|
Tree Dude posted:I feel like Reynal is going to play dumb about most of this because Jones' adjacent people seem to struggle with specifics and details like she is asking for. It's going to make her furious. Fortunately she can just find him in contempt and fine or imprison him. Judges tend to hold attorneys to much higher standards than parties.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 16:32 |
|
|
teen witch posted:Also WOW Reynal looks like John Mulaney, I could kind of see that casting "Juror #1: what's new, pussycat? Juror #2: what's new, pussycat? Juror #3: what's new, pussycat? Juror #4 what's new, pussycat? Juror #5: what's new, pussycat? Juror #6: what's new, pussycat? Juror #7: what's new, pussycat? Juror #8: It's not unusual. Juror #9: what's new, pussycat?"
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:17
|
|
|
KitConstantine posted:When the judge calls your conduct as counsel requiring 4 disciplinary hearings 'shocking' and 'unprecedented' is that...good?? Yes, you can't have a guilty verdict without a precedent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:27
|
|
|
Cmoooon Pattis
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:33
|
|
|
Just woke up, we got a link handy? I wanna watch that judge shave mullet boy
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:35
|
|
|
Livestream went offline for me. Anyone seeing anything? Edit: This is where it should be. I think. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jd5GPfS1Pgs
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:35
|
|
|
Devor posted:Livestream went offline for me. Anyone seeing anything? Bless, it's also offline for me though... hopefully it gets fixed
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:36
|
|
|
Pyrtanis posted:Bless, it's also offline for me though... hopefully it gets fixed It just came back up, with No Proceeding streaming right now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:38
|
|
|
So is Norm running late? Spent too much time working on his stand-up?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:45
|
|
|
mojo1701a posted:"Juror #1: what's new, pussycat? GOD DAMMIT! That's a good bit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:46
|
|
|
Not sure if the stream is gonna go live or not but this reporter is in the room livetweeting https://twitter.com/_frankigraziano/status/1559914780206432257?t=n5uhgfiEF5joTJqkVbQZ9w&s=19 Edit: from the above twitter guy - sounds like the delay in getting the Pattis part started was that it took a bit to schedule Reynal's show cause hearings. Now they are scheduled for August 25th and 26th KitConstantine fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Aug 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 15:48
|
|
|
This reporter is also in the room https://twitter.com/_ShannonMiller/status/1559915788227805186 https://twitter.com/_ShannonMiller/status/1559917636737187840
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:08
|
|
|
It seems like it's maybe started but the stream hasn't? Or maybe they're still in preliminaries. Not sure
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:10
|
|
|
We're not all waiting for something that's 100% in camera, are we?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:13
|
|
|
Nothing on the stream here E: yep they ain’t streaming apparently
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:13
|
|
|
Seven character witnesses seems like a lot. Would those be witnesses supporting his personal character or his professional competence?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:14
|
|
|
teen witch posted:Nothing on the stream here Seems like people are on the stand. Theoretically it should be streaming. Not sure why it's not, kinda sucks. https://twitter.com/_ShannonMiller/status/1559920807786291200?s=20&t=BRR6QR2v621UvAG0r_7uJA
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:15
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/_frankigraziano/status/1559921759687778304
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:15
|
|
|
Has anybody asked or answered why those records were collected in the first place? I don't see why Jones' lawyers had them at all and given past performance I'm inclined to believe the worst possible interpretation by default.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:22
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:Has anybody asked or answered why those records were collected in the first place? I don't see why Jones' lawyers had them at all and given past performance I'm inclined to believe the worst possible interpretation by default. Very curious about this as well
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:24
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:Has anybody asked or answered why those records were collected in the first place? I don't see why Jones' lawyers had them at all and given past performance I'm inclined to believe the worst possible interpretation by default. In the very first part of the hearing which was streamed the judge mentioned that she had concerns regarding the records being used in the case and specifically made a protective order regarding their use. So everyone was at least aware that the CT attorney would have access.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:29
|
|
|
It also seems that the files were on an external hard drive that went from pattis to bankruptcy attorney and then to reynal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:32
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:Has anybody asked or answered why those records were collected in the first place? I don't see why Jones' lawyers had them at all and given past performance I'm inclined to believe the worst possible interpretation by default. When a plaintiff alleges injuries of a medical or emotional nature, then their medical and emotional states become relevant. The plaintiff himself or herself is putting their own medical records into play, so a judge is almost always going to order the plaintiff to turn over those historical medical records. The defendant usually does not want to even be there, so it's not their fault that the plaintiff puts that kind of thing into play. If I allege that your actions caused me emotional distress, whether or not I have a history of being diagnosed with mental illnesses is super relevant to both whether I was injured and the extent of the injury caused by you. If I allege the car accident caused me a back injury, then whether or not I have a medical history of other back injuries is super relevant. The defendant can look and see if I have a history of other back injuries. Like it hate it, that's the general rule.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:33
|
|
|
Are character witnesses something that'll help, given that there's footage of Pattis on InfoWars? I only know of his stand-up, so I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:33
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:It also seems that the files were on an external hard drive that went from pattis to bankruptcy attorney and then to reynal. That seems uhhhh pretty loving bad all by itself? If my private records were passed around to the point where it got to a lawyer I've never met in another state, I'd be pretty pissed off. Especially if, for instance, that person already had a giant, creepy private investigator's background check on me that they refuse to explain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:35
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/_frankigraziano/status/1559928192462364672 https://twitter.com/_frankigraziano/status/1559928866566799364 https://twitter.com/_ShannonMiller/status/1559930023267778563
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:50
|
|
|
Judge mad it sounds like And she was already mad
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:51
|
|
|
I'm guessing that sort of thing should have been entered beforehand?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:52
|
|
|
BigHead posted:When a plaintiff alleges injuries of a medical or emotional nature, then their medical and emotional states become relevant. The plaintiff himself or herself is putting their own medical records into play, so a judge is almost always going to order the plaintiff to turn over those historical medical records. The defendant usually does not want to even be there, so it's not their fault that the plaintiff puts that kind of thing into play. That's significantly less evil than I expected. Makes sense though and yeah I get it. Now I guess we wait for someone to get nailed to the wall for not keeping that locked down like they should have which, given the last few posts above this, sounds like a fleet of busses are backing up to see who gets thrown under what and when.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
"Medical records" and "external hard drive" go as well together as "medical records" and "cloud storage" unless everyone involved knows how to keep them encrypted at rest and how to keep them from leaking. I'd feel more comfortable if they were analogue on dead tree tbh.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:59
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:That's significantly less evil than I expected. Makes sense though and yeah I get it. Now I guess we wait for someone to get nailed to the wall for not keeping that locked down like they should have which, given the last few posts above this, sounds like a fleet of busses are backing up to see who gets thrown under what and when. Basically, discovery is very loving broad in most states. The exact nature/extent of your mental anguish is 100% relevant discoverable material. Said material is still confidential and must be protected, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 16:59
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:"Medical records" and "external hard drive" go as well together as "medical records" and "cloud storage" unless everyone involved knows how to keep them encrypted at rest and how to keep them from leaking. In this case we get both! Medical records were on the hard drive and then put onto dropbox or onedrive where they were then shared accidentally with Mark Bankston.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:00
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:In this case we get both! Medical records were on the hard drive and then put onto dropbox or onedrive where they were then shared accidentally with Mark Bankston. sounds like HIPAAAAA
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:06
|
|
|
Xakura posted:sounds like HIPAAAAA Probably not? Do lawyers sign onto HIPAA? I know there are weird non-medical edge cases for that, I've been one of them, but I don't know if that would apply to lawyers. If nothing else, they handle more confidential stuff in general so you'd think there'd be a wider rule.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
It's been a hot minute since I was an EMT getting lessons on HIPAA but from memory that sounds exactly like a for-reals HIPAA violation. Not the stupid CHUD anti-mask wallet card dumb poo poo going around. My recollection is "If you are in a position to receive, store, or handle third-party personally identifiable information, this poo poo's on you to secure and not discuss. Don't gently caress it up or here's X, Y and Z."
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
I don't know how the law is in the USA, but where I am you don't get to say "oh, this doesn't cover me" with medical data or data of similar brisance. If such data falls within your custody you have to take steps to secure it against misuse. If it does leak you have to show you followed best practices or your rear end is toast.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:I don't know how the law is in the USA, but where I am you don't get to say "oh, this doesn't cover me" with medical data or data of similar brisance. If such data falls within your custody you have to take steps to secure it against misuse. If it does leak you have to show you followed best practices or your rear end is toast. HIPAA is a law, with a scope, which is mostly surrounding doctor's offices. When you say HIPAA to a lawyer, they will tell you about the law, and why it doesn't apply. When many lay people say HIPAA, they are referring to general medical privacy. Lawyers are concerned with general medical privacy - they just don't get there through HIPAA
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:18
|
|
|
Mark said he destroyed the copies he had recieved as soon as he realized he had them, right? I'm assuming that's what Reynar was SUPPOSED to have done, but had kept ahold of them for ~reasons~ and whoopsiedoodle, passed them along?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:18
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:In this case we get both! Medical records were on the hard drive and then put onto dropbox or onedrive where they were then shared accidentally with Mark Bankston. It's my impression that Jones shuffled through so many lawyers that each time they tapped out they'd just send everything they had for the next guy to deal with. Like quitting a lovely job and leaving your work computer on for the next guy to figure out with the password scrawled on a post-it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 16:32 |
|
|
HIPAA relates to Covered Entities which are very specific. Medical providers, nursing homes, insurance providers etc. If you're a business and you store someone's doctor's note in their personnel file, that is not covered by HIPAA because the business is not a Covered Entity in 99% of cases. That doesn't mean that a business can share private medical records without legal consequence. They just aren't covered by HIPAA. People throw around that term way too much. The US does not have real privacy laws and even the CCPA (local California law) sucks hard compared to the GDPR. One big problem with HIPAA is that it manages the organizations that control data and not the data itself. NAL so assume all of this is wrong until I get corrected by a real lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2022 17:23
|
|