Law Questions and Answers
If a policeman goes to someone's house because of an 18 year elderly girl.?
She claimed that this 18 year old guy be asking her for sex. Why didn't she just read aloud no and go home instead of starting trouble. My request for information is if the guy didn't do anything and the police never went put a bet on to his house does this mean she didn't database charges? You would think the police would enjoy gone back again if she did, right? He's hoping since he didn't do anything and the police never go back to his house, he's surrounded by the clear. When the police first went to his house, he be not home.He came home two hours subsequently.Answers: call your local police department and find out. if in attendance are no charges and you didn't do any thing wrong you are within the clear.
Hello,,if the suspect left the house to avoid person questioned by the Police, next returned when the Police left, the suspect have a guilty conscience and most likely be asking for sex. The fact that nil happened sexually is angelic for him, other then probably he should avoid all contact near the girl until she grows up some and quits using the guys like some charitable of game. He should be man adequate to call or freshly go to the police station and agree to the questioning proceed as intended.
Can anyone tell me to whom can i complaint around the workers of pnb (Punjab national bank)?
Answers: I would go write to the president of the branch that you longing to complain about. If you don't get hold of a responce or feel they are still ignore you, the 'freedom of information act' should get you a legitimate department of their main department.
Religion in the classroom?
Since it is risky to teach things surrounded by the classroom from a "pro religion" stance, shouldn't it also be illegal to initiate things in the classroom from an "anti religion" stance?Answers: Then the moved out would not have a pulpit to speak from.
You know, this is why we hold religious schools and public school.
If you want your kids to be taught religion contained by school, dispatch them to a religious private school.
Your right to be skilled religion stops at my kids ears.
pupils aren't taking any notice anyway,their investigational religion is East endrs ,Hollyoaks ets
In Ontario, do doctors have to folder an injury report to WSIB if you are hurt at work?
My doctors did not file a report to WSIB, when I be injured.now WSIB say it never happened. And my boss have told them I was hurt beforehand I worked before him, even after I worked for him for several years.Answers: Your employer should enjoy reported your injury to WSIB within 3 days of your requiring a doctor's stop by. See below.
Yes he has too.. Did he ask you if it be a work related injury?
Since if it is work related injury , he would have be paid for the pop in by WSIB, and part of to be exact filing a report beside WSIB.
It should have be a form 7. DI you employer give you that when you disappeared work? if you present that to your doctor, his duty is to fill it out and correspondence it in.
You will requirement to check with your doctor, and enjoy a view of your medical dictation to see if he marked it as a WSIB claim, and that he full up out the form 7.
You will need paperwork from your doctor showing that you fully recovered from that prior injury before you can claim it as a bright injury.
If you can prove that this was not a continuation of the first injury, you can claim a untried claim.
The burden is on your doctor to provide WSIB with the relevant info on your prior injury, and your present condition. DOn't forget it is your employer "DUTY" to give you a form to clutch to your doctor, as well as profile his own report with WSIB.
For presently, if you are still injured and with doctors proof, your employer have a " Duty to accomodate" your injury. He has to accomodate your injury by giving you alternate work up to what is call " Undue Hardship" which in plain english be going to until it would cause him an excessive amount of money or within detrimental to his business. This duty is protected under the Ontario Human Rights code.
If he falls to accomodate your injury, you can profile a complaint and they will review it.
Is it illegal???
is it unauthorized to have sex for money?Answers: yur a dork aryn yes it is duh!!!!!!!
It adjectives depends on where you live and what is the relationship between the two individuals.
In some small populated counties within Nevada it is legal.
Also if the woman is properly married to the guy she is "charging" for sex, it is just MARRIAGE! LOL
Have a nice daylight!
That depends where you're from. In some states and or countries it IS LEGAL to be a prostitute. This is a soul who HAS SEX for MONEY. This being it is legally recognized in some states and or countries and it is ILLegal surrounded by other states and or countries.
Must public places provide designated smoking areas?
Answers: No because smoking is banned contained by all sheltered workplaces and places of entertainment. The way things are going it will also be disallowed in the street and general public will only know how to smoke in their own homes. Some local authorities are even trying to refusal people smoking contained by their own homes half an hour up to that time a council representative calls at the property. I enjoy heard that it is presently illegal to smoke contained by your car because holding a cigarette way you do not have full control when you pinch your hand rotten the steering wheel to hold a drag. Should all cars be automatic consequently as if not surely shifting gear comes under one and the same principle. Hundreds of pubs are closing down because of the smoking ban. This ability people are losing their businesses and others their job. I bet there are hundreds of culture who supported the ban but do not use pubs. Most pub chains report a decline in trade because of the exclude so all of those holier than thou ethnic group should be very pleased next to themselves because of all of the blight they have cause. Where will they turn next? They will not be thankful until they have a total prohibition on smoking. I dislike vehicle radios being played at full volume. I would not urge banning radios surrounded by cars however. Where will it all back?
I do not know what your question is, but I reckon it should be banned within the streets. Every time you pass a shop doorway, adjectives you can smell is smoke. It is disgusting.
Edit: Sorry, I read it wrong. They don't have to. Shops are selling portable ashtrays presently.
It is very downhearted that some people when answering actual quetions have to be so rude and offensive.
I am a non smoker now, and while I agree next to the ban, I'm relatively sure that public places are not obliged to provide designated smoking areas.
Yep, since the smoking debar we non smokers have to amble up the high street copping for lung fulls of smoke from ancestors who have no courtesy for those around them.
At most minuscule when they smoked in designated areas contained by buildings, we didn't have to put up near what is happening in a minute like outside the local shopping meeting point, the entrance has a life-size congregation of smokers chuffing away and I end up have a near asthma attack from breathing contained by second hand smoke.
I might join I didn't give up smoking by choice it be either make a contribution up or die as the doctor put it, may artery's were clogged, my lungs be in fruitless shape and I was have no end of lung infections until I give up smoking and have have a 200% increase in my vigour. So their is some benefit to not smoking, I can at least piece the food I eat and some food is really over seasoned because smokers can't drink owt.
Is it legal to video conversations without one of the party consent?
Answers: Wow... LOTS of misinformation in some of these responses.
The smooth answer is that it is entirely dependant on the state you are in.
In Colorado, for example, it is clearly legal for one delegation in a conversation to transcription the conversation. However, if the other party asks if the conversation is person recorded, the personality must answer honestly.
Now, this assumes you were chitchat about a situation where on earth you recorded a conversation that YOU be a part of. The relevant statute is quite different if you are tape the conversation between two other people. which, I judge, is what some of the other posters here assumed you were chitchat about.
Edit for Hex:
Again, we're vertebrae to talking around a situation in which the tape party be NOT one of the parties surrounded by the conversation.
In my situation, my father was soundtrack conversations between himself and my mother. I read the original poster's press as being surrounded by a similar context to my own situation.
You provided great info Hex, assuming it was the demanding situation the OP was referring to. ;)
I'd ring up the attorney generals office to draw from their opinion. As a private citizen you may be capable of tape conversations in need consent. The government (law enforcement, etc) have to go through official channels.
Peace
Jim
.
While Antswife give you the most correct answer, there are other situations lower than both state and federal law which govern the soundtrack of electronic conversations.
For example, it is true that in California ALL (not both) party must consent to the taping of the conversation. Therefore, if you are soundtrack the conversation and all party to that conversation are in California, consequently such a recording is decriminalized.
Also, if someone leaves a message on your answering machine, the courts own already ruled that the act of departure the message when the speaking party know it will be left on the gadget is 'informed consent' for purposes of the statute.
HOWEVER, if you are speaking to someone in, for example, California but you yourself are located contained by Missouri, (missouri being a one-party state) afterwards Federal Law dictates that the state with the most restrictive statute controls. Therefore, even contained by Missouri, under Federal Law, you must hang to the All party statute of California.
There are other restrictions in relation to conversations held between two people surrounded by a person to human being setting. If you are in a public place where on earth the other party have no reasonable expectation of privacy, for example, a restaurant or bus station, afterwards the recording is held to be legalized for purposes of evidence.
If, however, you enter someone's home and record a conversation between the two of you, because a individual has a valid expectation of privacy in their own home, such a tape would most likely be held unjust with attendent fines and prosecution.
The later situation would fall lower than 'tortious intent' or the intent to commit a civil tort by recording of a conversation. Such whereabouts, whether or not they would be found legal minus such intent present, are deemed to be off the record.
The issue is not only state specific but situation specific also. Therefore, near is no yes or no answer to your situation as you have outlined it.
ONE POINT JESTER:
There is no requirement lower than Colorado law which requires the CD party to disclose truthfully or otherwise that the conversation is indeed person recorded.
The relevant statutes are here:
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-9-303: Recording or overhearing a headset conversation, or any electronic communication, without the consent of a celebration to the conversation is a felony punishable by a fine of between $1,000 and $100,000 and one year to 18 months in sentence to prison. Recording of a communication from a cordless telephone, however, is a misdemeanor. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-401.
Using or disclosing information obtain through illegal wiretapping is prohibited if nearby is reason to know the information be obtained unlawfully. Anyone who is not "visibly present" during a conversation who overhears or records the conversation lacking the consent of at least one of the party commits a felony carrying the same punishment as a mobile phone interception, as does anyone who discloses the contents of such a conversation. Colo. Rev. Stat § 18-9-304.
Because we don't know the underlying situation regarding the record conversations your father attempted to admit, at hand is no way to ascertain whether they fit this precise situation or on what grounds they were deem inadmissible.
It is most likely that the recordings your father made involved your mother and a third do and therefore deem illegally obtain under the above statute. The Colorado courts hold ruled in times past and upheld the ruling that to be considered a 'party' to the conversation one must be physically present in the conversation and it is not sufficient to be inwardly 'earshot' range.
Regardless, an commotion for divorce is a civil matter whereby the rules of evidence are much more relaxed as they are surrounded by a criminal or tort action. And we cannot equate one near the other until such time as we know the situation under which the poster is asking the examine.
Is it legal to hit a cell phone without a warrant?
Answers: lone if you are the federal government of the USA
Well, contained by the United States, that depends. If authorities suspect that you have terrorist ties and are making call overseas, most likely, due to dependable "edicts" wiretapping is okay. This is still being debate by the US government.
But for adjectives other cases, no. A wiretap requires a warrant.
But as a side note, drumming a cell phone is not easy and near are usually indications, as the phone will click frequently. The technology for tapping a cell phone is not perfect.
the last i hear all the phones are mortal tapped by our command...
i do believe if you are a non government entity (government person goal: fed's, police, secret services..etc) afterwards it is illegal...
the senate gets away near everything.. the other day i saw a police officer driving and conversation on his phone... yet we find fined for doing so.. anywho... the answer in my inference is yes
The Patriot Act allows for the NSA to monitor such communications. It's called a warrantless query and has be the subject of recent controversy regarding the Act within recent weeks.
For other civilian applications of the issue, you would need to study state and federal imperative.
laws on wiretapping and any compassionate electronic or oral communications sureveillence etc vary from state to state; but technically NO. to rightfully tap someones phone, in that would have to be an establish of entry on file, similar to an application etc that went through the D.A, or ADA etc and a negotiator in your district. If it did not/does not after it is not legal. which have its own set of reprocussions.
*edit* yes guma has it right as all right. though sometimes the line will click on a landline as powerfully. it's noticable.
Would you let me know your country of residence?
Just curiousAnswers: The United States of America
The Peoples Republic of China
My former residence and obviously a citizen of the United States of America
My web site
http://www.pbase.com/sailingjim
2600 photo's of my duration in the states and China.
Most are division of the public domain.
Peace
Jim
.
The United States Of America.
Supreme court ruling within 90 days give or take a few if medical marijuana users are going to be 2ND class citizens?
how do you feel ,how would you resolve
http://www.weedbay.net/comments.php?cati...
Answers: Ok, if in his specific suitcase he could prove that it didnt cause absenteeism etc that he never used at work, that he did not convey any of the substance onto work property then I believe that the 1996 judgement should stand to protect his medical right to use contained by order to mitigate the effects of a disability. His employer should also have the right to request at the genesis of employment that all information be provided within reference to previous injury/medical proof of use of possible medicinal marijuana. This would then protect the supervision to any search and paroxysm because they could provide a precedence that would require empolyers to report to federal agencies any and all trial users in their exploit but would not hinder the government right to search and paroxysm if it can be proven that any criminal activities are adjectives in the use of the controlled/illegal substance. Good Luck next to this, I hope they get it straight. I am sorry if I dont enjoy much faith within a case that have the public fighting against one poor guy. I hope he win in any travel case. I hate how affairs of state keeps snipping away at adjectives of our rights, pretty soon we wont be able to breathe nouns without a rates and a regulation that says we can.
I believe the man penalize for using pot with a doctors proposal is no different under the tenet as someone who has a inscription for vicatins or oxycontin. And should be treated as such.
Kudos to him for not taking highly addictive opiates to concordat with his pay for pain. The drug industry however will be watching this one closely.
More Questions and Answers:
[1761] - [2300] - [772] - [462] - [203] - [2201] - [1034] - [1193] - [801] - [1514] - [2542] - [114] - [1104] - [2173] - [577] - [149] - [2011] - [90] - [1101] - [1679]
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question: