Law Questions and Answers

Should the US let Conrad Black become an American citizen?

Go digit... He gets convicted of corporate fraud and immediately he thinks they will want him as a citizen.
Answers: These fraudulant corporate "citizens" bilk their
companys and stock holders out of billions,
attain convicted, go to "jail" at a country club for
a few years, receive out and go to Switzerland and
retreive their billions and live blissfully ever after.
Thee and me can not do a damn thing something like it.
My big old butt. I contemplate the sentence should
be handed out by the stock holders. AMEN.
Why would Lord Black want to become an American citizen? I thought adjectives of his ties were to Canada and Great Britain.

Besides, next to his criminal convictions, he would be excluded.

Which President got a speeding ticket while within office? 10 points to first right answer.?

That's right...this president be issued a speeding ticket while in bureau. When the issuer realized who it be, he tried to withdraw it, but the President told him that he must do his duty and issue the ticket. Who be this president? Ten points to first one who gets it.
Answers: Ulysses S. Grant
bauer

How do DUI attorneys sleep at night?

I see advertisement for attorneys who specialize in getting relatives off DUI arrests. I'm pretty sure most police are not unsystematically giving out DUIs, there's usually a good purpose to get these drunk drivers past its sell-by date the road...but if they end up getting bad because of a technicality even though they did drink and drive, how is this good for us?
Answers: This may not be what you want to hear, but I dream up that it's a story worth reading and I hope that it helps:

I am an attorney and prosecuted exclusively DUIs at the origination of my career.

95% of the time, most relatives just pled "no contest", which is like peas in a pod as pleading guilty. Most of the time, the defense attorneys would advise their client to plead no contest because it would be pointless to run the matter to trial (because the evidence be so overwhelming) and they could get a better plea promise by pleading early. The defense attorney regularly did their client (and the tax payers) a service by encouraging them to plead no contest hasty on. From our perspective, there be nothing more aggrevating, time consuming, and dissolute than taking a defendant to trial who represented himself.

So I liked profoundly of the criminal defense attorneys, and I thought that they were nifty at least some of the time.





That said, you should also cogitate about the situations where on earth the defendant in a DUI casing is actually innocent. I have more than one case where on earth I prosecuted someone but had doubts in the region of their guilt.

I actually have one case where on earth I was relieved that the jury found the guy not guilty since, by the finishing of the trial, I was convinced that the guy have been wrongly accuse. Basically, the defense attorney in that one be successfully able to show that the arresting officer confused who the driver be... we had effectively prosecuted someone for one the designated driver. Fortunately in his defence, the system worked.

So how did the defense attorney in that valise sleep at night? Just fine. She did her brief, I did mine, the jurors did theirs, the judge did his, the cop told the truth and did his, the system worked, and everyone slept that hours of darkness. The people who should hold trouble sleeping at night are the population who are too lazy, dishonest, corrupt, or blind to do their errand within the equality system--that's when innocent people travel to jail and criminals stride free.
Just like the attorneys that specialize contained by criminal law and take murders and child molesters off, and divorce attorneys whose simply interest is dragging out the process so they can end up next to most of the estate.
They are sub human, and their only interest is surrounded by making money.
The idea is that everyone is entitled to a do trial, but today our society has evolved into an conception that only the police and district attorney have to play by the rules and the attorneys can cheat and lie.
Everyone is entitled to a party trial. The very best bearing to insure that even the worse criminals get due process, which they are Constitutionally guaranteed, is to enjoy a lawyer prepare and argue their suitcase. Very, very few DUI defendants are found not guilty. Real existence is not like you see on TV or conjure up contained by your imagination.

That is the American system. Millions have died insuring your right to a open-minded trial.

Perhaps how they render "justice" in communist China is more to your affection? I hear that when they execute someone over there, they transport a bill to the family for the bullet.

People ***** and moan just about lawyers - until they themselves are accuse of a crime. Then, they are on their knees thanking God that they own one.

Edit: it sounds that you believe that many DUI defendants are "getting off" on technicalities. That notion is simply untrue. The infinite majority of DUI defendants either plead guilty or are found guilty at trial and, at lowest in my State, do send to prison time, pay weighty fines, and have their license suspended.

I invite you to take a hours of daylight off work or college and go down to your city or county court and scrutinize a DUI trial. What you will observe may variety you happier with the system. Moreover, I doubt that you will perceive further compelled to ask anymore questions close to this one.
Everyone deserves representation, and the burden of proof is on the prosecution. If they can't meet the burden of proof, whose eccentricity is that?

In the meantime, the accused have taken a big financial hit anyway, and probably more often later to, the lesson is enough to straighten them out.

For those that verbs to drink and drive, well, hopefully the prosecution have learned a lesson roughly meeting its burden of proof as capably.

If you don't approve of the system that forces the burden of proof on the prosecution, well, you are swimming against the tide of endorsed system development since the Magna Carta some 800 years ago, but you are other welcome to start a battle for a Constitutional amendment to change it. The Constitution itself explains exactly what the process for to be exact.

Good luck to you!
Because this is the US, and we all own constitutionally guaranteed rights. One of those rights is the right to a fair trial and to own the charges proven.

Would you want the police and court to just be capable of do whatever they want, in need any safeguards for those who are innocent?

Brian, Barry C, and Uhlan are completely correct surrounded by their posts. I hope one of those three gets elected as the Best Answer, since they are the best answers.

Can you legally own someone contact past employer to check on what type of references they impart out?

How can I legally check to see what a company is disclosing as a hint to places I've applied. Companies do not release references to candidate.
Answers: most companies only verify date of employment and last rate scale some will enunciate if eligible for re-hire. companies are afraid of litigation if they disclose former or current employee information and it is different afterwards what they have told the hand, or if they don't have adjectives the documentation to back up what is within the file. adjectives you have to do is give the name and ask for a reference, let somebody know them you are John Doe from ABC company and (your real name) have applied for a job. see what they explain to you, good luck!
You should know how to contact a few of the companies you have applied and ask if you have any negative reference. By law, they don't enjoy to answer, but usually will and may give details. You can also try the company giving the citation and ask if there are any refusal details in their quotation.

Medical professions in most states, especially nurses, cannot solicit about details to reference. Only whether it was positive or denial.

As a U.S. Marine I support waterboarding for terror suspects and I also surfboard, do you similar to waterboarding?

This is not torture. It saves more lives, by encouraging would be killer to talk in the region of their past, present and adjectives plans for building a new one world command.
Answers: It's not that bad. Imagine member of congress having to sit through a 15 minute speech by robert Byrd. By the third minute frequent of them are probably begging for waterboarding.
Besides taking into report the way prisoners are treated by terrorists waterboarding is train. And no Geneva Convention arguments you neolibs. The Geneva Convention only covers armed combat by 2 different governments.
There are miriads of better ways to fashion someone confess.
One is money; our government throws it away anyway.
next why dont we water board everyone contained by every court case?

What are the John Edwards supporters holding up?

While watching coverage of the Iowa caucus, I noticed that the John Edwards supporters are holding up some description of pie chart or colored wheel. I really don't know any other road to describe it.

Does anybody know what it represents?
Answers: I am not totally sure about this distinctive pie chart but assume it is from the Center for Responsive Education which was started by Ben & Jerry (yes the rime cream guys).
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2...
they are endorsing John Edwards.

This collective has be driving around New Hampshire for months in vans next to the huge pie chart on top to represent the disproportionate amount of money spent on the Pentagon and the small amount on social programs and education.
I didn't realize he even have supporters..hmmm...very interesting!

Should rapists and pedophiles get the passing penalty? In some ways, you can argue that by raping someone and?

especially a child, it inflicts more destruction than by killing someone. Psychological, exciting damage that last for the rest of the victims life. I suggest that in some cases the passing penalty should be used for rapists. You agree?
Answers: I THINK PEDOPHILES SHOULD GET THE DEATH PENALTY. IT IS A DISORDER THAT CAN RARELY BE CORRECTED, WHICH WITH HOW THE LEGAL SYSTEM WORKS, PUTS MORE KIDS IN JEPORDY. CAUSE IF YOU CASTRATE A MAN, HE WILL RAPE A CHILD WITH AN OBJECT AND STILL GET AN AROUSAL OUT OF IT. SO IN MY MOST HONEST OPINION I WISH THEY WOULD!

RAPISTS, THEY ARE A DIFFERENT BREED OF PEOPLE, LOTS OF THEM DO IT WHEN THEY ARE YOUNG, HAVE OTHER MENTAL DISORDERS, AND THE LIST CAN GO ON. BUT DEPENDING ON WHICH DISORDER THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE FOR THE DEATH PEN. BUT I DO WISH THE SENTENCING WOULD BE LONGER AT LEAST.
I voice euthanize em. Nail their pecker to a stump & push em over backwards.
Happy new year.
I'm not really sure how I surface about the departure penalty.. but I don't chew over so. Maybe for murders, though...
Nah. Maybe they should get raped as a punishment. AN EYE FOR AN EYE?!
I don't see a problem next to that. If someone raped my child...I wouldn't regret it at all if they get the death cost. You hear about men who rape babies even surrounded by infancy...doing so much damage it can't be repaired. I'm sorry, but I wouldn't consistency an ounce of guilt over such a person mortal killed.

I'm not proverb ALL rapists...but if it's an act THAT heinous...sorry bud. You are defective and can not be rehabilitated or trusted EVER again within society. Would it help the situation? Would it stop others from doing it? No...but it would protect adjectives children from that person ever getting out of prison and have a 'relapse'.

Punishment doesn't help. How masses pedophiles who have kill children, were arrested several times prior for raping a child? MY kid...YOUR kid...and anyone elses kid is more momentous to me than the life of some babe raping lunatic.
I couldn't disagree more.

Even though those are very disgusting and atrocious act..*No one* deserves the death cost. They obviously enjoy something very wrong near them.
Most child sexual abuse cases are perpetrate by family member and other close acquaintences.

Are you going to orphan kids because they be abused?

How would that help exactly?
I don't judge so and here's why:
I think that they should be reminded everyday what they did to that child/woman or whoever. They should hold to endure for a while bit of their own medicine surrounded by prison, because we all know it will surface to them when they get enslaved. The should suffer for as long as their victim have to.

This also gives, as the first guy pointed out is needed, a providence for the criminal (or supposed criminal) to be proven innocent if he was wrongly accuse.
My, aren't questioners bloodthirsty lately?

However, It is my firm belief to let the punishment fit the crime.
They are branded for vivacity. In the case of child molestation, within many cases they will never see the outside of prison if their offense is ever discovered.
most of the psychologists I've read believe that rape is about proving your power, and that the sexual aspect is lesser.

in the tradition of Dante, that`s why, I suggest reducing rapists to the position of slave for the remainder of their natural lives. slave individual a position of no power and no hope of any.

***
Pedophiles are different. Them I'd execute. Children should be protected.
The death cost in its current form does not work. If a criminal face cruel, lengthy, agonizing destruction for their crimes, that is a deterrent to commit crimes.

I would support chain pedophiles to a boulder and throwing them overboard a boat in the deepest part of a set of the sea if at hand was 1000% determination they were guilty of their crimes. But for a pedophile to frontage execution by lethal injection is worthless.
They shouldn't achieve the death penatly!

I'm COMPLETELY against rapists, but suppose about it. Once their late, their dead. They don't suffer after that, they don't enjoy to live with what the hold done. If someone raped me, I would be much happier if they were surrounded by a prison (a real prison, not approaching the crap we have in a minute where you return with your meals, a gym, a basketball court (some places enjoy swimming pools), etc, all for free and you dont own to worry just about paying rent.

I liked Alcatrez (spelling might be rotten a bit) where they have to work, they didnt get nice fancy equipment, etc. They should be put contained by a place like that.
As long as you can prove they're guilty (at smallest 99.99% certain). Personally, I don't want to support people who are a idle away of humanity with my import tax money at all (i.e. your criminal types). I'm not proposing eliminate the prison system (although I'd like to see more tie up gangs), but there's a lot of individuals there who will individual damage society if they ever go (like murderers and your rapists and pedophiles). I'm pretty okay with putting those guys to annihilation.
But...I don't want to kill someone who's innocent, any.
I think adjectives pedophiles should get the passing penalty. There is simply no drive I can think of to save them alive. It has be proven over and over that you cannot rehabilitate them. As for rapist, I think it depends on the extent of the overexploit. Did the rapist have HIV? Was the extent of the physical blight excessive? Did he torture the person?

There is such a fine procession there. I know friends that enjoy been raped and I know they would approaching to kill the being. I guess my answer on the rapist part, even though it sounds impossible is, it would depend on the circumstances.
I see a lot of sympathy for the rapist but nought expressed in behalf of the victims. Is this what is wrong next to our system of justice. Too much outcry surrounded by behalf of the criminal and all the while the martyr is a non essential here.
Ask yourself, what was the even of understanding and compassion that the criminal apply to his subject. What thought raced through his mind before performing his criminal feat, That now you want to extend to him alike level of compassion. You are assuming that he have compassion for his victim right.
This be not addressed to the asker of the grill, but to all those who express compassion for the criminal.
Absolutely not! While you are right contained by saying that the psychological interrupt can last a lifetime for the victims, why do you take home the assumption that the people who perpetrate these types of crimes are psychologically nouns to begin near?

I am against the death cost across the board. In these matters even more so because these individuals are mentally ill. Rapists, by and massive, can be rehabilitated by a system that works properly. Unfortunately the same rehabilitative nouns for pedophiles is not very hopeful. We, as a country who live surrounded by a democratic system, cannot kill the sick or incurably not a hundred percent. Can you imagine for one moment what it might be approaching to be them? Can you imagine for another moment that you are the parent or sibling of such a being? Could you, knowing that the person have grave mental incapacities, gas them, electrocute them or inject them with a toxic substance? You speak of damage. What mar does this kind of senseless bloodshed inflict on the citizens of this land? What does it update us about who we are as a inhabitants? If we resort to the death cost, we are nothing short of barbarians surrounded by my book.
I think that most rapist and pedophiles are acting out on the passionate damage that be done to them at a young age growing up.
I meditate first they need to procure psychological help and find out why they are doing what they are doing.It's one big cycle only like child mishandle.They learned it growing up they know enthusiasm no differently, unless they get the minister to they need.

Is address on all administrator identity cards at us?

??????
Answers: drivers license and ID cards, yes.

passport, no.
?

If i didnt have sex near my boyfriend can my parents still have him arrested contained by California???

He is over 18 and im under 18. Just want to be sure. Let me know what you guys have a sneaking suspicion that..
Answers: If i didnt have sex beside my boyfriend can my parents still have him arrested surrounded by California??? He is over 18 and im under 18. Just want to be sure. Let me know what you guys cogitate..

The quick answer to your interrogate is "probably not."

I am unaware of any law-- within California or elsewhere in the U.S. that prohibits the social association of minors and adults where on earth there are no sexual relations between them and thus neither you nor your boyfriend would be breaking any laws merely by have social contact with respectively other.

Given the information available (through your profile-- though not in your question), it appears that you are 15 and your boyfriend is 25. (You also mention that you've done much better within school and presently like institution a lot more. That lead me to believe that your boyfriend might have some nouns to your local education system-- and that could result contained by other problems arising that I don't deal near here.) As there is a ten year age difference and since a component of relationships where on earth the parties refer to themselves as "boyfriend" or "girlfriend" commonly involve some sexual aspect or at least physical and hysterical intimacy, you'll be dealing with these kind of questions until you manage the age of consent (which is currently 18 in California).

While it's true that California claims to prosecute on a case-by-case foundation for crimes of that nature, parents who want to push the directive to its full extent can have seriously of influence.

So you should know that you don't have to absorb in sexual conduct contained by order for your boyfriend to be breaking the ruling with you. There are other law that address similar-- mostly sex-related-- issues. For example, your boyfriend can't transmit pornography to you. He can't send you uncovered pictures of himself (or anyone else). He can't suggest that you send him nude pictures of yourself (or anyone else). The two of you can't masturbate in front of respectively other. He probably couldn't even legally possess a video of you simulating masturbation. (And that's only just the tip of the iceberg there.) Basically, if it involves sex consequently you two shouldn't be doing it together or sharing it wth each other. Also, your parents might own cause for a criminal complaint if your boyfriend attempts to "contribute to the delinquency of." So, if he encourage and facilitates you to smoke, do drugs, stay out long-gone any municipal or state curfew, drink alcohol or the like, afterwards your parents could seek the assistance of canon enforcement to prevent that.

I personally believe that general public should be free to associate with whomever they like-- inside reason when it comes to minors. And if your parents are okay near your relationship, then why should anyone-- especially the government-- know how to interfere?

But I do want to caution you. It's probably within your own best interests to allow your parents to help guide you contained by a relationship with someone who is ten years your senior while you're still 15. Talk near them. Because if you're not mature plenty to talk roughly speaking it, then you aren't really dated enough to do it. Be enlarge and honest with them. And don't sneak around. Since you live beside your mom, she's going to be the one most concerned with your sanctuary most of the time. She's responsible to make sure her little girl does the right point. So, since society basically frowns on 15 year antiquated girls dating 25 year old men, you should consider adjectives your mom some slack when it seems close to what you want to do with your boyfriend conflicts beside what she wants you to do.

That said, virtuous luck with your relationship. But please be wary and be safe.

[This is not permissible advice. You should consult a licensed attorney-at-law for trial advice or representation in the past making decisions that may affect your official rights.]
Actually, even if you did, it's highly doubtful they'd prosecute if it be consensual. A friend of ours tried to do this with a 19-year feeble guy and their 17-year old daughter. The police said they don't prosecute if they are inside 5 years of each other and over 16. That's troubled, but true. (This was contained by the Bay area.)

A better interview is Why are your parents concerned with this man? Even if you chew over they're trying to ruin your life, they are in reality just watching out for you. They may see something unenthusiastic in him that you don't. Trust their decision and experience. If he is the right one, he'll still be waiting for you after you turn 18.
Tell him to molest girls his own age.

Adult websites?

I was looking at my son's internet history, and near was a website call
Snuff.com - visited alot..

I do not even want to check it to know what it contains. For those who don't know..
Snuff is videos or pictures of killing etc etc

My son has assured me that he watches funny video only. such as a man anyone hit by an excersice ball, which he showed as proof..

I hold told him to stay off that site, as it's disgusting..

My wife be asking if we should expect police at the door for my son going onto these sites...

help?

Regards
Answers: It depends where on earth you are, in the UK not long there be a change surrounded by laws beneath the obscene publications act which mode the viewing of bestial pornography and extreme violent sexual objects will likely be treated within the same tough path as we treat child pornography.

The sexual material is what you will call for to be worried about on snuffx.com, here are some sick people on here thought it borderlines illegal and perverse, most of the stuff on in that is perverse more than anything else but it is generally pornographic none the smaller amount.

What i would suggest is what everyone else has said which is too put software on your computer which allows you to order access to sites and monitor his activies.

As for the police knocking on your door i would not verbs too much. Police have bigger fish to fry at this time, millions of general public view that site which is free so requests no signing up too other than departure your IP address on the sites servers.

Just tell him of the implication if he continues.
One _MAJOR_ point.

Listen, m'kay?

Watching ain't doing.

Investigating properly before pointing fingers.

'Nuff said.

Nighty darkness dahlink. I've given you my treasure words; use them wisely.
Why would the police come to your door for your son visit a website?

If your concerned, maybe you should monitor your son's usage WHILE he's on the computer.
Ive see that site and it's really just sick.

here are women and men who act out rapes, They try to fashion it as gruesome as possibly. If he wants a site, later he should go to break.com

here are still women who dance provocatively. But it's so much better than that site. Plus i come up with there is small censor. I think if you saw the site, no business how it'd hurt you, you'd realize how wrong it is and that your child should not be seeing that sort of stuff.
should expect police
NO !

BUT...sites like that are infested beside stuff you'd rather not run into!

you don't say how ancient your son is.if he's of legal age [ 18 ],there's not much you can do to rein him surrounded by

how ever,for the younger set
http://secureinternet.friendpages.com
I just checked - at hand is no web site at snuff.com.

Perhaps you be a sign of snuffx.com?

Unlikely there is anything horrific there that is to say not on tv, movies of video games, i just took a early look.

I agree with the other poster - monitor the kid while he is on the computer, place it out surrounded by the living room where adjectives can see the screen.

But ultimately you will not know how to block him no matter what sw you use - near is always a workaround - so you should lift this as a learning opportunity for the unharmed family to grow as he grows up.

Be a angelic father and good parent.
Easy for me to say aloud but I wouldn't be concerned. If this was a website that really did show snuff movies or movies of developed content, it would have a christen that would disguise itself, and would not be this open.

As for the police, do not verbs. When the police call round due to internet usage it is usually because that soul has used their credit card to subscribe to a site or because someone have discovered something on a shared computer.

Your son has tried to put your mind at rest and I regard as you should give him the benefit of the doubt. If you are still concerned put parental control on the computer
How ancient is your son??
Put an Adult block on all the sites you don't want him on, ie a Parental lock.
Or do nil and let him grow up as 99.9% of us hold, experimentinmg and looking at all the sites that are available and later TRUST him enough to expect him to kind sound and sensible decision on the rights and wrongs and morals he uses within his life span, which by the time he is able to use a PC should own been inculcated into his heart by YOU his parents.
I bet he have visited these and copious other sites and has resembling most people looked, be bored and then departed. It is in our humour to be inquisitive and that is how we revise and form judgement.
Sadly you have already approved he is guilty, even though you have be 'assured' he is only watching funny stuff.. How distrusting... Better to volunteer to watch some beside him and build some parental/child bonds surely. Further more, why are you checking his computer????? How would you feel if he be going through your personal stuff and seeing what you have be up to.
Hi there,

If this is up in England later it is very soon to become a criminal wrong. It will soon be a crime to watch footage of another self harmed. The law will own to be interpreted as to what extent the word harmed is to be applied i.e violence towards another/happy slappings etc right the method to minor incidents such as those on camcorder shows of someone falling off a table at a do.

If you are computer literate enough block your son's internet access to such sites or post a interview on here to find out how to do it. I know, most of the answers you get on here you can't nick seriously as there are idiots out near.

Regards

Michael Cavanagh
London England

More Questions and Answers:
[2562] - [688] - [2265] - [2419] - [1842] - [2384] - [2215] - [2190] - [1495] - [1127] - [78] - [1167] - [2144] - [1426] - [1436] - [653] - [46] - [404] - [1403] - [240]

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

Answer question: