there is no logic whatsoever behind doing this, i have never done any embarassing pictures whatsoever so they could only be from my online dating profile. this woman has caused no end of stress for my boyfriend and now she seems to be targetting me, is there anything i can do about this? its natrually embarassing for me that some psycho ex has sent pointless pics to my bosses! does anyone have any advice about this? She is really getting me down, i suffer from depression as it is and am trying to fight it. x
Answer:
Contact the police and get her charged for harrasment or something. or at least a scare!
restraining order sounds good..
If I were you, I would call your local police department and ask them what can be done. I have a feeling that would qualify as harassment, and your boyfriend should pursue it too.
take embarassing pictures of her and send them to her dad haha
Get a lawyer!she has no reason to have pics of you in the first place... you need to tell your ex to get her under control! What she is trying to do is defame you at your workplace...unless she works there too there is no reason for her to contact your employer for any reason...see if attorneys in your area give free consultations...because i doubt this will be the last of her harassment
unless she is making threats to your life or threats to cause harm to you theirs not allot you can do other than have your employer complain to the ISP about this person SPAMMING them.
Your employer should save all emails so that they can give a record of the number of emails that she is sending, its good practise to monitor the level of mailings from this person.
This then can be used as testament to the harassment and unwelcome attention that you are receiving.
Employ the help of Ted Bundy! On a serious note, yeah phone the police and get her done for harassment.
Try being creative ... file charges FOR INCITING violations of STALKING ... why - of course you are beautiful and by her sending pictures to your bosses - not only may it cause your bosses to sexually harrass you in the long run - as they stare at your pictures ... but; they could possibly start stalking you so you can't get them on charges of sexual harassments on the job.
File a PERMANENT INJUNCTION ORDER which is way more powerful than the protection order, as it is an extroidinary action that comes forth from extroidinary acts against you that you want to prevent FOREVER.
You can file for the Permanent Injunction Order as EX PARTE meaning the lady don't even know that it is in the court and the order can be signed by the evidence presented ... get your bosses to sign a statement that they received the pictures from her and that is probably all you need to show she is inciting any form of criminal acts against you or your person and you are scared and intimidated by her acts to solicit such crimes to be committed against you ...
Get the picture - get original and the judges will love the originality of it ... every one needs a change in their jobs to make them interesting and more enjoyable ... the judge will flip when you present such a lawful twist on laws he is supposed to uphold.
If you want real originality ... IF SHE GOT IT FROM YOUR DATING SERVICE ... ON LINE ... guess what she did by copying the pictures?? It is called copyright infringments and she don't have to sell it to violate the law - she violated it because she copied it and gave it away and used it for her personal use (enjoyment of making your life helllllll) ... and that would be easily provable if you can get one of the pictures and match it to the site - then contact the site by public information/open records act requesting information pertaining to any request to copy your information ...
Maybe you can get that site to prosecute ... and that would build credibility of that site that would advertise that those who copy such information would be prosecuted - as they protect their clients ... Twist the laws in a lawful manner and make lemonaide out of this situation ...
Or you could just forgive her?
Peace;
Aintmyfault
.
Speak with the police department %26 go from there. As others have suggested a restraining order would be prudent too have to!!
Also hopefully your employeer is worth their salt and will speak with you on a kind basis and figure out a solution to this post haste.
You don't say where you work or what field. If this person comes into your work place for no reason other than to harrass you,it would be expident to have your employeer aware of this troubled person.
Don't let her get you down and depressed cause that would only add fuel to her fire already. You are worth more than that and don't ever forget it!!
You can rise above this and don't let her win at this.
Keep your head up and hold it high and speak with the police and file a restraining order ASAP.
Good luck,
Laura
p.s. don't leave work alone cause if she's really wacko it might not be safe to leave work alone. Walk with someone to your vehicle cause it's best to be safe than sorry!!
p.p.s. Also if possible print off the emails she sent to your boss and visit with an attorney also you might be able to haul her to small claims court too!! If she keeps on pestering she may have a jail cell with her name on it or a psych ward with her name on the door just for her!
Beat her fKn @$$. Ok no, but seriously, this is harrassment. Call the police station ask them what to do, file a restraining order whatnot. However, I'll warn you, at least here, restraining orders are a complete joke until something serious goes down. But atleast call teh cops, a deputy will come talk to you, explain the situation he should know what to do.
Get some pictures of her and have someone do some photo shop retouches to them of her in compromising positions and post them in her neighborhood. I think she'll get the idea.
DID I HEAR RESTRAINING ORDER !?... ya i did.. sounds like a good idea
Just ignore her - don't make an issue of it - I recently had someone in my lady friend's email box sending out fake emails pretending to be her.
Once we all knew someone had broken into the box - they went away. She is just a sad case and will go away eventually if you don't rise to the bait.
If anyone asks just say that it is some loony doing it - you don't know why - and ask them to ignore it.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
My boyfriend just got put in jail?
And I was there for everything and I know he didnt do it I was there for everything. My so called friend was drunk and called the police on him and told them that he threatned to kill me and her and her two kids. My boyfriend is the sweetest guy in the world and he doesnt deserve this. Now this girl has put her current and past boyfriends in jail for similar crimes and then taken it back afterwards and has even got charged with mischief because of it. Now im not allowd to talk to my bf because of what she said and i just want to kno how i can get this resolved for the courts to let my bf come home. Hes out on bail but is to have no contact with me and this is really bothering me
Answer:
Ever think maybe you should chose your friends better?
Contact the prosecuting attorney's office and tell them you were there and no threat was made. Also emphasize that she was drunk and has done this in the past.
Didnt you talk to the cops when he was taken away? They should have asked if you wanted to press charges? And what your story was.
go to family court and petition the judge to lift the r.o.
then go to the prosecutors office or the police and file a malicous prosecution complaint,and see if the police can file a complaint for filing a false police report.
if there are other witnesses,bring them with you.
and dump the nutcase completely from your life.
i was charged similar years ago,spent the weekend in county cause no judge was on to set a bail amount.i was of coarse innocent,and the prosecutor asked me if i wanted to file a mal pro complaint.i declined because it was my wife and she was having drug problems,so i told her to get help or i would file.i had custody of my kids at the time so i was not in fear of her drug abuse around the kids.she got help and we are best friends to the day.
this stuff really irks me,domestic violence charges can ruin someones future and unfortunately are falsely filed all the time,and mostly it is men that are falsely accused,i think it is despicable and they need to modify the rules so people cant falsely file a complaint with no repurcussions.
Really you need to prove your friend has issues ...you can tell them to about you not wanting to press charges and he's never been violent torwards you..but it will work very lil because they feel if battered woman are that afraid...they will say anything out of fear...9which isnt always true) get a free consultation from a lawyer also and see what they say...but you really have to prove there are isssues within they're household and it escalated because of her alcohol consumption and adamosity she has for you...
Don't you have anything better to do than be a third rate troll?
If you can get in touch with your boyfriends lawyer, this may be your best option as a character witness or if you were with him the whole time or at certain times which could show or prove in court this other "so called friend" to be lying.
You could also try and talk to the police inspector in charge of the case
I'd suggest finding better friends.
Get a lawyer or talk to the public defender and let them know the circumstances of your case.
Answer:
Ever think maybe you should chose your friends better?
Contact the prosecuting attorney's office and tell them you were there and no threat was made. Also emphasize that she was drunk and has done this in the past.
Didnt you talk to the cops when he was taken away? They should have asked if you wanted to press charges? And what your story was.
go to family court and petition the judge to lift the r.o.
then go to the prosecutors office or the police and file a malicous prosecution complaint,and see if the police can file a complaint for filing a false police report.
if there are other witnesses,bring them with you.
and dump the nutcase completely from your life.
i was charged similar years ago,spent the weekend in county cause no judge was on to set a bail amount.i was of coarse innocent,and the prosecutor asked me if i wanted to file a mal pro complaint.i declined because it was my wife and she was having drug problems,so i told her to get help or i would file.i had custody of my kids at the time so i was not in fear of her drug abuse around the kids.she got help and we are best friends to the day.
this stuff really irks me,domestic violence charges can ruin someones future and unfortunately are falsely filed all the time,and mostly it is men that are falsely accused,i think it is despicable and they need to modify the rules so people cant falsely file a complaint with no repurcussions.
Really you need to prove your friend has issues ...you can tell them to about you not wanting to press charges and he's never been violent torwards you..but it will work very lil because they feel if battered woman are that afraid...they will say anything out of fear...9which isnt always true) get a free consultation from a lawyer also and see what they say...but you really have to prove there are isssues within they're household and it escalated because of her alcohol consumption and adamosity she has for you...
Don't you have anything better to do than be a third rate troll?
If you can get in touch with your boyfriends lawyer, this may be your best option as a character witness or if you were with him the whole time or at certain times which could show or prove in court this other "so called friend" to be lying.
You could also try and talk to the police inspector in charge of the case
I'd suggest finding better friends.
Get a lawyer or talk to the public defender and let them know the circumstances of your case.
My boss never pays anyone on time, what can we do to correct this?
2 other people and I work for a failing car dealer that hasn't sold cars in 2 years, we work in the shop and parts areas. We live in a small area (2k pop.) and there are not that many good family supporting jobs around. We do get paid (unlike a lot of my bosses bills) but it's always late. What can we do to correct this frequenting annoying problem?
Answer:
Call the Department of Labor. But if you cause your boss more problems, he might not be able to keep operating and fold the place up.
your best bet is to find a new job.ask yourself "is it going to any good to tell your boss you want paid on time?" does he really care? because if he doid he would pay you on time
Answer:
Call the Department of Labor. But if you cause your boss more problems, he might not be able to keep operating and fold the place up.
your best bet is to find a new job.ask yourself "is it going to any good to tell your boss you want paid on time?" does he really care? because if he doid he would pay you on time
My bf in jail continued?
And I was there for everything and I know he didnt do it I was there for everything. My so called friend was drunk and called the police on him and told them that he threatned to kill me and her and her two kids. My boyfriend is the sweetest guy in the world and he doesnt deserve this. Now this girl has put her current and past boyfriends in jail for similar crimes and then taken it back afterwards and has even got charged with mischief because of it. Now im not allowd to talk to my bf because of what she said and i just want to kno how i can get this resolved for the courts to let my bf come home. Hes out on bail but is to have no contact with me and this is really bothering me and when i talked to police they said i wasnt a credible witness because i am his girlfriend and im probbably tried to save him from going to jail
Answer:
His attorney should interview you as a witness. If your testimony is good he'll use you. Be able to show proof of her past mischief and call those guys as witnesses.
You don't need to be around a criminal. Have some self respect and find someone else. "Sweet" guys don't go to jail no matter what some girl says.
The best you can do is wait until his court date. You don't want to aggravate the situation by being caught with him because the judge is going to be irritated because he did not follow orders. Tell your friend to get a life and stay away from her and her kids. If she doesn't like your boyfriend enough to call the police then she don't like you either.
Answer:
His attorney should interview you as a witness. If your testimony is good he'll use you. Be able to show proof of her past mischief and call those guys as witnesses.
You don't need to be around a criminal. Have some self respect and find someone else. "Sweet" guys don't go to jail no matter what some girl says.
The best you can do is wait until his court date. You don't want to aggravate the situation by being caught with him because the judge is going to be irritated because he did not follow orders. Tell your friend to get a life and stay away from her and her kids. If she doesn't like your boyfriend enough to call the police then she don't like you either.
My bf & his son were arrested for cultivating and sales and he also got child endangerment for smoking w/son?
the cultivating was dropped and he plead guilty to sales and child endangerment, what are the chances of him getting any visitation with his kids
Answer:
About freakin' zero. And a good thing.
Class act of a boyfriend you have there.
Geez. Get a grip. Who says weed isn't wack?http://www.retrojunk.com/details_commerc...
a father will almost always get visitaion with his chld except in the case of child molestation and even then in a lot of cases
The court will probably require him to complete a drug treatment program and supervised visitation before allowing him to have unsupervised visitation with them.
I seriously doubt that any court will completely strip him of any type of visitation.
None. Especially after he had plead guilty to both.
It depends, his son may get to visit him in jail and when
he gets out he may get supervised visits.
You should be seeing a big RED flag, is this what you want?
a man that not only smokes marijuana but sells it as well?
I realize that love is blind but it doesn't have to be stupid.
You need to have a serious talk with your boyfriend and
get him to stop selling drugs (actually he should stop
smoking it as well because if he is caught with it again
he may face the same charges again). Or you need
to be willing to have separations from him while he
spends time in jail.
Try to get him to change his ways, I hate it when guys
do something fairly petty and screw up their lives and
the lives of those that love him.
Molly J - I seriously think it's about time that you started seeing other guys. This guy is a loser - get over him and expand your horizons.
He probally just has to go through some kind of treatment program. I know of people and their kids getting busted with alot harsher things than weed.. It depends on the degree of endangerment, age of the kid, and pretty much how the judge feels that day. He will probally have to have supervised visits for awhile. But in some cases, they hold it kind of like a contributing to minors case. Even though its illegal know matter how old you are. Now as far as the son living in the same household, well, sorry but I dont think that will happen anytime soon because they will still look at the cultivation even though not charged with it.
I see that you are asking this question over and over, hoping that a felony child endangerment charge won't hurt your boyfriend or your visitation rights.
A person who pleads guilty to felony child endangerment may be able to have visitation with his/her children. There is a strong public policy in our courts to try and keep children in contact with their parents. But the offending parent will have to successfully complete his or her sentence and may have additional restrictions placed on visitation. For example, the court may order only supervised visitation in a neutral location so that there is no danger that the child will be exposed to the same problems that led to the felony charge in the first place.
But--I hate offering you any hope. This man had no problem breaking the law, risking imprisonment, and then introduced his own child to drug abuse. And you stand by him! This guy is a loser, and you will be lost as well if you don't get out now.
Answer:
About freakin' zero. And a good thing.
Class act of a boyfriend you have there.
Geez. Get a grip. Who says weed isn't wack?http://www.retrojunk.com/details_commerc...
a father will almost always get visitaion with his chld except in the case of child molestation and even then in a lot of cases
The court will probably require him to complete a drug treatment program and supervised visitation before allowing him to have unsupervised visitation with them.
I seriously doubt that any court will completely strip him of any type of visitation.
None. Especially after he had plead guilty to both.
It depends, his son may get to visit him in jail and when
he gets out he may get supervised visits.
You should be seeing a big RED flag, is this what you want?
a man that not only smokes marijuana but sells it as well?
I realize that love is blind but it doesn't have to be stupid.
You need to have a serious talk with your boyfriend and
get him to stop selling drugs (actually he should stop
smoking it as well because if he is caught with it again
he may face the same charges again). Or you need
to be willing to have separations from him while he
spends time in jail.
Try to get him to change his ways, I hate it when guys
do something fairly petty and screw up their lives and
the lives of those that love him.
Molly J - I seriously think it's about time that you started seeing other guys. This guy is a loser - get over him and expand your horizons.
He probally just has to go through some kind of treatment program. I know of people and their kids getting busted with alot harsher things than weed.. It depends on the degree of endangerment, age of the kid, and pretty much how the judge feels that day. He will probally have to have supervised visits for awhile. But in some cases, they hold it kind of like a contributing to minors case. Even though its illegal know matter how old you are. Now as far as the son living in the same household, well, sorry but I dont think that will happen anytime soon because they will still look at the cultivation even though not charged with it.
I see that you are asking this question over and over, hoping that a felony child endangerment charge won't hurt your boyfriend or your visitation rights.
A person who pleads guilty to felony child endangerment may be able to have visitation with his/her children. There is a strong public policy in our courts to try and keep children in contact with their parents. But the offending parent will have to successfully complete his or her sentence and may have additional restrictions placed on visitation. For example, the court may order only supervised visitation in a neutral location so that there is no danger that the child will be exposed to the same problems that led to the felony charge in the first place.
But--I hate offering you any hope. This man had no problem breaking the law, risking imprisonment, and then introduced his own child to drug abuse. And you stand by him! This guy is a loser, and you will be lost as well if you don't get out now.
My best friend won the $96 million lottery last night and his dumbass forgot the ticket at my house, should I?
save him from his drug loving self and keep the ticket?
Should I stop making excuses, cash it, then move out of the country? Should I give it back to him and let him give me a couple million and watch him kill himself from the pill bottle to the grave?
Answer:
well, if my friend essentially left 96 mill at my house.bye bye friend. you could give him a couple of bucks to cover the cost of the ticket.
its not fair that he is going to spend it on drugs. but its his money. he should give you a bit of it, because you were kind enough to give it back to him. and don't worry, he'll have enough for the funeral.
Well, first of all I don't believe you that he won. Second of all, you would've be able to do it anyway, because he could sue you because of this post online. And if you are telling the truth, and don't want him to kill himself, then just rip it up. Or give it to a homeless person! OR, you could just cash it, and buy new friends!
Maybe he was out of it and wont remember the winning ticket.
heres the thing that people dont know, whenever someone wins millions and millions first thing is they might not be the only one to have won that day in which case the winnings might be split secondly if you do win soley then you have 2 choices, #1 except the full payout which is conciderably less then 96 million and also take the tax incurrence at the end of the year, or #2 take payments over 20-40 years in much smaller sums, also my last and final point when you claim you have won they do a very thorough investigation to see where you bought the ticket, what time it was bought, if any cameras spotted the buyer so on and so fourth so if you attempt to claim it they will see it wasnt you and you would be hauled off to jail, so might as well save yourself the hassle and give it back to your friend.
Should I stop making excuses, cash it, then move out of the country? Should I give it back to him and let him give me a couple million and watch him kill himself from the pill bottle to the grave?
Answer:
well, if my friend essentially left 96 mill at my house.bye bye friend. you could give him a couple of bucks to cover the cost of the ticket.
its not fair that he is going to spend it on drugs. but its his money. he should give you a bit of it, because you were kind enough to give it back to him. and don't worry, he'll have enough for the funeral.
Well, first of all I don't believe you that he won. Second of all, you would've be able to do it anyway, because he could sue you because of this post online. And if you are telling the truth, and don't want him to kill himself, then just rip it up. Or give it to a homeless person! OR, you could just cash it, and buy new friends!
Maybe he was out of it and wont remember the winning ticket.
heres the thing that people dont know, whenever someone wins millions and millions first thing is they might not be the only one to have won that day in which case the winnings might be split secondly if you do win soley then you have 2 choices, #1 except the full payout which is conciderably less then 96 million and also take the tax incurrence at the end of the year, or #2 take payments over 20-40 years in much smaller sums, also my last and final point when you claim you have won they do a very thorough investigation to see where you bought the ticket, what time it was bought, if any cameras spotted the buyer so on and so fourth so if you attempt to claim it they will see it wasnt you and you would be hauled off to jail, so might as well save yourself the hassle and give it back to your friend.
My bank decided to hold a check deposit after telling me it was available.?
We deposited a check into our bank account on Friday. It was for the amount of $4,000. I logged into the online banking today and checked our account and it said our available balance was -$345.00 and our ledger balance was $3,755. I talked to the bank representative and she said we were okay there was no problems. She opened up another window and saw there was a hold on it. According to her, the manager released the hold on the check and our receipt said at the time of deposit available balance $4,100. She even told us there was not a hold on the check and we were okay. The woman I spoke with said a second panel reviews the deposits at night and decided to put a hold on it. She said they don't let inform them when they do this, so I will have to be responsible for the overdraft charges they will apply because they decided to place a hold on it and not inform me. That's not right at all. Most of my purchases were small amounts. Not I'm looking at over $500 in overdraft fees.
Answer:
That is totally wrong! Go talk to the bank manager in person and explain exactly what you said here and ask for the overdraft fees to be refunded. They should have informed you when they decided to hold the check and since they didn't, you incurred the fees. It is their responsibility. Threaten to close your account if they don't refund the fees. Good luck!
This is most likely a matter of negotiation. My advise is to go in to the bnk. Be NICE and explain the issue. It's harder to refuse in person. All you need is one sympathetic person to waive the fees. If it doesn't work, go back the next day and try to speak with someone different.
Your only other option is small claims court. But, if they don't automatically take the fees out of your account, you should pay the fees by check and write "paid in protest" on the check. If you don't pay the fees, the bank could report you to credit agencies which could adversely affect your credit. But if you follow my advice, you can avoid all that and still preserve your right to sue.
Good luck.
Sounds like Bank Of America! The do love to jack us around don't they! They want you to know and get used to the fact THEY are in control of our money. Since all the rest of the banks except some really small independents are this way we will just have to live with it till something is done on a national level. Holding back checks is bad but the worst one is holding back payments so they can charge late fees this practice really burns my ***! This makes it necessary to do payments as certified mail to have proof the payment was made on time. It wouldn't hurt to get in touch with the branch manager and do some loud complaining in the bank!
Answer:
That is totally wrong! Go talk to the bank manager in person and explain exactly what you said here and ask for the overdraft fees to be refunded. They should have informed you when they decided to hold the check and since they didn't, you incurred the fees. It is their responsibility. Threaten to close your account if they don't refund the fees. Good luck!
This is most likely a matter of negotiation. My advise is to go in to the bnk. Be NICE and explain the issue. It's harder to refuse in person. All you need is one sympathetic person to waive the fees. If it doesn't work, go back the next day and try to speak with someone different.
Your only other option is small claims court. But, if they don't automatically take the fees out of your account, you should pay the fees by check and write "paid in protest" on the check. If you don't pay the fees, the bank could report you to credit agencies which could adversely affect your credit. But if you follow my advice, you can avoid all that and still preserve your right to sue.
Good luck.
Sounds like Bank Of America! The do love to jack us around don't they! They want you to know and get used to the fact THEY are in control of our money. Since all the rest of the banks except some really small independents are this way we will just have to live with it till something is done on a national level. Holding back checks is bad but the worst one is holding back payments so they can charge late fees this practice really burns my ***! This makes it necessary to do payments as certified mail to have proof the payment was made on time. It wouldn't hurt to get in touch with the branch manager and do some loud complaining in the bank!
My aunt is listening to our phone conversations by a police scanner...HELP?
My aunt is listening to our phone conversations using a police scanner. Is this legal? I know for a fact she is because we've all been in her room where the scanner is and we could hear all the neighbors talking. I don't think she can hear me from my house because I'm further than my mom but I have witnesses that she has listened to me and my mom talk even if it was a one sided conv. she's crazy! it's funny how she is always one step ahead of us during this family drama we have going on now. we are trying to get my cousin's daughter away from her because she has temp custody b/c my cousin lost her house in hurricane rita and her mom just went nuts and won't let any of us see my cousins daughter. so we've been helping my cousin and we go to trial on nov 12. my aunt is just nuts and needs to get in trouble for the things she does. I wish i had enought characters to tell you all of it but who would want to listen..so just please answer my ? if it is legal to listen to ppls calls.
Answer:
yes it's legal any conv. on wireless is not considered private and can be used against you in a court of law. as long as auntie keeps her mouth shut, she can listen all she wants so be careful what you say.
No it is not legal. Even the police need a court order to do a wiretap.
Airwaves are free territory.
If you don't want to be overheard, use a landline.
Simple.
Trust me, your aunt isn't the only one that has stumbled upon this idea.
*** This is not like wiretapping. She's not connecting to any wires. She's pulling signals from the air, like a radio station. Same thing.
If she doesnt know that you know...I'd soooooooooooo play headgames with her. Say some shocking stuff that'd blow her out of the water..maybe she'll decide NOT to listen anymore..
my bf's a lawyer and he confirmed what blue said..which brings me back to my original suggestion :)
You must be using cell phones or cordless. Get a couple of old-fashioned $10 phones that you plug the jack into directly for you and your mom.
Or sabotage her scanner...
If you are on a portable phone, it's not a problem to find you. You need to get on a phone that is direct into the wall or use the channel button often which will change frequencies. Unfortunately, it will not vary very much, so she can probably follow you. I would confront her, because it is against the law. Maybe mention it in a phone conversation that the police is aware of her.
call the police. they dont do anything, break into her house, break the scanner, and light her house on fire. november 12 is my birthday lol
Wow, That's a Lot of Extra Info there!
Listening in on any Civilian Broadcast is Legal. Broadcast waves are Not considered Private (like a Phone Line). Anyone can Listen to a Radio, if they want to. In some areas, Police Bands are Off Limits, however.
Cel phones use Scrambling Features, but Cordless Phones usually do Not. It is Not a Good Idea to use a Cordless for Saying anything you want Confidential (like Credit Card#s, or Medical Reports) which can be Intercepted.
It's not really illegal to listen to the radio. It would be illegal if she modified the police scanner for the specific purpose of listening in on your phone calls.
Buy a better cordless phone, you're old analog one is probably being listened to by half the neighborhood.
You're using an analog cordless phone or an old analog cell phone. Upgrade to a digital cordless or digital cell phone and she won't hear a thing.
better try to get someone else to believe this bs. a scanner is pre tuned to certain frequinces and will not pick up a phone call
Answer:
yes it's legal any conv. on wireless is not considered private and can be used against you in a court of law. as long as auntie keeps her mouth shut, she can listen all she wants so be careful what you say.
No it is not legal. Even the police need a court order to do a wiretap.
Airwaves are free territory.
If you don't want to be overheard, use a landline.
Simple.
Trust me, your aunt isn't the only one that has stumbled upon this idea.
*** This is not like wiretapping. She's not connecting to any wires. She's pulling signals from the air, like a radio station. Same thing.
If she doesnt know that you know...I'd soooooooooooo play headgames with her. Say some shocking stuff that'd blow her out of the water..maybe she'll decide NOT to listen anymore..
my bf's a lawyer and he confirmed what blue said..which brings me back to my original suggestion :)
You must be using cell phones or cordless. Get a couple of old-fashioned $10 phones that you plug the jack into directly for you and your mom.
Or sabotage her scanner...
If you are on a portable phone, it's not a problem to find you. You need to get on a phone that is direct into the wall or use the channel button often which will change frequencies. Unfortunately, it will not vary very much, so she can probably follow you. I would confront her, because it is against the law. Maybe mention it in a phone conversation that the police is aware of her.
call the police. they dont do anything, break into her house, break the scanner, and light her house on fire. november 12 is my birthday lol
Wow, That's a Lot of Extra Info there!
Listening in on any Civilian Broadcast is Legal. Broadcast waves are Not considered Private (like a Phone Line). Anyone can Listen to a Radio, if they want to. In some areas, Police Bands are Off Limits, however.
Cel phones use Scrambling Features, but Cordless Phones usually do Not. It is Not a Good Idea to use a Cordless for Saying anything you want Confidential (like Credit Card#s, or Medical Reports) which can be Intercepted.
It's not really illegal to listen to the radio. It would be illegal if she modified the police scanner for the specific purpose of listening in on your phone calls.
Buy a better cordless phone, you're old analog one is probably being listened to by half the neighborhood.
You're using an analog cordless phone or an old analog cell phone. Upgrade to a digital cordless or digital cell phone and she won't hear a thing.
better try to get someone else to believe this bs. a scanner is pre tuned to certain frequinces and will not pick up a phone call
Must sue ex-boyfriend?
My ex boyfriend tricked me into buying him a car in my name only. It just got repossessed. He owes, I owe 19000.00 on it. How can I get all the money that is owed to me?
Answer:
You owe on the car. But that doesn't mean your boyfriend doesn't "owe" you.
How did he "trick" you? You need to speak with a lawyer, as someone else here already indicated. Your recourse is to sue him, and the likelihood of your succeeding can be assessed only be a lawyer in your jurisdiction who can evaluate the strength of your case/evidence.
Just because the car is in your name, meaning that you bear all the financial responsibility vis-a-vis the creditor while your ex bears none, does not necessarily mean you're SOL. Although there is, as you know, a difference between winning in court and actually recovering the money from the defendant (your ex, in this case) -- so what can happen and what will happen may be two different things.
Please, speak to a lawyer. And don't be so quick to put an asset in your name next time -- it's your liability, your reputation, your credit rating on the line.
Good luck.
ETA The amount of money at issue means that any case would *not* be in small claims.
Your fault. Ultimately, he can't trick you because it was your decision.
Sue him
Ouch! You need to talk to a lawyer.
Unfortunently you can't. That was the risk you took when you allowed him to put your name on it. You assumed responsibility if he would default on his payments.
All you can do is sue him for the towing costs ect... Its in your name so you are responsible for the payments.
On a side note, you should wait until making huge finacial moves like that until you are married.
ya you should sue him
This was an extremely poor judgment on your part and you're going to have to deal with it somehow and learn from this horrible mistake.
I doubt that you can sue him - it will probably be laughed out of court.
Unless you have some written agreement with him, you're stuck for it. When you made your agreement, if not in writing, was anyone there to witness it? If so, you might have a slim chance in small claims court to get a judgement for him to pay the difference between the loan amount and what the car is eventually sold for. Hope you learned a lesson on this one. Good luck!
Put a contract out on his sorry butt. Then go get some counseling for ignorance.
ex boyfriend...lol...that's trick number 2
you can sue him but the 19K means that it will not be in small claims but in real civil court, better talk to a lawyer on how to file etc
legally, there is nothing that you can do. you could try judge judy or something like that, but thats about it.
take him to court..hopefully you have paper work to prove what you say is ture. if not you won't win then you will have to suck it up and count it as a lesson learned
How did he "trick you" into signing legal documents in front of a witness (the car dealer or loan officer)?
Sounds like you need to take some responsibility for your poor judgment and learn a lesson instead of trying to blame an idiot. You are in charge of your own decisions in life.
Unless you can show the court a written agreement to the effect that he will pay you back the money owed, or unless you can show the court proof that he made himself liable for the debt, you alone hold legal responsibility for the car.
Whether or not you like that it's the law. Sure, you can sue. However, for that amount you will be required to sue in District court where the cost of representation will be more than $3,000 at a minimum and without a guarantee of recovery.
You cannot leagally nor can the court, rewrite the agreement you had with the finance company. Therefore, the contract stands as written holding you individually liable for the debt.
why would you even think of doing that??
and yes you should sue him.might i ask why did you take the car from him as soon as you had broken up?
When he took off with the car should have reported it stolen.
Answer:
You owe on the car. But that doesn't mean your boyfriend doesn't "owe" you.
How did he "trick" you? You need to speak with a lawyer, as someone else here already indicated. Your recourse is to sue him, and the likelihood of your succeeding can be assessed only be a lawyer in your jurisdiction who can evaluate the strength of your case/evidence.
Just because the car is in your name, meaning that you bear all the financial responsibility vis-a-vis the creditor while your ex bears none, does not necessarily mean you're SOL. Although there is, as you know, a difference between winning in court and actually recovering the money from the defendant (your ex, in this case) -- so what can happen and what will happen may be two different things.
Please, speak to a lawyer. And don't be so quick to put an asset in your name next time -- it's your liability, your reputation, your credit rating on the line.
Good luck.
ETA The amount of money at issue means that any case would *not* be in small claims.
Your fault. Ultimately, he can't trick you because it was your decision.
Sue him
Ouch! You need to talk to a lawyer.
Unfortunently you can't. That was the risk you took when you allowed him to put your name on it. You assumed responsibility if he would default on his payments.
All you can do is sue him for the towing costs ect... Its in your name so you are responsible for the payments.
On a side note, you should wait until making huge finacial moves like that until you are married.
ya you should sue him
This was an extremely poor judgment on your part and you're going to have to deal with it somehow and learn from this horrible mistake.
I doubt that you can sue him - it will probably be laughed out of court.
Unless you have some written agreement with him, you're stuck for it. When you made your agreement, if not in writing, was anyone there to witness it? If so, you might have a slim chance in small claims court to get a judgement for him to pay the difference between the loan amount and what the car is eventually sold for. Hope you learned a lesson on this one. Good luck!
Put a contract out on his sorry butt. Then go get some counseling for ignorance.
ex boyfriend...lol...that's trick number 2
you can sue him but the 19K means that it will not be in small claims but in real civil court, better talk to a lawyer on how to file etc
legally, there is nothing that you can do. you could try judge judy or something like that, but thats about it.
take him to court..hopefully you have paper work to prove what you say is ture. if not you won't win then you will have to suck it up and count it as a lesson learned
How did he "trick you" into signing legal documents in front of a witness (the car dealer or loan officer)?
Sounds like you need to take some responsibility for your poor judgment and learn a lesson instead of trying to blame an idiot. You are in charge of your own decisions in life.
Unless you can show the court a written agreement to the effect that he will pay you back the money owed, or unless you can show the court proof that he made himself liable for the debt, you alone hold legal responsibility for the car.
Whether or not you like that it's the law. Sure, you can sue. However, for that amount you will be required to sue in District court where the cost of representation will be more than $3,000 at a minimum and without a guarantee of recovery.
You cannot leagally nor can the court, rewrite the agreement you had with the finance company. Therefore, the contract stands as written holding you individually liable for the debt.
why would you even think of doing that??
and yes you should sue him.might i ask why did you take the car from him as soon as you had broken up?
When he took off with the car should have reported it stolen.
Must employers hold fire/emergency evacuations exercises by law ?
Answer:
While there may not be an exact law that states emergency evacuation exercises must be carried out, all employers have a lawful obligation to provide a safe environment for their employees, and must, by law, inform the workers of all safety procedures within the company.
Some employers do indeed run practice emergency drills at random intervals to keep employees on their toes. Others furnish their new employees with a (tedious, some may think) health and safety lecture/video to get the safety procedures across.
Sadly, others just point their employees to the health and safety handbook (of which, somewhere nestled among the pages is the designated safety point in case of emergency evacuation), advise them to read it, and ask for their signature to verify that they have.
Unfortunately, even with signature stating otherwise, not all employees read it, but the employer has fulfilled his lawful obligations and will not be to blame should anything go wrong.
Maybe there should be a law, as no handbook, lecture, or video, is as effective as hands-on experience of a proper evacuation complete with fire bell ringing, although the downside of course is that employees may use it as an impromptu excuse to take a much-welcomed cigarette break...
no, the evac routes must be posted in a well visible spot though. and the emergency exits have to be marked with signs. also some places have to be kept clear for fire code saftey
MOSTLY BIG CORPORATIONS DO JUST SO EMPLOYEE'S DON'T PANIC IF THERE REALLY WAS AN EMERGENCY.
no they don't have to, as long as everyone knows the way to leave in a emergency then it is alright, also all walk ways that are a fire exit must be clear all the time, most company's do a drill once every three weeks, just so the staff are aware of exits,keep safe all the best
Must an oficer appear in traffic court for an accident?
I recently got into a car accident, my fault, as I rear-ended someone. The police officer gave me a ticket for careless driving, and told me to give him a call if the brakes were the problem and he would dismiss the ticket. After getting proof that the brakes were indeed the cause of the accident, I called the number he gave me only to find that he no longer worked for that police department. I contested the ticket, but now I'm wondering if court will go like other moving violations; an officer doesn't appear as a witness to the violation, then you win the case. Is this true with an accident?
Answer:
If the officer doesn't show up, there will be no witnesses and you could get off.
Only if you contest the facts of the report and plea not guilty. Then he must go to court and the findings always goes in favor of the police officer.
its still your resposibility to make sure your car is road worthy so you should get the ticket for driving without due care and attntion!
this is question for a real lawyer.
my understanding is the ticket maybe should have been dismissed on no show by the accuser..
and at least plead no contest for purposes of accident fault.
if its a no fault state may not matter.
but again its unclear whether you'd be at fault fro not keeping up on car maintenance or if it was a problem you couldn't have known. or should have known.. etc..
but fro sure..
accident and ticket are two very separate matters.
In most cases like this when an officer leaves he wraps up all of his open cases by giving an affidavit which is acceptable as his testimony in court. The one thing in your favor is that it's usually easier to defeat an affidavit than the officer himself.
if he doesn't show you can win the case! he is ordered to court the same as you and he is the states only witness against you!
Officer has to appear or it will be thrown out. You have a right to be heard and he is the accuser.
Answer:
If the officer doesn't show up, there will be no witnesses and you could get off.
Only if you contest the facts of the report and plea not guilty. Then he must go to court and the findings always goes in favor of the police officer.
its still your resposibility to make sure your car is road worthy so you should get the ticket for driving without due care and attntion!
this is question for a real lawyer.
my understanding is the ticket maybe should have been dismissed on no show by the accuser..
and at least plead no contest for purposes of accident fault.
if its a no fault state may not matter.
but again its unclear whether you'd be at fault fro not keeping up on car maintenance or if it was a problem you couldn't have known. or should have known.. etc..
but fro sure..
accident and ticket are two very separate matters.
In most cases like this when an officer leaves he wraps up all of his open cases by giving an affidavit which is acceptable as his testimony in court. The one thing in your favor is that it's usually easier to defeat an affidavit than the officer himself.
if he doesn't show you can win the case! he is ordered to court the same as you and he is the states only witness against you!
Officer has to appear or it will be thrown out. You have a right to be heard and he is the accuser.
Muslim exreemists in NHS are are they in the DHS?
Answer:
Probably, yes. It is an obvious tactic; if you want to access public money to support your troops while they prepare their assaults, where better to place a fifth column? DHS work is not well paid, and they are short of staff; so well-educated capable applicants are unlikely to find it hard to get inside, and even to get advancement to more senior positions.
Are they in the police? Probably not; the police are very choosy and it's quite hard to get accepted whoever you are. There may be one or two sleepers, but in my judgment not enough to form a network.
Common sense will suggest other areas they may want to infiltrate - but remember that they are likely to be handicapped by shortage of personnel. Recruitment to groups dedicated enough to kill themselves will never be overwhelmingly high, and there will always be wastage - the more so as time goes on without much success in altering the political landscape.
lot s are doctors get in via IRELAND
There part of Tony Bliars quangos dictating Government policy...
Sorry, what's the D.H.S?
That's all to do with open borders, close our borders, pull out of the common market and be happy.
there everywhere, they are the cancer of society!! they were put on this earth as a virus...
I'm more bothered about D.F.S. WHat happens if they start making sofa bombs? There oculd be blood on the carpet...
dont no what the dhs but i guess its the department health and social if so they could be nobody no were they are
Music copyright laws.?
I am from a non profit organization and I am making a video on childrens rights. I want to put music onto my presentation but I don't want to run into any copyright laws. Is there anywhere I can get music for this presentation without any problems. Also if you know of any website with the music copy right laws on it please let me know
Answer:
i was looking for some of the same stuff and came across this site maybe it will help you ... www.copyrightwebsite.com... if you find something would you email me with the info.... not what i was looking for but i think it will help you.. might be just what your looking for.after you click the "a little space"link.. click on the "songs" at the top of the page they have three CDs with lots of songs on each one http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2004/...
The safest solution is to use public domain materials, songs and recordings. This place should be helpful-
http://www.music4tvandfilms.com...
Answer:
i was looking for some of the same stuff and came across this site maybe it will help you ... www.copyrightwebsite.com... if you find something would you email me with the info.... not what i was looking for but i think it will help you.. might be just what your looking for.after you click the "a little space"link.. click on the "songs" at the top of the page they have three CDs with lots of songs on each one http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2004/...
The safest solution is to use public domain materials, songs and recordings. This place should be helpful-
http://www.music4tvandfilms.com...
Murder of a fetus?
I was reading a magazine article about that pregnant lady who had gone missing about a month ago. They had found her and her unborn baby, and the boyfriend was convicted. He was charged with murder of both his girlfriend AND her unborn baby.
How is it that he was charged with murder of the unborn baby? Isn't it the same concept of abortion (especially Partial-Birth Abortion)? If abortion is not murder, then how come ending the life of a fetus IS?
P.S. I'm a pro-lifer. I'm not sticking up for this guy. I just want you opinions (especially legal opinions)!
Answer:
In our country, it is only legal to murder a fetus if IT'S OWN MOTHER does it...sick pups, eh?
It depends on how far into the pregnancy the woman is. If the fetus is developed enough to where it could survive outside the womb, then it's considered murder.
Because in that state, the law states that if a baby is ABLE TO SURVIVE OUTSIDE THE WOMB, if someone causes the death of that baby, they can be charged with murder. But ONLY if the baby is far enough along to be able to survive outside. She was like 36 weeks pregnant and so the baby had a better than 90% chance of surviving if born at that time.
Most abortion advocates will say that a fetus becomes a child after 5 months (24 weeks)
The difference is the intent of the pregnant woman. If the woman decides to get an abortion it is her decision. If she is murdered and her fetus terminates, it was not her intent.
While I don't necessarily agree with the idea that involuntary termination of someone's fetus should be considered the same as murder, I do think there is logic behind making it a crime while allowing abortion.
There is an difference between an abortion and murder. Abortion is an choice that u make about not wanting this child @ all but being murder while ur pregnant is not ur choice, u have no control over that.
She was ready to have that baby within a week so it is human.
This varies by state. In California, the fetus is considered another person, but I think that's not usually the law elsewhere. A fetus isn't automatically a "person" until it's born... unless the law specifies otherwise.
I disagree with the court on this one... I'm VERY pro-choice, and I don't think he should be charged with the murder of a fetus. In fact, I think he did the fetus a favor: Isn't it better to die without knowing anything of the world, not knowing what you're missing, than to be born the child of the guy who was crazy enough to murder his girlfriend, and the woman dumb enough to sleep with a guy that crazy? He saved the baby from what I'm shore would have been a life of misery and suffering. I for one don't think killing a fetus is wrong, especially in a world this obscenely overpopulated. Give me thumbs up if you agree with me!
REALLY?? So many of you actually disagree with me? What it is about the human condition that causes us to cling so desperately to every possible shred of human life? With anti-abortionism, fear of aging, keeping people alive as vegetables for years on end... and ultimately this overwhelmingly intense and illogical fear of death.
Everywhere on earth, in every species except for humans, life and death is a matter confronted daily. Each day is a quest to find food to maintain one's own survival, and often times that results in the necessity to claim another life. Simultaneously, one worries about their own life, and fears bigger predators. For all of the animal kingdom, this is a normal part of existence. So why is it such a big issue for humans?
And why do humans ultimately fear death at all? It seems that humans illogically fear anything that is unknown to them. It also seems that statistically, in cases where a person is fearing an unknowns simply because it is an unknown, there is most often nothing to fear at all. So then death, being the ultimate unknown, is simply feared. People so rarely consider the possibility that death is not unpleasant... maybe it's just another experience, and for all any of us know, maybe it's downright pleasant. So why must we fear death so, and spend so much of our time, lives, and energy trying to evade a force that is inescapable and that we have no evidence is even a bad thing?
Because that baby is just alive as the parent is. We think that because the baby isnt walking and talking its not alife. The day that baby was conceived in the womb it had a soul. The safest place on earth should be in a mothers womb. America has been demoralized with the fact that life can be taken by anyone who freely wants too. God is the giver and taker of life. We are not our own, we are bought with a price.
(He hasn't been convicted, he has only been charged. Please make a note of it.)
When a pregnant woman is murdered, the accused is charged with the murder of the unborn child as well. It's the law.
When an unborn child is murdered by the mother it's "her decision" a.k.a. "abortion", and no crime has been committed. It's the law.
Why? Because Democrats %26 Liberals have a double standard for everything including the murder of unborn children.
Don't listen to the Democrat's hype!
Vote Republican!
The woman was almost nine months pregnant. The baby would have been considered full term had it been born. It was no longer a fetus, it was a human being. I am also pro life. But I am pro choice.
Very smart observation! I too am a "pro-lifer" and am a member of the American Life League with Judie Brown as President or Chairperson or whatever her specific title is, and I recommend you visit their website at www.ALL.org. And you'll love her new book "Saving Those Damned Catholics" which is not a condemnation of Catholics, only the "pro-choicers". It's a great book to read and you'll see just how strong she and the organization is in all their pro-life / anti-abortion work is. Thanks for your great question. God Bless you.
Keep in mind that he was not convicted of both murders, he was charged with them. The burden will be on the state to convince a jury that the fetus was viable and it's death meats the standard for murder. It's simple really. If the jury says it was two murders, then it was two murders. An appellate court may overturn the verdict but until and unless that happens, the jury rules.
If your wondering what the difference is between that and what happens when a woman chooses to abort, it was the Supreme court that ruled in Roe v Wade that made a woman's right to chose the law of the land. How you feel. How I feel. Doesn't really matter does it? The law's not asking our opinion.
This is called 'relativism' meaning that the life only has value according to the determination of mother...or person carrying the fetus, if the baby is unwanted. The age of the fetus is not taken into consideration if the woman lives, and even if she DOESN'T live, if the father or family is involved and it's clear that the woman wanted to continue with the pregnancy, the attorney general or district attorney can most certainly choose to attempt to prosecute the case, and will probably win.
well to me if a woman is pregnant i dont care how far along she is ..its murder.even abortion is murder and any woman who has abortions should go to prison.....
This is specifically determined by the statutory definition of a "life in being", in the state where this occurred. For example, in Arkansas you cannot do this because a "life in being" is only possible where a baby is live-birthed. If the baby doesn't take a single breath on its own, then it isn't alive. Other states have other rules.
"Killing a fetus" isn't he same thing as "killing a person" which would be murder. Even if the law defines it as murder, it's not murder in the case of abortion because court decisions like Roe v. Wade say it's not. That's inconsistent, yes, but it's the law, and the law is inconsistent all the time.
Now, if you want to accuse a person of being inconsistent for supporting this law against killing a fetus while also being pro-choice, that's a different story. You'd have a case there. I still think you'd lose the case, because as I noted above, you can oppose someone else killing someone's fetus without their permission without defining it as murder.
Historically it has never been a double murder to kill a pregnant women, as homocide required that the person be alive. Even when abortion was illegal in this country it was not murder, it was a crime, but did not carry the same punishment as murder.
Since Roe v. Wade the pro-life lobby has managed to convince states to make killing a pregnant women double murder. This has been done purely for political reasons. To create an inconsitancy for agurment purposes such as the one you are making.
It really does nothing punshment-wise. One murder carries the same sentence as two, defendant do not go to jail twice as long becaue it is single act.
How is it that he was charged with murder of the unborn baby? Isn't it the same concept of abortion (especially Partial-Birth Abortion)? If abortion is not murder, then how come ending the life of a fetus IS?
P.S. I'm a pro-lifer. I'm not sticking up for this guy. I just want you opinions (especially legal opinions)!
Answer:
In our country, it is only legal to murder a fetus if IT'S OWN MOTHER does it...sick pups, eh?
It depends on how far into the pregnancy the woman is. If the fetus is developed enough to where it could survive outside the womb, then it's considered murder.
Because in that state, the law states that if a baby is ABLE TO SURVIVE OUTSIDE THE WOMB, if someone causes the death of that baby, they can be charged with murder. But ONLY if the baby is far enough along to be able to survive outside. She was like 36 weeks pregnant and so the baby had a better than 90% chance of surviving if born at that time.
Most abortion advocates will say that a fetus becomes a child after 5 months (24 weeks)
The difference is the intent of the pregnant woman. If the woman decides to get an abortion it is her decision. If she is murdered and her fetus terminates, it was not her intent.
While I don't necessarily agree with the idea that involuntary termination of someone's fetus should be considered the same as murder, I do think there is logic behind making it a crime while allowing abortion.
There is an difference between an abortion and murder. Abortion is an choice that u make about not wanting this child @ all but being murder while ur pregnant is not ur choice, u have no control over that.
She was ready to have that baby within a week so it is human.
This varies by state. In California, the fetus is considered another person, but I think that's not usually the law elsewhere. A fetus isn't automatically a "person" until it's born... unless the law specifies otherwise.
I disagree with the court on this one... I'm VERY pro-choice, and I don't think he should be charged with the murder of a fetus. In fact, I think he did the fetus a favor: Isn't it better to die without knowing anything of the world, not knowing what you're missing, than to be born the child of the guy who was crazy enough to murder his girlfriend, and the woman dumb enough to sleep with a guy that crazy? He saved the baby from what I'm shore would have been a life of misery and suffering. I for one don't think killing a fetus is wrong, especially in a world this obscenely overpopulated. Give me thumbs up if you agree with me!
REALLY?? So many of you actually disagree with me? What it is about the human condition that causes us to cling so desperately to every possible shred of human life? With anti-abortionism, fear of aging, keeping people alive as vegetables for years on end... and ultimately this overwhelmingly intense and illogical fear of death.
Everywhere on earth, in every species except for humans, life and death is a matter confronted daily. Each day is a quest to find food to maintain one's own survival, and often times that results in the necessity to claim another life. Simultaneously, one worries about their own life, and fears bigger predators. For all of the animal kingdom, this is a normal part of existence. So why is it such a big issue for humans?
And why do humans ultimately fear death at all? It seems that humans illogically fear anything that is unknown to them. It also seems that statistically, in cases where a person is fearing an unknowns simply because it is an unknown, there is most often nothing to fear at all. So then death, being the ultimate unknown, is simply feared. People so rarely consider the possibility that death is not unpleasant... maybe it's just another experience, and for all any of us know, maybe it's downright pleasant. So why must we fear death so, and spend so much of our time, lives, and energy trying to evade a force that is inescapable and that we have no evidence is even a bad thing?
Because that baby is just alive as the parent is. We think that because the baby isnt walking and talking its not alife. The day that baby was conceived in the womb it had a soul. The safest place on earth should be in a mothers womb. America has been demoralized with the fact that life can be taken by anyone who freely wants too. God is the giver and taker of life. We are not our own, we are bought with a price.
(He hasn't been convicted, he has only been charged. Please make a note of it.)
When a pregnant woman is murdered, the accused is charged with the murder of the unborn child as well. It's the law.
When an unborn child is murdered by the mother it's "her decision" a.k.a. "abortion", and no crime has been committed. It's the law.
Why? Because Democrats %26 Liberals have a double standard for everything including the murder of unborn children.
Don't listen to the Democrat's hype!
Vote Republican!
The woman was almost nine months pregnant. The baby would have been considered full term had it been born. It was no longer a fetus, it was a human being. I am also pro life. But I am pro choice.
Very smart observation! I too am a "pro-lifer" and am a member of the American Life League with Judie Brown as President or Chairperson or whatever her specific title is, and I recommend you visit their website at www.ALL.org. And you'll love her new book "Saving Those Damned Catholics" which is not a condemnation of Catholics, only the "pro-choicers". It's a great book to read and you'll see just how strong she and the organization is in all their pro-life / anti-abortion work is. Thanks for your great question. God Bless you.
Keep in mind that he was not convicted of both murders, he was charged with them. The burden will be on the state to convince a jury that the fetus was viable and it's death meats the standard for murder. It's simple really. If the jury says it was two murders, then it was two murders. An appellate court may overturn the verdict but until and unless that happens, the jury rules.
If your wondering what the difference is between that and what happens when a woman chooses to abort, it was the Supreme court that ruled in Roe v Wade that made a woman's right to chose the law of the land. How you feel. How I feel. Doesn't really matter does it? The law's not asking our opinion.
This is called 'relativism' meaning that the life only has value according to the determination of mother...or person carrying the fetus, if the baby is unwanted. The age of the fetus is not taken into consideration if the woman lives, and even if she DOESN'T live, if the father or family is involved and it's clear that the woman wanted to continue with the pregnancy, the attorney general or district attorney can most certainly choose to attempt to prosecute the case, and will probably win.
well to me if a woman is pregnant i dont care how far along she is ..its murder.even abortion is murder and any woman who has abortions should go to prison.....
This is specifically determined by the statutory definition of a "life in being", in the state where this occurred. For example, in Arkansas you cannot do this because a "life in being" is only possible where a baby is live-birthed. If the baby doesn't take a single breath on its own, then it isn't alive. Other states have other rules.
"Killing a fetus" isn't he same thing as "killing a person" which would be murder. Even if the law defines it as murder, it's not murder in the case of abortion because court decisions like Roe v. Wade say it's not. That's inconsistent, yes, but it's the law, and the law is inconsistent all the time.
Now, if you want to accuse a person of being inconsistent for supporting this law against killing a fetus while also being pro-choice, that's a different story. You'd have a case there. I still think you'd lose the case, because as I noted above, you can oppose someone else killing someone's fetus without their permission without defining it as murder.
Historically it has never been a double murder to kill a pregnant women, as homocide required that the person be alive. Even when abortion was illegal in this country it was not murder, it was a crime, but did not carry the same punishment as murder.
Since Roe v. Wade the pro-life lobby has managed to convince states to make killing a pregnant women double murder. This has been done purely for political reasons. To create an inconsitancy for agurment purposes such as the one you are making.
It really does nothing punshment-wise. One murder carries the same sentence as two, defendant do not go to jail twice as long becaue it is single act.
MP's smoke and drink from duty free bar?
What is your view on this; The Houses of Parliament bar is duty free and MP's are allowed to smoke. Is it or is it not Illegal to smoke within the workplace anywhere in the UK as from 1st of July??...is this taking the p*** or what?? I am asking opinions of smokers and non-smokers - drinkers and tee totalers
Answer:
If this is true, it's the height of hypocrisy I'm astounded this is going on :)
yes i agree, pisstaking of the 1st degree
It's a joke!!!! Why do we sit about and put up with this!?...This is a very good point and one that needs addressing ...you first!
my view is that the law should be equal for all, and it's not. though but that's the way life is.
one rule for them, another for us !
You only have to look at their payslip to see the difference!
They get paid a sh1tload for waving bits of paper around and shouting "Nye" and "eye"etc!
What a load of fecking b0llocks!
They are there for themselves, not for the people!
ever heard of freemasons, same thing aint it ?
Don't forget, that duty free they get - is made up on goods and services us normal taxpaying British types are having to pay for.
it is totally illegal to smoke in the workplace or in work vehicles as from 1st july 2007 in england, we are following the lead of ireland, scotland and wales, i don't believe the mps can smoke in the parliment bar,from that date, check facts on. http://www.gosmokefree.co.uk/
even our government cannot be that 2 faced,
can they?...
the bar in the houses of parliment is a 'private members club'. that is how they are getting away with it. unlike other clubs it is never open to visitors. this is being challenged in the courts though
MP's are above the law in the Banana republic of UK
Answer:
If this is true, it's the height of hypocrisy I'm astounded this is going on :)
yes i agree, pisstaking of the 1st degree
It's a joke!!!! Why do we sit about and put up with this!?...This is a very good point and one that needs addressing ...you first!
my view is that the law should be equal for all, and it's not. though but that's the way life is.
one rule for them, another for us !
You only have to look at their payslip to see the difference!
They get paid a sh1tload for waving bits of paper around and shouting "Nye" and "eye"etc!
What a load of fecking b0llocks!
They are there for themselves, not for the people!
ever heard of freemasons, same thing aint it ?
Don't forget, that duty free they get - is made up on goods and services us normal taxpaying British types are having to pay for.
it is totally illegal to smoke in the workplace or in work vehicles as from 1st july 2007 in england, we are following the lead of ireland, scotland and wales, i don't believe the mps can smoke in the parliment bar,from that date, check facts on. http://www.gosmokefree.co.uk/
even our government cannot be that 2 faced,
can they?...
the bar in the houses of parliment is a 'private members club'. that is how they are getting away with it. unlike other clubs it is never open to visitors. this is being challenged in the courts though
MP's are above the law in the Banana republic of UK
Movies banned in US.?
I learned that the Movie "The Trip" with Peter Fonda is banned in the US. This is kind of shocking given that this is supposed to be a free speech nation and all that. Are there many other titles like this?
Answer:
I don't believe the movie is banned everywhere in the US. Obscenity laws are generally local laws and so it may be true that a certain state or town has banned it. But there are just as many liberal towns that could care less.
Consider this: in the 1930's, Charlie Chaplin dared to make a movie that poked fun at Hitler. He was branded a commie chased out of the states for that...
Really, take some time thinking about this one. It may change your view of the US of A.
There are very few pieces of media banned in the US purely because of "obscene" content. But I agree, this is a violation of a true "free speech" society. Especially when it is the banning of an art.
There are a few local laws that enforce restrictions on such movies, but I don't think they're truly banned. Even if they are, the ban is not enforcible, and some court will overturn it. I think such a ban is clearly unconstitutional.
Reminds me of "Easy Rider" which put Peter (The Devil in "Ghost Rider") on the road to easy Street.
Easy Rider like Electroglide in Blue was a bad influence in many ways...BUT never banned to my knowledge.
"Banned in Boston" used to be a much-desired label which guaranteed a curious audience.
To answer your question, there's no movie that's "banned" in the United States.
Answer:
I don't believe the movie is banned everywhere in the US. Obscenity laws are generally local laws and so it may be true that a certain state or town has banned it. But there are just as many liberal towns that could care less.
Consider this: in the 1930's, Charlie Chaplin dared to make a movie that poked fun at Hitler. He was branded a commie chased out of the states for that...
Really, take some time thinking about this one. It may change your view of the US of A.
There are very few pieces of media banned in the US purely because of "obscene" content. But I agree, this is a violation of a true "free speech" society. Especially when it is the banning of an art.
There are a few local laws that enforce restrictions on such movies, but I don't think they're truly banned. Even if they are, the ban is not enforcible, and some court will overturn it. I think such a ban is clearly unconstitutional.
Reminds me of "Easy Rider" which put Peter (The Devil in "Ghost Rider") on the road to easy Street.
Easy Rider like Electroglide in Blue was a bad influence in many ways...BUT never banned to my knowledge.
"Banned in Boston" used to be a much-desired label which guaranteed a curious audience.
To answer your question, there's no movie that's "banned" in the United States.
Moved into a house with garage full of previous owners stuff/tools and bits of old cars.. can i throw it away?
can the previous owner take legal action in gaining compensation for any of his belongings i throw out? how long can he expect me to not have use of my own garage for?.. it is rammed full of junk. Want an answer from someone in the know.. a legal person please.
i do not have a forwarding address for him.. just a mobile number that he doesnt answer.
Answer:
Well, did you buy the house- if you bought the house everything in it is now yours if he made no arrangement with you over it. If you are renting it you have a slighty different problem. If no mention has been made between you and him or between you and an agent then sling it- his own fault.
I am assuming as this is the UK AND IRELAND board then you are from the UK.
if you bought the house then yes throw it out but check your contract as it may state that he should have left it empty. you could make him pay to remove it.
Get in touch with your solicitor before chucking anything out, just to clarify your legal position. I feel sure he will tell you, that unless there was some kind of agreement between yourself and the previous owner, to just get rid of it.
ok,well if ur not renting the house u hav all rights to remove his stuff.but if u want 2 b nice about it,tell his answering machine he has at least 48 hours 2 com take his stuff,or u will b throwing it away.but by the way it sounds,he doesnt want anythin 2 do w/ that stuff.but if u throw it out,and he gtes mad,and sues u,u can counter-sue that he didnt com pick it up after u told him he had 48 hours to.good luck....and try 2 rub in his face a little bit wen u do it,ok?
If you are renting, then the landlord needs to take it. If it is your own home that you bought, then check with the selling real estate agent. Chances are you can consider it abandoned and dispose of it.
If you own the home and all paperwork has been filed... TRASH IT%26gt;
As a former landlord and house buyer and seller, you have a move in date, the legal time for you to take possession of your property. The previous owner has until that date to remove his/her stuff. Send a letter to him c/o the title company that did the closing, or ask them for a forwarding address. Send 2 letters, one certified, one regular mail.
Some states do not allow you to "profit" from abandonned property. Some are silent. You can possibly pay to haul it away and file a claim in small claims court to try and recoup your expenses. Take good pictures and document everything.
Good luck.
Give him notice - preferably in writing that the stuff is there - itemise it (in a general way) and tell him you will be disposing of it within x days - I would give him at least a weekend so that he can;t say you were unreasonable. Then you can get rid of it any way you like.
I'll assume you are the new owner, not renter, of the property, and that it's located in the USA.
Those items were abandoned and are now your property. Which in turn means that if there are environmental toxins (gasoline, oil, solvents) you will be the generator of the waste. If not disposed of properly, at a proper site, you have potential criminal exposure.
You should not have closed title with this stuff in the garage, because you are now an "involuntary bailee" and have an obligation not to destroy or throw the stuff away.
There should be a HUD-1 settlement statement with the seller's address. Send a certified letter notifying him to pick up the stuff within thirty days or you will deem it abandoned and do whatever you feel like doing with it. Alternatively, if you don't have the seller's new address, send it to the old address (that's right, 'cos he should have filed a change of address with the post office) and if he does not receive it, well, you did everything reasonable under the circumstances.
If you bought the house and he left the stuff after moving out, then he abandoned it. Legally the stuff is yours. Check your local laws about abandonment to make sure that the proper time has elapsed without word from the item's previous owner. But your post suggests that some months may have passed and you could be safe to say the stuff is yours.
If you're renting the house then legally the stuff belongs to the landlord and it is his responsibility.
By the way, don't just trash the stuff. Put the stuff up for sale on Craig's List or eBay. Old car parts are always wanted by someone. Even if you just give it away it will be used and won't take up land fill space. At the very least find a salvage yard or a scrap metal yard to take the parts.
ebay chief!
your property now throw it away he has no rights anything left in house unless stated in papers belongs to you
i suspect you're in the UK - if you were in the USA you'd use the term 'cellphone', not 'mobile'.
I think all the answers above have something to offer in terms of sensible practical advice.
You want to know your position under English Law - well, it's very simple.
As at the date of completion, unless there has been any specific agreement to the contrary, the house and everything within it become yours (techncially a sizeable chunk of the house belongs to the mortage compnay, but let's not go there).
So, as to the stuff in your garage, you can sell it, burn it or give it away. It's yours.
The previous owner cannot claim compensation because he was not the owner of any of it when it was disposed of.
As an aside, look at it another way - suppose you sent him a storage invoice after six months - what do you reckon your chances of getting it paid would be?
I rest my case, m'lud.
yes.
Check with your solicitor, but normally in the UK anything left in the property after completion becomes part of the deal, and you can do what you want with it.
Have you thought of approaching the vendor to charge him a storage fee until he gets the stuff removed ?
The rubbish is his responsibility and if you have to clear it then send him the bill.You could send him a letter to notify him of your actions first.
You bought the house you are entitled to throw them away or use them. HoweverwhatI would do is give the owner 14 days notice of your intention through his solicitor. He should have removed his properety on completion of the contract of sale.
Youmayhave a case in damages if you have topay for them to be removed, but you haveenough problems movingintothe house. Doyouneed thatas well? This is known as%26lt; " Cover your ****."
i do not have a forwarding address for him.. just a mobile number that he doesnt answer.
Answer:
Well, did you buy the house- if you bought the house everything in it is now yours if he made no arrangement with you over it. If you are renting it you have a slighty different problem. If no mention has been made between you and him or between you and an agent then sling it- his own fault.
I am assuming as this is the UK AND IRELAND board then you are from the UK.
if you bought the house then yes throw it out but check your contract as it may state that he should have left it empty. you could make him pay to remove it.
Get in touch with your solicitor before chucking anything out, just to clarify your legal position. I feel sure he will tell you, that unless there was some kind of agreement between yourself and the previous owner, to just get rid of it.
ok,well if ur not renting the house u hav all rights to remove his stuff.but if u want 2 b nice about it,tell his answering machine he has at least 48 hours 2 com take his stuff,or u will b throwing it away.but by the way it sounds,he doesnt want anythin 2 do w/ that stuff.but if u throw it out,and he gtes mad,and sues u,u can counter-sue that he didnt com pick it up after u told him he had 48 hours to.good luck....and try 2 rub in his face a little bit wen u do it,ok?
If you are renting, then the landlord needs to take it. If it is your own home that you bought, then check with the selling real estate agent. Chances are you can consider it abandoned and dispose of it.
If you own the home and all paperwork has been filed... TRASH IT%26gt;
As a former landlord and house buyer and seller, you have a move in date, the legal time for you to take possession of your property. The previous owner has until that date to remove his/her stuff. Send a letter to him c/o the title company that did the closing, or ask them for a forwarding address. Send 2 letters, one certified, one regular mail.
Some states do not allow you to "profit" from abandonned property. Some are silent. You can possibly pay to haul it away and file a claim in small claims court to try and recoup your expenses. Take good pictures and document everything.
Good luck.
Give him notice - preferably in writing that the stuff is there - itemise it (in a general way) and tell him you will be disposing of it within x days - I would give him at least a weekend so that he can;t say you were unreasonable. Then you can get rid of it any way you like.
I'll assume you are the new owner, not renter, of the property, and that it's located in the USA.
Those items were abandoned and are now your property. Which in turn means that if there are environmental toxins (gasoline, oil, solvents) you will be the generator of the waste. If not disposed of properly, at a proper site, you have potential criminal exposure.
You should not have closed title with this stuff in the garage, because you are now an "involuntary bailee" and have an obligation not to destroy or throw the stuff away.
There should be a HUD-1 settlement statement with the seller's address. Send a certified letter notifying him to pick up the stuff within thirty days or you will deem it abandoned and do whatever you feel like doing with it. Alternatively, if you don't have the seller's new address, send it to the old address (that's right, 'cos he should have filed a change of address with the post office) and if he does not receive it, well, you did everything reasonable under the circumstances.
If you bought the house and he left the stuff after moving out, then he abandoned it. Legally the stuff is yours. Check your local laws about abandonment to make sure that the proper time has elapsed without word from the item's previous owner. But your post suggests that some months may have passed and you could be safe to say the stuff is yours.
If you're renting the house then legally the stuff belongs to the landlord and it is his responsibility.
By the way, don't just trash the stuff. Put the stuff up for sale on Craig's List or eBay. Old car parts are always wanted by someone. Even if you just give it away it will be used and won't take up land fill space. At the very least find a salvage yard or a scrap metal yard to take the parts.
ebay chief!
your property now throw it away he has no rights anything left in house unless stated in papers belongs to you
i suspect you're in the UK - if you were in the USA you'd use the term 'cellphone', not 'mobile'.
I think all the answers above have something to offer in terms of sensible practical advice.
You want to know your position under English Law - well, it's very simple.
As at the date of completion, unless there has been any specific agreement to the contrary, the house and everything within it become yours (techncially a sizeable chunk of the house belongs to the mortage compnay, but let's not go there).
So, as to the stuff in your garage, you can sell it, burn it or give it away. It's yours.
The previous owner cannot claim compensation because he was not the owner of any of it when it was disposed of.
As an aside, look at it another way - suppose you sent him a storage invoice after six months - what do you reckon your chances of getting it paid would be?
I rest my case, m'lud.
yes.
Check with your solicitor, but normally in the UK anything left in the property after completion becomes part of the deal, and you can do what you want with it.
Have you thought of approaching the vendor to charge him a storage fee until he gets the stuff removed ?
The rubbish is his responsibility and if you have to clear it then send him the bill.You could send him a letter to notify him of your actions first.
You bought the house you are entitled to throw them away or use them. HoweverwhatI would do is give the owner 14 days notice of your intention through his solicitor. He should have removed his properety on completion of the contract of sale.
Youmayhave a case in damages if you have topay for them to be removed, but you haveenough problems movingintothe house. Doyouneed thatas well? This is known as%26lt; " Cover your ****."
Mother died,her half of house goes to hus. one of her sons died what happens to his share?
what happens to son that died
Answer:
--the son's children or spouse or both depending on the laws of the state where the house is located.
It depends on whether or not a Will was left, and if not, what the Laws of Intestacy for that particular state say.
I'm not clear on what your scenario is. If her half of the house went to her spouse, there is no share for the children, living or dead.
Obviously the dead don't inherit, but whether or not their children inherit in their place depends on the Will or Laws of Intestacy.
Anyway, you didn't give near enough facts to give you a decent answer. It would be a good Bar Exam question, though.
That depends solely on the inheritance laws of your state. In Many states, if either spouse dies, the estate goes to the surviving spouse, not the children.(If there is no will). If there is a will, and half DOES go to the children,if there are any other brothers and sisters, they will share in the half. If there are no siblings, the half will go to the son`s (who inherited) wife. If he had no wife or offspring, the half would revert to the parent (He/she would get it all).
Assuming that the son in the question was not the child of the husband, then his share of the house would go to his spouse, if any, or to his children, if any. Failing that, a table of consanguinity is used to locate other potential heirs. If there is absolutely nobody to take it, it escheats to the State.
Answer:
--the son's children or spouse or both depending on the laws of the state where the house is located.
It depends on whether or not a Will was left, and if not, what the Laws of Intestacy for that particular state say.
I'm not clear on what your scenario is. If her half of the house went to her spouse, there is no share for the children, living or dead.
Obviously the dead don't inherit, but whether or not their children inherit in their place depends on the Will or Laws of Intestacy.
Anyway, you didn't give near enough facts to give you a decent answer. It would be a good Bar Exam question, though.
That depends solely on the inheritance laws of your state. In Many states, if either spouse dies, the estate goes to the surviving spouse, not the children.(If there is no will). If there is a will, and half DOES go to the children,if there are any other brothers and sisters, they will share in the half. If there are no siblings, the half will go to the son`s (who inherited) wife. If he had no wife or offspring, the half would revert to the parent (He/she would get it all).
Assuming that the son in the question was not the child of the husband, then his share of the house would go to his spouse, if any, or to his children, if any. Failing that, a table of consanguinity is used to locate other potential heirs. If there is absolutely nobody to take it, it escheats to the State.
Most bars are camera:d up?
what about the bars in houses of parliment,see them all smoking and half pissed.
Answer:
different rules for the don't do as I do, do as I say fraternity.
Who's going to convict a politician - after all, they are ALL so HONEST to begin with ;);););)
Answer:
different rules for the don't do as I do, do as I say fraternity.
Who's going to convict a politician - after all, they are ALL so HONEST to begin with ;);););)
More on Guy Fawkes?
That is is not the point he blew himself up in the process so he was not stopped by us.
Answer:
He did not blow himself up. He was hung, drawn and quartered, which can be a wee bit painful.
No he didn't, your information is wrong.
no he didn't.
anyway he was probably just a scape goat.
Guy Fawkes didn't blow himself up. After the set up involving his arrest by the king, he was tortured, hanged, emasculated, drawn and quartered.
my dad used to say he was the only decent man ever in Parliament, then they hung him, ( yes and he was drawn and quartered )
he never blew himself up .he never got it right either
Martin S is 100% correct.
The last decent man, and the only one with honourable intentions.
He was caught then HDQ'd. But who grassed him up?
he was captured and killed. how could he blow himself up when the gunpowder plot was stopped before it could start? perhaps u should google guy fawkes to find out any more details
Hello Poppy-baby G.F was H.D.Q.! The only man to ever
enter parliament, with genuine intentions!
He didn't blow himself up. Nothing was blown up. If the explosives went off then Britain would probably be a republic. Guy Fawkes was captured BEFORE the explosion happened. The fact that he was captured and the king was saved is what is celebrated.
Moron Guy Fawkes? Another piece of terrorist trash who FAILED.
No. He was tortured (by order of the King) and was very ill when the day came for the conspirators to be put to death. On Friday, 31 January 1606, Fawkes, Thomas Wintour, Ambrose Rookwood and Robert Keyes were taken to the Old Palace Yard at Westminster and hanged, drawn and quartered "in the very place which they had planned to demolish in order to hammer home the message of their wickedness". Thomas Wintour was followed by Rookwood and then by Keyes. Guido, the "romantic caped figure of such evil villainy" came last. A contemporary wrote:
"Last of all came the great devil of all, Guy Fawkes, alias Johnson, who should have put fire to the powder. His body being weak with the torture and sickness he was scarce able to go up the ladder, yet with much ado, by the help of the hangman, went high enough to break his neck by the fall. He made no speech, but with his crosses and idle ceremonies made his end upon the gallows and the block, to the great joy of all the beholders that the land was ended of so wicked a villainy".
Thank you for your email, but you're still not getting it are you?
The Catesby Conspiracy. known more popularly as the gunpowder plot was led by Robert Catesby with the express intention of blowing up the Houses of Parliament when King James 1 arrived for the state opening of Parliament.
The intention was to get rid of the protestant king and eventually place a catholic Monarch back on the throne. The plot was thwarted and Guy Fawkes was caught red-handed in the cellars of Parliament by Robert Cecil.
To re-iterate my answer to your earlier question no one celebrates Guy Fawkes, he is an effigy and burning that effigy is a symbol of the carnage that was avoided. We would have lost our King and every leading Parliamentarian of the day had the plot succeeded.
It is also a present day reminder of our need for vigilance against those who would destroy everything we value and hold dear.
I hope everything is a little clearer to you now and I'm sorry if I sound as if I am lecturing, but you do seem to have a difficult time grasping the basic facts.
he didnt blow himself up!!
Answer:
He did not blow himself up. He was hung, drawn and quartered, which can be a wee bit painful.
No he didn't, your information is wrong.
no he didn't.
anyway he was probably just a scape goat.
Guy Fawkes didn't blow himself up. After the set up involving his arrest by the king, he was tortured, hanged, emasculated, drawn and quartered.
my dad used to say he was the only decent man ever in Parliament, then they hung him, ( yes and he was drawn and quartered )
he never blew himself up .he never got it right either
Martin S is 100% correct.
The last decent man, and the only one with honourable intentions.
He was caught then HDQ'd. But who grassed him up?
he was captured and killed. how could he blow himself up when the gunpowder plot was stopped before it could start? perhaps u should google guy fawkes to find out any more details
Hello Poppy-baby G.F was H.D.Q.! The only man to ever
enter parliament, with genuine intentions!
He didn't blow himself up. Nothing was blown up. If the explosives went off then Britain would probably be a republic. Guy Fawkes was captured BEFORE the explosion happened. The fact that he was captured and the king was saved is what is celebrated.
Moron Guy Fawkes? Another piece of terrorist trash who FAILED.
No. He was tortured (by order of the King) and was very ill when the day came for the conspirators to be put to death. On Friday, 31 January 1606, Fawkes, Thomas Wintour, Ambrose Rookwood and Robert Keyes were taken to the Old Palace Yard at Westminster and hanged, drawn and quartered "in the very place which they had planned to demolish in order to hammer home the message of their wickedness". Thomas Wintour was followed by Rookwood and then by Keyes. Guido, the "romantic caped figure of such evil villainy" came last. A contemporary wrote:
"Last of all came the great devil of all, Guy Fawkes, alias Johnson, who should have put fire to the powder. His body being weak with the torture and sickness he was scarce able to go up the ladder, yet with much ado, by the help of the hangman, went high enough to break his neck by the fall. He made no speech, but with his crosses and idle ceremonies made his end upon the gallows and the block, to the great joy of all the beholders that the land was ended of so wicked a villainy".
Thank you for your email, but you're still not getting it are you?
The Catesby Conspiracy. known more popularly as the gunpowder plot was led by Robert Catesby with the express intention of blowing up the Houses of Parliament when King James 1 arrived for the state opening of Parliament.
The intention was to get rid of the protestant king and eventually place a catholic Monarch back on the throne. The plot was thwarted and Guy Fawkes was caught red-handed in the cellars of Parliament by Robert Cecil.
To re-iterate my answer to your earlier question no one celebrates Guy Fawkes, he is an effigy and burning that effigy is a symbol of the carnage that was avoided. We would have lost our King and every leading Parliamentarian of the day had the plot succeeded.
It is also a present day reminder of our need for vigilance against those who would destroy everything we value and hold dear.
I hope everything is a little clearer to you now and I'm sorry if I sound as if I am lecturing, but you do seem to have a difficult time grasping the basic facts.
he didnt blow himself up!!
Moral Dilemma?
4 years ago I graduated uni and have been looking for work ever since. So dispondent, and fed up with the state of the country, I decided to emigrate to NZ 3 years ago. However in the process I met my girlfriend and decided to stay. We are now no longer together %26 I still have no work. I am therefore going to move to NZ in the new year. I am hoping to buy a house out there, but without a permanent job it will be impossible to get a mortgage.
My dilemma is this. I have now been offered a job, doing what I was trained for and interested in. Too much time, money and effort has been spent on my trip so cancelling now is not an option. So my 2 options are:
1. Refuse the job knowing that i will be leaving in 6 months and just rent in NZ
2. Take the job, get a mortgage and then leave after 6 months leaving the company in the lurch
I already know the right decision and therefore my answer. I just wanted to know what you people thought %26 whether you agree with my definition of morals.
Answer:
Definitely number 2. If you took the job and the company at some point wanted to reduce their headcount they'd make you redundant without giving your financial security or future a second thought. If employers can leave you in the lurch then it's only right that you should take the same attitude towards them.
Please leave. I can't stand the whining.
#1 is the ethical answer. #2 is the pragmatic answer, but I think you'd feel bad about yourself if you took it.
How about #3 -- tell the person hiring you that you will be leaving in six months, but would love to work the job until then, and ask if there's any chance you can fill in until they hire someone else.
I guess you've decided to take the job, get the mortgage and then go to NZ. However, with no job how are you going to actually pay the mortgage when you get there? Have you even thought about how you are going to pay back the tens of thousands of pounds that somebody else has lent you? The sensible thing to do is to take the job and stay for a year or two. If you do it this way you'll have that wonderful thing called "experience" under your belt. This will give you more chance of getting another job later. You will also be able to save some money so that when you take a mortgage you won't have to borrow as much.
What is your field? Where did you go to school? Was your GPA in the tank? You've been out of work for a long time.
If I were you, take the darned job for heavens sakes,and get a little experience in the 6 months you have left. Unless you were born in New Zealand, you don't want to go there, the Mauri Mauris will eat you for breakfast mate!
Take the job, rent. Then in six months, if you don't like the job, you can give notice and leave. However, you may find that the job is pretty good and decide to stay.
i hope you work out what you want, i wish you all the luck,when you finally make your mind up, keep safe all the best
My dilemma is this. I have now been offered a job, doing what I was trained for and interested in. Too much time, money and effort has been spent on my trip so cancelling now is not an option. So my 2 options are:
1. Refuse the job knowing that i will be leaving in 6 months and just rent in NZ
2. Take the job, get a mortgage and then leave after 6 months leaving the company in the lurch
I already know the right decision and therefore my answer. I just wanted to know what you people thought %26 whether you agree with my definition of morals.
Answer:
Definitely number 2. If you took the job and the company at some point wanted to reduce their headcount they'd make you redundant without giving your financial security or future a second thought. If employers can leave you in the lurch then it's only right that you should take the same attitude towards them.
Please leave. I can't stand the whining.
#1 is the ethical answer. #2 is the pragmatic answer, but I think you'd feel bad about yourself if you took it.
How about #3 -- tell the person hiring you that you will be leaving in six months, but would love to work the job until then, and ask if there's any chance you can fill in until they hire someone else.
I guess you've decided to take the job, get the mortgage and then go to NZ. However, with no job how are you going to actually pay the mortgage when you get there? Have you even thought about how you are going to pay back the tens of thousands of pounds that somebody else has lent you? The sensible thing to do is to take the job and stay for a year or two. If you do it this way you'll have that wonderful thing called "experience" under your belt. This will give you more chance of getting another job later. You will also be able to save some money so that when you take a mortgage you won't have to borrow as much.
What is your field? Where did you go to school? Was your GPA in the tank? You've been out of work for a long time.
If I were you, take the darned job for heavens sakes,and get a little experience in the 6 months you have left. Unless you were born in New Zealand, you don't want to go there, the Mauri Mauris will eat you for breakfast mate!
Take the job, rent. Then in six months, if you don't like the job, you can give notice and leave. However, you may find that the job is pretty good and decide to stay.
i hope you work out what you want, i wish you all the luck,when you finally make your mind up, keep safe all the best
Mockingbird Laws in Texas?
What is the fine for shooting a mockingbird in the state of Texas? I know that the mockingbird is protected by the state because it is the state bird. However, one lives outside my window and I haven't slept in a few days. Have you seen Failure to Launch? If you have, my situation is very similar to Kit's (is that the character name?). Thanks bunches!
Answer:
I would never say to use a b.b. gun or a sling shot ... I would never tell you to climb the tree with a fist full of trebble hooks and fish line ... nor would I tell you that a bow and arrow could do the trick.
These things are beyond me ... I love mocking birds and their noises that keep me up all night give me great thrills when trying to explain myself to those who want to know why my eyes are bloodshot and I am trembling like a crack head ...
I will not say that if ice pellets are used - that in short time in the summer months especially - that all the evidence MELTS and there cannot be a crime charged without a murder weapon can there be??
Can you see that I too ... have a state bird that visits me nightly?? Wonder what a State bird tastes like?
Ummm Chicken??
Peace and don't eat no bird that mocks you while you chew;
Aintmyfault
.
It's bad luck for life and failure to launch was the F***ng most boring movie on the planet. I made it 1/4th through and shut it off. Don't shoot mocking birds. Im pretty sure its illegal. Ever read the book "To kill a Mockingbird"?
Yes it is illegal to shoot a mockingbird in Texas as they are protected. Try putting a fake owl in the tree where the bird lives.
I can't tell you what to do, when I gave the same advise over a dog, they removed my answer
Get a cat from Animal Control. But take care of it if it solves your problem. Even if it doesn't. You'll have a freind for life.
Answer:
I would never say to use a b.b. gun or a sling shot ... I would never tell you to climb the tree with a fist full of trebble hooks and fish line ... nor would I tell you that a bow and arrow could do the trick.
These things are beyond me ... I love mocking birds and their noises that keep me up all night give me great thrills when trying to explain myself to those who want to know why my eyes are bloodshot and I am trembling like a crack head ...
I will not say that if ice pellets are used - that in short time in the summer months especially - that all the evidence MELTS and there cannot be a crime charged without a murder weapon can there be??
Can you see that I too ... have a state bird that visits me nightly?? Wonder what a State bird tastes like?
Ummm Chicken??
Peace and don't eat no bird that mocks you while you chew;
Aintmyfault
.
It's bad luck for life and failure to launch was the F***ng most boring movie on the planet. I made it 1/4th through and shut it off. Don't shoot mocking birds. Im pretty sure its illegal. Ever read the book "To kill a Mockingbird"?
Yes it is illegal to shoot a mockingbird in Texas as they are protected. Try putting a fake owl in the tree where the bird lives.
I can't tell you what to do, when I gave the same advise over a dog, they removed my answer
Get a cat from Animal Control. But take care of it if it solves your problem. Even if it doesn't. You'll have a freind for life.
Misspelled name?
My sirname is misspelled as tiwari on my 10th certificate. All other documents have 'tiwary'. Could I apply for a fresh passport with documents having different spellings? Or do i have to change my name...
Answer:
Its very simple case. For change of name insert advertisements in two reputed newspapers (one local newspaper of the area in which he/she is residing and 2nd in newspaper of the area of permanent address) and submit original newspapers at time of applying for passport in his/her new name. Along with this you have to give an Affidavit as provide in Annexure 鈥楨鈥?of the passport rules %26 regulations booklet, on non judicial paper signed %26 in presence of two witnesses %26 attested by the Notary Public with his stamp. Just take all these documents %26 your original passport %26 get the necessary change made after depositing the required fee in the regional passport office.
id keep everything the same
you will have to change your name on things so people don't get confused
Have someone prepare a supplementary document that states the correct spelling of your name, get it signed by the person or organization that issued it, get it notarized, and attach it to your "10th Certificate", if that's the only one with the incorrect spelling.
you have to correct your mispelled name, the name in your birth should be followed, if not, if you used your other name often than in your birth you should apply for changes to make it all same..if you ahve office of satistics office an office that holds all docs regarding name you should go there and ask if you could correct your name...
Pope John Paul II's sir name.
Indian names, in Roman script transliteration, are spelt in many ways. The problem comes only when different documents are to be correlated.It would be in one's own interest,to get the name spelt correctly on every occasion and ensure correction then and there.
For passport purposes, date of bith proof, is that mentioned in the SSC/SSLC. So, necessarily this document should have been relied upon by you, for all purposes, like PAN,LIP,Driving licence etc. While travelling abrorad as a tourist, you don't need any other document except visa of the country. But,when you want to study or seek work permit/permanent resident/green card/citizen status, then your SSC is not taken as authentic DOB proof, and passport too is not relied upon, by many countries, including USA. They need your birth certificate from Panchayat/Municipality/Corpora... of the place of birth. So, even a minor variation of one alphaber in your surname (not sir name), may not be acceptable.
So, determine the purpose, of your visit first. If only as a tourist, no change is needed. Otherwise, passport has got to be aligned exactly as per your DOB proof as per municipal records. For this you can apply to the Passport officer, for correction, including any other corrections you may need, after minutely scrutinising all other details recorded. You can't get another passport, when you have already one. If you succumb to any touts, by lodging fresh application, suppressing the fact of present passport, you are committing an offence, punishable in law.
Within India, this minor variation doesn't matter. If you still want only one way of spelling, this would require a change of name for which you have to file a declaration before a notary, publish it in newspapers, also in the official gazette. This is a process tedious and costly in time and money
It won't make any difference.
Answer:
Its very simple case. For change of name insert advertisements in two reputed newspapers (one local newspaper of the area in which he/she is residing and 2nd in newspaper of the area of permanent address) and submit original newspapers at time of applying for passport in his/her new name. Along with this you have to give an Affidavit as provide in Annexure 鈥楨鈥?of the passport rules %26 regulations booklet, on non judicial paper signed %26 in presence of two witnesses %26 attested by the Notary Public with his stamp. Just take all these documents %26 your original passport %26 get the necessary change made after depositing the required fee in the regional passport office.
id keep everything the same
you will have to change your name on things so people don't get confused
Have someone prepare a supplementary document that states the correct spelling of your name, get it signed by the person or organization that issued it, get it notarized, and attach it to your "10th Certificate", if that's the only one with the incorrect spelling.
you have to correct your mispelled name, the name in your birth should be followed, if not, if you used your other name often than in your birth you should apply for changes to make it all same..if you ahve office of satistics office an office that holds all docs regarding name you should go there and ask if you could correct your name...
Pope John Paul II's sir name.
Indian names, in Roman script transliteration, are spelt in many ways. The problem comes only when different documents are to be correlated.It would be in one's own interest,to get the name spelt correctly on every occasion and ensure correction then and there.
For passport purposes, date of bith proof, is that mentioned in the SSC/SSLC. So, necessarily this document should have been relied upon by you, for all purposes, like PAN,LIP,Driving licence etc. While travelling abrorad as a tourist, you don't need any other document except visa of the country. But,when you want to study or seek work permit/permanent resident/green card/citizen status, then your SSC is not taken as authentic DOB proof, and passport too is not relied upon, by many countries, including USA. They need your birth certificate from Panchayat/Municipality/Corpora... of the place of birth. So, even a minor variation of one alphaber in your surname (not sir name), may not be acceptable.
So, determine the purpose, of your visit first. If only as a tourist, no change is needed. Otherwise, passport has got to be aligned exactly as per your DOB proof as per municipal records. For this you can apply to the Passport officer, for correction, including any other corrections you may need, after minutely scrutinising all other details recorded. You can't get another passport, when you have already one. If you succumb to any touts, by lodging fresh application, suppressing the fact of present passport, you are committing an offence, punishable in law.
Within India, this minor variation doesn't matter. If you still want only one way of spelling, this would require a change of name for which you have to file a declaration before a notary, publish it in newspapers, also in the official gazette. This is a process tedious and costly in time and money
It won't make any difference.
Missouri gets it right, anti-gun tards stroking out?
Gov. Matt Blunt signed legislation on Tuesday allowing Missourians to fatally shoot intruders without fear of prosecution or lawsuits.
The measure spells out that people are not required to retreat from an intruder and can use deadly force once the person illegally enters their home, vehicle or other dwelling, including a tent. The bill provides an absolute defense against being charged or sued for using such force.
"It ensures law-abiding Missourians will not be punished when they use force to defend themselves and their family from attacks in their own home or vehicle," Blunt said in a written statement.
Under the old law, deadly force was justified only if people believed it necessary to protect themselves or others from death or serious injury.
Answer:
People have to be able to protect themselves at all times. Most people don't carry guns. There is coming a time where people are going to demand they have a right to protect themselves. Why?...
...The government today cannot adequately protect the average citizen. The criminal element has taken over in large and medium size cities, and the people in charge of protecting them have failed. We pay through the nose for law enforcement and they are either just collecting a paycheck or just don't care.
The rolls of the Missouri democrat party will soon be...how you say?...dweendling.
Awesome! I have decided where I'm moving. I'm so tired of having jackarses break in and only being able to call the cops who show up half an hour later and say we can't prove anything. My neighbors know they can get away with robbery, even if someone witnesses it! Man, if they knew they could get shot I bet they would quit.
i guess burglars better find a real liine of work for their own good!!
The measure spells out that people are not required to retreat from an intruder and can use deadly force once the person illegally enters their home, vehicle or other dwelling, including a tent. The bill provides an absolute defense against being charged or sued for using such force.
"It ensures law-abiding Missourians will not be punished when they use force to defend themselves and their family from attacks in their own home or vehicle," Blunt said in a written statement.
Under the old law, deadly force was justified only if people believed it necessary to protect themselves or others from death or serious injury.
Answer:
People have to be able to protect themselves at all times. Most people don't carry guns. There is coming a time where people are going to demand they have a right to protect themselves. Why?...
...The government today cannot adequately protect the average citizen. The criminal element has taken over in large and medium size cities, and the people in charge of protecting them have failed. We pay through the nose for law enforcement and they are either just collecting a paycheck or just don't care.
The rolls of the Missouri democrat party will soon be...how you say?...dweendling.
Awesome! I have decided where I'm moving. I'm so tired of having jackarses break in and only being able to call the cops who show up half an hour later and say we can't prove anything. My neighbors know they can get away with robbery, even if someone witnesses it! Man, if they knew they could get shot I bet they would quit.
i guess burglars better find a real liine of work for their own good!!
Mississippi laws about being 18 as in what can i do without my parents consent?
Answer:
your considered an adult at 18 in Mississippi, the only thing you cant do is drink and gamble, thats all, leagally you can do as you please, move out, buy cars, that sort of things, your an adult there pal.
Those stump broke cows are still off limits. Or is that W. Virginia?
Minors dont own anything?
are there any laws saying minors dont truely own anything?
Answer:
You only own what you paid for. Meaning you made the money that you paid for the item for.
If your parents paid for it, it is theirs. If they gave you the money that paid for it, it is theirs.
If you worked and made the money that paid for the item, it is yours.
Of course minors can own and inherit property. If the minor is too young to manage his/her own affairs, the property is often held in trust, but legal title to it is still the child's.
However, there are loopholes about minors entering into contracts. Laws about contracts can vary by state, but I believe that in most states, someone who enters into a contract with a minor under 18 cannot enforce against the minor - the contract is voided. The loophole is where the minor was under 18 at the time the contract was formed, passed age 18, and kept the benefit of the goods/services of the contract. In that case the contract becomes enforceable.
Actually, as a minor I am pretty sure you can own stuff -- However you may not have the ability to access it until you get your majority. An adult may have a custodial relationship in this situation.
Minors can own properties but they cannot transact and enter into contracts.
No, there are laws protecting minors but no law
prohibiting minors from owning anything.
Answer:
You only own what you paid for. Meaning you made the money that you paid for the item for.
If your parents paid for it, it is theirs. If they gave you the money that paid for it, it is theirs.
If you worked and made the money that paid for the item, it is yours.
Of course minors can own and inherit property. If the minor is too young to manage his/her own affairs, the property is often held in trust, but legal title to it is still the child's.
However, there are loopholes about minors entering into contracts. Laws about contracts can vary by state, but I believe that in most states, someone who enters into a contract with a minor under 18 cannot enforce against the minor - the contract is voided. The loophole is where the minor was under 18 at the time the contract was formed, passed age 18, and kept the benefit of the goods/services of the contract. In that case the contract becomes enforceable.
Actually, as a minor I am pretty sure you can own stuff -- However you may not have the ability to access it until you get your majority. An adult may have a custodial relationship in this situation.
Minors can own properties but they cannot transact and enter into contracts.
No, there are laws protecting minors but no law
prohibiting minors from owning anything.
Minors allowed to have porn?
I found on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/list_of_por... an article about pornography laws in different parts of the world. Read Canada's, it says that minors (People under 18) are not allowed to purchase it, but can own it. My question is, where would they get it from, or am I mis-interpitting this statement?
Answer:
In Canada the legal age of consent is 14 so I am not surprised.
Anyway, Canada has all kinds of laws like this. For example, it is illegal to buy cigarettes in Canada if you are under 18, however it is not illegal for you to smoke.
Funny that this is in the category of law and ethics. Canada is big on law but very short on ethics.
It could be given to them. They just can't buy it over the counter.
It's all over the internet for free, why would someone be stupid enough to bother buying it.
They are not allowed to purchase it, but it is not illegal to be in possesion of it. So if these kids are breaking into Dad's stash or dumpster-diving out behind the local XXX store, that's ok. The regulation against a sale of pornography to minors is the government in Canada's attempt to keep obscene materials out of the hands of their youth.
Answer:
In Canada the legal age of consent is 14 so I am not surprised.
Anyway, Canada has all kinds of laws like this. For example, it is illegal to buy cigarettes in Canada if you are under 18, however it is not illegal for you to smoke.
Funny that this is in the category of law and ethics. Canada is big on law but very short on ethics.
It could be given to them. They just can't buy it over the counter.
It's all over the internet for free, why would someone be stupid enough to bother buying it.
They are not allowed to purchase it, but it is not illegal to be in possesion of it. So if these kids are breaking into Dad's stash or dumpster-diving out behind the local XXX store, that's ok. The regulation against a sale of pornography to minors is the government in Canada's attempt to keep obscene materials out of the hands of their youth.
Minor In Trouble With Drug Addicted Father --HELP!?!?
Okay, Get ready for a long one... I live in Michigan and I'm 16 years old. I live with my mother who has full custody of me and always has. My father is a cocaine addict and I've always had problems with him. He verbally abused me from as far back as I can remember and finally while visiting him a couple weeks ago, he took something out on me that I had nothing to do with and I finally snapped and stood up for myself. He kicked me out of his house and I walked home until one of HIS friends came and gave me a ride. Now he's looking for any way to gain control over me. His best friend is also one of my friends and I told her something about me talking to this guy who is 22. She ended up telling me dad and now he says he's going to call the police and that my mother and I better have a good attorney. I didn't have sex with this guy or anything though, and now due to my dad, I've stopped talking to him completely. There is nothing he can do about this is there?
Answer:
Sounds like he is blowing smoke, if he is using drugs he doesn't want to get involved with the police, but stop hanging around the 22 year old to protect him from any repercussions.
your mother has full custody of you so as far as him and his threats, well who's going to believe an alleged dad who's main goal in his life is to get high over your mom who was given custody of you for good reason! tell him to go ahead an call the cops while you can go to the cops and tel them of his drug activity in his home! but you know i sense your a better person than him. so don't worry he's full of hot air!! but about the 22 yr. old who happens to be not only a big mouth but is aquainted with him'; i nsuggest you just keep your distance. you'll be fine. take care
Answer:
Sounds like he is blowing smoke, if he is using drugs he doesn't want to get involved with the police, but stop hanging around the 22 year old to protect him from any repercussions.
your mother has full custody of you so as far as him and his threats, well who's going to believe an alleged dad who's main goal in his life is to get high over your mom who was given custody of you for good reason! tell him to go ahead an call the cops while you can go to the cops and tel them of his drug activity in his home! but you know i sense your a better person than him. so don't worry he's full of hot air!! but about the 22 yr. old who happens to be not only a big mouth but is aquainted with him'; i nsuggest you just keep your distance. you'll be fine. take care
Mineral Rights?
My sister %26 I sold a 150 acres of land in Texas a number of years back, but we did retain the mineral rights. Diversified Land Management Company wants permission to look for oil or gas and said that if they found any then we would go fom there. Do we give them permission to do this or what?
Answer:
Consult an attorney.
NO. Do not do a thing without first seeing an attorney on this matter. Texas is a bit complicated, especially for Oil %26 Gas rights. It is worth your while to see an attorney about this right away.
You CAN give permission. Your question does not provide anywhere near enough information to determine in you SHOULD. Even if you provided the required information, this is not a question for which you should take advice from us Yahoos. Follow the advice of those who recommended consulting an attorney. They will be more familiar with your rights as they currently stand and how granting permission to the company will affect them. I would guess simply granting permission to look would not be a problem. Granting ANY permission beyond looking may. The rights of the current property owners is something else we don't know.
This is a very good thing. I have mineral rights and if someone told me that they wanted to look for mineral I would be very happy. The first thing is that they should be asking to lease the mineral from you. Do you have any contact info for any of the land owners that lived around your farm. Generally companies move in patterns across areas and your neighbors probably leased their mineral also. Ask how much they lease for and how long is the lease. The company SHOULD know from going through public records that you do not own the property and should get with the new land owners. I would tell them that you do not own the land and who you sold it to. The land owners should also get some money for them to work on the property. GOOD LUCK!!!
Answer:
Consult an attorney.
NO. Do not do a thing without first seeing an attorney on this matter. Texas is a bit complicated, especially for Oil %26 Gas rights. It is worth your while to see an attorney about this right away.
You CAN give permission. Your question does not provide anywhere near enough information to determine in you SHOULD. Even if you provided the required information, this is not a question for which you should take advice from us Yahoos. Follow the advice of those who recommended consulting an attorney. They will be more familiar with your rights as they currently stand and how granting permission to the company will affect them. I would guess simply granting permission to look would not be a problem. Granting ANY permission beyond looking may. The rights of the current property owners is something else we don't know.
This is a very good thing. I have mineral rights and if someone told me that they wanted to look for mineral I would be very happy. The first thing is that they should be asking to lease the mineral from you. Do you have any contact info for any of the land owners that lived around your farm. Generally companies move in patterns across areas and your neighbors probably leased their mineral also. Ask how much they lease for and how long is the lease. The company SHOULD know from going through public records that you do not own the property and should get with the new land owners. I would tell them that you do not own the land and who you sold it to. The land owners should also get some money for them to work on the property. GOOD LUCK!!!
Military child support. What do they use from your pay?
Base Pay, BAH, BAS. Do they use only Base Pay because once I am divorce I lose BAH and BAS??
Answer:
You need to make sure your attorney knows that you will lose your bah with dependents after the divorce. It all depends on the laws of your state and how they see non-taxible income. You need to make an appointment with JAG and they will be able to inform you more. Don't take anyones yes or no answer from this site, becuase like I said you need to check with your local laws. Also don't forget to get BAH-dif when you get divorced that will help you a little wth your child support.
I BELIEVE THEY USE THE BASE PAY BECAUSE YOU CAN'T COUNT ON THE OTHER TO REMAIN ONCE YOU ARE DIVORCED.
Base pay and all other 'assets' that you receive including hazardous duty pay, BAQ and other allowances all form your gross 'pay' for child support determinations.
You may also be required by the court to keep any children of the marriage on benefits.
Answer:
You need to make sure your attorney knows that you will lose your bah with dependents after the divorce. It all depends on the laws of your state and how they see non-taxible income. You need to make an appointment with JAG and they will be able to inform you more. Don't take anyones yes or no answer from this site, becuase like I said you need to check with your local laws. Also don't forget to get BAH-dif when you get divorced that will help you a little wth your child support.
I BELIEVE THEY USE THE BASE PAY BECAUSE YOU CAN'T COUNT ON THE OTHER TO REMAIN ONCE YOU ARE DIVORCED.
Base pay and all other 'assets' that you receive including hazardous duty pay, BAQ and other allowances all form your gross 'pay' for child support determinations.
You may also be required by the court to keep any children of the marriage on benefits.
Mike Nifong resigned today,after being disbarred. But can NIFONG stll practice law in any other state,?
Explain,how does being disbarred work?Can he practice down the road?
Answer:
If he has a license to practice anywhere else, he needs to notify those jurisdictions that he has been disbarred. Those jurisdictions will lift his ticket, too, because what Nifong did is disbarrable in all 53 US Jurisdictions. If he does not notify the other jurisdictions, they will summon him to appear and show cause why his ticket should not be lifted.
If he tries to get admitted elsewhere, he would have to re-take the bar exam (because North Carolina will not give him a certificate of good standing, therefore he can't "waive in" to the states that have reciprocity with NC) and go through the ethics clearance process. There was a time when one could lie like a bandit and get away with in in bar papers, but no longer. Every state, plus DC plus Puerto Rico (though I'm not sure about Guam, the 53rd jurisdiction) runs a serious background check on everyone who applies for a law license (not as bad as getting cleared for top secret, but they send investigators to talk to neighbors in all neighborhoods you've lived in for the past ten years or so). So either he tells the bar up front that he's an evil, lying sack of fertilizer (and gets denied) or he tries to hide it (and gets denied and possibly prosecuted for lying under oath).
Nifong is gone as a lawyer. I have no idea what he will do for a living, but he won't be practicing law in the USA.
Each state has a Bar association, and you have to pass the Bar Exam in each state to get a license to practice there. Nifong has had his NC Bar license cancelled. It would be up to other states whether they would allow him to take the exam.
I suspect other state Bars would not let him join. So he's washed up.
No, once you are disbarred by one state, no other state will allow Nifong to practice law because he would have to file a pro hac vice motion to be "temporarily" admitted and the disbarment will eventually surface.
If he really wanted to he could try.
Each state has different requirements regarding attorneys who were disbarred. In some cases they want full disclosure and a certain amount of years to have passed. In other cases it will be more difficult.
But my point is, if he has graduated from an accredited law school there is bound to be someplace where he can eventually re-enter the profession.
But he would have to be stupid to try it.
Answer:
If he has a license to practice anywhere else, he needs to notify those jurisdictions that he has been disbarred. Those jurisdictions will lift his ticket, too, because what Nifong did is disbarrable in all 53 US Jurisdictions. If he does not notify the other jurisdictions, they will summon him to appear and show cause why his ticket should not be lifted.
If he tries to get admitted elsewhere, he would have to re-take the bar exam (because North Carolina will not give him a certificate of good standing, therefore he can't "waive in" to the states that have reciprocity with NC) and go through the ethics clearance process. There was a time when one could lie like a bandit and get away with in in bar papers, but no longer. Every state, plus DC plus Puerto Rico (though I'm not sure about Guam, the 53rd jurisdiction) runs a serious background check on everyone who applies for a law license (not as bad as getting cleared for top secret, but they send investigators to talk to neighbors in all neighborhoods you've lived in for the past ten years or so). So either he tells the bar up front that he's an evil, lying sack of fertilizer (and gets denied) or he tries to hide it (and gets denied and possibly prosecuted for lying under oath).
Nifong is gone as a lawyer. I have no idea what he will do for a living, but he won't be practicing law in the USA.
Each state has a Bar association, and you have to pass the Bar Exam in each state to get a license to practice there. Nifong has had his NC Bar license cancelled. It would be up to other states whether they would allow him to take the exam.
I suspect other state Bars would not let him join. So he's washed up.
No, once you are disbarred by one state, no other state will allow Nifong to practice law because he would have to file a pro hac vice motion to be "temporarily" admitted and the disbarment will eventually surface.
If he really wanted to he could try.
Each state has different requirements regarding attorneys who were disbarred. In some cases they want full disclosure and a certain amount of years to have passed. In other cases it will be more difficult.
But my point is, if he has graduated from an accredited law school there is bound to be someplace where he can eventually re-enter the profession.
But he would have to be stupid to try it.
Microsoft anti-trust lawsuit? I live in iowa.?
Hi we purchased several new but not new copies of windows 2000 from a military guy for about half of what they originally cost, his shop was just throwing em out but they had never been used. They were originally owned by military, does anyone know if the product identification number will tell microsoft this when I go to file?
Answer:
Yes, it will. You may have obtained them illegally. I suggest you speak to an attorney about this now, so that you can avoid criminal charges by being proactive in the matter. This isn't an anti-trust matter at all. It concerns the ownership of government property.
On the settlement notice, there should be an address to contact for questions (the attorney representing the class). They will know exactly what is covered in the settlement and what isn't.
Answer:
Yes, it will. You may have obtained them illegally. I suggest you speak to an attorney about this now, so that you can avoid criminal charges by being proactive in the matter. This isn't an anti-trust matter at all. It concerns the ownership of government property.
On the settlement notice, there should be an address to contact for questions (the attorney representing the class). They will know exactly what is covered in the settlement and what isn't.
Michael vick--dog fighting--indicted--how much trouble is this going to be for him?
worst case scenario--jail time?, outed from the NFL
yahoo story below-b
Vick indicted over alleged dogfighting By HANK KURZ Jr., AP Sports Writer
Wed Jul 18, 7:39 AM ET
NFL star Michael Vick was indicted by a federal grand jury Tuesday on charges of sponsoring a dogfighting operation so grisly the losers either died in the pit or sometimes were electrocuted, drowned, hanged or shot.
The Atlanta Falcons quarterback and three others were charged with competitive dogfighting, procuring and training pit bulls for fighting and conducting the enterprise across state lines.
The operation was named "Bad Newz Kennels," according to the indictment, and the dogs were housed, trained and fought at a property owned by Vick in Surry County, Va.
The 18-page federal indictment, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, alleges the 27-year-old Vick and his co-defendants began the dogfighting operation in early 2001, the former Virginia Tech star's rook
Answer:
I'm hoping he does many years of prison and is never allowed to play again. I'd also like to see him have to give back all monies recieved for not fufilling his contract.
He will probably get probation from the courts but will suspended for the year from the NFL.
He's probably going to have a fine and jail time.
This will be a lot of trouble for his reputation and how he looks to the public.
Ya i agree. What an idiot too.
Not sure but my German Shepherd wants a piece of him :))
I hope they hang him by the gonads. And that's too good for him.
I hope they cut his balls off.
hope he gets the maximum, he's a heartless dick.
From news reports I've read, dog fighting investigations around the country have uncovered links to Michael Vick even prior to this incident in Virginia. I think it will be very difficult for Vick to be acquitted, but his celebrity will work in his favor with a jury, I'm sure. I think the NFL is in a difficult position since he has not been convicted of anything and has a clean record prior to this. Dog fighting is strongly tied to gang activity, which also ties to another rumor that Vick is a gang member. I hope his endorsement contracts will be affected by this - it may be that the only negative impact will be financial. I would like to see him suspended by the NFL, but they're probably afraid of being sued if they suspend him and he's later acquitted.
It's because of greedy, money hungry morons like him that I have to fight for my dogs (two gorgeous, well-behaved pit bulls) I hope he ends up in jail for quite some time, and gets outed from the NFL. He's a douchebag. May he be butt raped with something hard and sandpapery.
jail. definitely... indictment means the US government is the one pressing the charges so he's up against the big boys and their lawyers are as good or better than anything money can buy...
and he's not scooter libby so i doubt he'll get out early..
He'll walk...that's my guess. If it were you or I, we'd be in the slammer...he's a celeb so no problem.
I think he should be hung by the balls if found guilty! Seriously, the man is sick if he is doing that.Honestly, I wouldnt watch any game he played in. I always thought he was a good player and a good man but if this true I wouldnt even want to see his face again. Better for the Falcons to do away with him quickly if he did do it.
yahoo story below-b
Vick indicted over alleged dogfighting By HANK KURZ Jr., AP Sports Writer
Wed Jul 18, 7:39 AM ET
NFL star Michael Vick was indicted by a federal grand jury Tuesday on charges of sponsoring a dogfighting operation so grisly the losers either died in the pit or sometimes were electrocuted, drowned, hanged or shot.
The Atlanta Falcons quarterback and three others were charged with competitive dogfighting, procuring and training pit bulls for fighting and conducting the enterprise across state lines.
The operation was named "Bad Newz Kennels," according to the indictment, and the dogs were housed, trained and fought at a property owned by Vick in Surry County, Va.
The 18-page federal indictment, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, alleges the 27-year-old Vick and his co-defendants began the dogfighting operation in early 2001, the former Virginia Tech star's rook
Answer:
I'm hoping he does many years of prison and is never allowed to play again. I'd also like to see him have to give back all monies recieved for not fufilling his contract.
He will probably get probation from the courts but will suspended for the year from the NFL.
He's probably going to have a fine and jail time.
This will be a lot of trouble for his reputation and how he looks to the public.
Ya i agree. What an idiot too.
Not sure but my German Shepherd wants a piece of him :))
I hope they hang him by the gonads. And that's too good for him.
I hope they cut his balls off.
hope he gets the maximum, he's a heartless dick.
From news reports I've read, dog fighting investigations around the country have uncovered links to Michael Vick even prior to this incident in Virginia. I think it will be very difficult for Vick to be acquitted, but his celebrity will work in his favor with a jury, I'm sure. I think the NFL is in a difficult position since he has not been convicted of anything and has a clean record prior to this. Dog fighting is strongly tied to gang activity, which also ties to another rumor that Vick is a gang member. I hope his endorsement contracts will be affected by this - it may be that the only negative impact will be financial. I would like to see him suspended by the NFL, but they're probably afraid of being sued if they suspend him and he's later acquitted.
It's because of greedy, money hungry morons like him that I have to fight for my dogs (two gorgeous, well-behaved pit bulls) I hope he ends up in jail for quite some time, and gets outed from the NFL. He's a douchebag. May he be butt raped with something hard and sandpapery.
jail. definitely... indictment means the US government is the one pressing the charges so he's up against the big boys and their lawyers are as good or better than anything money can buy...
and he's not scooter libby so i doubt he'll get out early..
He'll walk...that's my guess. If it were you or I, we'd be in the slammer...he's a celeb so no problem.
I think he should be hung by the balls if found guilty! Seriously, the man is sick if he is doing that.Honestly, I wouldnt watch any game he played in. I always thought he was a good player and a good man but if this true I wouldnt even want to see his face again. Better for the Falcons to do away with him quickly if he did do it.
Mi. state law disorderly person?
what penply
Answer:
What is a penply. If you want an answer you have to come up with something more than that. I don't see real question or a way to give an Intelligent answer.
Verslum at best
Answer:
What is a penply. If you want an answer you have to come up with something more than that. I don't see real question or a way to give an Intelligent answer.
Verslum at best
Me and my 2 sons where ask to go up stairs at a grocery store to be searched...?
Me and my 2 sons where at a grocery store and my sons are 18 and 15 years of age..when i was finished checking out I was walking toward the door , the Manager asked me and my 2 sons to go upstairs with her, because she thinks my older son had somthing in his pocket ..we went up stairs of the store with her and she asked him to empty his pockets , so we all procede to go upstairs. All he had was a picture of his baby that was it!!.. for us to go up stairs we had to go by all the cash registers , it was really embarrasing,,,do I have rights...my 15 year old son was very very upset could not believe ...what happend ..I could not believe it I dont know what can I do please help? Do I have a Lawsuit?
Answer:
If the storekeeper had a reasonable basis to think that your son was stealing something, they can detain you for a reasonable period of time to investigate it and figure out if you stole something. You and your other son did not have to accompany him (though, like you, I would have). Obviously they saw your son playing with something in his pocket and must have thought he stole something. They asked him to come aside and empty his pockets. That's pretty reasonable in the grand scheme of things whereas strip searching him or tackling him in the parking lot would not be. Was it embarrasing? I am sure it was, and at the very least they owe you an apology but I don't see a suit here, and I do this kind of thing for a living.
It seems to me that the manager tried to handle it with discretion, rather than making a scene in public.
You can't do anything about it. Sorry. This is called "The Shopkeeper's Privilege". The manager did what she was supposed to do. She asked you to go upstairs rather than making a scene and searching you publically.
In most states, shopkeepers can detain you for a reasonable period of time to question you about shoplifting. Would you have been more embarrassed if they had you and your sons empty your pockets in front of everyone downstairs?
On the facts you state, I don't think you have a lawsuit.
I agree with schazjmd. They asked you to do nothin inappropriate. And it was in private not infront of everyone makin a sense. I personally dont think its ne thing big enough for a lawsuit.
You have no case. In your account you made reference to being "asked" to do several things. In each case you consented. Which of your individual rights or liberties do you think were violated. If you thought that they were violations, why didn't you just say no?
That's total crap, I would at least look into it. I had the same thing happen years ago but I told them to kiss my skinny A - - They are not cops and have no right to search anyone.
You didn't need to consent to the search, but since you did, no there is no lawsuit here.
No, you do not have a lawsuit. From what you described, the manager did not do anything inappropriate. The manager has every right to ensure that nothing is being taken from the store. I can understand being upset, but it is a necessary evil that must be done. Explain to your son that as long as he obeys the law he does not have to worry about these types of situations. It is just a minor inconvenience that is easily resolved. Sorry that this happened, but you can turn this into a positive life lesson for your children.
Yes, you do have rights. You can sue them for unlawful arrest.
No "shopkeepers privilege" in TX. The code of criminal procedure has this statute:
Art. 18.16. PREVENTING CONSEQUENCES OF
THEFT. Any person has a right to prevent the consequences of theft by seizing any personal property that has been stolen and bringing it, with the person suspected of committing the theft, if that person can be taken, before a magistrate for examination, or delivering the property and the person suspected of committing the theft to a peace officer for that purpose. To justify a seizure under this article, there must be reasonable ground to believe the property is stolen, and the seizure must be openly made and the proceedings had without delay.
You should have told that manager to go to the meat aisle, and pick up the largest girth sausage the store had, and shove it up her poopchute!!
Answer:
If the storekeeper had a reasonable basis to think that your son was stealing something, they can detain you for a reasonable period of time to investigate it and figure out if you stole something. You and your other son did not have to accompany him (though, like you, I would have). Obviously they saw your son playing with something in his pocket and must have thought he stole something. They asked him to come aside and empty his pockets. That's pretty reasonable in the grand scheme of things whereas strip searching him or tackling him in the parking lot would not be. Was it embarrasing? I am sure it was, and at the very least they owe you an apology but I don't see a suit here, and I do this kind of thing for a living.
It seems to me that the manager tried to handle it with discretion, rather than making a scene in public.
You can't do anything about it. Sorry. This is called "The Shopkeeper's Privilege". The manager did what she was supposed to do. She asked you to go upstairs rather than making a scene and searching you publically.
In most states, shopkeepers can detain you for a reasonable period of time to question you about shoplifting. Would you have been more embarrassed if they had you and your sons empty your pockets in front of everyone downstairs?
On the facts you state, I don't think you have a lawsuit.
I agree with schazjmd. They asked you to do nothin inappropriate. And it was in private not infront of everyone makin a sense. I personally dont think its ne thing big enough for a lawsuit.
You have no case. In your account you made reference to being "asked" to do several things. In each case you consented. Which of your individual rights or liberties do you think were violated. If you thought that they were violations, why didn't you just say no?
That's total crap, I would at least look into it. I had the same thing happen years ago but I told them to kiss my skinny A - - They are not cops and have no right to search anyone.
You didn't need to consent to the search, but since you did, no there is no lawsuit here.
No, you do not have a lawsuit. From what you described, the manager did not do anything inappropriate. The manager has every right to ensure that nothing is being taken from the store. I can understand being upset, but it is a necessary evil that must be done. Explain to your son that as long as he obeys the law he does not have to worry about these types of situations. It is just a minor inconvenience that is easily resolved. Sorry that this happened, but you can turn this into a positive life lesson for your children.
Yes, you do have rights. You can sue them for unlawful arrest.
No "shopkeepers privilege" in TX. The code of criminal procedure has this statute:
Art. 18.16. PREVENTING CONSEQUENCES OF
THEFT. Any person has a right to prevent the consequences of theft by seizing any personal property that has been stolen and bringing it, with the person suspected of committing the theft, if that person can be taken, before a magistrate for examination, or delivering the property and the person suspected of committing the theft to a peace officer for that purpose. To justify a seizure under this article, there must be reasonable ground to believe the property is stolen, and the seizure must be openly made and the proceedings had without delay.
You should have told that manager to go to the meat aisle, and pick up the largest girth sausage the store had, and shove it up her poopchute!!
McCulloch Vs. Maryland - Who was McCulloch?
I am doing research on landmark cases of John Marshall. I believe now that I understand the case 'McCulloch Vs. Maryland'. However, I cannot seem to find who Mr. McCulloch actually was.
My understanding of the case is this (this is very basic, i know there are more details and I didn't mention years, but I won't bore you):
In Maryland, the state government imposed a tax on all out-of-state banks. However, the only out of state bank at that time was the Second Bank of the United States, a federal bank. Therefore, there was a state tax on a federal bank.
My question at this point is who exactly sued who - I assume that Mr. McCulloch was a representative of the US Bank, and sued the state of Maryland? Am I wrong in that assumption?
Anyway, Maryland argued in the case that it was unconstitutional for Congress to make a US bank because it was not a power given to them by the Constitution. however, the 'necessary and proper clause', or Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the Constitution
Answer:
James William McCulloch was a cashier at the bank. If you read the decision from the US Supreme Court, you would find it there right in the first few paragraphs.
Probably some random federal government official, maybe from the now defunct national bank.
My understanding of the case is this (this is very basic, i know there are more details and I didn't mention years, but I won't bore you):
In Maryland, the state government imposed a tax on all out-of-state banks. However, the only out of state bank at that time was the Second Bank of the United States, a federal bank. Therefore, there was a state tax on a federal bank.
My question at this point is who exactly sued who - I assume that Mr. McCulloch was a representative of the US Bank, and sued the state of Maryland? Am I wrong in that assumption?
Anyway, Maryland argued in the case that it was unconstitutional for Congress to make a US bank because it was not a power given to them by the Constitution. however, the 'necessary and proper clause', or Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the Constitution
Answer:
James William McCulloch was a cashier at the bank. If you read the decision from the US Supreme Court, you would find it there right in the first few paragraphs.
Probably some random federal government official, maybe from the now defunct national bank.
McCANN'S ARRESTED FOR FRAUD.?
Just a glimpse of the future...sorry if I got you all excited..
Answer:
God damn it, you nearly made my day then! Dont put peoples hopes up like that! However, I do hope that is the headlines very very soon!
for what? posing as a conservative?
The pair of idiots will get away with it because they were scheming enough to stay in Portugal and let the whole silly saga die down. Now this terrorist attempt has really taken the heat off them. Disgraceful !!
I think that is wishful thinking on your part mate. i don;t think they will even be arrested for neglect of Maddy...so fat chance of being arrested for fraud.
Jesus...I nearly shouted Hurray !! ..
who said we were excited? thanks for the 2 points im nearly at the next level
i clicked on this question hoping you were right,oh well not too long now before the mccanns are investigated,surely the police arent that stupid, publicity,money making,round the world trips, i dont know which they're after,but its got to come to an end soon,they know where maddy is, and i hope to god she is safe and well.but there's something dodgy about her parents. the 50th day she was missing looked more like a celebration, than parents agonising over a missing child.
are you lot for real?seriously i hope you never have to go through what they have.how can you be so cold.you make me sick.yes maybe they shouldn't of left their girl alone but they could see the room from where they were.how many of you put your kids to bed at night can see their room from where you are?you should pray you never lose you precious kids the way they have
EDIT;stokies above i have two kids of my own and i never leave them alone either but you dont know for certain whats gone on or do you?how do you know she wasnt taken from another exit?by the way r u frm stoke if so so am i
Answer:
God damn it, you nearly made my day then! Dont put peoples hopes up like that! However, I do hope that is the headlines very very soon!
for what? posing as a conservative?
The pair of idiots will get away with it because they were scheming enough to stay in Portugal and let the whole silly saga die down. Now this terrorist attempt has really taken the heat off them. Disgraceful !!
I think that is wishful thinking on your part mate. i don;t think they will even be arrested for neglect of Maddy...so fat chance of being arrested for fraud.
Jesus...I nearly shouted Hurray !! ..
who said we were excited? thanks for the 2 points im nearly at the next level
i clicked on this question hoping you were right,oh well not too long now before the mccanns are investigated,surely the police arent that stupid, publicity,money making,round the world trips, i dont know which they're after,but its got to come to an end soon,they know where maddy is, and i hope to god she is safe and well.but there's something dodgy about her parents. the 50th day she was missing looked more like a celebration, than parents agonising over a missing child.
are you lot for real?seriously i hope you never have to go through what they have.how can you be so cold.you make me sick.yes maybe they shouldn't of left their girl alone but they could see the room from where they were.how many of you put your kids to bed at night can see their room from where you are?you should pray you never lose you precious kids the way they have
EDIT;stokies above i have two kids of my own and i never leave them alone either but you dont know for certain whats gone on or do you?how do you know she wasnt taken from another exit?by the way r u frm stoke if so so am i
Maybe facing a court case.?
i have made complaints to the council and animal welfare,regarding a primate sanctuary, which is really terrible. for some reason they have been given a good report from inspectors. i have now had a letter from their solicitor, telling me that if i do not retract my complaint then they will prosecute me.i do not know how they got hold of my details as i only gave them to the council.even their solicitor stated to me, that my details should not have been divulged.
Answer:
I would not worry, From what you have said they have absolutely no legal grounds to bring any claim against you whatsoever.
Prosecute you for what?
Go to your local CAB and get advise
if your complaint is genuine and not malicious then they wont have a leg to stand on. what are they proecuting for? did you make your complaint public? they are trying to scare and intimidate you.now thats not legal!
I would get the backing of some of the Animal Wellfare charities - try www.animalaid.co.uk
Or contact your local animals rights group, as they would properly be able to recommend a solicitor who specialises in this area
Good luck
If you complaint is valid and based on fact that can be documented then you have nothing to worry about.
They could only have got it from the council, phone the council and see what they have got to say about it, and demand the truth,
Complain to your local councillor and if necessary your M.P.
If that fails inform your M E P ( address in the telephone directory) what has happened, it is an infringement of your human rights by someone in the council and an investigation should be carried out.
You are not the first person to have their details revealed to a third party by either a council employee or a councillor.
Don't answer the letter from the solicitor until you have pursued this matter through the above channels.
Answer:
I would not worry, From what you have said they have absolutely no legal grounds to bring any claim against you whatsoever.
Prosecute you for what?
Go to your local CAB and get advise
if your complaint is genuine and not malicious then they wont have a leg to stand on. what are they proecuting for? did you make your complaint public? they are trying to scare and intimidate you.now thats not legal!
I would get the backing of some of the Animal Wellfare charities - try www.animalaid.co.uk
Or contact your local animals rights group, as they would properly be able to recommend a solicitor who specialises in this area
Good luck
If you complaint is valid and based on fact that can be documented then you have nothing to worry about.
They could only have got it from the council, phone the council and see what they have got to say about it, and demand the truth,
Complain to your local councillor and if necessary your M.P.
If that fails inform your M E P ( address in the telephone directory) what has happened, it is an infringement of your human rights by someone in the council and an investigation should be carried out.
You are not the first person to have their details revealed to a third party by either a council employee or a councillor.
Don't answer the letter from the solicitor until you have pursued this matter through the above channels.
May I ask a question if anyone here knows about law or lawyer here?
I have a friend needs help, her husband is come from other country now she contacted her husband but the husband doesn't answer the call and text messages, after how many days latter she contacted her husband again but a woman who answer his phone then she speak an spanish. Is there any law to help this kind of situation because my friend is legal married to him. Can you explain what to do? Thanks.
Answer:
Not much can be legally done. Divorce thats about it. May be able to go to civil court if there is any money or property she legally has a right to, but he's in possession of. Unfortunatly there's no law against cheating.
ummm well im not really sure what to tell you. maybe he is cheating on her? if that is the case she can file for divorce but other than that I really don't know if there is anything that can legally be done.
Answer:
Not much can be legally done. Divorce thats about it. May be able to go to civil court if there is any money or property she legally has a right to, but he's in possession of. Unfortunatly there's no law against cheating.
ummm well im not really sure what to tell you. maybe he is cheating on her? if that is the case she can file for divorce but other than that I really don't know if there is anything that can legally be done.
Max weight that can be lifted?
What is the maximum amount that a woman can be allowed/told to lift during work without any additional support or help? Such as when lifting boxes what is the maximum weight those boxes can be until the employer has to provide some assistance to a woman?
Answer:
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has a formula to help determine maximum safe lifting limits: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/94-110/...
Further, OSHA's website addresses this question: "It should be noted however, that the NIOSH criteria are not mandatory.
While OSHA does not have a standard written specifically for the problem you raised, employee exposure to hazards related to heavy lifting and back injuries can be addressed under Section 5(a)(1) of the OSH Act, commonly referred to as the General Duty Clause. The General Duty cause states that:
Each employer -- shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees;
In practical terms, the General Duty Clause says that if an employer knowingly exposes their employees to a recognized hazardous condition, then that employer may be in violation of the OSH Act."
Depends on how much the woman can lift.
It has nothing to do with gender. It depends on how much the person can lift that being said some jobs require a person (male or female) to lift a certain number of pounds to even be considered for the job.
Everyone is different. My right hand can lift 0 ounces and my left, 7 ounces.
I don't think that there is such a maximum. Some jobs require you to lift 50, 60 or more pounds on a regular basis. Every person is different.
depends on state and local codes.in general its 70 lbs.
Answer:
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has a formula to help determine maximum safe lifting limits: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/94-110/...
Further, OSHA's website addresses this question: "It should be noted however, that the NIOSH criteria are not mandatory.
While OSHA does not have a standard written specifically for the problem you raised, employee exposure to hazards related to heavy lifting and back injuries can be addressed under Section 5(a)(1) of the OSH Act, commonly referred to as the General Duty Clause. The General Duty cause states that:
Each employer -- shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees;
In practical terms, the General Duty Clause says that if an employer knowingly exposes their employees to a recognized hazardous condition, then that employer may be in violation of the OSH Act."
Depends on how much the woman can lift.
It has nothing to do with gender. It depends on how much the person can lift that being said some jobs require a person (male or female) to lift a certain number of pounds to even be considered for the job.
Everyone is different. My right hand can lift 0 ounces and my left, 7 ounces.
I don't think that there is such a maximum. Some jobs require you to lift 50, 60 or more pounds on a regular basis. Every person is different.
depends on state and local codes.in general its 70 lbs.
Massachusetts Marijuana Law?
I heard that there was a law in Massachusetts stating that you could possess no more than a quarter of an ounce of weed because it proves you're not a distributor or such. is that true
?
Answer:
if it is Im moving.
I doubt it. You will probably just get charged with simple posession instead of intent to distribute...
haven't heard that about Massachusetts but i do know that 1 oz or less in California, Oregon and Washington states is only a misdemeanor that will get you a ticket and a very small fine (50-100$), whereas in most states any amount is going to get you sent to jail.
check your state gov web page, should have links to laws there.
I'm with the first person.. I take marinol (a THC pill) for all my stomach problems.. the real thing would work much better if it was legal!
I heard it was true about all states not just Massachusettes.
Massachusetts makes possession of marijuana in any amount a crime. However there is a threshold amount of marijuana that will allow a prosecutor to establish that you have the intent to distribute. This is likely just a presumption which can be rebutted if you can show no intent to actually distribute. Other factors a court is likely to consider would be whether the individual had the marijuana in seperate bags, or had a scale as these tend to show an intent to distribute.
?
Answer:
if it is Im moving.
I doubt it. You will probably just get charged with simple posession instead of intent to distribute...
haven't heard that about Massachusetts but i do know that 1 oz or less in California, Oregon and Washington states is only a misdemeanor that will get you a ticket and a very small fine (50-100$), whereas in most states any amount is going to get you sent to jail.
check your state gov web page, should have links to laws there.
I'm with the first person.. I take marinol (a THC pill) for all my stomach problems.. the real thing would work much better if it was legal!
I heard it was true about all states not just Massachusettes.
Massachusetts makes possession of marijuana in any amount a crime. However there is a threshold amount of marijuana that will allow a prosecutor to establish that you have the intent to distribute. This is likely just a presumption which can be rebutted if you can show no intent to actually distribute. Other factors a court is likely to consider would be whether the individual had the marijuana in seperate bags, or had a scale as these tend to show an intent to distribute.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)