Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old May 29th 07, 10:35 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.analysis,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 417
Default John Hillery puts the jackass Brian P Lafferty, ESQ in his place

Brian Lafferty, ESQ:

"Other crimes, wrongs, or acts

Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove
the character of a person in order to show action in conformity
therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as
proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge,
identity, or absence of mistake or accident, provided that upon
request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall
provide reasonable notice in advance of trial, or during trial if the
court excuses pretrial notice on good cause shown, of the general
nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial.

I would respectfully suggest to you, Mr. Bachler, that you leave such
questions of standing and prior acts to those who have studied and
practiced law. To be blunt, as I sadly feel I must be given your
series of recent posts, you lack the legal education and background to
appreciate how inane some of your posts regarding law and justice have
become."

H. Vaughn:

"What I find objectionable about the "legal threats" ISN'T that they
are an assertion of the individual's rights.

What I find objectionable is that they are used to intimidate and
control the other party. We all know that even frivolous lawsuits can
cost thousands of dollars. Even if we feel that our positions are
correct, many of us would be intimidated if another person threatened
to sue us. IMHO, such comments don't belong in polite conversation.
While they may be "legal" -- I see such a comment from a lawyer as no
more than a threat from a school yard bully that he'll "beat you up".

If somebody's really just standing up for his rights, then he can
argue that point WITHOUT the threat. For example, tell another poster
that they aren't being fair, have made false accusations, or owe you
an appology, but don't threaten to sue them for libel."

John Hillery:

"I think most people would consider lack of legal knowledge less
reprehensible than abuse of one's legal education and status for
purposes of threats and intimidation. Speaking purely hypothetically,
of course."

  #2   Report Post  
Old May 30th 07, 12:44 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.analysis,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2006
Posts: 909
Default John Hillery puts the jackass Brian P Lafferty, ESQ in his place

On 29 May, 19:20, Ambassador wrote:
On May 29, 4:35 pm, wrote:





Brian Lafferty, ESQ:


"Other crimes, wrongs, or acts


Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove
the character of a person in order to show action in conformity
therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as
proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge,
identity, or absence of mistake or accident, provided that upon
request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall
provide reasonable notice in advance of trial, or during trial if the
court excuses pretrial notice on good cause shown, of the general
nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial.


I would respectfully suggest to you, Mr. Bachler, that you leave such
questions of standing and prior acts to those who have studied and
practiced law. To be blunt, as I sadly feel I must be given your
series of recent posts, you lack the legal education and background to
appreciate how inane some of your posts regarding law and justice have
become."


H. Vaughn:


"What I find objectionable about the "legal threats" ISN'T that they
are an assertion of the individual's rights.


What I find objectionable is that they are used to intimidate and
control the other party. We all know that even frivolous lawsuits can
cost thousands of dollars. Even if we feel that our positions are
correct, many of us would be intimidated if another person threatened
to sue us. IMHO, such comments don't belong in polite conversation.
While they may be "legal" -- I see such a comment from a lawyer as no
more than a threat from a school yard bully that he'll "beat you up".


If somebody's really just standing up for his rights, then he can
argue that point WITHOUT the threat. For example, tell another poster
that they aren't being fair, have made false accusations, or owe you
an appology, but don't threaten to sue them for libel."


John Hillery:


"I think most people would consider lack of legal knowledge less
reprehensible than abuse of one's legal education and status for
purposes of threats and intimidation. Speaking purely hypothetically,
of course."


I think that legal education has little place on the usenet.
Ilyumzhiov issues death threats over the usenet. What are you going to
do, sue FIDE?

Marcus Roberts- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


The problem with Brian P Lafferty, ESQ is his wife blows everybody but
him. So he's angry at the world and he's now taking it out of Terry
Winchester and John Hillery. What a ****ing scumbag. Anyone who uses
him for legal services is probably retarded.

  #3   Report Post  
Old June 1st 07, 08:28 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.analysis,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2006
Posts: 530
Default John Hillery puts the jackass Brian P Lafferty, ESQ in his place


"Ambassador" wrote in message
ups.com...
On May 29, 4:35 pm, wrote:

I think


That's debatable.

that legal education has little place on the usenet.
Ilyumzhiov issues death threats over the usenet. What are you going to
do, sue FIDE?

Marcus Roberts


So how is your lawsuit against FIDE going, Marcbob?


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
John Hillery puts the jackass Brian P Lafferty, ESQ in his place [email protected] rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 2 June 1st 07 08:28 AM
Why I'm voting for Sam jr rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 157 May 14th 06 02:29 PM
Why I'm voting for Sam jr rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 135 May 14th 06 02:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:16 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017