1999 Arlington crash jury award

"Richard Riley" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 08:40:42 -0800, Ron Wanttaja
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 10:18:37 -0600, "wes marso"
wrote:

EVERYONE FROM THE PRESIDENT TO THE TOWN Mayor IS A LAWYER.

Dubya has a history degree.

And an MBA.

As I think of it, it was the President who were lawyers that got
into
trouble

GW Bush - History, MBA
WJ Clinton - International Affairs, Law (impeached)
George Bush - Economics
Ronald Reagan - Economics
Jimmy Carter - Engineering
Gerald Ford - Political Science and Economics
Richard Nixon - History, Law (resigned)
Lyndon Johnson - History
John F. Kennedy - Iinternational affairs

Dwight D. Eisenhower - West Point

Well, let's flesh this thing out here just a little bit, get the
fabric on and the wings rigged.

Gerald Ford was indeed a lawyer. Founders Jefferson, Madison, and
Hamilton were lawyers. Abraham Lincoln was a lawyer.

Majorities of the House and Senate are NOT lawyers.

Nixon was an accessory and conspirator in major felonies, including
burglary, witness tampering, subornation of perjury, and obstruction
of justice; Clinton lied about a blowjob.
Nixon would surely have been removed from office if he had been
impeached; Clinton was tried on a bill of impeachment by a House and
Senate loaded with Republicans and overwhelmingly acquitted.

Clinton's problems were political in nature; Nixon's were criminal.

"Richard Riley" wrote in message
...
[...]

Clinton's [problem] stemmed from a sense of entitlement.

Pardon. But I think it was a sense of lust.

(" jls" wrote)
Pardon. But I think it was a sense of lust.



http://www.apfn.org/apfn/riady.htm
Interesting read. Stick with it.

Clinton is as corrupt as they come - BOTH of them!


Montblack

"Montblack" wrote

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/riady.htm
Interesting read. Stick with it.

Clinton is as corrupt as they come - BOTH of them!

If you only believe half of it, there is some scary sh*t in there!
--
Jim in NC

In article ,
"Morgans" wrote:

"Montblack" wrote

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/riady.htm
Interesting read. Stick with it.

Clinton is as corrupt as they come - BOTH of them!

If you only believe half of it, there is some scary sh*t in there!

A friend used to fly Clinton around when he was Gov. of Ark. When asked
why he doesn't write a book about it, he says, "I want to stay alive."

Might be overstating the case a bit, but I've found that the occasional
Repub. is a crook, but I find that many Demos. are absolutely EVIL. I'm
beginning to think that members of legislatures should be chosen by a draft
and be restricted to only one term. Especially they should not be able to
vote raises that took effect during their own terms. Also a death penalty
for bribes might prove useful. Such rules would make congress much more
effective and less crooked. Fact is though, it's too late, we already have a
ruling class in control.

HWB


"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news
In article ,
"Morgans" wrote:

"Montblack" wrote

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/riady.htm
Interesting read. Stick with it.

Clinton is as corrupt as they come - BOTH of them!

If you only believe half of it, there is some scary sh*t in there!

A friend used to fly Clinton around when he was Gov. of Ark. When asked
why he doesn't write a book about it, he says, "I want to stay alive."

"kd5sak" wrote in
et:

Might be overstating the case a bit, but I've found that the
occasional Repub. is a crook, but I find that many Demos. are
absolutely EVIL. I'm beginning to think that members of legislatures
should be chosen by a draft and be restricted to only one term.
Especially they should not be able to vote raises that took effect
during their own terms. Also a death penalty for bribes might prove
useful. Such rules would make congress much more effective and less
crooked. Fact is though, it's too late, we already have a ruling class
in control.

HWB

Personally I'd like to replace elections with a lottery and make the
proceeds from the sale of lottery tickets their sole source of funding.

If you don't want the office buy tickets for the candidate of your choice

How many people would buy a ticket for the oval office if they had a
lottery long shot at getting the job?

The prime qualification for holding the office now is to win a popularity
contest. How could pure chance be any worse?

If pure chance is too scary, how about holding a lottery for seats on the
electoral college and letting them elect the president without a popular
vote? I'm sure if it works for choosing a president we could scale it down
to the state level for congress critters and other elected pests.

Richard Riley wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 14:51:20 -0500, " jls"
wrote:


"Richard Riley" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 08:40:42 -0800, Ron Wanttaja
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 10:18:37 -0600, "wes marso"
wrote:

EVERYONE FROM THE PRESIDENT TO THE TOWN Mayor IS A LAWYER.

Dubya has a history degree.

And an MBA.

As I think of it, it was the President who were lawyers that got
into
trouble

GW Bush - History, MBA
WJ Clinton - International Affairs, Law (impeached)
George Bush - Economics
Ronald Reagan - Economics
Jimmy Carter - Engineering
Gerald Ford - Political Science and Economics
Richard Nixon - History, Law (resigned)
Lyndon Johnson - History
John F. Kennedy - Iinternational affairs

Dwight D. Eisenhower - West Point

Well, let's flesh this thing out here just a little bit, get the
fabric on and the wings rigged.

Gerald Ford was indeed a lawyer.

Oops, right you are.

Was Johnson (impeached) a lawyer?

...

Nixon was an accessory and conspirator in major felonies, including
burglary, witness tampering, subornation of perjury, and obstruction
of justice;

And more, including conspiracies to commit burglary and arson
have some out since his tapes have been published.

Clinton lied about a blowjob.

And suborned purjury, tampered with witnesses, and obstructed justice.

There wasn't enough evidence that he did any of those things
to even charge him. It isn't even possible to obstruct justice
in a lawsuit. That doesn't mean he didn't do the, but if he did,
he did them well (practice makes perfect).

The chief law enforcement officer of the US should not be doing any of
those things, no matter what party he's in.

Doh! Nor should anyone else.
The President of the untied States is not a law enforcement officer.

--

FF

Personally I'd like to replace elections with a lottery and make the
proceeds from the sale of lottery tickets their sole source of funding.

If you don't want the office buy tickets for the candidate of your choice

How many people would buy a ticket for the oval office if they had a
lottery long shot at getting the job?

The prime qualification for holding the office now is to win a popularity
contest. How could pure chance be any worse?

If pure chance is too scary, how about holding a lottery for seats on the
electoral college and letting them elect the president without a popular
vote? I'm sure if it works for choosing a president we could scale it
down
to the state level for congress critters and other elected pests.

Actually, my first thoughts were to fill all offices by a draft, pay no more
than expences
and make you come home when the term was up. If you couldn't steal yourself
rich the
lawyer types would definitely lack motivation to seek additional time in D.
C.

Harold
KD5SAK

We don't have a justice system.
We have a legal system.
We don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic.
(and to the democracy for which it stands?) NOT
JimV

On Jan 14, 11:18 am, "wes marso" wrote:
I have lived for sixty years in this , we call our home land .In that time
I have seen much in the ways of chipping at the wall of freedom .knowledge
is the first step . Morality is the second .Personal virtues falls . then
the rest is easy. Lawyers are the guardian people of the constitution today
.Every day people are too busy making a living to take time out of daily
life to fight anymore. All the Communist and socialist of the world have
converged in America and have changed our legal system to suite them . We as
Christians side step these issues because we despise confrontations . We
have been eaten by lions for Centuries . We are told from the pulpit to be
followers and forgive , turning the other cheek . Lawyers Make the laws ,
Lawyers change the laws, lawyers make possible the enforcement of the laws,
and it starts from the white house on down...EVERYONE FROM THE PRESIDENT TO
THE TOWN Mayor IS A LAWYER . And you still wonder why our justice system is
failing??? lookup the national lawyers guild and see under their
subsidiaries how many lawyers belong to the socialist movement.. ALL ofthem.."jls" wrote in oglegroups.com...



C J Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 12:40:10 -0800, jls wrote
(in article .com):

wrote:
A cool thing you might not know:

I got an idea you don't know much.

The NTSB reports are not
admissable (sic) in a brawl like this.

Just as the report of a highway patrol officer or city police officer
is not admissible in a court of law.

Can't cross examine the
NTSB, so they are out.

Not exactly true. If a witness who contributes to a NTSB report
appears and testifies in court, he can be cross-examined just like any
other witness.

Actually, NTSB reports are inadmissible by statute. This came up in a
recent
Cessna claim, too, and was reported by both AOPA and the Wall Street
Journal.
The idea was that keeping the NTSB out of court would make them more
'independent.' However, as you note, although the report is inadmissible,
you
certainly can introduce evidence used in the report. Thus, if NTSB has
witnesses who saw an aircraft buzzing cars, as in the Cessna incident,
then
you should be able to subpoena those same witnesses. That Cessna's
lawyers
did not do that I can only attribute to gross incompetence.

Leaves the plantiff to make
up anything they can sell to the jury.

Or someone like you to make up a lot of malarkey.

Gotta remember, the goal isn't to find the truth.

That's exactly what juries are for, to find the truth.

BWAHAHAHA! Right. Tell me another one. Juries do a poor job of finding
the
truth, and everyone in the legal biz knows it (or should -- but they will
not
always admit to it to outsiders).

Ah, then who is to find the truth, you? A judge? An LDS priest?

There are so many spectacular failures of
juries that one cannot even begin to catalog them all.

Name some.

That is some wild ranting if I ever heard it, coming from you even.
You get no credit howling sweeping generalizations. You got one bad
verdict, but it was cleared a bit by a verdict in Santa Monica. The
other one you don't know and weren't there. Give us some more. You
won't, of course. So you can't cite but one bum case to sully all the
rest.

Juries are typically
draw from the most gullible and least informed part of society --
deliberately.

Cite?

Attorneys do not want people who actually know something to
serve on a jury.

Are you calling the American people stupid?

I've seen a few stupid juries, 99% of the ones I've seen are right
smart.

That works great for Lizzie Borden and OJ Simpson, not so
well for aircraft manufacturers and airshow organizers.

Being incapable of getting fire-fighting equipment to the crash permits
a jury to find whether that constituted a failure to use due care by
the fly-in sponsors.
***********************************
In Young v. Young, Ann Eliza Webb Young sued Brigham Young for divorce
in 1873, claiming neglect, cruel treatment, and desertion (CHC
5:442-43). ...Claiming that Young was worth $8 million and had a
monthly income of $40,000, she asked for $1,000 per month pending the
trial, a total of $20,000 for counsel fees, and $200,000 for her
maintenance. Brigham Young denied her charges and claimed to have a
worth of only $600,000 and a monthly income of $6,000. More
fundamentally, he pointed out the inconsistency of granting a divorce
and alimony for a marriage that was not legally recognized." (Zion in
the Courts-A Legal History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints, 1830-1900 by Firmage and Mangrum, 1988, Univ. of Ill. Press,
p.249)

---- what C. J. is still smarting over, explaining some of his
hatred for law and lawyers. Since lawyers came to mormondom, they
have been universally hated. BTW, Eliza and a few of Brigham's other
*57* wives sued and collected. Ah, the perils of statehood.