|
So this girl's crazy boyfriend threatened to shoot me, apparently he's Sur13 which I doubt. Still, he kinda kept going on about how he had "a .40 for my rear end," blah blah blah. ROTC and poo poo seriously make me not want to have to deal with this rear end in a top hat, I don't need that kind of crap around me. Any advice?
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 1, 2024 23:40 |
|
|
cory ad portas posted:So this girl's crazy boyfriend threatened to shoot me, apparently he's Sur13 which I doubt. Still, he kinda kept going on about how he had "a .40 for my rear end," blah blah blah. Making Death Threats is a criminal offence, go to the police?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 01:08
|
|
|
cory ad portas posted:So this girl's crazy boyfriend threatened to shoot me, apparently he's Sur13 which I doubt. Still, he kinda kept going on about how he had "a .40 for my rear end," blah blah blah. Go to the police. Did anyone else hear him say this stuff?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 01:36
|
|
|
cory ad portas posted:So this girl's crazy boyfriend threatened to shoot me, apparently he's Sur13 which I doubt. Still, he kinda kept going on about how he had "a .40 for my rear end," blah blah blah. The lawyer's advice is to go to the police, but honestly I doubt that's gonna do a lot for your practical fear of actually getting shot, beaten, what-have-you. The best advice may be to just stay away from that guy, and/or places where he commonly goes. But yeah, go to the police if you think it's serious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 02:33
|
|
|
cory ad portas posted:So this girl's crazy boyfriend threatened to shoot me, apparently he's Sur13 which I doubt. Still, he kinda kept going on about how he had "a .40 for my rear end," blah blah blah. PPO/TRO/whatever your jurisdiction calls it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 02:42
|
|
|
cory ad portas posted:So this girl's crazy boyfriend threatened to shoot me, apparently he's Sur13 which I doubt. Still, he kinda kept going on about how he had "a .40 for my rear end," blah blah blah. Buy a gun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 02:45
|
|
|
uG posted:[the court may order the secretary of state to issue to the person a restricted license] Call your PD. Tell him you just found out that you can get a restricted license, and you really need one. At least around here, that's something that we'd be able to go back and fix, both from a "is this doable?" standpoint and from a "can my PD still do this?" standpoint.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 03:15
|
|
|
Well it's not so much fear of getting hurt, because honestly I doubt this kid owns a gun and I could beat his rear end, but that isn't something I'm interested in doing while pursuing a college degree and a career in the military, you know? Looks bad. Thanks for the advice, guys. If he keeps it up, I'll just call the cops and tell them I'm being threatened by some kid that claims to be a member of a particular gang the police here just happen to be trying to get rid of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 04:28
|
|
|
cory ad portas posted:Well it's not so much fear of getting hurt, because honestly I doubt this kid owns a gun and I could beat his rear end, but that isn't something I'm interested in doing while pursuing a college degree and a career in the military, you know? Looks bad. Thanks for the advice, guys. If he keeps it up, I'll just call the cops and tell them I'm being threatened by some kid that claims to be a member of a particular gang the police here just happen to be trying to get rid of. Is he really claiming to be a member of that gang? Don't lie to the cops or anything. It's probably all pointless posturing anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 04:34
|
|
|
EDIT: I'm in Australia, but general advice from anyone still welcome. I have a question about a landlord/tennant relationship with my father. My father bought a unit a few months ago with the intention of renting it out to me, his daughter. The current tennant is moving out this week (moving to join the army so at least that works out for him too) and so I'll be starting to move in soon. The question is, should I push for my father to do up paperwork/a lease for me? I am 99% sure that I will have no need for one, we get on great, he's been a landlord for strangers before and knows what he needs to do, we've made verbal contracts as to me paying rent and some exceptions to when I'd pay rent. The exceptions are that if he goes on an extended holiday, ie more than one week, I will housesit for him, look after his dog and cat, and any bills that arrive (from his money, I will just ensure payment) and in exchange I will not pay rent on my apartment. If I find myself unemployed or otherwise suffering financial hardship and rent money could be better used somewhere else in my life, he is happy for me to stop paying rent until I'm back on my feet. As I said, I'm 99% sure that verbal agreement would be binding. I love my dad, I respect him and he respects me. We both have a strong sense of responsibility and I am all but sure things will be fine. It's that 1% chance that something goes wrong that I'm worried about. We talked about doing up a lease contract just to be safe, but I'm not sure what we'd need to do to set in stone normal tennant/landlord rights plus those exemptions that are not part of a normal lease contract. Also, I'm worried that if we don't have something in writing BEFORE I start to move in that it could cause problems. So: Do I need to finalise all lease paperwork before I begin to move in, or can it be written up say a month later if both parties agree to it and sign it at that later date? Will a simple document written stating rent owed and exceptions where rent is not owed and conditions for that exemption, signed by me and my father be acceptable? Will that cover me if he loses his mind in december 2010 and tries to kick me out for not paying rent for three weeks in June 2010 when I housesit for him, if he agreed then? Should I get a written doccument signed by both of us every time we agree I am not liable for rent? I believe I should but I don't want to push things if it isn't necessary. Could one document cover that, or is it necessary for further doccumentation each time we make an exception? Last thought, if both my parents die suddenly and unexpectedly, would my tennancy agreement have any sway over the future of the property? I believe my parents' will involves a 50/50 split between my sister (adult) and I. My sister and I are on great terms, but again that 1% chance she'd contest the will/ force the sale of the place I plan to call home for years to come worries me. As this is a recently bought property I doubt it's been specifically addressed in my parents will. I do plan to talk to him about that, but I'm wondering if being willed half of the place plus being a rent paying tennant with some sort of lease agreement before the owners death would afford me any protections, or if I should be worrying about that at all at the beginnig of a lease. Vestral fucked around with this message at 15:46 on Apr 19, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 15:41
|
|
|
Vestral posted:EDIT: I'm in Australia, but general advice from anyone still welcome. You will want your tenancy attached to the property charges at your region's land registry in order to protect you should you Father suddenly decide to sell up. To do that you will probably need a written tenancy agreement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 16:01
|
|
|
Hello goons. I feel a bit silly to ask a relatively trivial question in a thread filled with weighty legal conundrums, but here it goes. I was cited in Arizona, US for 5 miles over the posted speed AND expired registration. The former can be offset by attending traffic school, and the latter can be reduced if I show that I've renewed my registration, which I've done. I don't plan to contest the charges themselves, but there is an uncertainty because the officer wrote down a future date on the citation, July 3, 2010. I called the court and they told me the citation was issued on April 5, 2010, which is impossible because I was at work and could not have been driving at the time the citation was issued. If necessary I can provide evidence for this. Do I stand much of a chance in court by arguing the date is wrong? I've heard that some cops are allowed to fix administrative mistakes like that in court. VVVV No, the citation date is July 3, 2010, and the court date is well before that. tpg0007 fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Apr 19, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 18:04
|
|
|
tpg0007 posted:Hello goons. I feel a bit silly to ask a relatively trivial question in a thread filled with weighty legal conundrums, but here it goes. The future date might be your scheduled appearance date.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 18:08
|
|
|
entris posted:Is he really claiming to be a member of that gang? Don't lie to the cops or anything. It's probably all pointless posturing anyway. Yeah, he really is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2010 18:22
|
|
|
Would it be possible to get out of a no seat belt violation(minnesota) or should I just try to pay it even though I don't have much money?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 17:40
|
|
|
Bougie Black Women posted:Would it be possible to get out of a no seat belt violation(minnesota) or should I just try to pay it even though I don't have much money? Were you wearing a seatbelt?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 18:21
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:Were you wearing a seatbelt? Is that a rhetorical question?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 18:25
|
|
|
Bougie Black Women posted:Is that a rhetorical question? No it's a relevant one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 18:31
|
|
|
I was not wearing my seatbelt, we were stopped next to each other at a light right before he stopped me; so, he would have been able to see if I did have it on.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 18:43
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:No it's a relevant one. Some might say THE relevant one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 18:43
|
|
|
Bougie Black Women posted:Would it be possible to get out of a no seat belt violation(minnesota) or should I just try to pay it even though I don't have much money?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 18:47
|
|
|
Bougie Black Women posted:I was not wearing my seatbelt, we were stopped next to each other at a light right before he stopped me; so, he would have been able to see if I did have it on. Here's what's going to happen: 1) You contest the ticket and get your court date 2) The officer sees your court date and remembers that he wrote down that he saw you not wearing a seatbelt 2a. Officer realizes his day off coincides with your court date, as it does with many other court dates for stops he's made 2b. Officer gleefully thinks about the next boat payment/dirtbike/power tool he will be able to afford from all the overtime he will rack up by showing up in court on his day off. There will be plenty of people trying to contest, and he will have to be there all day. He will get paid for sitting in the courthouse, drinking coffee and sexting with his girlfriend in between 5 minute bouts of saying "On _X_ date, I observed Defendant (that's you) doing __Y__ crime in violation of statute __1234.001__." 3) You show up in court and lose anyway. And you might have to pay court costs on top of your original fine. So, basically, your only hope is that he doesn't show up in court. Then you win. But he'll probably show up. If there's a trial by declaration in your state, you could try that, but you'd still have to pay the fine. All you've got to lose is time, though, so go for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 19:10
|
|
|
Ok, need a little bit of assistance on this one. I've got a bit of background in UK law but this involves someone in the US. I put together a Youtube video a few days ago with a view to it going viral and promoting my site and other projects. It did, however someone decided it would be good to take a chunk of the footage, unaltered and create a 'parody' video. Now to the best of my knowledge, he does not qualify for protection under parody law or fair use. He did not alter the footage, he did not credit the footage, he did not ask permission to use the footage and I own the footage in full. There was no 'parody' going on, it was just a 20 or so second chunk of my footage, including my unaltered voice, cut into a piece of his work. I filed a copyright claim, on the basis that this guy actively went out of his way to taunt and harrass me about the video, so hey, why not? Protecting my IP is entirely reasonable right? I informed him before doing so that I could in fact 'do poo poo to him' contrary to what he claimed and that his video did not qualify under US parody law. This dumbass has filed a counterclaim with Youtube, which means I'm now obliged to go after him and file a court action under the DMCA. In counterclaiming, he perjured himself and provided his full name and address for the purposes of filing. quote:"I consent to the jurisdiction of the Federal District Court for the I don't see any reason to let this guy get away with his behaviour, particularly when he went so far out of his way to try and rub it in my face. So the question is two-fold. 1) Is my understand of US copyright law correct? Is using a chunk of unaltered footage, without permission protected by parody law or not? 2) How would I file such a thing? I live in the UK, this guy is in Alabama. quote:As described in the United States Digital Millennium Any assistance would be much appreciated. I'd also like to know how much it would cost to file. I'd imagine he will back off when that happens so I won't need to go any further.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 21:03
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:So, basically, your only hope is that he doesn't show up in court. Does this even work, anywhere? In my experience, it's an automatic continuance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 21:27
|
|
|
Baruch Obamawitz posted:Does this even work, anywhere? In my experience, it's an automatic continuance. Yeah it works in most traffic courts I've been in. So at least two states.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 21:45
|
|
|
Caveat: Total Biscuit, I'd like to see your video and the other guy's, or at least a more detailed description of both. What I'm writing here is based upon what you've said so far. I may have totally misconstrued what little you've said about the operative facts. e: please tell me it's not about this. TotalBiscuit posted:Ok, need a little bit of assistance on this one. I've got a bit of background in UK law but this involves someone in the US. TotalBiscuit posted:Now to the best of my knowledge, he does not qualify for protection under parody law or fair use. He did not alter the footage, he did not credit the footage, he did not ask permission to use the footage and I own the footage in full. There was no 'parody' going on, it was just a 20 or so second chunk of my footage, including my unaltered voice, cut into a piece of his work. TotalBiscuit posted:I filed a copyright claim, on the basis that this guy actively went out of his way to taunt and harrass me about the video, so hey, why not? Why not? The overburdened Federal courts are not the proper place to assuage hurt feelings. TotalBiscuit posted:Protecting my IP is entirely reasonable right? I informed him before doing so that I could in fact 'do poo poo to him' contrary to what he claimed and that his video did not qualify under US parody law. Is it your hurt pride that you're protecting? No, not reasonable. TotalBiscuit posted:This dumbass has filed a counterclaim with Youtube, which means I'm now obliged to go after him and file a court action under the DMCA. TotalBiscuit posted:In counterclaiming, he perjured himself and provided his full name and address for the purposes of filing. TotalBiscuit posted:I don't see any reason to let this guy get away with his behaviour, particularly when he went so far out of his way to try and rub it in my face. TotalBiscuit posted:So the question is two-fold. 1. What little info you've provided about the other guy's work doesn't sound like "parody" but it does sound like "commentary," both of which are protected by the fair use doctrine. 2. Hire a lawyer to file the papers in the proper Alabama federal district. I believe the filing fee is $350. TotalBiscuit posted:I'd imagine he will back off when that happens so I won't need to go any further. http://www.somethingawful.com/d/legal-threats/ It's been 2 years, Leonard! We miss you! e: grammar joat mon fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Apr 21, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2010 23:57
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:Here's what's going to happen: It sucks...in Pennsylvania you have to pay court costs whether or not you go to court
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 01:04
|
|
|
TotalBiscuit posted:This dumbass has filed a counterclaim with Youtube, which means I'm now obliged to go after him and file a court action under the DMCA. In counterclaiming, he perjured himself and provided his full name and address for the purposes of filing. Just stop. You aren't filing suit in the US. There is no way you're prepared to spend the tens of thousands of dollars it would cost to litigate this. Also, it's ultimately a pretty short chunk of film, so I'm not even sure if your infringement case is a slam dunk.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 01:13
|
|
|
TotalBiscuit, basically what everyone else said, but I also should point out that there's no perjury there. He took advantage of the same DMCA that you did. The system is intentionally designed to put you in the situation you are in: If the litigation was important, you can file suit; otherwise, you let it go and don't clog up the judicial system with pointless litigation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 05:16
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:So, basically, your only hope is that he doesn't show up in court. Then you win. But he'll probably show up. In Minnesota, for a traffic violation, the cop gets paid overtime for every appearance (even if he isn't due OT) and gets a minimum for 3 hours. And they schedule trials based on the cop's schedule. Also, the first appearance is an arraignment. If you show up, they'll likely offer you some sort of sweetheart deal to get rid of the poo poo. Like $50 for a dismissal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 05:20
|
|
|
Offrampmotel posted:It sucks...in Pennsylvania you have to pay court costs whether or not you go to court Yeah, most states are like that. It's a backdoor way of funding the court system.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 05:38
|
|
|
SWATJester posted:TotalBiscuit, basically what everyone else said, but I also should point out that there's no perjury there. He took advantage of the same DMCA that you did. The system is intentionally designed to put you in the situation you are in: If the litigation was important, you can file suit; otherwise, you let it go and don't clog up the judicial system with pointless litigation. The DMCA is a pain in the rear end. Guy backed off and apologised after coming to his senses, so it's non-issue. Obviously it was never going to come to litigation, that's just dumb. I wanted to know more about this kind of situation and have enough understanding of the legal ramifications to have him back down and be reasonable. Now I do and now he has so thanks for spending the time to educate me. Sorry for coming off as a retard. TotalBiscuit fucked around with this message at 10:36 on Apr 21, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 10:28
|
|
|
Quick question, I don't want to go into the whole ordeal since it is still in the courts and I'm sorry in advance for the vagueness. I am trying to leave out the facts of the case; I am more interested in the main question below. I will edit out the rest if that is better. .... Main question: In about a month, d. will be getting student loan money that will cover the fine. If the fine is paid before the criminal court is decided (same facts), is that an admission of guilt? I am not attempting to/do not want to fight the ordinance, but I do not want to screw up the criminal issue. I cannot find the answer anywhere (including from the current lawyer, who just says "don't pay" let me file an appearance, which again, can't really afford), and no, this is not a DUI/DWI with a traffic violation attached. It was an accident, no one hurt, $40 property damage that has already been paid to the other party. edited as I think I am screwed... usbombshell fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Apr 22, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 17:52
|
|
|
usbombshell posted:stuff Have you called the court to see if you can appear for the hearing by phone?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 17:58
|
|
|
I did call, and I read in their rules of trial something about an appearance in writing, so I did request that. I will amend my request to add phone, since the point of the appearance it is just to answer some questions about finances. When I call, they tell me everything must be in writing. Thanks for the idea though!
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 18:01
|
|
|
usbombshell posted:Let's say someone was arrested for X and it is currently being prosecuted for a C-felony in Indiana (A lawyer is on this case). There was also an ordinance violation based upon the same facts and d. was found guilty for that and fined $2500. Lawyer advised not to pay on that while the felony is still in progress Any screwing up of the criminal issue happened with pleading guilty/ being found guilty on the ordinance violation; paying the fine is immaterial. If someone's already been found guilty (and been ordered by the court to pay a fine), paying the fine can't make someone any more guilty. Was someone represented by counsel when she pled/ was found guilty on the ordinance violation? Did someone plead guilty or was she found guilty? My cynical side wonders if the attorney is telling someone not to pay the fine so that he gets his fee first. If the ordinance violation was for the exact same facts, there might be a double jeopardy issue in your favor, but resolving that potential issue is highly fact dependent and Indiana law dependent. e: I'm not saying that someone should go pay her fine against her attorney's advice based upon what some anonymous guy from the internet said; but someone might want to ask her attorney some more pointed questions about the matter. VVVVV: Yep, she did. I was honoring her original effort at pseudo-anonymity in case she wanted to edit. joat mon fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Apr 21, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 18:44
|
|
|
joat mon posted:'someone' admitted it was him in his first post.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 21:25
|
|
|
Question about what I guess would be the eviction process. Say you have someone who claims residence living in your in-law apartment, not paying rent but claiming residence. How long does said person have to have been out of the house living somewhere else to no longer be considered taking residence at the house?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 22:49
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:Question about what I guess would be the eviction process. Say you have someone who claims residence living in your in-law apartment, not paying rent but claiming residence. How long does said person have to have been out of the house living somewhere else to no longer be considered taking residence at the house? 1) What do you mean by "in-law" apartment? 2) What city/state is this in? 3) Does this person share in the utilities or upkeep of the apartment?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 22:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 1, 2024 23:40 |
|
|
In Michigan if you received an arrest warrant for violation of probation will your hearing not be scheduled until after you're arrested?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2010 23:03
|
|