Posts by brighteagle24

Chloe Baker88 said:If someone gets "floppy" during sex without consent—basically a failed attempt at rape—could that be blamed on some kind of impairment? Could that actually lead to a lighter sentence? 🙄

I’ve been losing my damn mind for two days straight digging through legal books, but I just can't wrap my head around 🙂

Here is a little something to give your brain a break from those two days of heavy lifting 😁

"I remember back when I was presiding over a court, a fellow judge came to me with a dilemma regarding a rape case. There was this gentleman, probably in his sixties, who intended to assault a woman of a similar age out in a field. It dragged on for an hour, but he couldn't actually complete the act because, well, he couldn't get an erection. My colleague told me he was going to rule it as an attempted crime. I wasn't quite sure if that fit the definition of an attempt; I argued that it would imply no one else under the exact same circumstances could ever succeed, and I wasn't so certain that was true. He just shrugged and said, 'It's the age, and it was winter—do you have any idea what a US winter does to a man?' So, I just conceded that he certainly knew more about those physiological matters than I did.

He ended up ruling it as an unsuccessful attempt, but the Supreme Court overturned his decision and sent it back. He came to see me again later, insisting he’d rule it as an attempt all over again just to watch them overturn it a second time. I told him, fine, go ahead—at least you'll clear the docket when they hand the case off to a different panel. Some time passed, and I had almost forgotten about him, until he showed up once more.

'You know,' he tells me, 'I didn't rule it as an attempt this time, let them have their way, but I finally figured out the pattern. Those justices on the Supreme Court are all older than me... if they were to accept it as an unsuccessful attempt, they'd essentially be admitting that nobody under those specific conditions could possibly pull it off! But hey, if they need that delusion to sleep better at night, fine by me—they know, and I know, that it was an unsuccessful attempt.'"

Just some copy-paste from an old internet forum..

William Adams4 said:Are we even sure the statute of limitations has run out?

I've been called in to testify for one crime where the clock definitely hasn't run out—otherwise, there wouldn't even be a trial—so it feels totally surreal that the statute of limitations would have expired for this other thing my buddy and I did.

Wouldn't it just be way easier to just say I don't remember anything?

🤦

- For you, the statute of limitations on prosecution might have expired; fraud carries a five-year sentence, and the clock runs based on the maximum penalty...
- Regarding this specific offense, it could be classified as an economic crime, which changes things—it isn't just about the statute of limitations on prosecution if proceedings were initiated before it lapsed; now we're looking at the absolute statute of limitations. It might be getting close, or perhaps not. Which specific charge are we talking about? Does your summons cite a particular section of the Penal Code?

Why don't you just head down to a local law firm and get some actual legal counsel? We can sit here and go in circles forever, but that won't change much.

Even if we assume they committed a crime—fraud, specifically, involving various accomplices—I’ll say this again: feel free to share the details. You mentioned it’s been ten years since the incident, which means the statute of limitations has already run out.

Besides, I have no way of knowing if your friend was ever in direct contact with the defendant, or if he even had the chance to meet them personally the way you did. If that's the case, once you testify, he’ll likely just tell the judge himself that it wasn't him. Denying it would be pointless; you'd only end up digging yourself into a hole.

William Adams4 said:Hey everyone,

I just got subpoenaed to testify in court regarding some shady stuff my old boss was doing. I was technically working there through a temp agency about 10 years ago... but here's the kicker: my buddy was actually the one doing the work under my name because back then, you could only get hired through those student agencies. Everyone was cutting corners like that back then, and I honestly never dreamed it would come back to haunt me like this.

The hearing is in a month and a half, so I really need to figure out my next move before then. Anyone got any actual, helpful advice?...

Thanks a ton.

The both of you should just show up to the hearing..
In your testimony, you'll explain that it wasn't actually you working at the time, but rather your friend, and that you had informed him about this entire process. He can simply accompany you to court and wait in the hallway, which means there is a distinct possibility he could be called in immediately to provide his own statement regarding the circumstances.
(The hearing isn't going to be postponed; you did the right thing—both for your friend then, and for the court now 😉).

Given that ten years have passed since then, feel free to explain the reasoning behind this little "identity swap" of yours.

Ashley Stewart3 said:There isn't any rulebook covering this. It’s possible they assume the monitor (and the cable) has some value, so they just loot the hardware in general; I've even seen them walk off with an LCD TV, which obviously holds zero data, yet they still take it.👍👍

Well, thank God I wasn't the only one who clocked the television.🙂

Exactly...
I suppose that’s how they show everyone just how "busy" they really are. ;-)

(Did anyone else catch that moment where they were lugging Bill Clinton's TV out of there too?..) ;-)

stormylynx14, I’d give that response a solid A+.

Whether this qualifies as assisted suicide or not really boils down to one thing:
-is the request entirely personal, and is the individual making it capable of providing valid statements and making sound decisions?
-a child, an incapacitated person, or someone with diminished mental capacity cannot provide such a statement.
(in those instances, we would be looking at murder or first-degree murder instead.)
-the petitioner must fully grasp the consequences of their "request."
-the decision to submit the request has to be unequivocal and without any hesitation.

The motives are just as critical:
-illness, advanced age, chronic pain, and things like that—situations where a victim develops a persistent, recurring plea for death due to unbearable, permanent suffering, the awareness of imminent mortality, and so on.

This specific request is what distinguishes this type of assisted suicide from euthanasia, because in euthanasia, a terminally ill patient often lacks the capacity to make a request of this caliber.

Personally, I think it would make more sense if the term used in Section 94 was "homicide upon request" rather than "on demand"... because when someone is that sick, they are far more likely to "beg" someone else to end their misery than they are to formally "demand" anything in such a state.
Besides, you have to wonder how anyone could actually force someone to fulfill an obligation based on a request made while in that kind of condition.
The whole concept of assisted suicide is quite strange, and frankly, trying to prove it otherwise is a lost cause.

frozencyclist4 said:The Heinzel center? I've never heard of it—I'm from a small town in Kansas, so is there anything closer to my neck of the woods?

They’re just setting up highway patrol checkpoints right where the accident happened...

polly said:Following the call, their father drove them to the police station on Heinzelov in the area where the incident occurred at xx o'clock on the xx day. There, in his presence, they each gave individual statements to a juvenile court judge. It wasn't held in a courtroom, just at the precinct. They couldn't give statements to the officers who were called when it happened because it was Saturday at 8 PM, and those judges aren't on duty then.

That isn't how the law is structured... there aren't juvenile court judges stationed at police precincts.

Setting aside all the speculation for a moment, once the actual legal proceedings begin—regardless of the specific violation—just tell your side of the story clearly. Suggest witnesses who can testify that your headlights were actually on rather than off (which could become an issue if the officer's version sticks, though there's always a chance they won't), and let the court handle summoning them, as they certainly have the authority to ensure they show up...
Given the circumstances of how this unfolded, the penalties shouldn't be overly severe, so there is a path toward a positive outcome here..
Since we don't know yet what the exact charge will be, I'm not even sure if community service would be an option to offset it. Just wait for things to develop; until you receive something in writing or official notification, there isn't much point in reacting..
I am aware of instances where parents have been held legally liable because their underage children were playing unsupervised near a roadway, causing a driver to swerve or lose control. It is entirely possible that some level of negligence could be argued in this case as well..

jadesailor14 said:[**My daughters gave statements to the police before a juvenile court judge**[/B]

The logic here is a bit fuzzy...
either they spoke to the police while their father was present—since they’re minors
—or they appeared in juvenile court, in which case that guy wouldn't have been 23, but rather under 21, according to your account...

silverraven95 said:The moral of the story? A colleague of mine claims he was fully aware of everything—he just stayed incredibly relaxed—but he hasn't touched a cigarette since.

A coworker of mine had the same experience with Darko Rauš, and lo and behold, she quit... she hasn't smoked in five months now, though she watches me and "smokes along with me" every time I light one up...
she's even put on about 11 pounds, gaining a pound every month, but...
she isn't smoking, while I am...
and honestly, I want to quit too; I just have no idea how or when to actually pull it off.
For me, ☕ and 🙂 are inextricably linked...

I read your posts and find myself both admiring and envying everyone who has actually succeeded...