Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: The Convoluted Conundrum of Court

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    The Convoluted Conundrum of Court

    Does anyone else here feel our system of justice has failed us? Who here believes that far too many lawyers, who are technically officers of the court, lie six ways to Sunday because they're far more concerned about winning their cases than ensuring, as is their duty as officers of the court, justice is appropriately dispensed? Who here has seen a judge, when faced with a preponderance of evidence towards one conclusion, decide to the contrary based on nothing more than she's worked with the opposing attorney for a number of years and that she "trusts him implicitly?"

    The ^^^above^^^ is true, and despite all parties, including the judge, having been delivered a certain piece of paper well ahead of court, despite that same piece of paper being presented in court, under oath, and admitted to the court record, the judge, chums of the other attorney, sided with that attorney in her decision, even going so far as to claim, "I have yet to see any evidence of the alleged document in question."

    Fortunately, based on the document, the court record, filings by the attorney, and the judge's ruling, the attorney was censured and suspended from practicing law for six months. Unfortunately, that does little harm to a lawyer practicing in a firm, as they're still allowed to do work as a paralegal. About the only thing they cannot do is represent a client.

    Since it was his antics in violation of his oath of office which cost me more than $20,000, I'd have preferred to see him censured and suspended from practicing law for three months while being forced to pay me 25% of the mean of his annual gross income for the previous three years. That would have just about covered the debt while sending a clear message to other attorneys: Quit Lying.

    What about the judge? Was she censured? Was she forced to vacate or change her previous decision?

    Nope. She, the ultimate authority in this debacle, got away scott-free, and I was the one left holding the $20,000 loss.

    Pardon me if I do not appear to hold the courts or out system of justice in high esteem. In my experience, they have yet to earn it, while having most certainly earned loads of disdain.

    Well, that's my story. Let's hear yours! Perhaps someone within the system will read this and think twice about just how much deceit and subterfuge can cost an innocent party.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Two things brought this to mind this morning:

    1. The 15-year anniversary of the McDonald's "hot coffee" lawsuit. Apparently, there's much more to the issue than an apparently frivilous lawsuit.

    2. Convicted murder testifies contrary to previous disclosure to another inmate. Amanda Knox remains jailed. How much you want to bet the prosecution, eager to keep Knox behind bars, offered Guede early release or transfer to an easier prison in exchange for him recanting his previous statements?
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Two things brought this to mind this morning:

    1. The 15-year anniversary of the McDonald's "hot coffee" lawsuit. Apparently, there's much more to the issue than an apparently frivilous lawsuit.

    2. Convicted murder testifies contrary to previous disclosure to another inmate. Amanda Knox remains jailed. How much you want to bet the prosecution, eager to keep Knox behind bars, offered Guede early release or transfer to an easier prison in exchange for him recanting his previous statements?
    Since-what's the ribbon after the Air Medal? I don't recognize it.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Two things brought this to mind this morning:

    1. The 15-year anniversary of the McDonald's "hot coffee" lawsuit. Apparently, there's much more to the issue than an apparently frivilous lawsuit.

    2. Convicted murder testifies contrary to previous disclosure to another inmate. Amanda Knox remains jailed. How much you want to bet the prosecution, eager to keep Knox behind bars, offered Guede early release or transfer to an easier prison in exchange for him recanting his previous statements?
    #1. Yes, I agree. Any idiot who needs a warning label to know coffee is hot is probably too stupid to read the label anyway. In cases like this the justice system is being abused. Unfortunately those within the justice system that could of stopped this lawsuit from progressing did not.

    2. That case is playing out in Italy's court system not ours so I can't say too much about that one.
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546
    Quote Originally Posted by thebigsd View Post
    #1. Yes, I agree. Any idiot who needs a warning label to know coffee is hot is probably too stupid to read the label anyway. In cases like this the justice system is being abused. Unfortunately those within the justice system that could of stopped this lawsuit from progressing did not.
    Have you actually read the McDonald's coffee case facts?
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    In regards to the McD issue, both parties are at fault. There is no reason for the coffee to have been so hot that it caused second degree burns (that is excessively hot), but at the same time the woman should have realized "duh, coffee=hot" and not of needed a label.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Aknazer View Post
    In regards to the McD issue, both parties are at fault. There is no reason for the coffee to have been so hot that it caused second degree burns (that is excessively hot), but at the same time the woman should have realized "duh, coffee=hot" and not of needed a label.
    Third degree burns.

    And the court did assign split fault. She was partially at fault for the coffee being spilled. McDonald's was partially at fault for having way f'ing hot coffee...
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  8. #8
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
    Third degree burns.

    And the court did assign split fault. She was partially at fault for the coffee being spilled. McDonald's was partially at fault for having way f'ing hot coffee...
    And the end result is now we often have tepid coffee by the time we get around to drinking the coffee.

    I am split on that case, opinion wise, yes she got burned but guys like me in construction on a cold day working outside want our coffee as hot as possible by the time we get to the jobsite. But do understand that yikes they fried (boiled?) an old lady.
    Last edited by sudden valley gunner; 06-29-2011 at 10:47 PM.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    Since-what's the ribbon after the Air Medal? I don't recognize it.
    Good morning, Gunslinger. It's an Aerial Achievement Medal.

    How's the weather East of town?

    - since9
    Last edited by since9; 07-01-2011 at 08:36 PM.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •