It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I Really Want to Know.

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

What would you have done?

Charge based on hearsay? It's enough to get a case, not a conviction. Let's say it does, is that now the new bar for qualifying evidence?

Could I then take you to court because I claimed you stole from me and get a few people to go along with it? It sets a dangerous precedent.

I'm not for sexual assault of any sort but lets not pretend that thousands of varying cases go unsolved or won't even make it to a courtroom daily.




posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:17 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Ah. But if the case proceeds it means that depositions (statements, under oath) will be required. It means that "he said/she said" enters a different realm. We will find out who is willing to lie (or not) under penalty of law. It means "discovery."

Do you think that the real reason Trump's lawyers don't want this case to proceed is because he is too busy. At Mar a Largo. Golfing? (You've got to admit, that was a good one.)

edit on 12/7/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: carewemust

You missed the point. It's not about options but how to prove it.


I was responding to the two Phage questions:
"Does it matter?" and "To Whom?"

His OP was multi-faceted.


You replied to me.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I think all of this “he grabbed my @$$ 20 years ago “ stuff is nonsense.

If it wasn’t rape, or an authority figure RETALIATING after being refused.. it is called a failed come on that made everyone feel uncomfortable..



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Yes, we will go from hearsay to testimony. However, as you know, before we can get there, there needs to be charges filed. Criminal. I'm not sure how civil cases work in such regards. (Nor an expert on criminal either)




Do you think that the real reason Trump's lawyers don't want this case to proceed is because he is too busy. At Mar a Largo. Golfing?


Trumps lawyers know as well as I assume you do that he is busy being the PotUS. If the judge decides they have a legitimate case, then on with it.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:20 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI


What would you have done?


Don't know.


Charge based on hearsay?
If there is a legal basis for a (criminal) charge, yes. If not, no.


Could I then take you to court because I claimed you stole from me and get a few people to go along with it?


If there is a legal basis.
edit on 7-12-2017 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:21 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

If she was 14 at the time?
Hell, if she was 18 at the time?

(Yes, I shifted gears. But not topic.)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krakatoa
Legally, it is not harassment if the "victim" does not tell the "perpetrator" it is unwelcome at least once. Silence breeds acceptance.



Why did the lady who had her boobs groped by Senator Franken, whilst she slept, not say anything until now? Did someone recently show her that damning photograph for the first time?



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:22 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI




I'm not sure how civil cases work in such regards. (Nor an expert on criminal either)

I've been involved with a civil case.
A deposition is a deposition. Under oath.


If the judge decides they have a legitimate case, then on with it.
That is not the argument of Trump's lawyers.

edit on 12/7/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Ok, 'if there is legal basis.'

How long do you think it would take to fill court dockets with (even more) frivolous cases based on hearsay and a couple witnesses? What do you think would be the ratio in validity?



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

At what point is the deposition taken? Before or after an arraignment?



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:25 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

The legal basis is law. What charges can be brought under the law.

Frivolous suits are not under a legal basis, hence why they are dismissed.

Eta: I'm talking criminal, not civil insofar as legal basis of law.
edit on 7-12-2017 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI



At what point is the deposition taken? Before or after an arraignment?


You are confused.
A civil case does not involve arraignments.
edit on 12/7/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:33 AM
link   
I am confused. Liqui is talking criminal and Phage is talking civil

Phage: Jones had Lewinsky. It didn't pan out so well, no? While Zervos may very well have precedent to move forward, I guess we'll have to see what the judge says.

Liqui: It's not what you know, it's what you can prove. Even testimony, or a deposition needs some corroboration with other evidence. I would think anyway.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

The key differences is that some have denied the allegations while some have admitted the allegations.

The question you might ask is; "Is there innocence until guilt is proven"?

Or has that gone by the way side?

I'll admit, I was ready to hang Moore. The allegations were that creepy. Trump? Where are the accusers? Why isn't that getting any air time? It's not like the media likes Trump.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:37 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI




I would think anyway.


I have been party (as a witness) to a civil proceeding. Evidence is good, when available. Beyond that...have you ever watched Judge Judy? That's not a joke. The judge decides who is lying.

Trump does not want this case to go to trial, and not because he's too busy. If the judge says "ok, let's do this", Trump will settle. In the words of a famous man, "Believe me."



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Trotting them out at election time suggests a political ploy, not a plea for justice.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:41 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Um. It's not exactly election time. Except for Alabama.
What did Ailes have to do with it? O'reilly? Weinstein?



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I don't doubt any of that....well maybe the Judge Judy bit. I just don't think personally that she has that strong of a case. It's not like Trump was a nobody when it happened and I do think the judge will take that into consideration.

Why do you think they are downplaying Gloria Allreds activity in this? You know, a DNC delegate? Then expect anyone with half a brain to not think that this is political?



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:43 AM
link   
I smashed my thumb with a hammer 125 years ago.
Now I want to sue hammers.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join