"Mike Murray" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:25:25 -0400, "Chess One"
wrote:


I've got a copy of the court order directing no hot saucing.

Hey Deuce!

Is that a pro-forma injunction requiring the court to record it, and any
more than that? Does it indicate any necessary truth in the accusation?

Come on line-Judge, honesty time, or is the truth above you?

))

So, Phil, you're suggesting the guardian ad litem made it up? Do you

Murray, you have declared you have no interest in other than Paul Truong
being the perp, by virtue of the fact that you will not look candidly at
existing evidence, and here intercede because the Line Judge is directly
challenged to his legal representation - and has put his foot in his mouth.

know what a guardian ad litem does ? Or this he/she just one more
stooge of the kangaroo court you keep fretting about?

You mean the Line Judge should not be required to answer his public
proposition - which would render it merely a supposition, and this
would/would not, make it a kangaroo court a-la-McCarthy?

PI

Phil Innes

And I've heard about it directly from the kid's father who was in court
when the guardian ad litem brought it to the court's attention. Facts.
Not assertions.