-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
PA soccer mom LTCF revocation hearing transcript now available
- Thread starter Mike
- Start date
Vegassteve
Regular Member
imported post
How do I need to type it in to make it work?
How do I need to type it in to make it work?
Statkowski
Regular Member
imported post
You need the latest version of Adobe Acrobat Reader (available for free elsewhere on-line).
You need the latest version of Adobe Acrobat Reader (available for free elsewhere on-line).
david.ross
Regular Member
imported post
The link is botched up..
Here is a correction, please correct the original link.
http://furryzone.com/user/insane_kangaroo/Appeal_from_Revocation_of_License.pdf
The link is botched up..
Here is a correction, please correct the original link.
http://furryzone.com/user/insane_kangaroo/Appeal_from_Revocation_of_License.pdf
Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
Thanks for the interesting read.
I see that we OCDO aren't the only ones struggling with such as 'allude v. elude'.
Thanks for the interesting read.
I see that we OCDO aren't the only ones struggling with such as 'allude v. elude'.
tracylaud83
Regular Member
imported post
Interesting read.
Thanks.
Interesting read.
Thanks.
shefearsnothing
Regular Member
imported post
Just an FYI....that is not accurate at all. There are things that have been completely changed. Not sure why but seeing how I was there and all....it's not even just my own testimony that has been changed (although it's mainly some of my convo with the judge that has been "altered" or outright butchered) but a few other parts that have been altered or omitted all together. *sigh*
Just an FYI....that is not accurate at all. There are things that have been completely changed. Not sure why but seeing how I was there and all....it's not even just my own testimony that has been changed (although it's mainly some of my convo with the judge that has been "altered" or outright butchered) but a few other parts that have been altered or omitted all together. *sigh*
Aran
Banned
imported post
Everyone's clearly out to get you.
Everyone's clearly out to get you.
imported post
shefearsnothing wrote:
Even with this, there were goofs and misquotes but they were not substantive.
Yata hey
shefearsnothing wrote:
I paid for my own court reporter for a case that was heard in a court that did not transcribe the testimony - only recorded the verdict. Had very good reason and the written record by a neutral party made all of the difference in the world with follow-up action.
Even with this, there were goofs and misquotes but they were not substantive.Yata hey
shefearsnothing
Regular Member
imported post
Grapeshot, while I am not "glad to hear this" I am in a way. I mean, I did not think it was done intentionally but was sort of annoyed with the way some of it ended up sounding in the end. Ok, it was very annoying that they completely ommitted the part where the sheriff said "I don't understand the question" and the question was VERY simple. :lol:
Grapeshot, while I am not "glad to hear this" I am in a way. I mean, I did not think it was done intentionally but was sort of annoyed with the way some of it ended up sounding in the end. Ok, it was very annoying that they completely ommitted the part where the sheriff said "I don't understand the question" and the question was VERY simple. :lol:
Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
Can you not object to the transcript as it says above the court reporter's signature?
Can you not object to the transcript as it says above the court reporter's signature?
imported post
Doug Huffman wrote:
Anybody with legal insight?
Yata hey
Doug Huffman wrote:
I suspect that the court does not allow digital recording equipment; therefore, any objection is going to end up meaningless unless very substansive and meaningful - perceived loss or bearing on another case.
Anybody with legal insight?
Yata hey
shefearsnothing
Regular Member
imported post
Well, I know they don't allow any digital recording devices to be taken into the courthouse (although about five reporters snuck them in...this I know because they had them for interviews when I walked out of the courtroom). To my knowledge know one else snuck one in and I don't know that the court itself records anything with a digital recorder. They really should though. In the grand scheme of things it's not the end of the world, like I said. It is a personal peeve of mine to be misquoted though.
Well, I know they don't allow any digital recording devices to be taken into the courthouse (although about five reporters snuck them in...this I know because they had them for interviews when I walked out of the courtroom). To my knowledge know one else snuck one in and I don't know that the court itself records anything with a digital recorder. They really should though. In the grand scheme of things it's not the end of the world, like I said. It is a personal peeve of mine to be misquoted though.
Tosta Dojen
Regular Member
imported post
The transcript reads to me like some pages are missing. Perhaps they were merely omitted when the transcript was assembled.
The transcript reads to me like some pages are missing. Perhaps they were merely omitted when the transcript was assembled.
fingers80002
Regular Member
imported post
I read it, it was NOT the hearing I attended!!!!!!
I read it, it was NOT the hearing I attended!!!!!!
shefearsnothing
Regular Member
imported post
there is something missing between page 8 and 9....
Also a page missing between 21 and 22
Also a page missing between 37 and 38
another one missing between 38 and 39
another missing between 52 and 53
also one missing between 54 and 55.
I didn't put the pdf together...
there is something missing between page 8 and 9....
Also a page missing between 21 and 22
Also a page missing between 37 and 38
another one missing between 38 and 39
another missing between 52 and 53
also one missing between 54 and 55.
I didn't put the pdf together...
AFCop
Regular Member
imported post
If it is not to late, someone file a motion with the court with the objections. Yes nothing may come of it because of no digital record of the hearing BUT at least the objection will be on record. Much more believeable if the objection is on therecord as opposed to......"It was not right, no I didn't try to fix get it fixed"
Bryan
If it is not to late, someone file a motion with the court with the objections. Yes nothing may come of it because of no digital record of the hearing BUT at least the objection will be on record. Much more believeable if the objection is on therecord as opposed to......"It was not right, no I didn't try to fix get it fixed"
Bryan
shefearsnothing
Regular Member
imported post
I have all the pages. I am sure I sent them all to insanekangaroo. Maybe he missed them when putting them together? I need to check with him but have not caught up with him online. However, there are still inaccuracies as far as the actual text. I highly doubt anyone is going to care what I say about the inaccuracies though. They will probably just tell me to go pound sand.
I have all the pages. I am sure I sent them all to insanekangaroo. Maybe he missed them when putting them together? I need to check with him but have not caught up with him online. However, there are still inaccuracies as far as the actual text. I highly doubt anyone is going to care what I say about the inaccuracies though. They will probably just tell me to go pound sand.