And we're back!
Started by Syt, December 06, 2015, 01:55:02 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 03, 2022, 07:21:30 PMIn BC a lawyer who receives information which was mistakenly sent to them must inform the other side and either return the information unread or destroy the information without reading it.
Quote from: Jacob on August 03, 2022, 03:36:56 PMApparently Alex Jones made about $800,000 day on Infowars.And apparently his lawyer accidentally handed over the contents of Alex Jones' phone to the Sandy Hook parents' lawyer.
Quote from: Jacob on August 03, 2022, 07:30:09 PMQuote from: crazy canuck on August 03, 2022, 07:21:30 PMIn BC a lawyer who receives information which was mistakenly sent to them must inform the other side and either return the information unread or destroy the information without reading it.In the clip circulating, the Sandy Hook Parents lawyer says (in court, when he reveals that he has the files) that Jones' lawyer sent him the files 12 days ago. When informed of it, Jones' lawyer did not assert privilege or otherwise object... so, apparently, 10 days later the evidence is in the clear to use.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on August 04, 2022, 02:12:38 AMThe text messages about the SH incident would presumably not involve communications with counsel and thus could not be clawed back as privileged. That certainly appears to be true of the one example used in Court. Although the inadvertent production of such material would be a blunder, the bigger question in my mind would be (as grumbler alluded to above) why such relevant evidence had been previously withheld.
QuoteJones offered that explanation that "I put Sandy Hook into the search function and nothing came up. I don't know, I'm not a tech guy."Compelling stuff.
Quote from: Jacob on August 05, 2022, 02:00:00 PMHypthetical question for the lawyers here:Let's say I make a statement under oath that I never sent an email in which I said "everyone on languish is a bunch of jerks" (and this is relevant to the case being tried).I have in fact sent such emails where I unequivocally state that I think "everyone on languish is a bunch of jerks." However, I do not share this during the discovery phase whether through incompetence or in an attempt to be clever.A little while later, my idiot lawyer sends all my email records to opposing council, including emails in which I make the statement I swore I did not make.Opposing counsel informs my idiot lawyer (as they're supposed to) and they - being more on the ball than Jones' lawyer - assert privilige.Am I in the clear? I have perjured myself and done whatever the technical term is for playing games with discovery by withholding relevant evidence... but officially nobody knows that. So am I safe, or is there a way this could come to light officially and with due process?
Quote from: Syt on August 03, 2022, 12:57:16 PMAnother one shared by my niece's husband.Bigger size: https://i.postimg.cc/hDwRLK1p/image.png
Quote from: Razgovory on August 05, 2022, 06:00:53 PMWhen someone posts pepe the Frog I automatically assume that person is a racist.
Page created in 0.029 seconds with 18 queries.