Reply With Quote
yep, plus the city and PD are on the defensive.
Arrest and lock these guys up for 8 hours? The Cops
Pretending that every comment is like that is funny. You on the other hand keep away from actually ever discussing your views in depth.
yep, plus the city and PD are on the defensive.
Arrest and lock these guys up for 8 hours? The Cops
Starbucks to close all company-owned stores on the afternoon of May 29 for racial-bias education day
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/17/starbucks-to-close-all-stores-on-may-29-for-racial-bias-education-day.html
ugh...
Blake
No . He'd rather pay off some bums than have a nation wide protests by blacks.
Chris
And a discrimination lawsuit that he might lose.No . He'd rather pay off some bums than have a nation wide protests by blacks.
Especially if Starbucks comes out with racial-bias education training for everyone day after the incident.
He already excepted the million dollar slap on the wrist instead of nation wide protesting you dumb .
It's all calculated. Doesn't want to lose his job if starbucks starts to lose money on the stock market.
that would be inadmissible evidence tbh
the court of public opinion is a much bigger concern at this point
Slideshow for the class just leaked:
Starbucks to close all company-owned stores on the afternoon of May 29 for racial-bias education day
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/17/starbucks-to-close-all-stores-on-may-29-for-racial-bias-education-day.html
Needs more Blonde es.Slideshow for the class just leaked:
LolSlideshow for the class just leaked:
The family guy jpeg forthwith
Lol inadmissible evidence.
Plaintiff lawyer: why did you (Starbucks) schedule a May 29th racial-bias education training the day after the incident occurred?
Defense: objection
Judge: sustained
Jury: *mental notes
see, the problem is you dont know how it works
in advance of trial, a competent attorney would file whats called a motion in limine, which would ask the court to bar opposing counsel from doing a, b, and c. you get that ruling ahead of time and if its granted, opposing counsel can't bring it up. if he does, it could be grounds for a mistrial and sanctions
the race bias education would clearly be inadmissible... it's a "subsequent remedial measure"
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_407
this is the federal version of the rule... and if its brought in state court each state has its own equivalent
That was just one scenario.
See, I think it's relevant evidence and can be used.
that's adorable
blake's opinion on what is relevant overrides the rules of evidence
it would be admissible only for very specific, limited uses, and none that are likely to be applicable or helpful
It's relevant to this case because it was a direct result of the incident.
It's even more adorable you're trying to big time lawyer a scrub on a message board.
relevance is not the only factor when it comes to admissibility of evidence
that would make it a subsequent remedial measure. which is inadmissible to show culpabilitybecause it was a direct result of the incident.
It's even more adorable you're trying to big time lawyer a scrub on a message board.
you bring up a potential lawsuit and get upset when somebody talks about law. you just talked out of your ass and are now upset that someone called you out for it.
"Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice
Evidence of a person’s habit or an organization’s routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice. The court may admit this evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_406
Racial sensitivity class being suddenly and incredibly necessary for thousands of employees nationwide shows recognition of a habit and routine practice prior to incident.
Motion in limine denied
you bring up a potential lawsuit and get upset when somebody talks about law. you just talked out of your ass and are now upset that someone called you out for it.
Because it'd be embarrassing to be shown up by a scrub. Because you've made it clear that message board looks are important to you.
good job. you quoted habit evidence
a) "recognition" of a habit is not a habitRacial sensitivity class being suddenly and incredibly necessary for thousands of employees nationwide shows recognition of a habit and routine practice prior to incident.
Motion in limine denied
b) if it is "suddenly" necessary then it is by definition NOT a habit and is thus not habit evidence
again, you're just googling and talking out of your ass. habit evidence, as you quoted, is meant to show that "on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice"
for example, if you want to prove in a car accident case, that the defendant DID use his turn signal, you could have a witness (say, somebody who has carpooled with him hundreds of times) to say "yeah, i know for sure bob ALWAYS uses his turn signal, without fail." even though the witness might not have been in the car during the actual incident in question, you can provide evidence that the person/organization has a general habit, that can be inferred to mean he probably acted in accordance with that habit on this particular occasion
whether the jury buys it is a different question, but the testimonial evidence of the habit (always using the turn signal) would be allowed over an objection
Last edited by spurraider21; 04-17-2018 at 04:58 PM.
its totally not a big deal for somebody who is not a lawyer to make a mistake. when pointed out, you could either have said "oh, ok, i didnt know that" or you could be a moron and continue to talk out of your ass.
Because it'd be embarrassing to be shown up by a scrub. Because you've made it clear that message board looks are important to you.
that much is up to you
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
