|
Parking tickets go to a vehicle. Moving violation tickets go to a driver.
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 13:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 04:54 |
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Parking tickets go to a vehicle. Moving violation tickets go to a driver. How's the vehicle going to pay it, it doesn't have a job and is likely too young to stand trial.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 14:34
|
|
|
Isn't the asset itself the defendant in civil forfeiture cases? It can't defend itself, cops get a brand new delivery truck.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 14:57
|
|
|
Happiness Commando posted:Isn't the asset itself the defendant in civil forfeiture cases? It can't defend itself, cops get a brand new delivery truck. But mooooom I wanted a tank!
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 15:22
|
|
|
Happiness Commando posted:Isn't the asset itself the defendant in civil forfeiture cases? It can't defend itself, cops get a brand new delivery truck. I can't believe you just ruined my sense of joy and wonder at US case titles like United States v Approximately 64 Dogs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 15:33
|
|
|
Nothing will ever remove my sense of joy and wonder at in rem case names. I’m just sad I can’t draw, because in my mind I see the Statue of Liberty and Uncle Sam at the prosecutor’s table, and approximately 165 cans of mackerel (or whatever) at the defendants’ table.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 16:16
|
|
|
Organza Quiz posted:I can't believe you just ruined my sense of joy and wonder at US case titles like United States v Approximately 64 Dogs. So, goon lawyers, is this the only thing that would make you pause if someone were to ask "so, I should never go to law school?" Edit: gently caress, never mind, you're not actually trying 64 dogs. gently caress law School.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 18:26
|
|
|
If one wanted to give one's children the proceeds from a piece of property in the most tax-free way possible, would the best way to do that be through a trust, or could one just sign over the property and it would get re-basised, like with inheritance (drive googling seems to indicate this wouldn't be the case)? Would it be best to talk to an accountant,a tax attorney, or a probate attorney about this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 18:34
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:If one wanted to give one's children the proceeds from a piece of property in the most tax-free way possible, would the best way to do that be through a trust, or could one just sign over the property and it would get re-basised, like with inheritance (drive googling seems to indicate this wouldn't be the case)? Would it be best to talk to an accountant,a tax attorney, or a probate attorney about this? Pay an estate attorney in your local town
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 18:35
|
|
|
For the third time in under 10 years I've been selected for Jury Duty but this is the first time they're actually telling me to show up. What should I expect and should I bring a book RealFoxy fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Aug 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 21:54
|
|
|
What to expect depends on lots of factors but yes bring a book and expect the potential for waiting a long time doing nothing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 22:56
|
|
|
null_pointer posted:So, goon lawyers, is this the only thing that would make you pause if someone were to ask "so, I should never go to law school?" United States v. Article Consisting of 50,000 Cardboard Boxes More or Less, Each Containing One Pair of Clacker Balls United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2021 23:11
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins Why didn’t they just say “about 64 killerbites”
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2021 02:24
|
|
|
Bad Munki posted:Why didn’t they just say “about 64 killerbites” 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2021 04:11
|
|
|
Bad Munki posted:Why didn’t they just say “about 64 killerbites” No
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2021 07:37
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2021 15:05
|
|
|
Now that I've attended it's a Federal Grand Jury for 18-24 months. 8am-5pm on the days we're called in, potentially up to once per week because there was a backup due to COVID. No downtime other than lunch unless a witness is running late which only happened once and that was the only time we got to stretch our legs outside of lunch. No cell phones or books either. Hell, they took our watches (Non smart-phone watches) and there's no clock inside the room so we're just sitting there 8 hours a day listening to federal crimes in very uncomfortable seats.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2021 22:34
|
|
|
Yeah grand jury is different than petit (trial) jury. Maybe a federal defender or better yet, a federal prosecutor can clue you in better but I doubt any AUSAs are browsing this thread. At least not to post anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 00:27
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Yeah grand jury is different than petit (trial) jury. Maybe a federal defender or better yet, a federal prosecutor can clue you in better but I doubt any AUSAs are browsing this thread. At least not to post anyway. Most of the first day was orientation, in about two and a half hours we went through 7 different cases. Most of them seemed like just slam dunks but we couldn't hear the other side of the story so  It was fairly interesting but hot drat, 18 months of this
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 02:59
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:What to expect depends on lots of factors but yes bring a book and expect the potential for waiting a long time doing nothing. I suppose this is a legal question (and I assume the answer comes with a healthy dose of “it depends on where you are”), but presumably people are allowed to have their phones nearby when waiting around for jury duty? Or do you have to lock them up or something before going to the waiting room to grow old? If phones can be in there, what’s stopping someone from taking some variety of portable video game or music player, etc.? Or is that a thing people do?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 03:57
|
|
|
RealFoxy posted:No cell phones or books either. Hell, they took our watches (Non smart-phone watches) and there's no clock inside the room so we're just sitting there 8 hours a day listening to federal crimes in very uncomfortable seats. this seems like cruel and unusual punishment, what did you do to get this sentence?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 05:08
|
|
|
Sonic Dude posted:I suppose this is a legal question (and I assume the answer comes with a healthy dose of “it depends on where you are”), but presumably people are allowed to have their phones nearby when waiting around for jury duty? Or do you have to lock them up or something before going to the waiting room to grow old? Some larger courts with several jury trials going on in a week bring in a venire pool (everyone called for jury duty) of a few hundred people, and you sit in a waiting room until being randomly selected to a smaller panel for voir dire (where the lawyers and judges ask questions and pick the actual jury from the panel) in an actual case. In the waiting room you can read and do whatever, in the courtroom you can’t have a phone or book. Smaller courts may only have one jury trial happening and so they bring the whole venire (which might only be 60-80 people) into the courtroom, then put 20 or so in the box for voir dire at a time—but since everyone is in the courtroom the whole time, no phones etc. In any case individual courts almost always have sole discretion to decide how to run things, so it’s very location specific. Grand jury is different—no voir dire, no panels, no courtrooms. Just a DA and whatever witness(es) they want to get an indictment from, case after case.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 11:43
|
|
|
Are jurors allowed to take notes, or do they need to operate essentially from memory during deliberations? I know they can (maybe only limitedly?) request stenography be re-read while they're sequestered
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 11:52
|
|
|
mercenarynuker posted:Are jurors allowed to take notes, or do they need to operate essentially from memory during deliberations? I know they can (maybe only limitedly?) request stenography be re-read while they're sequestered You get a blank notepad that you can take notes on. These are destroyed at the end of the trial. You can ask to see evidence while deliberating. Usually you can’t have testimony re-read to you (it’s not transcribed yet anyway). You can send questions to the judge, but you may or may not get an answer other than “continue deliberating based on the evidence and testimony presented to you during the trial.” “Sequestered” is when a jury has been ordered to keep apart from family and the public during the whole trial to avoid outside information tainting them. The OJ Simpson jury was sequestered. “Deliberation” is when the jury retires to a back room at the end of the case to discuss and render a verdict. Sometimes deliberation lasts overnight, but if the jury has not been sequestered then you can go home and come back in the morning to continue deliberations. Usually juries prefer to hammer it out as long as it takes so they don’t have to spend another day in court, but sometimes in very complex cases it takes a long time to figure everything out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 11:59
|
|
|
sullat posted:this seems like cruel and unusual punishment, what did you do to get this sentence? The first time (before lunch) I accidentally got my smart watch through because they thought it was just something on my car keys, the second time they caught it and they kept it up front in a box. They let the women take their purses in and don't go through them much, just make sure there's no weapons in them thru the x-ray. For men we had to take everything out of our pockets and take our belts off before we could go in. Kinda weird and I think a couple women even had their phones in the room because you could hear one going off every once in a while
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 12:22
|
|
|
Sequestration is rare, but how rare? How many sequestered juries are there in all of the U.S. in one year? I see that it’s required in some states for some charges. That must be the dominant share, right? Platystemon fucked around with this message at 12:50 on Aug 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 12:41
|
|
|
RealFoxy posted:Now that I've attended it's a Federal Grand Jury for 18-24 months. 8am-5pm on the days we're called in, potentially up to once per week because there was a backup due to COVID. That's quite a long commitment. When I got summoned for a Federal Grand Jury, I was on call for 6 months, but didn't have to go in at all. On the other hand, I knew a couple people who were on a state grand jury and it was every day for a month.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 13:53
|
|
|
Every jury I've served on in Houston has specifically forbade note taking. We were told we could request to see evidence or have testimony read back during deliberation, but no notes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 14:05
|
|
|
Thats seems nonsensical to me. Wouldn't you want the jurors to have as much as possible to remember with, especially in life or capital cases? I would be in hell with my ability to remember exactly jack poo poo ever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 14:38
|
|
|
D34THROW posted:Thats seems nonsensical to me. Wouldn't you want the jurors to have as much as possible to remember with, especially in life or capital cases? I would be in hell with my ability to remember exactly jack poo poo ever. IANAL, but I bet it's because notes aren't evidence, evidence is evidence, and if you take the wrong notes you can arrive at a conclusion not supported by the evidence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 15:09
|
|
|
OPAONI posted:IANAL, but I bet it's because notes aren't evidence, evidence is evidence, and if you take the wrong notes you can arrive at a conclusion not supported by the evidence. I've been on two (civil) juries in GA and IL and I had my notes with me during deliberation
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 15:37
|
|
|
SlapActionJackson posted:Every jury I've served on in Houston has specifically forbade note taking. We were told we could request to see evidence or have testimony read back during deliberation, but no notes. Did they say why? Edit: oh hey new posts OPAONI posted:IANAL, but I bet it's because notes aren't evidence, evidence is evidence, and if you take the wrong notes you can arrive at a conclusion not supported by the evidence. And if you don't remember something correctly because you couldn't take notes... Like, I could see someone making that argument, but it's a completely nonsensical one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 15:43
|
|
|
I can see an argument that jurors should be watching the witnesses properly and absorbing the evidence instead of trying to write and watch and listen at the same time, but you would think having so many of them would cut down on the risk of something important being missed. That's interesting about transcripts not being completed by the time a jury is deliberating, I used to be a court transcriptionist and we had extremely strict deadlines for criminal trials (ie the only jury trials here) which essentially meant that everyone had the full day transcript within hours of the end of each day of the trial.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 15:58
|
|
|
Yeah, in CA our jurors got readback.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
The thing that I always used to think about with the transcripts was we weren't meant to transcribe half words. I imagined some sort of courtroom drama where a witness started saying something incriminating and caught themself halfway through and it turning into super important evidence that didn't make it into the transcript...
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 16:15
|
|
|
Our trials are audio recorded, and jurors can listen to playback of whatever they want. Transcripts only get done by the court system for appeal. All jurors can take notes. Some judges even let the jurors write down questions they have for a witness and after the attorneys are done those written questions get posed by the judge. That's actually a super great practice in my opinion. Technically transcripts are hearsay. They are an out of court statement of the transcriptionist offered for the truth of what the transcriptionist heard. They are also statements created specifically for the purposes of litigation, so prosecutors can't even use them. Transcriptionists also have exactly zero requirements for qualifications and do not submit their transcripts under any sort of oath or affirmation. An unscrupulous attorney can and will pay his or her 16 year old kid to transcribe something, and maybe pay an extra $50 if the transcript gets flubbed in favor of their client. I have seen this happen three times in my career - all three times wildly in favor of the defendant in a criminal trial in transcripts prepared by attorneys with a history of wild dishonesty. I do not trust transcripts. BigHead fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Aug 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 16:43
|
|
|
I worked for a company that had a contract with the courts and we were regularly audited for accuracy and the company would be fined if there were more than a certain number of mistakes/typos per page. It was a genuinely stressful job sitting there going "poo poo poo poo poo poo was that 'a' or 'the' I just heard" or whatever, multiple times a day. It makes sense that in a jurisdiction where transcripts aren't given to jurors, they're done ad hoc and are unreliable. Mind you in my current job we do our own transcripts and have the transcriptionist provide them under affidavit that it's an accurate record of what they heard, but the other side has access to the same audio recordings of the hearings we do and they're perfectly capable of objecting to the accuracy of the transcript if they want to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 16:55
|
|
|
Note taking is allowed some places and not others Since you are allowed to see the evidence and testimony I don’t see the point really
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 17:56
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:Did they say why? It's been a while, but the gist was that they wanted us to pay attention to all the testimony holistically, rather than worry about detailed note taking. I'm sure they also didn't want you unduly influenced by the copious notes you took early (prosecution phase) and lack of notes after you got bored (defense phase)
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 18:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 04:54 |
|
|
Organza Quiz posted:I can see an argument that jurors should be watching the witnesses properly and absorbing the evidence instead of trying to write and watch and listen at the same time, but you would think having so many of them would cut down on the risk of something important being missed. It's pretty well attested scientifically that taking notes makes you remember things better even without the actual notes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2021 18:33
|
|
