|
Look Sir Droids posted:Scale of 1 to 10, how awesome is it to smush that good buy's face? Like a 16? Oh it's a 9.5. Minimal drool, maximum meat, very soft.
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 22:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 03:56 |
|
|
Here is a decidedly less meaty girl protecting baby blarzgh from bad camera boi.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 22:22
|
|
|
Two out of my four dummies: Edit: Sorry for giant pic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 22:36
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Here is a decidedly less meaty girl protecting baby blarzgh from bad camera boi. That is A+ high quality meat right there, don't you believe otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
Dog 1 and Dog 2 - Both good dogs. Lacking in meat department
Sab0921 fucked around with this message at 22:56 on Mar 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:Two out of my four dummies: Brown dog is making the same face Toona made in the hot tub the other day.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 22:58
|
|
|
Love getting a compromise verdict that necessitates the jury believe the victim 100% in one count but also not at all in the second.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Love getting a compromise verdict that necessitates the jury believe the victim 100% in one count but also not at all in the second. Seems like grounds for an appeal?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 23:30
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Seems like grounds for an appeal? They're both convictions, one as charged (the one they had to believe the victim 100% on), the other a lesser included that required them to disbelieve the victim. The lesser-included conviction was 100% a compromise verdict and they aren't necessarily wrong, just inconsistent in how the two convictions work together. From the Defendant's point of view, he could appeal but he'd be a fool and wouldn't really have grounds. Verdicts can be inconsistent with each other, so long as they are each independently supportable by evidence. If he appealed he'd be risking 2 years for another shot at us getting 26.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2019 23:34
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:They're both convictions, one as charged (the one they had to believe the victim 100% on), the other a lesser included that required them to disbelieve the victim. The lesser-included conviction was 100% a compromise verdict and they aren't necessarily wrong, just inconsistent in how the two convictions work together. Okay, I guess I was reading it through my civil glasses, like "we do find that there was a breach of the contract, but we don't find that the defendant breached their fiduciary duty."
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 01:30
|
|
|
This Cohen thing, I don't even know. We're way past Better Call Saul legal crimes territory here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 02:08
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:This Cohen thing, I don't even know. We're way past Better Call Saul legal crimes territory here. It'll be generations before the profession recovers it's reputation for professionalism and ethics!!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 02:39
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:This Cohen thing, I don't even know. We're way past Better Call Saul legal crimes territory here. The legal bills thing really reminded me of that law student that got a bill for a law clerk interview from like 3 big law associates and then to add insult to injury they padded their bills
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 03:43
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:The legal bills thing really reminded me of that law student that got a bill for a law clerk interview from like 3 big law associates and then to add insult to injury they padded their bills Wait. Three associates billed for time spent interviewing an applicant? Am I reading that right? If I were on a jury for someone that responded to a demand like that with a box of their own poo poo, I would go for jury nullification
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 07:15
|
|
|
Lote posted:Wait. Three associates billed for time spent interviewing an applicant? Am I reading that right? https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/6vcr2r/ny_ny_interview_with_a_law_firm_led_to_being/ quote:However, earlier last week I received a bill in the mail for billable hours from the firm. They are charging me for the initial phone interview (.5 hours), day of the interview (1.5 hrs, even though actual interview time was about 45 minutes) and response to my thank you email (.5 hours).
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 07:36
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Love getting a compromise verdict that necessitates the jury believe the victim 100% in one count but also not at all in the second. Funny. I posted about something like that previously. Nice piece of fish posted:Today a big profile case just ended, a corruption/orgcrime/drugs case where one of the defendants is an undercover cop who allegedly assisted organized drug smuggling in extremely large quantities into the country. The jury, however, acquitted him on all the counts of accessory to drug smugglin' but convicted on police corruption... for assisting in the drug smugglin'. Handy for him though, since that shaves off a good number of years from the possible sentence. Kinda the same thing, he was guilty of police corruption, but the only police corruption he was accused of was accessory to drug smuggling, which he was acquitted of. The judges threw the entire thing out because this was all just too dumb for words, so it's getting retried at the same appellate level without a jury. So the answer is get rid of the jury system, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 09:05
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/6vcr2r/ny_ny_interview_with_a_law_firm_led_to_being/ The worst part is there’s no resolution. Boo!
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 17:38
|
|
|
El_Elegante posted:The worst part is there’s no resolution. Boo! Is there any reason to not tell them to go pound sand? There's a very low likelihood that he was informed ahead of time that the interview/application process would be billed, and it's not reasonable to assume it would be, there's no way it's enforceable. poo poo, I'd forward it to the NY ethics board. I mean, if they try and enforce it. It's probably just an admin mistake like the replies say.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 17:45
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Is there any reason to not tell them to go pound sand? There's a very low likelihood that he was informed ahead of time that the interview/application process would be billed, and it's not reasonable to assume it would be, there's no way it's enforceable. poo poo, I'd forward it to the NY ethics board. It sounds super on brand for lawyers, but I bet the explanation is simple clerical error. That firm sets up non-billable accounts for interviews and someone, probably legal assistant, mistakenly clicked the wrong thing and made it billable. The associates billed for the time marked out on their calendar, not the actual time it took. User didn't post a resolution because that's it and it's boring.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/6vcr2r/ny_ny_interview_with_a_law_firm_led_to_being/ Reminds me off an episode of Better off Ted where the guy is having an affair at work with a lawyer and the company starts sending him bills for her time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
sullat posted:Reminds me off an episode of Better off Ted where the guy is having an affair at work with a lawyer and the company starts sending him bills for her time. that show really never should have been canceled, it's fantastic
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 19:46
|
|
|
I'm sad that I can't get the Supreme Courtship demo to play on my Windows 10 computer. Any ideas?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2019 22:51
|
|
|
Roger Stone's attorneys claim that they have received terabytes of discovery from the prosecution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 00:47
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Roger Stone's attorneys claim that they have received terabytes of discovery from the prosecution. One month of pole cam video is about a TB. That plus a few nerds' gaming PCs with three hundred steam games all imaged and you are at a plural number of terabytes. Big cases get up there quickly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 01:06
|
|
|
BigHead posted:One month of pole cam video is about a TB. That plus a few nerds' gaming PCs with three hundred steam games all imaged and you are at a plural number of terabytes. Big cases get up there quickly. It's mostly documents in this case. 2.2 million is the number I recall. They don't have months of video footage of roger stone. It's all emails, chat logs, phone records, etc. Also holy loving poo poo Manafort only got 47 months.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 01:09
|
|
|
Manafort got to loving skate, goddamn.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 01:20
|
|
|
I like Judge Ellis telling this motherfucker he lived an honest life when he’s directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in Angola, not to mention working for loving murderous dictators like Ferdinand Marcos and Mobutu Sese Seko, the Pakistani ISI, and Viktor Yanukovych, and Oleg Deripaska. Ellis is garbage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 01:45
|
|
|
Trump could get impeached, indicted, convicted of everything he’s charged with, and some old white man judge will sentence him to 26 months
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 01:49
|
|
|
Lol he let Manafort skate because Manafort is, apparently, a generally good person. Isn’t this the judge that last year got super pissed at prosecutors because they focused too much on making Manafort look like a generally bad person?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
disjoe posted:Lol he let Manafort skate because Manafort is, apparently, a generally good person. Yes, a generally good person continues doing crimes while on bail and in actual jail. Wtf. gently caress this judge.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 02:35
|
|
|
I hope Jackson throws the book at him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 02:36
|
|
|
It’s been a while since I was involved in a sentencing hearing. But the last time I was, our client got 80 months for being a felon in possession of a firearm. that he didn’t use. Just had it in his car.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 02:39
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Trump could get impeached, indicted, convicted of everything he’s charged with, and some old white man judge will sentence him to 26 months Hahahahahahahahaha you think Trump might go to jail.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 02:45
|
|
|
TRUMP
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 02:46
|
|
|
disjoe posted:Lol he let Manafort skate because Manafort is, apparently, a generally good person. The prosecution kept mentioning Manafort's lavish lifestyle and the judge basically told them to stop it because "being rich wasn't a crime" or something. My friend had a client get 5 years for stealing beer with a screwdriver (aka, a deadly weapon) in his pocket. sullat fucked around with this message at 06:16 on Mar 8, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 06:13
|
|
|
Lol whoops https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/03/paul-manaforts-otherwise-blamess-life-crime/584419/
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 12:12
|
|
|
Behind the bastards has a good couple eps on Manafort. He's a dictator enabler who shaped and grew the endemic corruption in Washington and arranged for his wife to be hosed against her will because he's a voyeuristic psycho cuck. Blameless life otherwise though, good outcome
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 12:15
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:Behind the bastards has a good couple eps on Manafort. He's a dictator enabler who shaped and grew the endemic corruption in Washington and arranged for his wife to be hosed against her will because he's a voyeuristic psycho cuck. Blameless life otherwise though, good outcome Listen, I gotta level with ya. Guy's a piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 13:37
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:Lol whoops HE IS LITERALLY WAITING TO BE SENTENCED FOR OTHER CRIMES AND THE JUDGE USED THE WORDS “OTHERWISE BLAMELESS LIFE”
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 13:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 03:56 |
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:HE IS LITERALLY WAITING TO BE SENTENCED FOR OTHER CRIMES AND THE JUDGE USED THE WORDS “OTHERWISE BLAMELESS LIFE” Yeah that Manafort guy is a pretty bad egg too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 14:01
|
|