Law Questions and Answers

What exactly is it like contained by juvenile hall?

I'm not planning to be in motion anytime soon, but my bf is... Exact schedule please if you can... Thanks.
Answers: Basically close to a prison for juveniles. He can expect to get into fight and be sexually molested by a group of guys. Gangs are prevalent, stay away from them. It is not a picnic.

Was this a death threat? If so, should I do something going on for it???

Last night me and my EX-roommate (who is a guy) have a dispute. I apparently made him really angry and this is exactly what was said:

GUY: "If you be a dude, I would come over there and tap your ***"

ME: "If you ever touched me, then you would longing you never did... A guy should never threaten to hit a girl"

GUY: "You better be glad I'm keeping myself from coming over there."

ME: "OH Yeah! Come over here and hit me and see what happens"

GUY: "See what happen? What are you going to do??"

I didn't say anything, at hand was a space and he said:

GUY: "I have some friends I could call for up right now and bring them to kill your ***"

...
Is that considered a disappearance threat towards me? I know he was trying to terrify me or whatever, and it worked, because conversation about butchery someone is very serious.

And also, if that's consider man a death threat, isn't that a crime? Is that a moral lawsuit against him for threatening my life??
Answers: Stay away from the idiot...should he bother you any further help yourself to action! Let the situation die down and tolerate cooler heads prevail! Keep away from those type of folks. You will soon be out of sight and also out of mind! Give the big-blow-hard a method out of running his big-mouth about have you harmed! Unless you know for sure he has have it done to someone else...just stay away from him and own no contact under any circumstances! Basically, the police would not do anything until he does or have something done to you and by then it does not really help out you, so just stay away from him and adjectives contact.let the situation budge away!
Yes. You could easily obtain a civil restraining order since you lived within the same house. Call the police.

You in truth could sue him for a tortious assault if you can prove that you perceived the threat as imminent (which is a threat of disadvantageous or offensive contact). Or intentional infliction of heated distress, but it might be expensive to litigate unless you could find a lawyer who would cart it on contingency.

Do you have any evidence or witnesses?
yeah, you could hail as the cops if you are scared or procure restrining order. You should not hold said,

ME: "OH Yeah! Come over here and hit me and see what happens"

he will use that in defense

but I he did in actuality threaten you

GUY: "I have some friends I could send for up right now and carry them to kill your ***"

so ring the cops.

it might be more trouble than it is workth since he is ex-roomate. He will tink about it and it will disperse.

Can you sue him? Is it on tape? If not, It more trouble than it is worth.
im not saw that it was right of him to read out that..but i dont think he intended that he was truly going to do it..he was threatening you but i dont cogitate he was serious in the region of going through with it.
techinically it prob. is a loss threat..but i really dont think its a well brought-up lawsuit against him.
Yes it can be considered a death threat but the police will update you it's your word against his and there's nothing they can do so try and carry him on tape the subsequent time you have an argument.That's why so lots women die at the hands of men...because until he does something the cops's paw are tied.

Why dont all the celebs purely take name and get restraining directives on all the paparatzi?

Answers: Probably because any press is polite press, but I'm sure celebs have taken trial action against terrifying paparazzi.
Because a telephoto lense can trump a restraining order of 500 yard. . .

Besides, they would have to prove that they are surrounded by physical danger. No style guru is going to issue a restraining order simply due to the papparazzi individual annoying. The court would be backed up for years!

If you don't approaching it, then don't buy the magazine and look at the pix they take. If the money isn't within, they don't do it. As long as people verbs to buy the rags and check out the internet sites, they are going to verbs to stalk the celebrities. . . So if you would resembling to blame someone, blame the public.
Because the celebs NEED the paps.

Hypothetically speaking, if someone appeared threatening how far could I go and claim self defense within court?

Pretend the following occurred: some kids on a street within my neighborhood threw a snowball at my vehicle as I drove to my condo. I got out, asked if anybody looked-for to die, was told they be going to get an AK, I go to get a handgun and meanwhile my girlfriend told them to draw from inside because I'm insane and will hurt them. They do, so I leave and dance inside my place. Several hours later, I'm surrounded by my front yard walking my dog and a motor rounding the corner slams on the brakes and pops the trunk. All 3 guys get out and one scrape together a snowball from the ground and I immediately run at the vehicle as they scramble to seize back within. I catch the driver beforehand he shuts the door and proceed to punch him approx. 10 times, landing a few. I was intoxicated and surface terrible going on for it after sobering up, but I guess at the time I just didn't want to risk a weapon coming out of the trunk. Obviously I go too far from a moral standpoint, but did I also go above and beyond self defense? Thx
Answers: For the defense of self-defense to apply FULLY, you enjoy to have a okay belief that you were within physical danger. You enjoy several problems with this defense within your scenario: (a) a snowball is usually not going to be considered a sufficient weapon to put you in misgivings for your safety; (b) you (apparently) did not hit the snowball originator, but the driver; (c) the driver was running AWAY from you when you hit him; (d) you be drunk.

Now, the events earlier contained by the day could be used to explain your activities and help verbs the charges against you but, if you're going to punch somebody on a public street, you better be pretty sure that he's winding up to bring a swing at you. If he throws a beer bottle at him, it's probably ok to pop in the trunk if he's still coming at you. If he's running away from you, even with the snowball surrounded by his hand, merely let him keep hold of running.
You could claim temporary mental insanity. Self defense, markedly not as there be no immediate threat nor bodily damage. Besides, self defense is always sort of 50/50, not too suitable shot to take.

Hope that help
Self defense only applies when at hand is an immediate threat. An stretch out car trunk does not count. A snowball down not count. You moved out your property so "defense of home" or the "castle doctrine" does not apply once you got into the street. The driver be trying to leave the nouns. When someone is walking away from you , or trying to drive away from you, they are no longer any kind of threat to you.

You will not be capable of claim self defense and in certainty, you were the aggressor. The driver would enjoy been defensible to say he tried to close his door, you prevented it and attacked him. In frequent states the castle doctrine applies to the car, so he would possibly own been sound in shooting you.

You screwed up royal. If they want to press criminal assault charges against you, they could do so. The reality you were drunk does not minister to you at all. I suggest you sober up, attend AA meeting and clean up your stroke.
You don't say what relation the second set of snowballers have to this, but apparently the first ones were minors and at tiniest one of the second set was antiquated enough to drive. Possibly still minors as ably.

1. The kids threw snowballs; childs play. You threatened them.
2. The three guys were going to throw a snowball at you. You assume (while intoxicated) that they enjoy a gun, so you physically attack one of them.

How can you claim your behavior was sane or contained by self defense? You appear to be the aggressor and need to swot how to function in society.
Most self defense clauses require you to prove you have NO other means of retreat. no fund door or window of retreat.
Further more if the police did arrive ,more later likely you would own been surrounded by some sort of trouble due to having your "everyday faculties impaired". I'm not wise saying you were within the wrong.And I hope the sitiuation is "done" .But beware sometimes theres nothing more dodgy then a wanna be.

Im in an ebay pickle!?

About 2 weeks ago I be told I was approved for a phone on a plan beside a new headset, so I put my phone on ebay and it sold! Yesterday I was call up by the phone company telling me necessarily that they had changed in attendance mind... no phone or plan for me!
Problem is, the person rewarded into my account that be overdrawn, even after I gave them clean account details. I dont want to transport them the phone and want to offer them a compensation of there money, But i dont enjoy the whole amount newly yet!
What should I do?
Answers: Did you sign anything beside the phone company saying they initially agreed? If you did, you could lug them to court for breach of contract.

If you didn't sign anything and it was adjectives verbal, after I would suggest writting an email to the winner explaining the situation. In the notification, tell them when they can expect the full settlement. You might want to give them an incentive to adopt the refund contribute by giving them a 10% or a few dollars extra for their patience and caring.
you sold it.
they paid.
what is within to discuss.
if they understand and agree to a settlement then you necessitate to borrow the money or whatever but it is not their responsibility you have financial issues.
There is nil to guess at. You sold the item, the buyer paid, you are required to distribute them the merchandise...

Send the phone before you gain in genuine trouble.
While you are looking for a way to attain the money ,go on at hand & write the customer who bought it, that's better than letting it go. plus you'll catch a bad reputation on e-bay, & that's no devout.

You'll get the money & distribute it back to them & evacuate them also a good rating on your close, explaining how patient they be. things matter & dont want to be overlooked..

What state has the lowest crime rate?

Answers: Most states that citizens can take a weapon have a much lower crime rate than others. Duh I wonder why.
North Dakota - 79.4 % unruly crime rate.

see: Wikipedia
I think possibly Antartica..hahah..sorry,just kid..it's not a state..

Advice for a person who be rear finished?

a few hours ago i stopped at an intersection because the emergency light come on...you know, the light that comes on when an ambulance or something is coming..

powerfully, i stopped to let the emergency vehicle go thru the intersection and get hit from behind by some female...i pulled over, she drove off...i get her plate, i got pictures of the spoil with my cell phone..

im in recent times wondering how far i should take this? i made a police report at the scene for insurance purposes..its awfully minor damage but i still dont come up with it would be fair if i get stuck with the bill to repair it..especially considering this human being did not even stop to see if my brother and i were okay

this is frustrating..my nouns and back are kinda sore even tho it be a small impact and very minor defacement to my bumper..i dunno if i should be lenient or really staple this person you know? any input would be appreciated, gratefulness!
Answers: I was of late rear-ended last month. There be 2000.000 damage. My suggestion is to follow legal procedure. You are right to hail as and file a report. You are necessary in using your phone for license plate. Follow protocol. This female either did not realize she hit you (give her the benefit of doubt) but even so, she is responsible. You may not enjoy been the first party she has done this to. With driving come responsibility. Her bomb to demonstrate responsibility behind the rudder, does not negate your responsibility to follow through, for your sake, her sake, and others who may be unfortunate adequate to have her aft them. The next individual may not come out with minor disrupt or injury. Bothers me that she did not stop to see if you and passengers be all right. Do us adjectives a favor and follow through. You are not nailing her, a short time ago following protocol. If you are hurt though, you needed to go to ER right away. Still, by contacting her insurance company for repair cost you hold some options if you want medical attention later. Insurance company will want to close this claim and you enjoy I believe 2 years to sign off.
That be a hit and run. You should report her. You could have be hurt ...and badly and she drove sour. Dont feel discouraging for reporting her either...that could hold been a child crossing the road ... Report her and consent to the authority's go after her...or give the name your insurance and give them her license plate...they will find out who it is and pursue her insurance!

Good luck!
contact your insurance they will button this for you. if you feel the stipulation seek medical attention. your insurance company will verbs anything they spend from her insurance company.depending on the state you have 1 or 2 years to directory a civil suit to collect damages if you do not feel her insurance company treated you rightly. let the system work for you earlier you give away any of your settlement to an attorney.

I have a examine about undisputed privacy rights?

My sister got arrested finishing night.. which be legit and when they took her to jail, they made her strip in the nude and shower while guard watches her. Did she have to strip completely with nothing on or is there any clause where on earth you can ask that a female guard hold watch instead of a manly or is there nil that could have be done? She's really upset.
Answers: Well if this jail is surrounded by America, no matter what State, within are certain law and rules concerining human rights and privacy issues mandated by DCJS.

Once a human being has be arrested, and they are finished with the booking process, they enjoy to be admitted into lockup holding until they are assigned to a long-lasting cell or released. Either way, once within lockup, most (not all) facilites demand a thorough flush to include a strip search and afterwards a shower. Why?
1. Security reasons for one. Inmates try to sneak contained by all sorts of things close to drugs, cigarettes, lighters, phones, money, weapons, etc, etc. Women hold even more interesting hiding places to stash things than men do.
2. Hygiene - People come into jail beside all sorts of Heebie Jeebies, and it's one of the few ways send to prison staff can control the spread of diseases, parasites and funk.

Now, surrounded by regards to a mannish guard watching your sister in the shower. That is absoulutely a betrayal of her privacy and most jails/institutions have strict guidelines prohibiting such entertainment.. Interestingly enough, most feminine guards can search and transport manly inmates, but male guards cannot check out female inmates and they cannot transport them alone.

Don't drop to conclusions though. You may not know what state of mind your sister was contained by at the time of her incarceration. Make sure you have adjectives the facts straight before you travel acusing the department, because an investigation will most likely verbs. If they truly did do this though, you may have a lawful case and grounds for a directive suit.
Did your sister lie to you, or are you lying to us? IF what you claim if truth be told happened surrounded by the US, it would have be all over the national report.

Should supreme court have power to overturn unconstituitional federal regulation?

Answers: It already does, that is exactly what it's work is...
They DO have that power, surrounded by fact that's their primary brief.

The thing is, they don't automatically review law as soon as they're passed. There has to be a shield, which must be appealed all the means of access up to the Supreme Court. Until someone is arrested for breaking a law, and have a lot of money to clash it, the SC never reviews a law.

This is why the ACLU exists, to provide money and lawyer to fight cases of law they feel might be unconstitutional.
Tell me Mr. Hav'ard Law student what do you suppose?

Of course they do. Why is it called The Supreme Court? Because it rules on cases to sort sure everything is correct and lawful according to the Constitution when someone challenge their case be affected wrongly.

There are NO UNCONSTITUTIONAL law. They would not be laws if they be found to be unconstitutional.
Yes, have you hear of the concept of "checks and balances?"

If they can't enforce the Constitution and overturn law that are in conflict next to it, then the Constitution is nil more than a nice piece of paper that the law-makers and the president can choose to shame. We really don't want that, right?
Congress makes decree, the Supreme Court's job is to interpret the decree.

If they deem a law passed by Congress is unconstitutional, later the legislation needs to be amended by Congress and the President, not the Supreme Court.
Its call Judicial Review and the whole point they exist.

To drive it home, ask yourself the converse: What could happen if they did not own that power?

Congress could then wirte law, and the President place into effect, that would trample all over your rights as a citizen, contained by the interest of the majority. If the Supreme court couldn't stop it, since it trampled on your rights, then you would be stuck.

Extreme Example: suppose within the name of making a out of danger world, all music to be exact not classical music will no longer be allowed to be played anywhere in the US. If the majority of Congress and the sitting president fixed that was a devout idea and put into effect a federal decree; who would you turn to argue that this "law" was trampling on your rights?

If that seem silly, then replace the occupancy music with religion. Same point applies

The reality that the Supreme Court has Judicial Review prevents the "Tyranny of the Majority" that democracies surrounded by the past own had come about. Meaning, without JR, the majority could settle on what every they want without ramification as to the rights of anyone else. A bad state of affairs if you ask me.
Look at it this bearing. The constitution prohibits bills of attainder. (That's where the Congress pass a law declare you a criminal and sentencing you.)

Suppose Congress passes such a bill. You are arrested. You wallet for habeas corpus, saying the adjectives time, "I've been jailed underneath an unconstitutional bill of attainder."

What do you want the Supreme Court to say, "Sorry, bud, not our problem?"
No. The framers of the Constitution would roll over within their graves...

Goodbye 2007?

i don't want 2008
i like 07 bearing better can someone help me preetend that it will still be 07
Answers: lalalalala. yeah 2007 be good but 2008 might be better!
It IS going to stay 2007. Who told you otherwise?

More Questions and Answers:
[1363] - [270] - [1005] - [1329] - [2263] - [2059] - [33] - [1633] - [670] - [1815] - [840] - [858] - [1854] - [1924] - [1975] - [2267] - [1548] - [493] - [1455] - [1776]

The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.

Answer question: