Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests I'm not a lawyer, but I could play one on TV

good luck with everything...women are a drag...

In civil law in my state, there are TWO types of dismissals, those "WITH prejudice" (it's over, done, cannot be refiled) and those "WITHOUT prejudice", dismissed but NOT decided on the merits. Has your matter been fully litigated to a decision on the merits?

My point? If you THINK you know what you are talking about so confidently, mr. self-proclaimed lawyer equivalent, you might heed closely the old Abe Lincoln quote that goes something like: "an attorney that represents himself has an *ss for an attorney and a fool for a client."

Are you so pissed that you are incapable of even considering the chance you are wrong? And why are you so convinced your research is correct? How is it that you're so smart you can pick up in a few days what it takes an attorney with an IQ of 145 a couple years to do -- learning to do good reliable research?

With your mindset, you shouldn't even want you as a client.

Ask yourself what you are risking if it turns out you're wrong. Then WAIT AT LEAST A WEEK to get your perspective back before you start a silly, short-sighted, counter-productive thermonuclear exchange that may likely NOT be in your best interests to even win at.

Anyone can learn the law, even an engineer geek like me.

But learning to put arguements together, researching cases to seek what precidents have been set, etc is the real work of attorneys.

Clerks, (not meaning to belittle clerks) can look up the law and find related cases, but lawyers put it together into an argument.

TB
Probably needs a divorce attorney himself

Hey, PA 3L SVT, until you have the exact question asked of your criminal attorney (in writing preferred, so there is little chance of garbled communications issues over did you REALLY ask the right question or not), and get a WRITTEN opinion from that attorney, then a reading comprehension exercise does NOT address my concerns. If you missed something in doing your research, or if you did not quite ask the right question of your attorney, or if he misunderstood your question, or you misunderstood his answer, then you are looking to screw yourself.

Hetfield wants to agree with you, but by that, does he mean to vouch for the accuracy of your conclusions and the information on which you based them? He can't. And he shouldn't, in part because those issues are TOO EASY to get wrong. Similar to how you are now saying everything is final and decided in your criminal matter, my opponent said everything was decided and final in a civil dispute in Mossbrucker v. Greenfield Implement, 774 P2d 1267. When I came aboard in the case after trial, the trial court judge even agreed with my opponent. But I disagreed. And a panel of the court of appeals agreed with me.

So be my guest, stay on the surface with a cute reading comprehension exercise. Or think a bit more critically, and figure out that you're maybe not as safe as you thought. Hey, if you're happy with your conclusion, it's your shot to call and it's your life. But if you are seeking superficial validation about the quality of your legal research and soundness of your legal conclusions from guys on a car site, you have it.

PDX,

First off, anything you say about civil law HAS NO bearing on my particular case, as it is purely a criminal case. You can cite all the civil case law you want, it is irrelevant. You see, the Constitution (and especially the 5th Amendment) is interpreted more liberally for civil matters than it is for criminal matters, since in the majority of the time the government itself is NOT a party to civil matters but is ALWAYS a party to criminal matters.

Read up on the 5th Amendment as it regards to criminal proceedings before you start calling me a fool. Good old Abe once said: "It is better to be thought a fool in silence than to open one's mouth and remove any doubt."

Secondly, I have an (excellent) attorney and he has a model (and innocent) client. I research the law as it regards to me, and come to him to confirm my understanding and clear up any questions I have.

The very first time he talked to the DA he put this on the table: "It's either a nolle pros OR it is a trial." Her deals went from "11.5 to 23 months" (in Novemeber) to "probation and anger management counselling" (in December) to "plead to Disorderly Conduct with no penalty or costs imposed" (on Friday) to "hold a non-jury trial for Disorderly Conduct" (again on Friday). I turned them all down and told them I was ready for the last one. Heck, I even dared the DA to try me on Simple Assault by demanding a jury trial - she blinked and I knew I won by asking for the Summary Trial (no right to a jury there for me).

The DA never discussed the nolle pros with us prior to requesting that entry of the trial judge. She just kept pushing to see if he was serious, and we were. He agreed, and I got what I wanted - a non-guilty judgement with prejudice attached.

Third, I did ask that exact question of my attorney after court on Monday. And we discussed my plans to file a Private Criminal Complaint. We also discussed ridiculous hypothetcals related to any criminal culpability I had remaining from this incident.

Fourth, I have had seven months to think about what to do when this day came (and I knew it would).

Finally, I wasn't coming here to flaunt any type of mad legal skillz I have. I wanted to keep the people (like hetfield for instance) that knew about my situation informed that things were finally turning my way.

The truth will set you free - those words had no greater meaning for me than on Monday in Courtroom D of the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas.

Regardless of all this trivial BS regarding his criminal complaint, the positive here is that Jason is free. For those that don't know him, he has always been willing to lend a hand to anybody who needs it and has probably been one the most knowledgable and helpful CEGers that I have met.

good luck bro, seriously, kick some arse n take some names