble doing that. if you weren't subpoenaed to be in court, you could try just not showing up, but they may just reschedule and THEN subpoena you for a later date.
Your best bet is to call the prosecuting attorney aside prior to getting into court so he/she won't be blindsided when you get on the stand...
depending upon the pros's case load, they may just say to heck with it and give you a lecture. if you've got one of those anal-pros's, then yeah, they could charge you with false statement, but that alone would not cause you to lose your child. besides, they would then have to PROVE you ';knowingly'; made a false statement while you were in your right mind....and that's IF the state atty's office wanted to spend the bucks to prosecute you.
Most likely, they'll just lecture you. most state atty's offices are overburdened with cases and don't bother doing anything. you'd be surprised to find out how often the pros finds out the vic lied b/c they were mad at the time of the incident and wanted some ';get back'; at the other party. so it's not like what you did is out of the norm--make sense?
just make sure you get to that atty BEFORE the trial begins. and that's IF you decide to go. b/c they can't prosecute the defendant without the witness/vic.
While you are gong ro loose your husband for sure, because you cant recant that kind of stuff. Courts got all tired of women having second thoughts about prosecuting husbands who DID beat them.
So your Husband IS GOING TO PRISON because you were upset.If you will screw up his life like that Why should the State allow you to raise another life ? Would you let YOU even babysit your kids?
I do not know if you are a believer or not but what do you think it means that you shall not bear false witness?
You know, I have been in jail a few times and guys sit around and talk about why they are there. I've heard the ';My wife said i hit her but i never did'; line and never bought it before.
You even tried to hide behind that bi-polar crap in your post. yes I think you are too sick to care for children.
That's really at the discretion of the judge. If he doesn't think you're mentally sound and fit to parent, then he might grant custody to your husband
You give a true abused woman a bad name since some cops will start to not believe a woman when she is truly abused.
you had better contact a lawyer..You know when you sign that statement you are under perjury,..Your best option would be to tell you judge you lied and why you lied.. And take the sentence you get.. If you go to jail ..your husband wont if he didnt do anything bad to you..So he will be able to watch the kid. Most likley if you fess up you will get a sentence of probation or somthing..BUT your BEST option is to just drop the charges.... I forgot that just untill know.. Just drop the charges
Friday, February 12, 2010
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Even Higher Courts do not take serious view of false affidavits submitted to affect judgements, Why?
In some writ petitions ,the respondents submit false statements even with affidavits under oath to distort the facts trying to mislead the courts to attempt miscarriage of justice to petitioners. Inspite of pointing out the falsehood of the statements made and that too under affidavit, the High Court does not take the matter as serious. What sort of justice can be expected from the court?Even Higher Courts do not take serious view of false affidavits submitted to affect judgements, Why?
I have faced this same problem. In my matter, I filed an Application u/S.340CrPC asking the Court to take action against my opponent for Perjury. I have cited Supreme Court judgments : Suo moto vs Karuppan and Arivandandam vs Satyapal, which specifically direct the lower courts to deal with perjury in a severe manner. Another good judgment to cite along with perjury applications is Chengalvaraya Naidu vs Jagannath - fraud on court. As mine is a Civil matter being a suit filed against me, I have also made an Application u/O.7 R.11 CPC for rejection of the plaint on these grounds. My applications are still pending; the previous judge was inclined to view it very seriously but then she got transferred and the present judge does not seem very interested but because he has to dispose of my Application, he grudgingly said he will hear it simultaneously with the main matter. Then he gave a very long date, probably to avoid having to apply his mind ! However, I will not let go and will take this up to the next level if I have to. I am sure that the Bombay High Court will take it seriously. I appear in person. Lawyers will never encourage clients to file perjury applications because most of them make false and misleading statements in affidavits prepared for their clients, as a matter of routine.Even Higher Courts do not take serious view of false affidavits submitted to affect judgements, Why?
Because prejury is generally a misdemeanor offense. If the court is satisfied that even with some false testimony they have enough truthful information to render a verdict they will do so.
Hope this helps.
None can check all, none can hear all. To error is human. All want short cut. Many times, I answer without reading question in detail.
Heavy work load on courts .
No doubt Perjury is a punishable offence but in order to prove of perjury not only sufficient evidence to prove it false is required by the prosecution but the evidence regarding that the false statement given on oath was known to the person giving it that the fact it was false. Since the giving of statement on oath in the form of Affidavits come under the category of perjury there should be such evidence that shows that the same person had given a different affidavit or had stated on oath statement just the opposite to what he stated in the present affidavit for which a offence of perjury is being prayed against him. When such evidence is brought before any court whether lower court or High Court the court will definitely move for the prosecution of such an offender. The Courts even issue notice to the person who is found prima facie of purposely making false statement. A recent example is the Jessica Lal Murder case where High Court of Delhi issued notices for perjury to the various witnesses who retracted from there original statements made during the investigation stage. As far taking no notice of any falsehood of the statements made on oath in the form of affidavit is concerned either bring before the concerned High court sufficient evidence of the falsehood as I explained above, or file a formal complaint to the High court showing them that a prima facie case of perjury exist in the pending matter before it, merely pointing this at the time of arguments will not solve your problem, because after all whenever a matter is contested both the parties file affidavits in support of their case one of which is correct %26amp; other not, if the High courts start taking action against each %26amp; every affidavit made in a case or all cases those failed before them then it will amount to unlimited number of such cases of perjury that will not only increase the number of litigations but also a never ending process of litigation. High courts take notice of all application made to them hence its best advised to move a formal application complaining of perjury. If the attitude of the Court is lukewarm its so because a formal application/complaint regarding the prima facie case of perjury is not made to it, simply relying on few documents won't solve your problem, doesn't this thing strike the mind of your learned advocate that he is supposed to make a formal application under section 195, 340 of the criminal procedure code,1973 to the concerned court, that they should file a formal complaint under section 193 Indian Penal Code for perjury against the person who filed false affidavit, M I supposed to tell all this to you that also free of cost where as you are paying your advocate in thousands.
High courts first only consider the evidence most favorable to the non-moving party (respondents), and second to not rehash any of the trial, they only decide if the lower court made a reversible error of law. Affidavits that are distorted in the facts would be a factual issue for the jury to decide, so it would be an error of fact, not of law.Ltd
I have faced this same problem. In my matter, I filed an Application u/S.340CrPC asking the Court to take action against my opponent for Perjury. I have cited Supreme Court judgments : Suo moto vs Karuppan and Arivandandam vs Satyapal, which specifically direct the lower courts to deal with perjury in a severe manner. Another good judgment to cite along with perjury applications is Chengalvaraya Naidu vs Jagannath - fraud on court. As mine is a Civil matter being a suit filed against me, I have also made an Application u/O.7 R.11 CPC for rejection of the plaint on these grounds. My applications are still pending; the previous judge was inclined to view it very seriously but then she got transferred and the present judge does not seem very interested but because he has to dispose of my Application, he grudgingly said he will hear it simultaneously with the main matter. Then he gave a very long date, probably to avoid having to apply his mind ! However, I will not let go and will take this up to the next level if I have to. I am sure that the Bombay High Court will take it seriously. I appear in person. Lawyers will never encourage clients to file perjury applications because most of them make false and misleading statements in affidavits prepared for their clients, as a matter of routine.Even Higher Courts do not take serious view of false affidavits submitted to affect judgements, Why?
Because prejury is generally a misdemeanor offense. If the court is satisfied that even with some false testimony they have enough truthful information to render a verdict they will do so.
Hope this helps.
None can check all, none can hear all. To error is human. All want short cut. Many times, I answer without reading question in detail.
Heavy work load on courts .
No doubt Perjury is a punishable offence but in order to prove of perjury not only sufficient evidence to prove it false is required by the prosecution but the evidence regarding that the false statement given on oath was known to the person giving it that the fact it was false. Since the giving of statement on oath in the form of Affidavits come under the category of perjury there should be such evidence that shows that the same person had given a different affidavit or had stated on oath statement just the opposite to what he stated in the present affidavit for which a offence of perjury is being prayed against him. When such evidence is brought before any court whether lower court or High Court the court will definitely move for the prosecution of such an offender. The Courts even issue notice to the person who is found prima facie of purposely making false statement. A recent example is the Jessica Lal Murder case where High Court of Delhi issued notices for perjury to the various witnesses who retracted from there original statements made during the investigation stage. As far taking no notice of any falsehood of the statements made on oath in the form of affidavit is concerned either bring before the concerned High court sufficient evidence of the falsehood as I explained above, or file a formal complaint to the High court showing them that a prima facie case of perjury exist in the pending matter before it, merely pointing this at the time of arguments will not solve your problem, because after all whenever a matter is contested both the parties file affidavits in support of their case one of which is correct %26amp; other not, if the High courts start taking action against each %26amp; every affidavit made in a case or all cases those failed before them then it will amount to unlimited number of such cases of perjury that will not only increase the number of litigations but also a never ending process of litigation. High courts take notice of all application made to them hence its best advised to move a formal application complaining of perjury. If the attitude of the Court is lukewarm its so because a formal application/complaint regarding the prima facie case of perjury is not made to it, simply relying on few documents won't solve your problem, doesn't this thing strike the mind of your learned advocate that he is supposed to make a formal application under section 195, 340 of the criminal procedure code,1973 to the concerned court, that they should file a formal complaint under section 193 Indian Penal Code for perjury against the person who filed false affidavit, M I supposed to tell all this to you that also free of cost where as you are paying your advocate in thousands.
High courts first only consider the evidence most favorable to the non-moving party (respondents), and second to not rehash any of the trial, they only decide if the lower court made a reversible error of law. Affidavits that are distorted in the facts would be a factual issue for the jury to decide, so it would be an error of fact, not of law.
Courts have a political nature?? true/false?
TRUECourts have a political nature?? true/false?
On a theoretical level, the judiciary is supposed to be independent. Until very recently, judges could not declare a political party in elections, and candidates were not supposed to give opinions on questions of law that they might encounter in their courts. That's being liberalized. Judges are supposed to interpret statutory and administrative law and apply it to questions of fact. As a practical matter, though, conservative administrations tend to skew court decisions by appointing liberal or conservative judges to vacancies on the bench.Courts have a political nature?? true/false?
That depends on the judges. Local courts reflect the local attutude, some liberal, some conservative. The Supreme Court justices are nominated by the President, their membership depends on who won the last election. Judges are supposed to swing based on the last elections, they are to reflect the will of the people.
On a theoretical level, the judiciary is supposed to be independent. Until very recently, judges could not declare a political party in elections, and candidates were not supposed to give opinions on questions of law that they might encounter in their courts. That's being liberalized. Judges are supposed to interpret statutory and administrative law and apply it to questions of fact. As a practical matter, though, conservative administrations tend to skew court decisions by appointing liberal or conservative judges to vacancies on the bench.Courts have a political nature?? true/false?
That depends on the judges. Local courts reflect the local attutude, some liberal, some conservative. The Supreme Court justices are nominated by the President, their membership depends on who won the last election. Judges are supposed to swing based on the last elections, they are to reflect the will of the people.
If you got arrested and you got false inprisonment because you paid your find would you sue the courts.?
please answer in ahurry anyone i need help i had to pay 4 a bonds man to get me out and the judge just said i owe you asoory help, but i cant get you money back.If you got arrested and you got false inprisonment because you paid your find would you sue the courts.?
Yes ,but you can try ,high chance you wont be sucessfulIf you got arrested and you got false inprisonment because you paid your find would you sue the courts.?
first off you have to wonder is it worth it, a lawyer is going to charge you by the hour and unless harm to your person was done while in jail you may not be able to recoup anything other than lawyer fees and an official apology, the way it sounds though was you had a warrant for a fine took care of it after a FTA was issued before the record came through got arrested for it if that was the case remember the jury of your peers are probably your grandparents and may see the case as a waste of their time and then you recoup nothing and you have a lawyer bill to pay to boot. All in all whose fault was it that you got arrested was it you the arresting officer or the system
Hell yea.
you can win that, I hear of them on the news occasionally
yes
and
yes
you will not win
You need money to get justice in America. Sad but true. Can you afford a top notch attorney? If not, don't waste your time.
Hmmm....I don't think you can sue. But I would think a refund and your record cleared is due by them. If not...contact an attorney to find out. Depends on the situation.
Yes, if a court makes a mistake and falsly imprisons you, they must 1-reimburse your loss and 2-compensate for more. This is a very serious crime and there are few records in which a victim is falsley accused.
No because you'll lose anyway. As long as the officer did it in good faith he's pretty much covered. So ... who would you sue? The county? That is great, cost the tax payers more money. Mistakes happen. If you seriously had already paid your fines, they'll give your money back that you overpaid. There should be a record of that.
Yes ,but you can try ,high chance you wont be sucessfulIf you got arrested and you got false inprisonment because you paid your find would you sue the courts.?
first off you have to wonder is it worth it, a lawyer is going to charge you by the hour and unless harm to your person was done while in jail you may not be able to recoup anything other than lawyer fees and an official apology, the way it sounds though was you had a warrant for a fine took care of it after a FTA was issued before the record came through got arrested for it if that was the case remember the jury of your peers are probably your grandparents and may see the case as a waste of their time and then you recoup nothing and you have a lawyer bill to pay to boot. All in all whose fault was it that you got arrested was it you the arresting officer or the system
Hell yea.
you can win that, I hear of them on the news occasionally
yes
and
yes
you will not win
You need money to get justice in America. Sad but true. Can you afford a top notch attorney? If not, don't waste your time.
Hmmm....I don't think you can sue. But I would think a refund and your record cleared is due by them. If not...contact an attorney to find out. Depends on the situation.
Yes, if a court makes a mistake and falsly imprisons you, they must 1-reimburse your loss and 2-compensate for more. This is a very serious crime and there are few records in which a victim is falsley accused.
No because you'll lose anyway. As long as the officer did it in good faith he's pretty much covered. So ... who would you sue? The county? That is great, cost the tax payers more money. Mistakes happen. If you seriously had already paid your fines, they'll give your money back that you overpaid. There should be a record of that.
How should the courts go about stopping false accusations of rape and DV?
Many claim that if you jail false accusers that it will stop actaul victims from coming forward but does that justify putting men in prison who have committed are innocent of the false claims against them?How should the courts go about stopping false accusations of rape and DV?
I understand where the difficulty is in this--the only way they can jail a false accuser is if he or she admits they falsely accused the person. They can't jail a person if the case was found unsubstantiated or simply don't have enough information. The problem that happens, then, is that if one falsely accuses another, if jail time is the punishment for the crime, the person is less likely to admit that they falsely accused the person. So its a catch-22.
However, that said, I do think there should be a heavy punishment for false accusations. I do think that once people realize a jail sentence goes with throwing around accusations, people will be less likely to throw them around. I just worry for, when people who do persist, for the victims of the false accusations who have to endure more as the accuser would be less inclined to admit they lied.
EDIT--You have a good point except I would argue with the ';many times'; part. Often its VERY hard to prove or disprove rape. That's why a HUGE percentage of rape cases end up being unsubstantiated. Now if there was some kind of video evidence that the man was somewhere else, or a mass group of ppl who saw him at a place that would put him away from the woman (or man, rape can go both ways) at the time of the crime, then that's different. And I fully agree the false accuser should get jail time and be punished for attempting to ruin another persons life and wasting police time and resources.
But, truth be told, such evidence is usually very lacking. Often police find that the accuser is making a false statement because he or she says so after extensive interviewing or when they're caught in a lie and they confess. Thats the problem then. Since MOST false accusations are cleared after the accuser admits its a lie, it becomes difficult to say what would happen if the false accuser know jail was at the end when they admit the lied.
I think some people fail to realize how often rape cases are found unsubstantiated. In in a case where it is found unsubstantiated, the accuser should NEVER be punished as there isn't enough evidence to say he or she is lying.How should the courts go about stopping false accusations of rape and DV?
';I don't see how it'd stop real victims from coming forward, sounds like BS to me.';
I can, if you follow Fex's reasoning. A ';not guilty'; verdict does NOT mean a rape didn't occur, it means that they couldn't prove it. Maybe there wasn't enough evidence or maybe the guy had a really good lawyer. If women were faced with possible jail time if their case resulted in a ';not guilty'; verdict, some women may not press charges. I can see that occurring especially in date rape situations.
I do believe that when it is obvious that a false claim has been made, the accuser should get some type of punishment. Jail time is a good idea. But there has to be evidence that it was a completely false claim and not that there wasn't enough evidence to prove rape.
Nothing justifies jailing the innocent. But then, it's impossible to ALWAYS avoid jailing the wrong person. Charges of crime should be investigated, and the evidence weighed; that's all one can do.
How often does this happen, really?
That a woman mis-identified her rapist is NOT just cause to jail her.
And, yes, if a woman is raped, and knows that, if the prosecution loses the case, SHE'LL be imprisoned, that would prevent nearly every rape victim from ever reporting.
You'd need to explain better what you're talking about. Especially how big a problem this really is.
given that rape victims are still often not believed, and that they're often blamed for the brutal crime committed against them, and how often rapists go free, I'm not at all sure that false accusations are the larger problem than rapists being free to continue to rape.
Ditto DV.
Certainly, whenever anyone wrongly convicted of any crime is found to not have done it, they should be immediately released.
But one shouldn't automatically imprison whoever charged them, without equally good evidence that they committed a wrong (such as making the whole thing up).
BTW, doing that IS a crime.
I don't see how it'd stop real victims from coming forward, sounds like BS to me.
There should be some sort of punishment for those who falsely accuse.
If there's a way to prove the accuser made false allegations knowingly, then definitely, punish.
There will be the dippy part though where then people use whatever loophole is available and get out of it, just like they do now. Slimy ******* always do their best to find them, or roll the dice and hope it works.
If there were ways to be sure they were prosecuted anyhow, and they couldn't just pull, ';Yeah, but I thought this WAS assault!'; -- then we're golden and can punish the ones who tarnish it for all the legit cases.
Jail time would be a novel idea.
';A woman who made eight separate false claims of rape or sexual assault has been spared jail.
Gemma Gregory, 28, accused seven different men over a six-year period.
Former boyfriends were subjected to police questioning and DNA testing to clear their names.
Her fantasy stories also wasted huge amounts of police time.
I understand that some very stupid people actually believe that a not guilty verdict proves that the accused is innocent. Not so. A woman automatically going to jail just because a defendant is found not guilty would mean a lot of women would be going to jail, and the rapist, who was found not guilty merely due to lack of evidence, would be going free. Not an acceptable solution. However, if it was proven to be a false accusation, the accuser should indeed go to jail.
In cases where it's been proven that a woman has made a false accusation, then I think she should receive a jail sentence -- after all, that's what the man would've got if his accuser had succeeded.
Tougher sentences for women who lie about rape would act as a deterrent, which would actually help genuine rape victims. They might feel more able to come forward if they were confident that they'd be believed, and the things that stop them being believed are loose definitions of rape and false accusers.
There is only one way.
Upon the rendering of a ';not guilty'; verdict for a charge of rape, domestic violence, sexual harassment, or child abuse in a custody hearing, whatever the minimum sentence that could have been conferred upon the accused must be immediately conferred upon the accuser.
The crime needs to be taken seriously and punished accordingly. Right now it is hardly punished. It will not stop the practice, just like punishment will not stop any crime, but it will discourage the practice and make it less frequent.
Proper punishment would result in less false accusation.
The courts are a little soft on this subject.
I understand where the difficulty is in this--the only way they can jail a false accuser is if he or she admits they falsely accused the person. They can't jail a person if the case was found unsubstantiated or simply don't have enough information. The problem that happens, then, is that if one falsely accuses another, if jail time is the punishment for the crime, the person is less likely to admit that they falsely accused the person. So its a catch-22.
However, that said, I do think there should be a heavy punishment for false accusations. I do think that once people realize a jail sentence goes with throwing around accusations, people will be less likely to throw them around. I just worry for, when people who do persist, for the victims of the false accusations who have to endure more as the accuser would be less inclined to admit they lied.
EDIT--You have a good point except I would argue with the ';many times'; part. Often its VERY hard to prove or disprove rape. That's why a HUGE percentage of rape cases end up being unsubstantiated. Now if there was some kind of video evidence that the man was somewhere else, or a mass group of ppl who saw him at a place that would put him away from the woman (or man, rape can go both ways) at the time of the crime, then that's different. And I fully agree the false accuser should get jail time and be punished for attempting to ruin another persons life and wasting police time and resources.
But, truth be told, such evidence is usually very lacking. Often police find that the accuser is making a false statement because he or she says so after extensive interviewing or when they're caught in a lie and they confess. Thats the problem then. Since MOST false accusations are cleared after the accuser admits its a lie, it becomes difficult to say what would happen if the false accuser know jail was at the end when they admit the lied.
I think some people fail to realize how often rape cases are found unsubstantiated. In in a case where it is found unsubstantiated, the accuser should NEVER be punished as there isn't enough evidence to say he or she is lying.How should the courts go about stopping false accusations of rape and DV?
';I don't see how it'd stop real victims from coming forward, sounds like BS to me.';
I can, if you follow Fex's reasoning. A ';not guilty'; verdict does NOT mean a rape didn't occur, it means that they couldn't prove it. Maybe there wasn't enough evidence or maybe the guy had a really good lawyer. If women were faced with possible jail time if their case resulted in a ';not guilty'; verdict, some women may not press charges. I can see that occurring especially in date rape situations.
I do believe that when it is obvious that a false claim has been made, the accuser should get some type of punishment. Jail time is a good idea. But there has to be evidence that it was a completely false claim and not that there wasn't enough evidence to prove rape.
Nothing justifies jailing the innocent. But then, it's impossible to ALWAYS avoid jailing the wrong person. Charges of crime should be investigated, and the evidence weighed; that's all one can do.
How often does this happen, really?
That a woman mis-identified her rapist is NOT just cause to jail her.
And, yes, if a woman is raped, and knows that, if the prosecution loses the case, SHE'LL be imprisoned, that would prevent nearly every rape victim from ever reporting.
You'd need to explain better what you're talking about. Especially how big a problem this really is.
given that rape victims are still often not believed, and that they're often blamed for the brutal crime committed against them, and how often rapists go free, I'm not at all sure that false accusations are the larger problem than rapists being free to continue to rape.
Ditto DV.
Certainly, whenever anyone wrongly convicted of any crime is found to not have done it, they should be immediately released.
But one shouldn't automatically imprison whoever charged them, without equally good evidence that they committed a wrong (such as making the whole thing up).
BTW, doing that IS a crime.
I don't see how it'd stop real victims from coming forward, sounds like BS to me.
There should be some sort of punishment for those who falsely accuse.
If there's a way to prove the accuser made false allegations knowingly, then definitely, punish.
There will be the dippy part though where then people use whatever loophole is available and get out of it, just like they do now. Slimy ******* always do their best to find them, or roll the dice and hope it works.
If there were ways to be sure they were prosecuted anyhow, and they couldn't just pull, ';Yeah, but I thought this WAS assault!'; -- then we're golden and can punish the ones who tarnish it for all the legit cases.
Jail time would be a novel idea.
';A woman who made eight separate false claims of rape or sexual assault has been spared jail.
Gemma Gregory, 28, accused seven different men over a six-year period.
Former boyfriends were subjected to police questioning and DNA testing to clear their names.
Her fantasy stories also wasted huge amounts of police time.
I understand that some very stupid people actually believe that a not guilty verdict proves that the accused is innocent. Not so. A woman automatically going to jail just because a defendant is found not guilty would mean a lot of women would be going to jail, and the rapist, who was found not guilty merely due to lack of evidence, would be going free. Not an acceptable solution. However, if it was proven to be a false accusation, the accuser should indeed go to jail.
In cases where it's been proven that a woman has made a false accusation, then I think she should receive a jail sentence -- after all, that's what the man would've got if his accuser had succeeded.
Tougher sentences for women who lie about rape would act as a deterrent, which would actually help genuine rape victims. They might feel more able to come forward if they were confident that they'd be believed, and the things that stop them being believed are loose definitions of rape and false accusers.
There is only one way.
Upon the rendering of a ';not guilty'; verdict for a charge of rape, domestic violence, sexual harassment, or child abuse in a custody hearing, whatever the minimum sentence that could have been conferred upon the accused must be immediately conferred upon the accuser.
The crime needs to be taken seriously and punished accordingly. Right now it is hardly punished. It will not stop the practice, just like punishment will not stop any crime, but it will discourage the practice and make it less frequent.
Proper punishment would result in less false accusation.
The courts are a little soft on this subject.
I have a child support order in which the mother wrote down false information to the courts.?
She falsely put down the wrong income that I make, as well as not providing the courts of the insurance I provide for our daugther as well. Is there anything I can do to show the courts how she maniuplated the system?I have a child support order in which the mother wrote down false information to the courts.?
You were served and had the opportunity to appear in court with your DOCUMENTATION. Why didn't you?I have a child support order in which the mother wrote down false information to the courts.?
It would be an easy matter to prove. Take some of your check stubs to the court and explain what happened, give them the phone number to whoever does your payroll. They can then file charges on her for falsification of court documents or something similar.
Bring in your own documentation of your pay, and give them a phone number direct to payroll. Women always try to take everything you have and everything you will ever get.
Most often, income is proved by income tax filing from the prior year. If your income has changed since then, you should provide the new income numbers to the courts to get this corrected.
Don't fight in court, it's just a win-win for the lawyers involved and in the long run isn't good for your daughter. The cost to prosecute her for perjury would probably exceed any support issues you're having.
Insurance is not the same as child support, and will probably not count towards the dollar amount you have to pay, a family policy typically costs the same if you have 1 child or 3 children. Is it written in your court order that you provide the insurance?
Your lawyer should be helping you with all this, if you don't have one, look online and find out what the child support percentage of pay is in your State for the number of children you have.
Good luck - I hope this all gets straightened out for you.
I resent the first answer you received to your question--women are money grubbing sluts and take advantage of ex-husbands for money, but his answer is correct. I can't believe that the judge accepted her version of how much your income is and insurance. Surely you have better records of this than she does. Take them to court, but be willing to pay your share for their care, and make sure you have visiting rights too.
Take the proof that you have concerning this matter and go to the courthouse that the case was heard in,go to the clerk and inform them
that you want to file a mottion for perjury against your ex-wife. But 1st
go to the prosecutors office because most likely the'll want to handle it themself and will take care of everything that needs to be filed in the courts.
You were served and had the opportunity to appear in court with your DOCUMENTATION. Why didn't you?I have a child support order in which the mother wrote down false information to the courts.?
It would be an easy matter to prove. Take some of your check stubs to the court and explain what happened, give them the phone number to whoever does your payroll. They can then file charges on her for falsification of court documents or something similar.
Bring in your own documentation of your pay, and give them a phone number direct to payroll. Women always try to take everything you have and everything you will ever get.
Most often, income is proved by income tax filing from the prior year. If your income has changed since then, you should provide the new income numbers to the courts to get this corrected.
Don't fight in court, it's just a win-win for the lawyers involved and in the long run isn't good for your daughter. The cost to prosecute her for perjury would probably exceed any support issues you're having.
Insurance is not the same as child support, and will probably not count towards the dollar amount you have to pay, a family policy typically costs the same if you have 1 child or 3 children. Is it written in your court order that you provide the insurance?
Your lawyer should be helping you with all this, if you don't have one, look online and find out what the child support percentage of pay is in your State for the number of children you have.
Good luck - I hope this all gets straightened out for you.
I resent the first answer you received to your question--women are money grubbing sluts and take advantage of ex-husbands for money, but his answer is correct. I can't believe that the judge accepted her version of how much your income is and insurance. Surely you have better records of this than she does. Take them to court, but be willing to pay your share for their care, and make sure you have visiting rights too.
Take the proof that you have concerning this matter and go to the courthouse that the case was heard in,go to the clerk and inform them
that you want to file a mottion for perjury against your ex-wife. But 1st
go to the prosecutors office because most likely the'll want to handle it themself and will take care of everything that needs to be filed in the courts.
True or False: Federal bankruptcy and tax courts have . . ???
True or False:
Question: Federal bankruptcy and tax courts have exclusive jurisdiction over such matters.True or False: Federal bankruptcy and tax courts have . . ???
true
Question: Federal bankruptcy and tax courts have exclusive jurisdiction over such matters.True or False: Federal bankruptcy and tax courts have . . ???
true
What happens when someone files false accusations to the courts?
Me %26amp; my sons father are going to court for child custody. I submitted the 1st documents for child custody, %26amp; his father filed a response, and as well made a couple of false accusations to the courts. For example: 1st he told the courts that in 1997 my brother raped a girl and was going to court for raping a girl. Which is FALSE. My brother was never accused or went to court for rape. 2nd he filed to the courts that a couple of years ago my father was fired from work for running over a co-worker because he was under the influence of an illegal drug. Which is FALSE again, my father is still at his job. I got a letter from my fathers supervior and it states that my father is working at this same job and has never given his supervisor any reason to suspend or fire my father. I find these accusations offensive and un-called for. My brother is very upset and stressed out, because it has caused problems for his family especially his marriage.
I wanted to know what can be done about these false accusations that my sons father has filed to the courts. Can something be done about the fact that my sons father is causing stress, family and marriage problems for our family.What happens when someone files false accusations to the courts?
This happens more then you would think. My husband was accused (by his ex) for making threats to kidnap their daughter. What we did was we filed a response to those accusations which basically asked her for proof, and she obviously couldn't provide it because well, it never happened. Some people will go to extreme lengths to make someones Else's life hell!!! You can, if you want, file a report for slander, although, I think, your brother and father would need to do that.
Good Luck!!!!Ltd
I wanted to know what can be done about these false accusations that my sons father has filed to the courts. Can something be done about the fact that my sons father is causing stress, family and marriage problems for our family.What happens when someone files false accusations to the courts?
This happens more then you would think. My husband was accused (by his ex) for making threats to kidnap their daughter. What we did was we filed a response to those accusations which basically asked her for proof, and she obviously couldn't provide it because well, it never happened. Some people will go to extreme lengths to make someones Else's life hell!!! You can, if you want, file a report for slander, although, I think, your brother and father would need to do that.
Good Luck!!!!
State courts never enforce federal law True or False?
False. State courts can enforce some federal laws.
Dana (attorney who has litigated in state and federal courts)State courts never enforce federal law True or False?
According to the Federalist Papers, which are a series of articles published by some of the AUTHORS of the US Constitution, it was their intent that State law enforcement would be the PRIMARY means of enforcing Federal law.
State courts never enforce federal law True or False?
100% FALSE. State courts have the power to interpret and enforce federal laws under the US Constitution. Reason: Article III, which creates the judiciary.
true, unless it is also a state offense
False, its a law, therefore they must enforce it
Dana (attorney who has litigated in state and federal courts)State courts never enforce federal law True or False?
According to the Federalist Papers, which are a series of articles published by some of the AUTHORS of the US Constitution, it was their intent that State law enforcement would be the PRIMARY means of enforcing Federal law.
Report Abuse
State courts never enforce federal law True or False?
100% FALSE. State courts have the power to interpret and enforce federal laws under the US Constitution. Reason: Article III, which creates the judiciary.
true, unless it is also a state offense
False, its a law, therefore they must enforce it
Why do family courts allow false reports on tro to be served?
My wife left me cause I wasnt making enough money. We have two beautiful kids together. I have moved up the ladder in work since. She came to my house on july 15, 2008 demanding more money for child support. I had been giving her 1,500 dollars a month. Now that I found a house for me and our two kids. she says I should move into a studio and pay whatever the leftover is to her. We dont have any court order for child support, but I would do anything for my kids. She will call me if diapers were running low or the babys food. I dont care because I love kids. Well, on july 15 I had refused to pay more money cause I wanted reciepts for everything she buys for our kids.I would like to know what the money is used for. She gets angry, then threaten me I will never see the kids. On july16, 2008 was our daughters 1st birthday. I was served with a tro. She claimed I said I was going to hit her. Im torn cause she wants to get it permanent and move to CA. .......Bleeding heart in paradiseWhy do family courts allow false reports on tro to be served?
Again another example of a women overusing her power. She totally depends on your money. As a father you should want to support your children, which you are doing. But you cant have someone hold you hostage either. You need to go to court get your support lowered, you are probably paying too much. she cant hold the children from you if you do this through the court. retraining orders are bull in most cases. It's the goofballs that really harm people that screw the situation up. One thing I did, years ago my ex pulled this on me. I told her to keep the kids! I will see them when they are no longer under her ';power';. I didn't mean it actually because I adored my kids. she changed her tune real quick! She became more manageable. Right now she is using you because she thinks you are scared of losing them. Get tough! Stay tough! you gotta teach this women. And it is your business what she is doing with the money. Good luckWhy do family courts allow false reports on tro to be served?
You need to take actions to secure your financial matters. You will never get a fair deal in family court so don't look for one. You're a man and you are always wrong in the courts view. Lawyers and judges are all connected. No fair deals ever always a fight - Hide your savings and income.
Child support and those things are usually set when the divorce is final, so some of this makes no sense. You maybe able to get a restraining order preventing her from relocating the children. You should go for custody of the children to show you want them.
GET YOURSELF A LAWYER FAST!
Because they rather error on the side of caution....They would rather order a TRO....and you not be an abuser...than for them to ignore her complaints against you...do nothing to protect her....and you end up hurting or killing her....FYI....if you are paying support to her....what she spends the money on is non of your business......
You need to contact a lawyer ASAP!!!
You need to get a lawyer. She's just trying to get over on you. What you need to do is pay her the child support with money orders, that way you have a receipt of your responsibilities. $1500 a month is way more than enough. She just wants to keep up with herself. Maybe some of it is going for the kids, but I bet most of it is going towards personal use.
Don't worry about her saying you hit her, there is no proof because she doesn't have any bruises, unless someone else hit her, then you can take a lie detector test. I can't stand females like that. It makes the good ones like us look bad. DIRTY, JUST PLAIN DIRTY.
SHE is on a huge power trip with you. She is using the kids as a bait for you because she knows your weakness.
First of all, you need to remember she left you. Her mistake. Unless you guys aren't legally divorced, you do not have to pay her a dime. Here in Texas, you have to go to court to to have a ';legal separation'; until the divorce is final, that's the only way you have to pay.
What I would do, is if she calls and says she ';needs'; then YOU go out and buy the stuff for the children. She made the choice to leave, then she needs to quit being stupid and get a job to support those babies, ya know?
What gets me is that she wants you to move into a studio, yeah and if you did that then she would make claims that your house isn't suitable enough blah blah blah......
Save your money, file for divorce and make everything legal. That way she has no control over you, and you never know you might get the kids because she can't provide for them.
Also, another way of not having to pay so much is do the custody 50/50 and that way you have your babies as well.
Obviously you can tell what she is after.
also, I would go to a lawyer to prevent her from moving.
The courts will sometimes issue a TRO regardless of whether the underlying story is true. You should have a court date on the order that you received. That will be your chance to speak up. If it is determined that there isn't sufficient reason to keep the order in place it will be dismissed. What you really need to do is hire an attorney. Get a legal separation order in place that details temporary custody/visitation/child support until such a time as you two are divorced. You can also have it specified that she cannot leave the state with the children, at least until the matter of your divorce is decided. You need to do this quickly. It's never a good idea to try and work things out among yourselves when children are involved and emotions are running high. The temporary order will protect you until the final divorce order is in place. Do yourself a favor and hire a good attorney... spend whatever you have to. It sounds as if she's a pretty vengeful woman who will use your children as pawns if she's permitted. Get on the phone ASAP, get an attorney and put a stop to this legally.
Again another example of a women overusing her power. She totally depends on your money. As a father you should want to support your children, which you are doing. But you cant have someone hold you hostage either. You need to go to court get your support lowered, you are probably paying too much. she cant hold the children from you if you do this through the court. retraining orders are bull in most cases. It's the goofballs that really harm people that screw the situation up. One thing I did, years ago my ex pulled this on me. I told her to keep the kids! I will see them when they are no longer under her ';power';. I didn't mean it actually because I adored my kids. she changed her tune real quick! She became more manageable. Right now she is using you because she thinks you are scared of losing them. Get tough! Stay tough! you gotta teach this women. And it is your business what she is doing with the money. Good luckWhy do family courts allow false reports on tro to be served?
You need to take actions to secure your financial matters. You will never get a fair deal in family court so don't look for one. You're a man and you are always wrong in the courts view. Lawyers and judges are all connected. No fair deals ever always a fight - Hide your savings and income.
Report Abuse
Child support and those things are usually set when the divorce is final, so some of this makes no sense. You maybe able to get a restraining order preventing her from relocating the children. You should go for custody of the children to show you want them.
GET YOURSELF A LAWYER FAST!
Because they rather error on the side of caution....They would rather order a TRO....and you not be an abuser...than for them to ignore her complaints against you...do nothing to protect her....and you end up hurting or killing her....FYI....if you are paying support to her....what she spends the money on is non of your business......
You need to contact a lawyer ASAP!!!
You need to get a lawyer. She's just trying to get over on you. What you need to do is pay her the child support with money orders, that way you have a receipt of your responsibilities. $1500 a month is way more than enough. She just wants to keep up with herself. Maybe some of it is going for the kids, but I bet most of it is going towards personal use.
Don't worry about her saying you hit her, there is no proof because she doesn't have any bruises, unless someone else hit her, then you can take a lie detector test. I can't stand females like that. It makes the good ones like us look bad. DIRTY, JUST PLAIN DIRTY.
SHE is on a huge power trip with you. She is using the kids as a bait for you because she knows your weakness.
First of all, you need to remember she left you. Her mistake. Unless you guys aren't legally divorced, you do not have to pay her a dime. Here in Texas, you have to go to court to to have a ';legal separation'; until the divorce is final, that's the only way you have to pay.
What I would do, is if she calls and says she ';needs'; then YOU go out and buy the stuff for the children. She made the choice to leave, then she needs to quit being stupid and get a job to support those babies, ya know?
What gets me is that she wants you to move into a studio, yeah and if you did that then she would make claims that your house isn't suitable enough blah blah blah......
Save your money, file for divorce and make everything legal. That way she has no control over you, and you never know you might get the kids because she can't provide for them.
Also, another way of not having to pay so much is do the custody 50/50 and that way you have your babies as well.
Obviously you can tell what she is after.
also, I would go to a lawyer to prevent her from moving.
The courts will sometimes issue a TRO regardless of whether the underlying story is true. You should have a court date on the order that you received. That will be your chance to speak up. If it is determined that there isn't sufficient reason to keep the order in place it will be dismissed. What you really need to do is hire an attorney. Get a legal separation order in place that details temporary custody/visitation/child support until such a time as you two are divorced. You can also have it specified that she cannot leave the state with the children, at least until the matter of your divorce is decided. You need to do this quickly. It's never a good idea to try and work things out among yourselves when children are involved and emotions are running high. The temporary order will protect you until the final divorce order is in place. Do yourself a favor and hire a good attorney... spend whatever you have to. It sounds as if she's a pretty vengeful woman who will use your children as pawns if she's permitted. Get on the phone ASAP, get an attorney and put a stop to this legally.
If jefferson cty courts of co do not notify me of a hearing who's at fault 4 false service is my word good
I have a seperation hearing in dec for jefferson cty colo. courts i have not been served and was told about this hearing through probation i have a feeling i won't be served it's how they work how can i prove i was never served if i wasn't and will they believe me over the server's service as they have done to me beforeIf jefferson cty courts of co do not notify me of a hearing who's at fault 4 false service is my word good
when they serve you they get a signature.if they aint gotta signature, then you should be okay.
this time its free next time its expensive
when they serve you they get a signature.if they aint gotta signature, then you should be okay.
this time its free next time its expensive
Do you agree with U.S. Rep. John Boozman said illegals overwhelm police and courts with false identities ?
LITTLE ROCK - U.S. Rep. John Boozman said Hispanic immigrants coming to northwest Arkansas overwhelm police and courts with false identities, leaving warrants unserved and cases unprosecuted.
';There's chaos involved,'; Boozman told The Associated Press in an interview Wednesday. ';And along with that, the public is feeling they are paying for all of this.';
Boozman, the sole Republican in the state's congressional delegation, said immigration reform would come only after Congress and President Bush listen to what he described as overwhelming public concern on the issue. Boozman said that he and others would view any plans to offer citizenship through fines as an amnesty that would overwhelm the nation.
';Now, does that make them criminal in the sense of being violent crimes and stuff like that? No, they're up here playing the system as best they can to feed their families back home or their families here,'; Boozman said. ';There's no difference in these people if they have a green card or if they don't as far as the person's work ethic and stuff like that ... but there is a limit of how much the country can absorb.';
Boozman's district is in northwest Arkansas, home to poultry plants and other jobs attracting immigrants from Mexico and Latin America. Census estimates show Arkansas has more than 141,000 Hispanic residents, as recent studies conclude about half of the state's immigrant population lives in the United States illegally.
Boozman said those illegal immigrants overwhelm police by offering false identities. The problem has made Social Security numbers and birth certificates marketable goods, he said.
';It is a problem. It is a problem now for no other reason than public perception,'; Boozman said. ';The public feels like we're a nation of laws and there's so many little things, the DUIs, the knowledge that someone is working on an assembly line next to an individual who decides to go back home and they sell their identity to a friend.';
In Rogers, which absorbed many of the state's Hispanic immigrants, officers have seen dramatic increases in the number of tickets issued for drivers not having licenses. Police Chief Steve Helms said of 1,443 tickets issued last year, 1,224 went to Hispanic drivers, as whites accounted for 193 and blacks received 17.
';It kind of goes into that perception ... that whatever identification they provide or whatever name they provide, it is really difficult to confirm that's who that individual actually is,'; Helms said.
Boozman said the influx of Hispanic workers also affects schools, where children of Hispanic immigrants speak what he called ';jive Spanish'; and need remedial help in their own language before learning English. Boozman also wondered what effect Hispanic immigrants would have on Medicare as they age.
';You're not going to be a roofer until you're 65 years old, working 16-hour days,'; Boozman said. ';We'll pay disability for people who have carpal tunnel syndrome and can't work. Many of those people will become disabled. They'll become unemployable because we can't retrain them'; because their level of education is too low.
Boozman acknowledged the need for some sort of visa system for visiting immigrant laborers. He said the system doesn't need to ';necessarily lead to citizenship,'; as many want to return home after saving money. However, he said the increased focus on border security after the Sept. 11 terror attacks caused ';unintended things to happen'; _ like many immigrants to stay in the U.S. with their families as opposed to crossing the border regularly.
';It does need to be thought through,'; Boozman said. ';The Senate bill just went very, very rapidly and basically they were trying to cram it down our throat.';
http://www.pbcommercial.com/articles/2007/08/15/ap-state-ar/d8r1ogbg0.txtDo you agree with U.S. Rep. John Boozman said illegals overwhelm police and courts with false identities ?
Yes, I do. It has allowed very serious criminals to get away with murder and many other crimes. I wish we would just get this deportation issue going and that alone would solve soooooooo many of this countries problems. The legal immigrants that are here should protect themselves and made sure that their papers are in proper order so they will have no problems. The illegals should collect what they want to take with them and go back home and apply to enter our country legally. And the rest should be prepared, there are many people who can pick up a telephone and notify authorities of their whereabouts. I'm sorry if this seems harsh to some, but we have and out of control problem that needs to be fixed.Do you agree with U.S. Rep. John Boozman said illegals overwhelm police and courts with false identities ?
Good call=
Yep, sure do.
I agree. That Mr. Boozman should run for President. I would vote for him. He's right. The government is trying to cram those illegal aliens down our throats.
How could you DISAGREE? These are real problems that need real solutions. Fred Thompson, PLEASE announce your candidacy.
I think it is time that we have a national ID, just like the technology the Mexican government uses to identity their voters. It would be a tramper proof, picture, with finger prints and a hologram to keep it from being copied. For those that object, I can not see why, being their are very few place that one can go from airports, hospital, court houses that do not have to prove who I am, so should we all not have the same type of proof. It is amazing that Mexico a third world has used technology to unsure that only eligible voters can vote, and we can not keep their nationals from not only accessing things that they are not entitled to, but using false or stolen documents. So once again it is the will not the way
';There's chaos involved,'; Boozman told The Associated Press in an interview Wednesday. ';And along with that, the public is feeling they are paying for all of this.';
Boozman, the sole Republican in the state's congressional delegation, said immigration reform would come only after Congress and President Bush listen to what he described as overwhelming public concern on the issue. Boozman said that he and others would view any plans to offer citizenship through fines as an amnesty that would overwhelm the nation.
';Now, does that make them criminal in the sense of being violent crimes and stuff like that? No, they're up here playing the system as best they can to feed their families back home or their families here,'; Boozman said. ';There's no difference in these people if they have a green card or if they don't as far as the person's work ethic and stuff like that ... but there is a limit of how much the country can absorb.';
Boozman's district is in northwest Arkansas, home to poultry plants and other jobs attracting immigrants from Mexico and Latin America. Census estimates show Arkansas has more than 141,000 Hispanic residents, as recent studies conclude about half of the state's immigrant population lives in the United States illegally.
Boozman said those illegal immigrants overwhelm police by offering false identities. The problem has made Social Security numbers and birth certificates marketable goods, he said.
';It is a problem. It is a problem now for no other reason than public perception,'; Boozman said. ';The public feels like we're a nation of laws and there's so many little things, the DUIs, the knowledge that someone is working on an assembly line next to an individual who decides to go back home and they sell their identity to a friend.';
In Rogers, which absorbed many of the state's Hispanic immigrants, officers have seen dramatic increases in the number of tickets issued for drivers not having licenses. Police Chief Steve Helms said of 1,443 tickets issued last year, 1,224 went to Hispanic drivers, as whites accounted for 193 and blacks received 17.
';It kind of goes into that perception ... that whatever identification they provide or whatever name they provide, it is really difficult to confirm that's who that individual actually is,'; Helms said.
Boozman said the influx of Hispanic workers also affects schools, where children of Hispanic immigrants speak what he called ';jive Spanish'; and need remedial help in their own language before learning English. Boozman also wondered what effect Hispanic immigrants would have on Medicare as they age.
';You're not going to be a roofer until you're 65 years old, working 16-hour days,'; Boozman said. ';We'll pay disability for people who have carpal tunnel syndrome and can't work. Many of those people will become disabled. They'll become unemployable because we can't retrain them'; because their level of education is too low.
Boozman acknowledged the need for some sort of visa system for visiting immigrant laborers. He said the system doesn't need to ';necessarily lead to citizenship,'; as many want to return home after saving money. However, he said the increased focus on border security after the Sept. 11 terror attacks caused ';unintended things to happen'; _ like many immigrants to stay in the U.S. with their families as opposed to crossing the border regularly.
';It does need to be thought through,'; Boozman said. ';The Senate bill just went very, very rapidly and basically they were trying to cram it down our throat.';
http://www.pbcommercial.com/articles/2007/08/15/ap-state-ar/d8r1ogbg0.txtDo you agree with U.S. Rep. John Boozman said illegals overwhelm police and courts with false identities ?
Yes, I do. It has allowed very serious criminals to get away with murder and many other crimes. I wish we would just get this deportation issue going and that alone would solve soooooooo many of this countries problems. The legal immigrants that are here should protect themselves and made sure that their papers are in proper order so they will have no problems. The illegals should collect what they want to take with them and go back home and apply to enter our country legally. And the rest should be prepared, there are many people who can pick up a telephone and notify authorities of their whereabouts. I'm sorry if this seems harsh to some, but we have and out of control problem that needs to be fixed.Do you agree with U.S. Rep. John Boozman said illegals overwhelm police and courts with false identities ?
Good call=
Yep, sure do.
I agree. That Mr. Boozman should run for President. I would vote for him. He's right. The government is trying to cram those illegal aliens down our throats.
How could you DISAGREE? These are real problems that need real solutions. Fred Thompson, PLEASE announce your candidacy.
I think it is time that we have a national ID, just like the technology the Mexican government uses to identity their voters. It would be a tramper proof, picture, with finger prints and a hologram to keep it from being copied. For those that object, I can not see why, being their are very few place that one can go from airports, hospital, court houses that do not have to prove who I am, so should we all not have the same type of proof. It is amazing that Mexico a third world has used technology to unsure that only eligible voters can vote, and we can not keep their nationals from not only accessing things that they are not entitled to, but using false or stolen documents. So once again it is the will not the way
If n/a & a/a are anonimous how did the courts in ontario ca. find out of false attendance signitures?
It is against AA %26amp; NA Traditions to do so. Nevertheless, some people break them at times. Hopefully, other members will talk with the guilty parties involved. A similar thing was happening here with a particular group member, but the situation has been rectified.
Incidentally, the court system has no legal right to compel anyone in a 12 step program to divulge such info either, but they often try..If n/a %26amp; a/a are anonimous how did the courts in ontario ca. find out of false attendance signitures?
If they were REALLY anonymous, why would you start each meeting with, ';Hi I'm ______, and I'm an alcoholic.';
?
Incidentally, the court system has no legal right to compel anyone in a 12 step program to divulge such info either, but they often try..If n/a %26amp; a/a are anonimous how did the courts in ontario ca. find out of false attendance signitures?
If they were REALLY anonymous, why would you start each meeting with, ';Hi I'm ______, and I'm an alcoholic.';
?
Should Professor Henry Lewis Gates of Harvard Sue Cambridge Police Dept. For False Arrest? Courts to Decide?
No, but I think Sgt. Crowley should sue him.Should Professor Henry Lewis Gates of Harvard Sue Cambridge Police Dept. For False Arrest? Courts to Decide?
Yes. of course!! He has a right to be upset as he wants to be. Police came into his home and after seeing his ID and university ID arrested him. You can say what you want about who ever mother you want to!! Of course he was upset when they didn't believe he was who he said he was. He pays the bills for that house and after they see his ID's they still need to call and verify I would have been highly upset too. A lot of people don't want to admit that race had something to do with it because they've never been affected by racism but hello!! Yes it still happens and if he was white it would have been settled after seeing his ID or a break-in never would have been called in anyway!! Get over it people racism still exist!!Should Professor Henry Lewis Gates of Harvard Sue Cambridge Police Dept. For False Arrest? Courts to Decide?
As a matter of fact he should sue the police department. They should have not arrested the man in the first place after he presented his id from the university and his state issued id. The officers knew it was his home, and there was no need to arrest him. What would you do if a police officer asked you to see your id in your own home, you do so, then they arrest you? I think that it it a racial thing, and I'am a white attorney. I just believe that the police did do a false arrest.
I do not believe this arrest was racially based but attributed based,
The problem that majority of supports of the officer forget is a little something called the first amendment right to free speech, Now we all know we are not free to say anything we like at any time, but in order to curtail a person right of speech the restriction must past a strict scrutiny test,
So in Gates case: while the investigation was under way, the professor gates was not free to say or act how ever he wanted, but once that investigation concluded, and professor gates decided to give attitude to the officer rightfully or wrongfully, unless those words where “fighting words” i.e. hostile intent against the officer or others, the officer did not have the right to arrest for disorderly conduct on his own porch, even though the porch is quasi public,
Demanding in a boisterous manner the officer ID and badge number on his own porch is a first amendment right at that point, saying I’ll see your mama on the porch while rude does not equate to a criminal offense, The first amendment does say you can be rude to Presidents, politicians, School teachers, etc, but in no way in any manner can you be rude to a officer of the law
The DA dropped the case not from pressure but they looked at the incident report i.e. the officer own words and rightfully found that a older man, on his own porch acting in a Tumultuous manner i.e. noisy/ greatly agitated did not equate to a criminal complaint solely on his first amendment right to free speech
Also Since the officer teaches racial profiling you would assume he would be able to identify the likely route cause of the professors tumultuous manner, rightly or wrongfully on the professor side and factor it into his assessment on the situation
In my opinion what happen was professor on his own porch was giving lip to the officer in front of fellow officers and members of the public neither one was going to back down, but both should have temper their actions; the end result professor is arrested and the officer name is splashed all over the world, a outcome I think neither wanted in the end
No. An investigation has already been done, and Crowley was found to have acted appropriately. Gates is backing off now, because he knows that the 911 call and testimony from neighbors will show that HE was disorderly and racist.
I wish he would. That way the truth would be brought out that Gates acted like a racist moron.
I think Professor Gates should do what his Attorneys thinks is necessary.
I am still trying to figure out why the police called for back up after he saw Gates ID? Adn called for Harvard Police to verify Gates lived in this house?
No
False arrest? The arrest was very real, and for a good reason too. Gates was making a public disturbance and harrassing an officer who was calmly trying to sort out the situation and keep Gates under control.
Gates is an arrogant, racist elitist who deserved to spend a few hours in jail. Almost everyone in Massachusetts supports Crowley (except the governor, the Boston Globe, and Gates' Harvard buddies) and it should be the police department who sues Gates for defamation.
Yes. Originally I thought that he should be content with an apology from the arresting officer. But now the officer has said ';I have nothing to apologize for.'; He needs to be educated about free speech, and unfortunately that may require a law suit.
I don't know whether there was genuine racism on the part of the police officer, or whether Gates was being as nasty as described. But offending a policeman's delicate ego is not a crime in this country. I think we can all agree that no arrest should have been made.
Should Professor Henry Lewis Gates of Harvard Sue Cambridge Police Dept. For False Arrest? No, because it was not a false arrest.
Will Professor Henry Lewis Gates of Harvard Sue Cambridge Police Dept. For an Alleged and So-called False Arrest? Yes, because Gates has played the race card his entire life. Why should now be any different?
No way - the actions by the officer were appropriate and charges should not have been dropped.
I am fed up with the ';racism'; thing and am appalled at the ';stupidity'; of Mr. Obama.
No. It's pretty obvious that both Gates and Crowley want to put this episode behind them. Gates signed an agreement not to sue so that he could get released immediately, and although it's almost impossible to enforce those types of agreements in court it's equally difficult to sue a cop for false arrest and make it stick. I've heard through the grapevine that Crowley has been given a ';confidential off-the-record'; reprimand for arresting Gates. Police aren't suppose to enter private residences in a law enforcement capacity, except when there are exigent circumstances, they are in hot pursuit, or they are invited in the residence. Crowley screwed up but that's behind us.
No. He should stop crying racism, save face, and offer some sort of apology to the arresting officer for his conduct.
I think Mr Gates should consider a novel concept.... personal responsibility.
He probably doesn't want the transcript of his remarks about Crowley's momma made public. He would be exposed as the Bozo he is. So, no.
It reminds me of when McKinney, the congresswoman was arrested for disorderly conduct when she hit the policeman when he asked to see her ID when she was going into the capital building. I'm sure she figured it was racial profiling while the fact was, she wasn't wearing her congressional pin. There are about 435 congress members. It isn't like someone would recognize all of them. Many blacks seem to have this in the backs of their minds and it makes them over react in these circumstances.Ltd
Yes. of course!! He has a right to be upset as he wants to be. Police came into his home and after seeing his ID and university ID arrested him. You can say what you want about who ever mother you want to!! Of course he was upset when they didn't believe he was who he said he was. He pays the bills for that house and after they see his ID's they still need to call and verify I would have been highly upset too. A lot of people don't want to admit that race had something to do with it because they've never been affected by racism but hello!! Yes it still happens and if he was white it would have been settled after seeing his ID or a break-in never would have been called in anyway!! Get over it people racism still exist!!Should Professor Henry Lewis Gates of Harvard Sue Cambridge Police Dept. For False Arrest? Courts to Decide?
As a matter of fact he should sue the police department. They should have not arrested the man in the first place after he presented his id from the university and his state issued id. The officers knew it was his home, and there was no need to arrest him. What would you do if a police officer asked you to see your id in your own home, you do so, then they arrest you? I think that it it a racial thing, and I'am a white attorney. I just believe that the police did do a false arrest.
I do not believe this arrest was racially based but attributed based,
The problem that majority of supports of the officer forget is a little something called the first amendment right to free speech, Now we all know we are not free to say anything we like at any time, but in order to curtail a person right of speech the restriction must past a strict scrutiny test,
So in Gates case: while the investigation was under way, the professor gates was not free to say or act how ever he wanted, but once that investigation concluded, and professor gates decided to give attitude to the officer rightfully or wrongfully, unless those words where “fighting words” i.e. hostile intent against the officer or others, the officer did not have the right to arrest for disorderly conduct on his own porch, even though the porch is quasi public,
Demanding in a boisterous manner the officer ID and badge number on his own porch is a first amendment right at that point, saying I’ll see your mama on the porch while rude does not equate to a criminal offense, The first amendment does say you can be rude to Presidents, politicians, School teachers, etc, but in no way in any manner can you be rude to a officer of the law
The DA dropped the case not from pressure but they looked at the incident report i.e. the officer own words and rightfully found that a older man, on his own porch acting in a Tumultuous manner i.e. noisy/ greatly agitated did not equate to a criminal complaint solely on his first amendment right to free speech
Also Since the officer teaches racial profiling you would assume he would be able to identify the likely route cause of the professors tumultuous manner, rightly or wrongfully on the professor side and factor it into his assessment on the situation
In my opinion what happen was professor on his own porch was giving lip to the officer in front of fellow officers and members of the public neither one was going to back down, but both should have temper their actions; the end result professor is arrested and the officer name is splashed all over the world, a outcome I think neither wanted in the end
No. An investigation has already been done, and Crowley was found to have acted appropriately. Gates is backing off now, because he knows that the 911 call and testimony from neighbors will show that HE was disorderly and racist.
I wish he would. That way the truth would be brought out that Gates acted like a racist moron.
I think Professor Gates should do what his Attorneys thinks is necessary.
I am still trying to figure out why the police called for back up after he saw Gates ID? Adn called for Harvard Police to verify Gates lived in this house?
No
False arrest? The arrest was very real, and for a good reason too. Gates was making a public disturbance and harrassing an officer who was calmly trying to sort out the situation and keep Gates under control.
Gates is an arrogant, racist elitist who deserved to spend a few hours in jail. Almost everyone in Massachusetts supports Crowley (except the governor, the Boston Globe, and Gates' Harvard buddies) and it should be the police department who sues Gates for defamation.
Yes. Originally I thought that he should be content with an apology from the arresting officer. But now the officer has said ';I have nothing to apologize for.'; He needs to be educated about free speech, and unfortunately that may require a law suit.
I don't know whether there was genuine racism on the part of the police officer, or whether Gates was being as nasty as described. But offending a policeman's delicate ego is not a crime in this country. I think we can all agree that no arrest should have been made.
Should Professor Henry Lewis Gates of Harvard Sue Cambridge Police Dept. For False Arrest? No, because it was not a false arrest.
Will Professor Henry Lewis Gates of Harvard Sue Cambridge Police Dept. For an Alleged and So-called False Arrest? Yes, because Gates has played the race card his entire life. Why should now be any different?
No way - the actions by the officer were appropriate and charges should not have been dropped.
I am fed up with the ';racism'; thing and am appalled at the ';stupidity'; of Mr. Obama.
No. It's pretty obvious that both Gates and Crowley want to put this episode behind them. Gates signed an agreement not to sue so that he could get released immediately, and although it's almost impossible to enforce those types of agreements in court it's equally difficult to sue a cop for false arrest and make it stick. I've heard through the grapevine that Crowley has been given a ';confidential off-the-record'; reprimand for arresting Gates. Police aren't suppose to enter private residences in a law enforcement capacity, except when there are exigent circumstances, they are in hot pursuit, or they are invited in the residence. Crowley screwed up but that's behind us.
No. He should stop crying racism, save face, and offer some sort of apology to the arresting officer for his conduct.
I think Mr Gates should consider a novel concept.... personal responsibility.
He probably doesn't want the transcript of his remarks about Crowley's momma made public. He would be exposed as the Bozo he is. So, no.
It reminds me of when McKinney, the congresswoman was arrested for disorderly conduct when she hit the policeman when he asked to see her ID when she was going into the capital building. I'm sure she figured it was racial profiling while the fact was, she wasn't wearing her congressional pin. There are about 435 congress members. It isn't like someone would recognize all of them. Many blacks seem to have this in the backs of their minds and it makes them over react in these circumstances.
If you put Christianity on trial, say under the US courts system, would it be ruled true or false?
assume a civil proceeding burden of proof (preponderance of evidence) for argument's sakeIf you put Christianity on trial, say under the US courts system, would it be ruled true or false?
Minjask - ';true. you would be amazed at how much science actualy proves God's existence.';
No evidence has ever been presented that even points towards God's existence, much less proves it.
This, obviously, does not amaze me.
What *would* amaze me is if you became the first person in the history of humanity to actually provide some evidence. So, please, amaze me. I love to be amazed.If you put Christianity on trial, say under the US courts system, would it be ruled true or false?
Science cannot prove, it can only disprove. As science concerns itself solely with material tests it cannot say anything about God. There are many evidences for God. Go amaze yourself with metaphysical evidences put forward by Kant, Hobbes, Plantinga, Craig etc.
It would be both true and false because people hold different truths: what's true for one may not be true for the other, but that doesn't mean the other person's truth is false -- it's just not true for anther person.
If Christianity were to be put on trial, it would be the longest court hearing ever and would probably continue for all eternity since it has been under scrutiny and argument since it's inception. And it all comes down to folks arguing truths.
There was a law lecturer at Harvard University who was an atheist. He used to tell his students not to decide on anything without first considering the evidence. One day, one of his students asked him about Christianity.The lecturer said that he did not believe in Christianity. To his embarrassment he had to admit that he did not consider the evidence. So the law teacher studied Christianity. He became a Christian. His name is Simon Greenleaf (please look up Wikipaedia).
great question! the answer is it would be ruled TRUE, even under a criminal ';proof beyond a reasonable doubt'; standard.
so why are so few people Christians? because they don't actually want to hear the evidence with an open mind and an open heart, but want to rather assume that the answer is false, since that would keep things status quo for them.
Back in the day, Americas top lawyer did just that. He was an athiest but after he pur the Bible through a rigoris legal trial, he was a totally comitted Christian.
It has already been done and the Bible was ruled true.
This is a moot question, in additional to being an impossible question. The US courts system does not put belief systems on trial.
Go in peace.
And, always remember: -- Jesus loves you!!
Sincerely,
Uncle Floyd
Innocent until proven guilty would become false until proven true. So, any religious belief (or lack of belief) would be ruled false.
Christianity created the american way and the constitution,so you will have to put itself on trial. I never heard of anyone suing themselves.
Neither. Just unconstitutional to force people to live by it.
true. you would be amazed at how much science actualy proves God's existence.
Well it can't be disproves either so under the justice system it would get off :-)
Unresolved.
Well if we're looking for proof, then it'd definitly be ruled as false.
False, of course.
By Christian standards, all murderers would walk free.
That's sort of what Dover vs. Kitzmiller was. ID lost.
false as there is no evidence to support its claims
Minjask - ';true. you would be amazed at how much science actualy proves God's existence.';
No evidence has ever been presented that even points towards God's existence, much less proves it.
This, obviously, does not amaze me.
What *would* amaze me is if you became the first person in the history of humanity to actually provide some evidence. So, please, amaze me. I love to be amazed.If you put Christianity on trial, say under the US courts system, would it be ruled true or false?
Science cannot prove, it can only disprove. As science concerns itself solely with material tests it cannot say anything about God. There are many evidences for God. Go amaze yourself with metaphysical evidences put forward by Kant, Hobbes, Plantinga, Craig etc.
Report Abuse
It would be both true and false because people hold different truths: what's true for one may not be true for the other, but that doesn't mean the other person's truth is false -- it's just not true for anther person.
If Christianity were to be put on trial, it would be the longest court hearing ever and would probably continue for all eternity since it has been under scrutiny and argument since it's inception. And it all comes down to folks arguing truths.
There was a law lecturer at Harvard University who was an atheist. He used to tell his students not to decide on anything without first considering the evidence. One day, one of his students asked him about Christianity.The lecturer said that he did not believe in Christianity. To his embarrassment he had to admit that he did not consider the evidence. So the law teacher studied Christianity. He became a Christian. His name is Simon Greenleaf (please look up Wikipaedia).
great question! the answer is it would be ruled TRUE, even under a criminal ';proof beyond a reasonable doubt'; standard.
so why are so few people Christians? because they don't actually want to hear the evidence with an open mind and an open heart, but want to rather assume that the answer is false, since that would keep things status quo for them.
Back in the day, Americas top lawyer did just that. He was an athiest but after he pur the Bible through a rigoris legal trial, he was a totally comitted Christian.
It has already been done and the Bible was ruled true.
This is a moot question, in additional to being an impossible question. The US courts system does not put belief systems on trial.
Go in peace.
And, always remember: -- Jesus loves you!!
Sincerely,
Uncle Floyd
Innocent until proven guilty would become false until proven true. So, any religious belief (or lack of belief) would be ruled false.
Christianity created the american way and the constitution,so you will have to put itself on trial. I never heard of anyone suing themselves.
Neither. Just unconstitutional to force people to live by it.
true. you would be amazed at how much science actualy proves God's existence.
Well it can't be disproves either so under the justice system it would get off :-)
Unresolved.
Well if we're looking for proof, then it'd definitly be ruled as false.
False, of course.
By Christian standards, all murderers would walk free.
That's sort of what Dover vs. Kitzmiller was. ID lost.
false as there is no evidence to support its claims
True or False..family courts are biased towards women?
come on..tell the truth..True or False..family courts are biased towards women?
true, my parents are divorced and because of that i see my mom way more than my dad and he didnt do anything wrongTrue or False..family courts are biased towards women?
Complicated.
By agreement between the two parties, women generally get custody, but when men try to obtain it, they generally get custody, at least as found by the Massachusetts Supreme Court:
';We began our investigation of child custody aware of a common perception that there is a bias in favor of women in these decisions. Our research contradicted this perception. Although mothers more frequently get primary physical custody of children following divorce, this practice does not reflect bias but rather the agreement of the parties and the fact that, in most families, mothers have been the primary caretakers of children. Fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physical custody over 70% of the time. Reports indicate, however, that in some cases perceptions of gender bias may discourage fathers from seeking custody and stereotypes about fathers may sometimes affect case outcomes. In general, our evidence suggests that the courts hold higher standards for mothers than fathers in custody determinations.';
Very true. When it comes to divorce women are the victims regardless of circumstances. In child custody women are seen as the natural ';caregivers';and ';nurturers'; even though this is not always the case, so she has the biased advantage. Don't expect feminists to be promote ';equality'; in this area of society.
They're supposed to be on the children's side.
So you think they are biased against men? I've just had a friend sobbing on the phone - she's threatening to commit suicide. Again. Because she can't take it anymore. She's working in a stressful job, her boss has told her to increase her hours, she can't afford childcare, her ex refuses to help her out by looking after the kids after school. He also quibbles over the child support, has had it reduced because he has the kids one night a week. He doesn't pay towards childcare - £800 in the month of August - after school care, or during the holidays.
And he doesn't have to - he can walk away. Her son is coming home from school to an empty house - he's 11. If anything happens to him, she gets done for negligence, not him. And he's the one who walked away from the marriage.
And you think the courts are biased against men?
What to you mean ';biased';?
';Biased'; means ';prejudiced'; or ';bias against';...
Do you mean that you're saying that family courts are prejudiced against women?
Or maybe the ';towards'; means the opposite.
I do not think and I do not hope so.
(I'm just a housewife with a cheating husband, having a pregnant girlfriend half his age...I sure hope the judge will side with me...)
Yes, but this is changing, and has been changing for a long time.
Traditionally women get the kids, Im guessing since they came from her body, she has first consideration. That is kinda fair as far as I think.
But just for that fact, if the child will have a better life with the father, and the father proves to the court, that financially, spiritually, and stability would be better provided in his home, there is no reason not to give custody to the father.
I disagree as a whole. Maybe the majority are, but not all judges are biased, generally speaking. Some judges can be just as biased the other way around. Neither is such a great thing.
Some judges are loyal to cops so they can get the support of the police department come election time. That's probably even worse than gender bias. At least gender bias has a biological basis, which is that the mother takes care of the baby for at least 9 months where the dad does not. Just my opinion of course.
family courts are very biased. they always prefer the mother, except in extreme situations. society still believes that its the woman's job to raise a family and the man must work. even though no one will come out and say that, its definitely an underlying issue
Well, they are supposed to be biased in favor of the children......
but I have no direct experience, only lack of faith that the system delivers what it is supposed to deliver.
true been there done that and turned the tables.
Initially the bias is there because men are guilty until proved innocent.
to beat it you have to put your all into it, it costs mental and physical health and lots of money ...
true.
nearly always true.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;…
answer mine?
i really need your advice...
9 times out of 10 yes but i know a particular judge in my county that is known for her preference for the male in the duo so you just never know.
FALSE, very false.
Some judges may be biased toward women, but some are biased toward men, and some toward the people they know. It's more about the judge than the whole system.
I say NO it is all about who is the beter parent and who is most fit to act as parent i know most time MOM wins but if she is unfit or cheating or what ever the man stands a chance.
yep - increadibly so. Don't even get me started
(had 3 different female judges and the man is ALWAYS wrong....)
I'd say true, as exemplified by my dad's best friend's difficulties with his ex-wife.
in cases of custody then definitely unless she is extremely unsafe but I'm not sure about other types
TRUE, I cant believe someone actually asked this one
true true and more true.....
You need to ask???
True.
In the US, I would have to say true.
possibly but they wont ever admit it
TRUE!!!
TRUE TO THE MAX!
Ask any guy who's had to pay alimony.
True.
I'm a woman so I dont care....BoOYA!
true
true
true
true
not anymore. they're making up for lost time. catching up to the bs of fathers rights crap
true, my parents are divorced and because of that i see my mom way more than my dad and he didnt do anything wrongTrue or False..family courts are biased towards women?
Complicated.
By agreement between the two parties, women generally get custody, but when men try to obtain it, they generally get custody, at least as found by the Massachusetts Supreme Court:
';We began our investigation of child custody aware of a common perception that there is a bias in favor of women in these decisions. Our research contradicted this perception. Although mothers more frequently get primary physical custody of children following divorce, this practice does not reflect bias but rather the agreement of the parties and the fact that, in most families, mothers have been the primary caretakers of children. Fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physical custody over 70% of the time. Reports indicate, however, that in some cases perceptions of gender bias may discourage fathers from seeking custody and stereotypes about fathers may sometimes affect case outcomes. In general, our evidence suggests that the courts hold higher standards for mothers than fathers in custody determinations.';
Very true. When it comes to divorce women are the victims regardless of circumstances. In child custody women are seen as the natural ';caregivers';and ';nurturers'; even though this is not always the case, so she has the biased advantage. Don't expect feminists to be promote ';equality'; in this area of society.
They're supposed to be on the children's side.
So you think they are biased against men? I've just had a friend sobbing on the phone - she's threatening to commit suicide. Again. Because she can't take it anymore. She's working in a stressful job, her boss has told her to increase her hours, she can't afford childcare, her ex refuses to help her out by looking after the kids after school. He also quibbles over the child support, has had it reduced because he has the kids one night a week. He doesn't pay towards childcare - £800 in the month of August - after school care, or during the holidays.
And he doesn't have to - he can walk away. Her son is coming home from school to an empty house - he's 11. If anything happens to him, she gets done for negligence, not him. And he's the one who walked away from the marriage.
And you think the courts are biased against men?
What to you mean ';biased';?
';Biased'; means ';prejudiced'; or ';bias against';...
Do you mean that you're saying that family courts are prejudiced against women?
Or maybe the ';towards'; means the opposite.
I do not think and I do not hope so.
(I'm just a housewife with a cheating husband, having a pregnant girlfriend half his age...I sure hope the judge will side with me...)
Yes, but this is changing, and has been changing for a long time.
Traditionally women get the kids, Im guessing since they came from her body, she has first consideration. That is kinda fair as far as I think.
But just for that fact, if the child will have a better life with the father, and the father proves to the court, that financially, spiritually, and stability would be better provided in his home, there is no reason not to give custody to the father.
I disagree as a whole. Maybe the majority are, but not all judges are biased, generally speaking. Some judges can be just as biased the other way around. Neither is such a great thing.
Some judges are loyal to cops so they can get the support of the police department come election time. That's probably even worse than gender bias. At least gender bias has a biological basis, which is that the mother takes care of the baby for at least 9 months where the dad does not. Just my opinion of course.
family courts are very biased. they always prefer the mother, except in extreme situations. society still believes that its the woman's job to raise a family and the man must work. even though no one will come out and say that, its definitely an underlying issue
Well, they are supposed to be biased in favor of the children......
but I have no direct experience, only lack of faith that the system delivers what it is supposed to deliver.
true been there done that and turned the tables.
Initially the bias is there because men are guilty until proved innocent.
to beat it you have to put your all into it, it costs mental and physical health and lots of money ...
true.
nearly always true.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;…
answer mine?
i really need your advice...
9 times out of 10 yes but i know a particular judge in my county that is known for her preference for the male in the duo so you just never know.
FALSE, very false.
Some judges may be biased toward women, but some are biased toward men, and some toward the people they know. It's more about the judge than the whole system.
I say NO it is all about who is the beter parent and who is most fit to act as parent i know most time MOM wins but if she is unfit or cheating or what ever the man stands a chance.
yep - increadibly so. Don't even get me started
(had 3 different female judges and the man is ALWAYS wrong....)
I'd say true, as exemplified by my dad's best friend's difficulties with his ex-wife.
in cases of custody then definitely unless she is extremely unsafe but I'm not sure about other types
TRUE, I cant believe someone actually asked this one
true true and more true.....
You need to ask???
True.
In the US, I would have to say true.
possibly but they wont ever admit it
TRUE!!!
TRUE TO THE MAX!
Ask any guy who's had to pay alimony.
True.
I'm a woman so I dont care....BoOYA!
true
true
true
true
not anymore. they're making up for lost time. catching up to the bs of fathers rights crap
Judicial review allows courts to review the constitutionality of lower courts' decisions. True of False?
False - it is the doctrine that allows the judiciary to review the constitutionality of legislative and executive acts.
True or false? ';Jewish people lived in their own section of Alexandria and held their own courts.';?
About Alexandria (Alexander the Great) and the Greek Empire-- Is that statement true or false? I'm pretty sure it's false, but can anybody correct that?
';Jewish people lived in their own section of Alexandria and held their own courts.';True or false? ';Jewish people lived in their own section of Alexandria and held their own courts.';?
It is actually true
The history of the Alexandrian Jews dates from the foundation of the city by Alexander the Great, 332 B.C., at which they were present. They were numerous from the very outset, forming a notable portion of the city's population under Alexander's successors. The Ptolemies assigned them a separate section, two of the five districts, of the city, to enable them to keep their laws pure of indigenous cultic influences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_鈥?/a>True or false? ';Jewish people lived in their own section of Alexandria and held their own courts.';?
It is false.
it is false... when alexandria conquered almost like half of the world... he conquered everything including israel.
false
';Jewish people lived in their own section of Alexandria and held their own courts.';True or false? ';Jewish people lived in their own section of Alexandria and held their own courts.';?
It is actually true
The history of the Alexandrian Jews dates from the foundation of the city by Alexander the Great, 332 B.C., at which they were present. They were numerous from the very outset, forming a notable portion of the city's population under Alexander's successors. The Ptolemies assigned them a separate section, two of the five districts, of the city, to enable them to keep their laws pure of indigenous cultic influences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_鈥?/a>True or false? ';Jewish people lived in their own section of Alexandria and held their own courts.';?
It is false.
it is false... when alexandria conquered almost like half of the world... he conquered everything including israel.
false
False statements; will the officials who told the press of de Menezes' ';aggressive manner'; face a court?
...individual officers, that is? The police said he jumped over the barrier, but paid for his ticket with a credit card and walked through. He was also accused of running away from them...he didn't. They claimed to have shouted warnings when they didn't.
It made me realise the police, like your normal Joe Bloggs will tell all sorts of lies, realising the truth in this particular case would finish them off.
Could be the reason why he was shot so many times was to make sure he would never 'awaken' to indeed tell the truth?False statements; will the officials who told the press of de Menezes' ';aggressive manner'; face a court?
Most likely the officials will not be taken to court for their false statements unless enough people who know the truth speak up and complain.
What you need to remember is that a world govt. is being formed and one of several things that must be done is convince the general public that it is in constant danger.
When the police screw up,they will say whatever they want until they get caught in a lie or two and then try to change their story.False statements; will the officials who told the press of de Menezes' ';aggressive manner'; face a court?
The man was not innocent he was here illegally had he not been so he would not have tried to run away and would not have got shot.
I understand that shanty town children are known to be shot by Police in certain South American countries because they count as vermin. I think Brazil may be one of them. A genuine error was made fortunately it is not illegal to lie to the press. However it is to lie to the Court.
The matter is closed and done. Let's just get on shall we! For whatever reason, de Menezes got shot dead. No words will ever change that. It's done.
de Menezes RIP.
Makes me wonder why a simple accident should be covered up. Blunder after blunder, lies upon lies, now they are covering up for SIR Ian Blair, incompetence is not an excuse. Will the public ever know the truth ? Is this English Justice ? I am sure the word HONOUR is not in SIR Blair's dictionary.
Would he have had a better chance in Brazil?......we all know the answer. IT WAS A MISTAKE
No chance ! ! these lot look after each other !
Of course not.
The present Government has so far done a good ';white wash';of the whole sordid affair; with the help of the chief of the Met.police force;whom they repaid by ensuring he retained his job.
Why should they ';rock the boat'; at this late date?
They have the newer problem of the ';lost discs'; and Mr Darling to deal with;and deciding how to present this as nothing of concern to the general public.
They have started by stating that they are probably on government property!
It would appear to have been a tragic accident as the Officers were given inaccurate information, but Sir Ian Blair must take the blame. I can't beleive that he wasn't aware of what had happened when he appeared on tv.
They should all be brought to justice, starting with Sir Ian Blair. An innocent man, shot dead in London all in the name of the war on terror and they tried to cover it up. Shameful!Ltd
It made me realise the police, like your normal Joe Bloggs will tell all sorts of lies, realising the truth in this particular case would finish them off.
Could be the reason why he was shot so many times was to make sure he would never 'awaken' to indeed tell the truth?False statements; will the officials who told the press of de Menezes' ';aggressive manner'; face a court?
Most likely the officials will not be taken to court for their false statements unless enough people who know the truth speak up and complain.
What you need to remember is that a world govt. is being formed and one of several things that must be done is convince the general public that it is in constant danger.
When the police screw up,they will say whatever they want until they get caught in a lie or two and then try to change their story.False statements; will the officials who told the press of de Menezes' ';aggressive manner'; face a court?
The man was not innocent he was here illegally had he not been so he would not have tried to run away and would not have got shot.
I understand that shanty town children are known to be shot by Police in certain South American countries because they count as vermin. I think Brazil may be one of them. A genuine error was made fortunately it is not illegal to lie to the press. However it is to lie to the Court.
The matter is closed and done. Let's just get on shall we! For whatever reason, de Menezes got shot dead. No words will ever change that. It's done.
de Menezes RIP.
Makes me wonder why a simple accident should be covered up. Blunder after blunder, lies upon lies, now they are covering up for SIR Ian Blair, incompetence is not an excuse. Will the public ever know the truth ? Is this English Justice ? I am sure the word HONOUR is not in SIR Blair's dictionary.
Would he have had a better chance in Brazil?......we all know the answer. IT WAS A MISTAKE
No chance ! ! these lot look after each other !
Of course not.
The present Government has so far done a good ';white wash';of the whole sordid affair; with the help of the chief of the Met.police force;whom they repaid by ensuring he retained his job.
Why should they ';rock the boat'; at this late date?
They have the newer problem of the ';lost discs'; and Mr Darling to deal with;and deciding how to present this as nothing of concern to the general public.
They have started by stating that they are probably on government property!
It would appear to have been a tragic accident as the Officers were given inaccurate information, but Sir Ian Blair must take the blame. I can't beleive that he wasn't aware of what had happened when he appeared on tv.
They should all be brought to justice, starting with Sir Ian Blair. An innocent man, shot dead in London all in the name of the war on terror and they tried to cover it up. Shameful!
I made a false statement to a police officer and it ended up having to go to court..help what do I do?
My husband and I have been seperated for the past 10 months and I made a false statement to the police saying he pushed me down the stairs and that I was pregnant..my next door neighbor called the cops and the rescue came..I told the police officers what happened and lied about it and the case has gone to superior court.I am supposed to testify tomorrow but nothing really happened.I was just mad at him. what is going to happen to me?I made a false statement to a police officer and it ended up having to go to court..help what do I do?
You have statistics working against you on this one.
First of all, it is common for victims of abuse to feel remorse and want to withdraw their statements.
Secondly, statistics show the truth comes easy, and lies require conscious thought. Studies also show it is more difficult to lie whey you are in a heightened emotional state. For these reasons, your initial statement will be given more credibility. For the same reasons, it is not likely the prosecutor will be interested in pursuing charges against you.
Even if you attempt to invoke your Fifth Amendment privilege, the prosecutor can ask the judge for ';one time immunity';. This means anything you say will not be used against you. You can then be compelled to testify.I made a false statement to a police officer and it ended up having to go to court..help what do I do?
You do not have to make any statements in court that will incriminate yourself. 5th amendment. Explain to the judge that any statements you made at the height of emotional turmoil were true to the best of your knowledge if need be, but I would stick with the silence approach. If you are asked to make a statement that you feel will get you in to legal trouble you just look everyone right in the eye and say, ';Fifth amendment, I will not answer that question.'; And in the future, don't lie to the police, say NOTHING to the police. They are NOT there to help you they are there to make sure that someone is punished in some way.
Your husband will declare you unworthy mother- he will have full custody of the child- every month you will pay monthly - child SUPPORT.-money..that will teach a lesson to lie ...against your wonderful husband.
Just tell them you're a pathological lying whore and they probably won't do anything about it.
Just say ya can't recall. Politicians do all the time, u don't see them in jail.
The judge will probably push you down some stairs
You will probably go to jail! or if you have a good lawyer you should be fine.
www.lawguru.com ask a lawyer that question for free.
ask your lawyer........and you're dumb for being with an abusive man
Mark Twain (Sammy Clements) once said, ';If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.';
That being said, you will always have to remember what you said, to whom you said it to, when you said it, where you were when you said it, etc. No one can remember all of the minor and insignificant details. So you will eventually get caught. Some detail that you reported will be denied by you later and that person will remember what you said that is different.
You can be charged with swearing a false statement to the police. Your credibility for any future violence by your husband against you will carry very little or no weight at all. At least your story may be called into question unless you have serious physical injuries to back up your claims. Expect your husband's attorney to question you about what happened. He will find discrepancies in your story vs what you told the police.
The fifth amendment probably won't help you here. You made a claim of abuse. You will have to testify to support your claim. Failure to testify may cast doubt about the incident. This is not like the state charging you with a crime where you could claim the 5th.
You have statistics working against you on this one.
First of all, it is common for victims of abuse to feel remorse and want to withdraw their statements.
Secondly, statistics show the truth comes easy, and lies require conscious thought. Studies also show it is more difficult to lie whey you are in a heightened emotional state. For these reasons, your initial statement will be given more credibility. For the same reasons, it is not likely the prosecutor will be interested in pursuing charges against you.
Even if you attempt to invoke your Fifth Amendment privilege, the prosecutor can ask the judge for ';one time immunity';. This means anything you say will not be used against you. You can then be compelled to testify.I made a false statement to a police officer and it ended up having to go to court..help what do I do?
You do not have to make any statements in court that will incriminate yourself. 5th amendment. Explain to the judge that any statements you made at the height of emotional turmoil were true to the best of your knowledge if need be, but I would stick with the silence approach. If you are asked to make a statement that you feel will get you in to legal trouble you just look everyone right in the eye and say, ';Fifth amendment, I will not answer that question.'; And in the future, don't lie to the police, say NOTHING to the police. They are NOT there to help you they are there to make sure that someone is punished in some way.
Your husband will declare you unworthy mother- he will have full custody of the child- every month you will pay monthly - child SUPPORT.-money..that will teach a lesson to lie ...against your wonderful husband.
Just tell them you're a pathological lying whore and they probably won't do anything about it.
Just say ya can't recall. Politicians do all the time, u don't see them in jail.
The judge will probably push you down some stairs
You will probably go to jail! or if you have a good lawyer you should be fine.
www.lawguru.com ask a lawyer that question for free.
ask your lawyer........and you're dumb for being with an abusive man
Mark Twain (Sammy Clements) once said, ';If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.';
That being said, you will always have to remember what you said, to whom you said it to, when you said it, where you were when you said it, etc. No one can remember all of the minor and insignificant details. So you will eventually get caught. Some detail that you reported will be denied by you later and that person will remember what you said that is different.
You can be charged with swearing a false statement to the police. Your credibility for any future violence by your husband against you will carry very little or no weight at all. At least your story may be called into question unless you have serious physical injuries to back up your claims. Expect your husband's attorney to question you about what happened. He will find discrepancies in your story vs what you told the police.
The fifth amendment probably won't help you here. You made a claim of abuse. You will have to testify to support your claim. Failure to testify may cast doubt about the incident. This is not like the state charging you with a crime where you could claim the 5th.
False accusations of physical and sexual abuse from previous marriage, can they take him to court?
This a complicated situation. I have been married to my huband for 9 years and we have 5 children. He was previously married for 17 years and had three children. When they divorced his ex wife got custody of kids and refused to allow him anywhere near them. She threatened him that she would do anything it took to keep him away and get him thrown in jail if he tried to see them. They agreed that there would be no spousal or child support. So to keep the peace and stability for his kids he did not see them for a number of years. When his youngest son was in high school the son got a job where we could see him once a week and they started a relationship again. Over the next 5 years they talked once a week, son came by to visit, played with siblings, made us a part of his family. There was never any contact with older two children and husband resepcted their wishes and didn't bother them. Son was killed at 21 years old in a job related accident. There is a wrongful death suit pending. Ex-wife has now claimed that husband abandoned family and had no realtionship with son. We just had to go through depositons and she claims that he physically abused her. She only could come up with two incidences and both are false. She said he kicked her with steel toed boots and she had to go to emergency room. Husband didn't own steel toed boots at the time. Oldest son, now 29, says he punched him once- also false, and daughter,now 27, is claiming that he sexually abused her from age 4, also false. If the mother knew this and believed it why did she not go to police years ago? Police were never called for any incident, there were no doctor visits, no counselling. I have never suspected husband of any wrong actions against our children. Can they turn this into a case and persue charges against my husband? There was never anything said until there are potentially millions of dollars at stake. just looking for opinions or advice.False accusations of physical and sexual abuse from previous marriage, can they take him to court?
The answer to your question is yes charges can be filed. The sound of this you are doing what a wife should do and that is uphold and believe your husband, then again you being a mother should look at how the other kids feel regardless of their ages... Sometimes kids will keep things to them self until they feel safe and secure even if it means waiting until you are an adult. Then I understand that sometimes people can be mean and cruel and do things that make absolutely no sense to anyone. This is a very bad situation that you guys are in.. may the truth help you out.. good luckFalse accusations of physical and sexual abuse from previous marriage, can they take him to court?
She can take him to court for anything, but the judges are not stupid, He or she will also wonder why these accusations are surfacing now instead of before. and will judge the case accordingly, the judge knows that just because it;s a deposition, it doesn't mean it's the truth.
I start wondering whenever a woman claims that everybody is lying except her husband. It's far more likely that there is only one liar in this scenario - your husband.
he needs proof...find witnesses of their relationship from back then. sorry
OKay I'm not saying one way or another if your husband is guilty or innocent. I'm just giving personal experience.
My mothers husband had been previously married and had two children. The ex-wife claimed he was abusive and violent. My mother stood beside and fought with him. It was all brought out during the custody battle. There was never any charges pressed or anything. He ended up with visitation. That didn't happen often and it wasn't a happy blending as I think his kids picked up his crazy gene. Anyway later on (much later) his son began to claim that he was abused -- not sexually, but physically -- like punches and stuff. The daughter says it never happened, but shes not very stable and lies alot. That's not biased that's just reality btw.
My mom stood by him during all these accusations. The psychiatric evaluation that was done on her husband during the court battles -- were false she said. Etc etc...
This year was their 15th year together. She finally kicked him out and started the process of divorce. He was abusive. Physically, emotionally, and verbally. He did throw my mom threw walls, he did manipulate me, and physically hurt my sisters (he could never hit me as I wasn't his child. My mom would have nailed his balls to the wall for that one for sure. She wasn't a weak woman, but he knew exactly how far to push her before she would leave him) Anyway, he was very abusive. The last straw was him having my mom raped by his co worker.
My point is that love can be blind. Some times women throw unfounded accusations out just to win these cases, but most times they are legitimate. It could be she didn't say anything during the divorce because she felt she was the victim. It's a big thing for a victim of abuse to stand up and divorce the abuser. Addinghumiliationn to that might not have been what she wanted to do. Abuse victims want to cut and leave. They have the survival instinct of ';just get away'; They don't care how they just want out. Therefore she might not have brought it up, at the time, due to that. Now that she has been free for 9 years she might feel a little more confident and secure to speak out about it.
Or, she could just be a gold digger, trying to make a profit off her sons death.
She can't really press charges because these things happened so long ago. There is no way to really prove them. There is a statue of limitations and chances are the deadline has passed. She can smear his name in court though but a good judge should dismiss it as ';he said, she said.';
In the end I would try to get documentation to prove her allegations false. But please be careful. There is a smallpercentagee of women that cry wolf, but there are still many who really were victimized. I personally watched my love blinded mom go through years of abuse and humiliation and still tell herself he wasn't abusive. Victims abuse lead rough lives.... but the hardest thing for them to do is to stand up and get out.
Anyone can sue another person in court for any reason, as long as their is solid proof..sounds like there are many serious issues pending. and your husband should be seeking out legal counsel..
If the ex wife has file any charges against your husband, then they would be an investigation by law enforcement..
they can make him go to court and fight it out int he court systems but once a judge looks at it he is basically going to see through the lies and see what is going on My Fiance is going through the same false accusations wtih his EX and three kids :0)
Just make sure your husband has PROOF that they are all LIES and the EX wife could also get into BIG BIG trouble with the law as she let it go on and KNEW about it before hand
My parents were married 16 years and in that time frame, my father molested my sister and brother both! My mom didn't know about it, and neither did my sister or brother go to Police or report it to any one.
If this lady says he abused her, he probably did. If your saying it was only twice..........what the heck does that mean? Isn't ONCE enough??
If his own kids say they were abused........they probably were!
People do and can change maybe this man has done so in his new marriage.
So in other words, your husband and you feel you deserve millions cause of the death of a son he wasn't even really a father to? Money hungry and your mad that the ex wife can profit from this and you may not? maybe go have one of your 5 die and get money that way!
';She threatened him that she would do anything it took to keep him away and get him thrown in jail if he tried to see them';.
If he was innocent, why in the world would he sit back and let her 'take' his children completely out of his live like that? It seems very unlikely. If it were my kids, I would fight with everything I had to keep them in my life regardless of 'false' claims of abuse.
How long have you known this man? Did you know him when he was still married to this woman? How do you know all of these allegations are false, as you say?
It sounds to me like she is terrified of him and having her children near him. This sounds like a woman who has been abused and may have witnessed her children being abused. Many women and kids do no report crimes of sexual or physical assault because of FEAR. If I were you, I would stop listening to the thoughts and ideas that your husband is feeding you, and listen to your intuition. What do you really feel, deep down in your gut? This story has way too many holes and questions. It's very fishy that ALL family members are claiming abuse. No man abandons his family when threatened like that, unless he knows he has done something wrong.
It also sounds like this is all coming to the surface again because there is a financial settlement in the near future. Honestly, hasn't any of this crossed your mind?
The answer to your question is yes charges can be filed. The sound of this you are doing what a wife should do and that is uphold and believe your husband, then again you being a mother should look at how the other kids feel regardless of their ages... Sometimes kids will keep things to them self until they feel safe and secure even if it means waiting until you are an adult. Then I understand that sometimes people can be mean and cruel and do things that make absolutely no sense to anyone. This is a very bad situation that you guys are in.. may the truth help you out.. good luckFalse accusations of physical and sexual abuse from previous marriage, can they take him to court?
She can take him to court for anything, but the judges are not stupid, He or she will also wonder why these accusations are surfacing now instead of before. and will judge the case accordingly, the judge knows that just because it;s a deposition, it doesn't mean it's the truth.
I start wondering whenever a woman claims that everybody is lying except her husband. It's far more likely that there is only one liar in this scenario - your husband.
he needs proof...find witnesses of their relationship from back then. sorry
OKay I'm not saying one way or another if your husband is guilty or innocent. I'm just giving personal experience.
My mothers husband had been previously married and had two children. The ex-wife claimed he was abusive and violent. My mother stood beside and fought with him. It was all brought out during the custody battle. There was never any charges pressed or anything. He ended up with visitation. That didn't happen often and it wasn't a happy blending as I think his kids picked up his crazy gene. Anyway later on (much later) his son began to claim that he was abused -- not sexually, but physically -- like punches and stuff. The daughter says it never happened, but shes not very stable and lies alot. That's not biased that's just reality btw.
My mom stood by him during all these accusations. The psychiatric evaluation that was done on her husband during the court battles -- were false she said. Etc etc...
This year was their 15th year together. She finally kicked him out and started the process of divorce. He was abusive. Physically, emotionally, and verbally. He did throw my mom threw walls, he did manipulate me, and physically hurt my sisters (he could never hit me as I wasn't his child. My mom would have nailed his balls to the wall for that one for sure. She wasn't a weak woman, but he knew exactly how far to push her before she would leave him) Anyway, he was very abusive. The last straw was him having my mom raped by his co worker.
My point is that love can be blind. Some times women throw unfounded accusations out just to win these cases, but most times they are legitimate. It could be she didn't say anything during the divorce because she felt she was the victim. It's a big thing for a victim of abuse to stand up and divorce the abuser. Addinghumiliationn to that might not have been what she wanted to do. Abuse victims want to cut and leave. They have the survival instinct of ';just get away'; They don't care how they just want out. Therefore she might not have brought it up, at the time, due to that. Now that she has been free for 9 years she might feel a little more confident and secure to speak out about it.
Or, she could just be a gold digger, trying to make a profit off her sons death.
She can't really press charges because these things happened so long ago. There is no way to really prove them. There is a statue of limitations and chances are the deadline has passed. She can smear his name in court though but a good judge should dismiss it as ';he said, she said.';
In the end I would try to get documentation to prove her allegations false. But please be careful. There is a smallpercentagee of women that cry wolf, but there are still many who really were victimized. I personally watched my love blinded mom go through years of abuse and humiliation and still tell herself he wasn't abusive. Victims abuse lead rough lives.... but the hardest thing for them to do is to stand up and get out.
Anyone can sue another person in court for any reason, as long as their is solid proof..sounds like there are many serious issues pending. and your husband should be seeking out legal counsel..
If the ex wife has file any charges against your husband, then they would be an investigation by law enforcement..
they can make him go to court and fight it out int he court systems but once a judge looks at it he is basically going to see through the lies and see what is going on My Fiance is going through the same false accusations wtih his EX and three kids :0)
Just make sure your husband has PROOF that they are all LIES and the EX wife could also get into BIG BIG trouble with the law as she let it go on and KNEW about it before hand
My parents were married 16 years and in that time frame, my father molested my sister and brother both! My mom didn't know about it, and neither did my sister or brother go to Police or report it to any one.
If this lady says he abused her, he probably did. If your saying it was only twice..........what the heck does that mean? Isn't ONCE enough??
If his own kids say they were abused........they probably were!
People do and can change maybe this man has done so in his new marriage.
So in other words, your husband and you feel you deserve millions cause of the death of a son he wasn't even really a father to? Money hungry and your mad that the ex wife can profit from this and you may not? maybe go have one of your 5 die and get money that way!
';She threatened him that she would do anything it took to keep him away and get him thrown in jail if he tried to see them';.
If he was innocent, why in the world would he sit back and let her 'take' his children completely out of his live like that? It seems very unlikely. If it were my kids, I would fight with everything I had to keep them in my life regardless of 'false' claims of abuse.
How long have you known this man? Did you know him when he was still married to this woman? How do you know all of these allegations are false, as you say?
It sounds to me like she is terrified of him and having her children near him. This sounds like a woman who has been abused and may have witnessed her children being abused. Many women and kids do no report crimes of sexual or physical assault because of FEAR. If I were you, I would stop listening to the thoughts and ideas that your husband is feeding you, and listen to your intuition. What do you really feel, deep down in your gut? This story has way too many holes and questions. It's very fishy that ALL family members are claiming abuse. No man abandons his family when threatened like that, unless he knows he has done something wrong.
It also sounds like this is all coming to the surface again because there is a financial settlement in the near future. Honestly, hasn't any of this crossed your mind?
What are the laws on filing a false police report? even if it doesn't make it to court?
my husband and his ex do not get along and they are in a custody battle over there 2 year old daughter.... she has 2 open cases against her right now in idaho for signing him up on porn sites and getting into his bank account and using the info against him. now she filed a police report stating he and his friends followed her (after one of there exchanges for there daughter) on the road and tried to run her down or scare her. she then tried to take him to court over it but then changed her mind as we agreed to meet at the police station for exchanges We have proof in her statement that she lied to the police about everything but she will not admit it. she gave the police a completely different story even the location of being followed then she did in her court papers. We also have that exchange of that night on video tape and with witnesses as to where the exchange was done. what are the laws against something like this? if any.What are the laws on filing a false police report? even if it doesn't make it to court?
Talk to a lawyer!!! You won't be able to check our credentials to see if we are qualified to answer your question!
Talk to a lawyer!!! You won't be able to check our credentials to see if we are qualified to answer your question!
False ticket after being searched and patted down. Help me for the court hearing?
I was driving home the other ight from a friends house and stopped at a stop light. a cop pulled up in the lane immediately perpendicular to me. my light changed and i slowly accelerated very aware that a cop was sitting there. i noticed that the cop then turned and followed me to a second stop light about 1/4 mile away. i was very aware that this was happening and was driving 35-37 in a 35. i got to the light and made a full stop and waited for it to change. as soon as it changed i slowly started to accelerate and boom the lights come on. I pulled over he came up to my window and asked for DL yada yada yada. he came back to my car and asked some questions then another cruiser pulls up. they ask me to step out of my car which i do. they ask me to search the vehicle which i say no to. then they sit in their cars and wait for about 10 minutes. then another unmarked cruiser pulls up and they bring a dog out to sniff the car. according to them the dog 'hit' on my car which gave them the right to search it. following a lengthy search of the vehicle they find nothing. after the finish searching the vehicle they then have me put my hands on the car and pat me down. they also find nothing. they finish that up and then the another cop pulls up ad just starts to BS with the other ones. finally after 45 minutes of standing on the side of the road the cop who originally pulled me over brings me to the back of his cruiser and writes me a ticket for doing 45 in a 35. Not only is this a lie but i feel like this lie perpetrated the search of my vehicle therefore making the search illegal and a violation of my fourth amendment. i plan on setting a court date tommarrow. any advice on what to do?False ticket after being searched and patted down. Help me for the court hearing?
The legal principle you are referring to is called the Exclusionary Rule, commonly referred to a The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine. It states anything that arises from an illegal act is not admissible in court. The problem is, the officer is alleging you were speeding. That happened before the search, not after. Therefore, the Exclusionary Rule does not apply.
Keep in mind it was not how fast you were going when you saw the officer, it was how fast you were going when he saw you. It is possible you were clocked long before he pulled next to you.
Officers with computers in the car will sometimes run your plate and wait for a return before they stop you. This could take a couple minutes. That would explain the delay in stopping you.
You can request a copy of the officer's report from the department, or from the prosecuting attorney if you plea not guilty. His report will indicate where you were clocked doing 45, and what method he used to clock you.False ticket after being searched and patted down. Help me for the court hearing?
Take it to court and contest the ticket. Many officers are too busy to show up and sometimes judges will clear the case on your favor. Good luck.
The first bit of advice I give you is to not mention you believe the search to be a violation of your fourth amendment right, because it wasn't. Unless you are trained in drug sniffing dogs and can attest to the fact that the dog was not set off by your car, you have no case. A dog can sniff your vehicle without a warrant. They state the dog gave them an indication that there was illegal drugs in your vehicle, which gives them the ability to search your vehicle. Your fourth amendment rights were not violated, regardless of how you feel.
If you have proof you were not speeding, and the officer didn't have you on radar, you will have a case, but if it's your word against theirs, you are more than likely going to lose. You have a better chance of winning if the officer doesn't show up, but you are not guaranteed to win simply because they don't show up. Be respectful and if the judge finds you guilty, ask for leniency on the fine.
The Supreme Court has determined that you have the right to not give consent to a search of your vehicle. If a cop has reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed he wouldn't ask for permission. They HATE it when you exercise your rights. The dog search is permissible however.
Basically you pissed them off and they made you pay for it. Fight the ticket but you may have to get a lawyer to do it. Keep in mind, though, that this will further piss them off. If you live in this town, pay the ticket and let it go.
boy are you really that you know...off the wall ? you need to pay the fine and get on with life and the next time you get pulled over and have nothing to fear when the cop asks to search your car say please do officer is there anything else that I can do or say to help you ?
The legal principle you are referring to is called the Exclusionary Rule, commonly referred to a The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine. It states anything that arises from an illegal act is not admissible in court. The problem is, the officer is alleging you were speeding. That happened before the search, not after. Therefore, the Exclusionary Rule does not apply.
Keep in mind it was not how fast you were going when you saw the officer, it was how fast you were going when he saw you. It is possible you were clocked long before he pulled next to you.
Officers with computers in the car will sometimes run your plate and wait for a return before they stop you. This could take a couple minutes. That would explain the delay in stopping you.
You can request a copy of the officer's report from the department, or from the prosecuting attorney if you plea not guilty. His report will indicate where you were clocked doing 45, and what method he used to clock you.False ticket after being searched and patted down. Help me for the court hearing?
Take it to court and contest the ticket. Many officers are too busy to show up and sometimes judges will clear the case on your favor. Good luck.
The first bit of advice I give you is to not mention you believe the search to be a violation of your fourth amendment right, because it wasn't. Unless you are trained in drug sniffing dogs and can attest to the fact that the dog was not set off by your car, you have no case. A dog can sniff your vehicle without a warrant. They state the dog gave them an indication that there was illegal drugs in your vehicle, which gives them the ability to search your vehicle. Your fourth amendment rights were not violated, regardless of how you feel.
If you have proof you were not speeding, and the officer didn't have you on radar, you will have a case, but if it's your word against theirs, you are more than likely going to lose. You have a better chance of winning if the officer doesn't show up, but you are not guaranteed to win simply because they don't show up. Be respectful and if the judge finds you guilty, ask for leniency on the fine.
The Supreme Court has determined that you have the right to not give consent to a search of your vehicle. If a cop has reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed he wouldn't ask for permission. They HATE it when you exercise your rights. The dog search is permissible however.
Basically you pissed them off and they made you pay for it. Fight the ticket but you may have to get a lawyer to do it. Keep in mind, though, that this will further piss them off. If you live in this town, pay the ticket and let it go.
boy are you really that you know...off the wall ? you need to pay the fine and get on with life and the next time you get pulled over and have nothing to fear when the cop asks to search your car say please do officer is there anything else that I can do or say to help you ?
I'm in drug court, how do i fight a sanction for a false positive from eating poppy seed bagels?
I'm in drug court in Michigan. I have been sanctioned with a week in jail for producing a false positve urine test from eating bagels that contained poppy seeds. The judge said I had extremely high levels of codene and morphine in my system the day of the false positve. However the following morning I tested clean. The judge will most likely count this as a relapse and I will then have to repeat a whole phase all over again.
I know i did not relapse, my probation officer and my counseler both strongly believe that I did not use any drugs. I am in a bind because in drug court I have given up my rights to seek any counsel. Is there a way for me to legally fix this. I am seriously afraid to eat because I do not want to go back to jail.
I want to know if I can move back to Chicago. I feel that this whole drug court is ruining my life. It is keeping me from succeeding. I have a little over a yr left in college I'm getting a BS in IT/programming, I have 2 kids and a wife. The economy is terrible here in Michigan there are no jobs. I feel like drug court has made my life worse instead of making it better.
I have never missed a drug test, i was only late twice. I have made every AA meeting, and attended every counseling meeting. What should I do?I'm in drug court, how do i fight a sanction for a false positive from eating poppy seed bagels?
Why would you back up your answer with the excuse that you're an LPN? All LPNs do is wipe ***. You don't have to consume large amounts of poppy seeds to fail a drug test.Consult you're attorney and talk to your probation officer. You can also bring in an expert source to testify on your behalf, like a chemist, someone more familar with information about diagnostic procedures and laboratory work.I'm in drug court, how do i fight a sanction for a false positive from eating poppy seed bagels?
Yeah, Poppy Seeds are a myth. You might as well drop out of drug court, take the revocation and do the straight time.
In the long run you will be better off.
Honesty is the first step with any recovery (yes, you are an addict with multiple drug counts) but you are a far cry from recovery.
Just do the prison sentence. 3 squares and cot is still better than a junkie lifestyle.
You're full of crap. FYI that's the OLDEST excuse in the book and everyone knows that you have to eat a large amount of poopyseeds for it to cause a positive. That's why they aren't going to let you get out of it.....
And eating one or 2 the night before wouldn't cause that. I'm an LPN so you can't fool me.
Don't even try to use that excuse, just stop using opiates. Obviously this event decreased your quality of life, but that was something to consider before you used drugs illegally.
okay well according to research you would have to consume ungodly amounts of poppy seeds to fail a piss test. So in that case, your screwed, even if you are telling the truth. I would have to say you will not get out of it, hypothetically if i was a cop i would think you lied, and bought the receipt because you knew you would fail and needed an alibi.. i don't know what to say except get a good lawyer.
everyone knows you can't eat poppy seeds before a drug test but if you did there is an extra test to tell if it was from poppy seeds or not so they know already and if you tell this story in court your gonna be in a lot more trouble. if you think drug court is bad try to get a job with a drug conviction on your record you'll never be able to pass a security clearance or even a basic background check
I know i did not relapse, my probation officer and my counseler both strongly believe that I did not use any drugs. I am in a bind because in drug court I have given up my rights to seek any counsel. Is there a way for me to legally fix this. I am seriously afraid to eat because I do not want to go back to jail.
I want to know if I can move back to Chicago. I feel that this whole drug court is ruining my life. It is keeping me from succeeding. I have a little over a yr left in college I'm getting a BS in IT/programming, I have 2 kids and a wife. The economy is terrible here in Michigan there are no jobs. I feel like drug court has made my life worse instead of making it better.
I have never missed a drug test, i was only late twice. I have made every AA meeting, and attended every counseling meeting. What should I do?I'm in drug court, how do i fight a sanction for a false positive from eating poppy seed bagels?
Why would you back up your answer with the excuse that you're an LPN? All LPNs do is wipe ***. You don't have to consume large amounts of poppy seeds to fail a drug test.Consult you're attorney and talk to your probation officer. You can also bring in an expert source to testify on your behalf, like a chemist, someone more familar with information about diagnostic procedures and laboratory work.I'm in drug court, how do i fight a sanction for a false positive from eating poppy seed bagels?
Yeah, Poppy Seeds are a myth. You might as well drop out of drug court, take the revocation and do the straight time.
In the long run you will be better off.
Honesty is the first step with any recovery (yes, you are an addict with multiple drug counts) but you are a far cry from recovery.
Just do the prison sentence. 3 squares and cot is still better than a junkie lifestyle.
You're full of crap. FYI that's the OLDEST excuse in the book and everyone knows that you have to eat a large amount of poopyseeds for it to cause a positive. That's why they aren't going to let you get out of it.....
And eating one or 2 the night before wouldn't cause that. I'm an LPN so you can't fool me.
Don't even try to use that excuse, just stop using opiates. Obviously this event decreased your quality of life, but that was something to consider before you used drugs illegally.
okay well according to research you would have to consume ungodly amounts of poppy seeds to fail a piss test. So in that case, your screwed, even if you are telling the truth. I would have to say you will not get out of it, hypothetically if i was a cop i would think you lied, and bought the receipt because you knew you would fail and needed an alibi.. i don't know what to say except get a good lawyer.
everyone knows you can't eat poppy seeds before a drug test but if you did there is an extra test to tell if it was from poppy seeds or not so they know already and if you tell this story in court your gonna be in a lot more trouble. if you think drug court is bad try to get a job with a drug conviction on your record you'll never be able to pass a security clearance or even a basic background check
People's Court fans: I heard that ';Douglas'; the bailiff played for the Patriots - True or False ?
I know he worked on a fishing boat, but that's about it.
What is his last name so I can look him up - I'm sure he was pre-cheater (Coach Bill B.), as far as when he played - probably had a very short career.People's Court fans: I heard that ';Douglas'; the bailiff played for the Patriots - True or False ?
hmm i never heard that but he looks like he could've been... did you know on judge judy.. byrd is really doing crossword puzzles on that clip board of his.... i saw it the other day... he had the puzzle clipped right on.. lol... i always thought he was taking notes or somethingPeople's Court fans: I heard that ';Douglas'; the bailiff played for the Patriots - True or False ?
Douglas McIntosh
http://www.patriots.com/news/index.cfm?a鈥?/a>
Did Douglas Macintosh who is on the People鈥檚 Court ever play for you? The judge on the show said he did, me being a fan, cannot remember him.
William Hammer
No, I don鈥檛 think Douglas ever played for me. Of course I have never been a coach or an owner of a team, so I don鈥檛 really know how he could have played for me. Sorry to hammer you back with that shot, I鈥檓 just kidding. And I can鈥檛 find any record of him playing for the Patriots at any point either.
Andy Hart
Also his bio on http://peoplescourt.warnerbros.com/about鈥?/a>
does not mention it.Ltd
What is his last name so I can look him up - I'm sure he was pre-cheater (Coach Bill B.), as far as when he played - probably had a very short career.People's Court fans: I heard that ';Douglas'; the bailiff played for the Patriots - True or False ?
hmm i never heard that but he looks like he could've been... did you know on judge judy.. byrd is really doing crossword puzzles on that clip board of his.... i saw it the other day... he had the puzzle clipped right on.. lol... i always thought he was taking notes or somethingPeople's Court fans: I heard that ';Douglas'; the bailiff played for the Patriots - True or False ?
Douglas McIntosh
http://www.patriots.com/news/index.cfm?a鈥?/a>
Did Douglas Macintosh who is on the People鈥檚 Court ever play for you? The judge on the show said he did, me being a fan, cannot remember him.
William Hammer
No, I don鈥檛 think Douglas ever played for me. Of course I have never been a coach or an owner of a team, so I don鈥檛 really know how he could have played for me. Sorry to hammer you back with that shot, I鈥檓 just kidding. And I can鈥檛 find any record of him playing for the Patriots at any point either.
Andy Hart
Also his bio on http://peoplescourt.warnerbros.com/about鈥?/a>
does not mention it.
My police report contained false information...what will happen when I go to court?
I had misdemeanor charges for attempting to elude and officer and reckless driving. I went to pick up the police report from the county, and upon reading it found out that the officer had a false report. In the report he said that I passed a car and was driving in the opposite lane for a bit then turned from it which did not happen. I am 18 and was not even tested for drugs or alcohol even though I was driving at extremely high speeds and was reckless. In fact the officer did not even write my name S.S. number, DOB, in the space provided. The only place my name was written on the report was in the description of the chase where he said my name after he found my wallet.
What should I do in Court? And can any of this help my case?My police report contained false information...what will happen when I go to court?
get a good lawyer.
you might be able to find a way out of it because of his lack of detail on filing out the report.My police report contained false information...what will happen when I go to court?
Good luck with that. In a court the cop is always right, and you're always wrong.
Hey - can't you be thankful that you got stopped and are not dead -- or you could be facing big prison time for killing someone else???
Go to court and plead Guilty to the charges -- pay your fine and do what ever the judge says for you to do. That means community service if ordered. Suspend or revolk your licenses....Don't ever let this happen again -- no 2nd chances...
As long as the officer can identify you as the driver, your SSAN and DOB can be added later.
By the sounds of it, you admitted ot being reckless even if you argue his statement that you passed a car, so I doubt that will help your case either.
Hey, prick. Accept responsiblity for your own actions. You probably DID drive in the opposite lane... he has a camera and you were an idiot.
Pay your fine and move on.
What should I do in Court? And can any of this help my case?My police report contained false information...what will happen when I go to court?
get a good lawyer.
you might be able to find a way out of it because of his lack of detail on filing out the report.My police report contained false information...what will happen when I go to court?
Good luck with that. In a court the cop is always right, and you're always wrong.
Hey - can't you be thankful that you got stopped and are not dead -- or you could be facing big prison time for killing someone else???
Go to court and plead Guilty to the charges -- pay your fine and do what ever the judge says for you to do. That means community service if ordered. Suspend or revolk your licenses....Don't ever let this happen again -- no 2nd chances...
As long as the officer can identify you as the driver, your SSAN and DOB can be added later.
By the sounds of it, you admitted ot being reckless even if you argue his statement that you passed a car, so I doubt that will help your case either.
Hey, prick. Accept responsiblity for your own actions. You probably DID drive in the opposite lane... he has a camera and you were an idiot.
Pay your fine and move on.
How can I get something to bring to court to show Ibuprofen can cause a false positive for thc?
I'm on probation, granted I did used to smoke pot before I got on probation but I haven't since being on probation. I happen to get surgery on a fri. and went in for a drug test on the next monday. When I went in for the surgey they doped me up on a lot of stuff and I have the note for that but they also gave me a RX for 800mg Ibuprofen (highest that can be given out) w/ directions to take 1 every 6 hours. so for 3 days leading up to my test I took the most Ibuprofen you can take and my drug test came back positive for benzifinze*sp (thats the stuff they gave me there) and THC. I was looking online and saw that enough Ibuprofen can come back as THC and honestly thats the only thing it could be. what can I bring to court to show that this false positive is possible?How can I get something to bring to court to show Ibuprofen can cause a false positive for thc?
Evidently you are correct (at least according to the cited web site below) that ibuprofen is one possible cause of a positive drug test for delta-9 cannibinol. Another possibility is if you used marijuana within 45 days prior to the drug test, it is at least possible that THC redistributing out of storage sites in fatty tissue in your body into the bloodstream may have been detected. That could make it look like you used marijuana, when you had not for several weeks.
Most drug tests are initially done first with a simple screening method such as immunoassay (similar to home pregnancy kits). If the screening test is positive, then a more specific test (such as gas chromatography-mass spectrometry) is used as a confirmatory test. By federal law, drug tests have to be set with minimum detectable levels, so that false positives are not reported. That minimizes people getting a positive opioid test for eating a poppy seed bagel or positive THC test for being in a confined space with a bunch of people smoking marijuana.
Although the cited web site has some points of contact where you can further information, you may want to consider consulting an attorney with expertise in drugs of abuse testing.
I hope things work out for you, you are not alone:
http://answers.google.com/answers/thread鈥?/a>
Evidently you are correct (at least according to the cited web site below) that ibuprofen is one possible cause of a positive drug test for delta-9 cannibinol. Another possibility is if you used marijuana within 45 days prior to the drug test, it is at least possible that THC redistributing out of storage sites in fatty tissue in your body into the bloodstream may have been detected. That could make it look like you used marijuana, when you had not for several weeks.
Most drug tests are initially done first with a simple screening method such as immunoassay (similar to home pregnancy kits). If the screening test is positive, then a more specific test (such as gas chromatography-mass spectrometry) is used as a confirmatory test. By federal law, drug tests have to be set with minimum detectable levels, so that false positives are not reported. That minimizes people getting a positive opioid test for eating a poppy seed bagel or positive THC test for being in a confined space with a bunch of people smoking marijuana.
Although the cited web site has some points of contact where you can further information, you may want to consider consulting an attorney with expertise in drugs of abuse testing.
I hope things work out for you, you are not alone:
http://answers.google.com/answers/thread鈥?/a>
Are Republicans upset that the Supreme court ruled in favor of Democrats against false allegations ?
of voter fraud in Ohio?
The Supreme Court sided Friday with Ohio's top elections official( who is a Democrat) in a dispute with the state Republican Party over voter registrations.
The justices overruled a federal appeals court that had ordered Ohio's top elections official to do more to help counties verify voter eligibility.
In court filings, it stated that the GOP has not produced any specific evidence of voting fraud, only unsubstantiated reports that voters from other states had cast fraudulent ballots during the early voting period.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081017/ap_o… Are Republicans upset that the Supreme court ruled in favor of Democrats against false allegations ?
Good stuff. Thanks for the link.
Edit: Funny how earlier claims here of ';WATCH THIS ACORN IS GOING TO BE SHOT DOWN IN OHIO AND MCCAIN WILL BE CROWNED PRESIDENT NOW'; ended up with the courts saying the GOP was full of crap and now we get replies like ';We figured as much, look who is on the bench. Bleeding heart liberals.';
I see that tin foil manufacturing is still a good place to invest money. Are Republicans upset that the Supreme court ruled in favor of Democrats against false allegations ?
The Ohio Secretary of State has admitted that almost one third (200,000 out of 660,000) new registrations do not match the information in DOT or social security databases. The fact that she does not seem to want to do anything about this is highly suspect.
The Supreme Court is obviously a liberal body that has been influenced by the MSM with their ';gotcha'; questions and have obviously not been watching enough Fox News to understand what's really happening in our country.
I'm not a republican but even I know that the Ohio Secretary of State has violated federal law by not having a system in place to verify voter registrations.
the subject was not based on false allegations. The Ohio secretary of state (a democrat) just didn't want to do the job as ordered by her state court.
Umm, have you really read anything about this
There was someone named Kqqqlanqa or something like that was registered
also Mickey Mouse was registered
.
No, were you upset when the Supreme Court decided in favor of GWB as president of the USA?
Not particularly.
We know that McCain will win despite the Liberal fraud.
does anyone really care? democrats and republicans are all losers
whoa, I didn't even know there was anything going on. How bad is that! ; )
We figured as much, look who is on the bench. Bleeding heart liberals.
In Chicago they are still investigating the electoral rolls and have condemned the democratic party machine in this city as one of patronage and Obama as one of the leaders of the process to enrol voters with so many repeat signings and false names including the whole of the Dodgers football team, how can he not claim to have known of the fact that 50% of all contributions come from members on the public payroll, in this city who got their jobs from this patronage, as well as taking on the man who was party secretary in this rotten borough, if black people are not more discriminating in their selection of candidates they may just get what they wish for, but history will recall a rotten candidate was their first choice as a black president, and what will that tell their children about whether they are any better than white racists, think again and check the facts....this is a big BIG mistake, and the press are failing in their responsibilities as guardians of the truth, this is not the best choice, there will be a black president eventually, but this should not be the one, if any black American does believe that, then America really is in trouble.......
Republicans have no regard for the law and that decision proves it.
repubs are always upset...
The Supreme Court sided Friday with Ohio's top elections official( who is a Democrat) in a dispute with the state Republican Party over voter registrations.
The justices overruled a federal appeals court that had ordered Ohio's top elections official to do more to help counties verify voter eligibility.
In court filings, it stated that the GOP has not produced any specific evidence of voting fraud, only unsubstantiated reports that voters from other states had cast fraudulent ballots during the early voting period.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081017/ap_o… Are Republicans upset that the Supreme court ruled in favor of Democrats against false allegations ?
Good stuff. Thanks for the link.
Edit: Funny how earlier claims here of ';WATCH THIS ACORN IS GOING TO BE SHOT DOWN IN OHIO AND MCCAIN WILL BE CROWNED PRESIDENT NOW'; ended up with the courts saying the GOP was full of crap and now we get replies like ';We figured as much, look who is on the bench. Bleeding heart liberals.';
I see that tin foil manufacturing is still a good place to invest money. Are Republicans upset that the Supreme court ruled in favor of Democrats against false allegations ?
The Ohio Secretary of State has admitted that almost one third (200,000 out of 660,000) new registrations do not match the information in DOT or social security databases. The fact that she does not seem to want to do anything about this is highly suspect.
The Supreme Court is obviously a liberal body that has been influenced by the MSM with their ';gotcha'; questions and have obviously not been watching enough Fox News to understand what's really happening in our country.
I'm not a republican but even I know that the Ohio Secretary of State has violated federal law by not having a system in place to verify voter registrations.
the subject was not based on false allegations. The Ohio secretary of state (a democrat) just didn't want to do the job as ordered by her state court.
Umm, have you really read anything about this
There was someone named Kqqqlanqa or something like that was registered
also Mickey Mouse was registered
.
No, were you upset when the Supreme Court decided in favor of GWB as president of the USA?
Not particularly.
We know that McCain will win despite the Liberal fraud.
does anyone really care? democrats and republicans are all losers
whoa, I didn't even know there was anything going on. How bad is that! ; )
We figured as much, look who is on the bench. Bleeding heart liberals.
In Chicago they are still investigating the electoral rolls and have condemned the democratic party machine in this city as one of patronage and Obama as one of the leaders of the process to enrol voters with so many repeat signings and false names including the whole of the Dodgers football team, how can he not claim to have known of the fact that 50% of all contributions come from members on the public payroll, in this city who got their jobs from this patronage, as well as taking on the man who was party secretary in this rotten borough, if black people are not more discriminating in their selection of candidates they may just get what they wish for, but history will recall a rotten candidate was their first choice as a black president, and what will that tell their children about whether they are any better than white racists, think again and check the facts....this is a big BIG mistake, and the press are failing in their responsibilities as guardians of the truth, this is not the best choice, there will be a black president eventually, but this should not be the one, if any black American does believe that, then America really is in trouble.......
Republicans have no regard for the law and that decision proves it.
repubs are always upset...
True or false: A person with abnormal brain activity and seizers, should not be on the Supreme Court.?
As long as it does not impair their ability to decide if something is constitutional or not it should not matter what kind of issue they have. That is the only job of the supreme court.True or false: A person with abnormal brain activity and seizers, should not be on the Supreme Court.?
I don't believe you deserve Best Answer, and that should have went Wounded Duck.
Abnormal brain activity, seizures, forgetfulness ,memory loss, brain damage after each seizure is too much for me, and all Americans deserve a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court that has a normal brain.
True or false: A person with abnormal brain activity and seizers, should not be on the Supreme Court.?
I worked with a psychologist who had stress seizures. They were quite horrible to witness, and appeared the same as organic. He looked like a boxer from falling on ground and objects. It would be entirely discriminatory to make this a disqualification for any job not involving motion acuity.
President Bush, yes I use the term though I despise him, has done more for idiocy in high positions, than any world leader in history. I don't mean Nazi, Japanese Militarist before and during WW11, and the like, because of the deaths they caused was different.
false!!!!!!!! every one as long as he/she is a legal citizen of these united states of America has the right to be on the supreme court.
Most seizures can be successfully managed without impairing judgement of those afflicted. This is not a reason for Roberts to step down.
Two seizers in 14 years doesn't exactly constitute a problem.
True, let alone be Chief Justice!
False. Seizures can be well controlled with medicine.
Although I would be happy to see him go...abnormal brain activity and seizures do not significantly handicap a judge.
False.
Give up your prejudices, and learn a little neurophysiology.
man hard question i dont think its a good idea....sorry dont do it...good luck
The man should be a be allowed to fulfill his term until he is no longer able to serve the country.
Based on this very limited information from a non-medical person, I'm assuming here. I realize I could be wrong.
It sounds like no but I would want to know more information.
I don't believe you deserve Best Answer, and that should have went Wounded Duck.
Abnormal brain activity, seizures, forgetfulness ,memory loss, brain damage after each seizure is too much for me, and all Americans deserve a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court that has a normal brain.
Report Abuse
True or false: A person with abnormal brain activity and seizers, should not be on the Supreme Court.?
I worked with a psychologist who had stress seizures. They were quite horrible to witness, and appeared the same as organic. He looked like a boxer from falling on ground and objects. It would be entirely discriminatory to make this a disqualification for any job not involving motion acuity.
President Bush, yes I use the term though I despise him, has done more for idiocy in high positions, than any world leader in history. I don't mean Nazi, Japanese Militarist before and during WW11, and the like, because of the deaths they caused was different.
false!!!!!!!! every one as long as he/she is a legal citizen of these united states of America has the right to be on the supreme court.
Most seizures can be successfully managed without impairing judgement of those afflicted. This is not a reason for Roberts to step down.
Two seizers in 14 years doesn't exactly constitute a problem.
True, let alone be Chief Justice!
False. Seizures can be well controlled with medicine.
Although I would be happy to see him go...abnormal brain activity and seizures do not significantly handicap a judge.
False.
Give up your prejudices, and learn a little neurophysiology.
man hard question i dont think its a good idea....sorry dont do it...good luck
The man should be a be allowed to fulfill his term until he is no longer able to serve the country.
Based on this very limited information from a non-medical person, I'm assuming here. I realize I could be wrong.
It sounds like no but I would want to know more information.
Each time i try to get my ex in court to get to see my child,my ex moves or files false charge is on me.?
Ipay child support in TN,she is in Ga. The state can not conbine childsupport %26amp; visatation to gether. Each time she make's a new claim it take's two years or more to get it trown out of court.She will not show up to let me defend myself. The state say they can not seem to locate her. No state will let you see your child with charges on you. GA law is so slow.Each time i try to get my ex in court to get to see my child,my ex moves or files false charge is on me.?
Sounds like you got screwed dude. Get an attorney and haul her into court.Each time i try to get my ex in court to get to see my child,my ex moves or files false charge is on me.?
You need a very good attorney.
David: This is a problem that is rampid throughout the US right now. There are support systems for men like you, you can find them and choose which one to join, however they bring experience to the table and can cut legal expenses way down by showing you the way. I will see if I can locate the good one that my friend joined...I would call but he is on vacation in Europe right now. Know that you are not alone....this is a common problem and it is a form of continued abuse.
Most states will take over jurisdiction on a case like yours. You shouldn't have to go from state to state to get a hearing. What you can do is file in the state that handled your divorce. Seek a summary judgement against her. Ask for full custody of your child. If she doesn't show up to court, than you will get a judgement for full custody. You can communicate this to her through newspapers in the last known address that you have. Once that order is in hand, she can't collect child support anymore, which will flush her out of hiding. She'd have to take you back to court to prove that she shouldn't have to give up custody. If you are contacted by another state's child support collection agency, fax them the NEW orders by the new judge. She'll have to deal with you face to face if she wants her support back.
Just a thought...
is there not a visitation schedule in the divorce decree? or is there even a divorce? she should have to give you notice before she moves (by law)
Sounds like you got screwed dude. Get an attorney and haul her into court.Each time i try to get my ex in court to get to see my child,my ex moves or files false charge is on me.?
You need a very good attorney.
David: This is a problem that is rampid throughout the US right now. There are support systems for men like you, you can find them and choose which one to join, however they bring experience to the table and can cut legal expenses way down by showing you the way. I will see if I can locate the good one that my friend joined...I would call but he is on vacation in Europe right now. Know that you are not alone....this is a common problem and it is a form of continued abuse.
Most states will take over jurisdiction on a case like yours. You shouldn't have to go from state to state to get a hearing. What you can do is file in the state that handled your divorce. Seek a summary judgement against her. Ask for full custody of your child. If she doesn't show up to court, than you will get a judgement for full custody. You can communicate this to her through newspapers in the last known address that you have. Once that order is in hand, she can't collect child support anymore, which will flush her out of hiding. She'd have to take you back to court to prove that she shouldn't have to give up custody. If you are contacted by another state's child support collection agency, fax them the NEW orders by the new judge. She'll have to deal with you face to face if she wants her support back.
Just a thought...
is there not a visitation schedule in the divorce decree? or is there even a divorce? she should have to give you notice before she moves (by law)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)