Page 13 of 68 FirstFirst ... 3456789101112131415161718192021222363 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 325 of 1698

Thread: Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #1

  1. #301
    Snaz's Avatar
    Snaz is offline "Heavens to Habeas Corpus" ~ Legal Eagle Lion
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Sunny Florida
    Posts
    1,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Snaz View Post
    Question for one of the lawyers on the board: If KC, by some miracle, decides to plead guilty to the murder of her child, doesn't that take the DP off the table? Isn't LWOP the most she can get, at that point?

    As I understand it, that is one of the reasons defendants will sometimes plead guilty at some point along the way; to avoid the DP.

    TIA!
    Quoted myself...LOL

    I'm actually referring to if KC changes her plea from 'not-guilty' to 'guilty'.... not if the SA offers her a plea.... I'm not convinced the SA would offer her a plea....

    So I guess what I'm asking is this: Can you please elaborate as to the procedure if KC changes her plea of her own accord and not with a plea offer from the State.

    Thank you!
    "Judge, Mr, Ashton is laughing at me..... " ~ Jose Baez, Closing Argument 7/3/11 (Paraphrased, of course!)

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Snaz For This Useful Post:


  3. #302
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    6,097
    Quote Originally Posted by Snaz View Post
    Question for one of the lawyers on the board: If KC, by some miracle, decides to plead guilty to the murder of her child, doesn't that take the DP off the table? Isn't LWOP the most she can get, at that point?

    As I understand it, that is one of the reasons defendants will sometimes plead guilty at some point along the way; to avoid the DP.

    TIA!
    Quote Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
    Thanks for this question Snaz, and I'd like to tag along with it - just to get the plea process clear in my mind once and for all. I believe you've answered this in the past AZ or Themis, but once more please?

    If and when the defense comes to the table with a guilty plea, doesn't the SA then begin a negotiation process, starting with the DP, since that's what's on the table and negotiate from there?

    In other words, the SA can say these are the conditions and the consequences we outline for a plea, and the defense can accept the conditions or no?

    Do you think the SA will drop the DP for LWOP for a guilty plea, if the defense approaches for said guilty plea? Or does the judge make this decision?
    Quote Originally Posted by Snaz View Post
    Quoted myself...LOL

    I'm actually referring to if KC changes her plea from 'not-guilty' to 'guilty'.... not if the SA offers her a plea.... I'm not convinced the SA would offer her a plea....

    So I guess what I'm asking is this: Can you please elaborate as to the procedure if KC changes her plea of her own accord and not with a plea offer from the State.

    Thank you!
    I don't believe it would take the DP off the table for KC to change her plea on her own (i.e., not as part of a plea agreement). My understanding is that the DP would still be on the table, and KC would have the right to have a jury decide the sentence.

    Certainly the DP would be off the table as part of any plea agreement, and I would think the State would be willing to discuss such an agreement in light of the circumstantial nature of the evidence and the uncertainties of proceeding before a jury.

    ETA: Any plea agreement would have to be reviewed and accepted by the judge.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94


  4. #303
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    16,017
    Quote Originally Posted by Snaz View Post
    Quoted myself...LOL

    I'm actually referring to if KC changes her plea from 'not-guilty' to 'guilty'.... not if the SA offers her a plea.... I'm not convinced the SA would offer her a plea....

    So I guess what I'm asking is this: Can you please elaborate as to the procedure if KC changes her plea of her own accord and not with a plea offer from the State.

    Thank you!
    Sorry for confusing you Snaz - because I meant the same thing - that is if Casey steps forward with a guilty plea without the State offering a plea deal first.

    I don't think the SA has a plea offer on the table at the present time - I remember there was one in the early days, but I believe they took it off the table when the DP was put back on.

  5. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to logicalgirl For This Useful Post:


  6. #304
    Snaz's Avatar
    Snaz is offline "Heavens to Habeas Corpus" ~ Legal Eagle Lion
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Sunny Florida
    Posts
    1,176
    Quote Originally Posted by logicalgirl View Post
    Sorry for confusing you Snaz - because I meant the same thing - that is if Casey steps forward with a guilty plea without the State offering a plea deal first.

    I don't think the SA has a plea offer on the table at the present time - I remember there was one in the early days, but I believe they took it off the table when the DP was put back on.
    No problem! I wasn't sure if I had made my first post clear about what I was asking!

    Thanks!
    "Judge, Mr, Ashton is laughing at me..... " ~ Jose Baez, Closing Argument 7/3/11 (Paraphrased, of course!)

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Snaz For This Useful Post:


  8. #305
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    9,045
    I asked this question on the Trial thread, but no one quite sure...
    If the Court is now paying for Casey's defense do they have to operate within a pre-set budget, or do they have a blank checkbook to depose any and everyone they want, obtain expert opinions Nationwide, from as many experts as they wish, until they find one they agree with...?

  9. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to ZsaZsa For This Useful Post:


  10. #306
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The beautiful roundabout of Context, Veracity, and JUSTICE
    Posts
    11,434
    Now that JS has outlined timeframes for depos, trial start date and even (seemingly) trial conclusion date... is there any way that the defense could stall? If we come up to the deadline for expert depos, say, and defense claims they just couldn't work in a good time for everyone to get together by that date, what happens?

    TIA and for all your help!
    You can hold back from the suffering of the world. You have free permission to do so and it is in accordance with your nature.
    But perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering you could have avoided.
    Franz Kafka

    Be not simply good. Be good for something.
    HDT

  11. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to ynotdivein For This Useful Post:


  12. #307
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    6,097
    Quote Originally Posted by ZsaZsa View Post
    I asked this question on the Trial thread, but no one quite sure...
    If the Court is now paying for Casey's defense do they have to operate within a pre-set budget, or do they have a blank checkbook to depose any and everyone they want, obtain expert opinions Nationwide, from as many experts as they wish, until they find one they agree with...?
    No blank checks...but in a capital case the defense will be given lots of leeway to get experts, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by ynotdivein View Post
    Now that JS has outlined timeframes for depos, trial start date and even (seemingly) trial conclusion date... is there any way that the defense could stall? If we come up to the deadline for expert depos, say, and defense claims they just couldn't work in a good time for everyone to get together by that date, what happens?

    TIA and for all your help!
    Dates can always be changed for good cause. As we get closer to trial, however, the judge will be less tolerant of delay.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94


  13. #308
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    377
    AZ, thanks for all your answers. Can you elaborate on how the defense is kept under control with their expenses, once KC is indigent. I understand that there are no blank checks, yet leeway. But how is that accomplished?? Does the state make a judgement call each time Baez submits an invoice for an expense incurred? Will we see Baez in court arguing each time the state doesn't cover one of his expenses? It could be a real headache for the state to decide what's reasonable vs not reasonable with a lawyer who's known to push the limits. KWIM? TIA for any insight you can provide!

  14. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to knt For This Useful Post:


  15. #309
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    6,097
    Quote Originally Posted by knt View Post
    AZ, thanks for all your answers. Can you elaborate on how the defense is kept under control with their expenses, once KC is indigent. I understand that there are no blank checks, yet leeway. But how is that accomplished?? Does the state make a judgement call each time Baez submits an invoice for an expense incurred? Will we see Baez in court arguing each time the state doesn't cover one of his expenses? It could be a real headache for the state to decide what's reasonable vs not reasonable with a lawyer who's known to push the limits. KWIM? TIA for any insight you can provide!
    The decisions should be made by the judge, not by the state.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94

  16. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to AZlawyer For This Useful Post:


  17. #310
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The beautiful roundabout of Context, Veracity, and JUSTICE
    Posts
    11,434
    In all today's "bombshell" discussion re: the purported GA affair, there was not much lawyerly input. I would be grateful to any of our WS legal eagles for sharing their thoughts about the veracity and/or implications of the latest news. Many thanks in advance!
    You can hold back from the suffering of the world. You have free permission to do so and it is in accordance with your nature.
    But perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering you could have avoided.
    Franz Kafka

    Be not simply good. Be good for something.
    HDT

  18. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to ynotdivein For This Useful Post:


  19. #311
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    a galaxy far, far away
    Posts
    206
    Quote Originally Posted by ynotdivein View Post
    In all today's "bombshell" discussion re: the purported GA affair, there was not much lawyerly input. I would be grateful to any of our WS legal eagles for sharing their thoughts about the veracity and/or implications of the latest news. Many thanks in advance!
    I at least don't feel I have enough information yet to have useful thoughts . What has come out so far is confusing. It appears that the sister who spoke to Kathi Belich, Skye Benhaida, has a twin sister, but I am still not sure from what I have read whether the (alleged) mistress of GA is that twin, or yet a third woman who is the sister of the twins.

    The apparent parallels *are* quite intriguing to me, but nothing more at this point.
    How we squander our hours of pain. -- Rilke

  20. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hell's Belle For This Useful Post:


  21. #312
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,644
    I haven't read this entire thread, and chances are I probably won't because it all goes so far over my head, but I just wanted to throw out a random question and see if anybody cares to answer off the top of their head:

    Is there anything that has happened so far in this case, from infidelities to unethical behaviors to lying to LE to whatever (so far), that sets precedence?

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gnatcatcher For This Useful Post:


  23. #313
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    a galaxy far, far away
    Posts
    206
    Quote Originally Posted by Gnatcatcher View Post
    I haven't read this entire thread, and chances are I probably won't because it all goes so far over my head, but I just wanted to throw out a random question and see if anybody cares to answer off the top of their head:

    Is there anything that has happened so far in this case, from infidelities to unethical behaviors to lying to LE to whatever (so far), that sets precedence?
    "Anything that has happened" by definition are facts (or allegations of fact).

    A precedent is a legal ruling, i.e. a judge making a decision about what consequences should arise from the facts that are ultimately determined to have occurred.

    So the answer to your question is, strictly speaking, no.

    If what you really want to know is whether the facts in this case are unique, I have a two-part answer: (1) all cases have unique aspects if you look at the facts closely enough but (2) there is nothing new under the sun.
    How we squander our hours of pain. -- Rilke

  24. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hell's Belle For This Useful Post:


  25. #314
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,794
    I heard today that KC stated that she has not sold her rights to her story, however I have not heard anyone ask if Caylee's story had been sold..... Who would have rights to sell Caylee's story? Could KC, JB, and AL have found a loophole, by telling the truth that there is no deal to sell Casey's story, however would she or JB be able to sell Caylee's story?
    JUSTICE IS COMING HALEIGH AND CAYLEE

    YOU GOT TO LOVE JUDGE STRICKLAND
    At it's core, the defense counsel's motion accuses the undersigned of being a "self aggrandizing media hound". Indeed. The irony is rich.

    Motion granted.

    Stan Strickland
    Circuit Judge

  26. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to butterfly1978 For This Useful Post:


  27. #315
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    6,097
    Quote Originally Posted by butterfly1978 View Post
    I heard today that KC stated that she has not sold her rights to her story, however I have not heard anyone ask if Caylee's story had been sold..... Who would have rights to sell Caylee's story? Could KC, JB, and AL have found a loophole, by telling the truth that there is no deal to sell Casey's story, however would she or JB be able to sell Caylee's story?
    I don't think there could be a story "belonging" to Caylee without her being here to tell it. IMO, anyone could attempt to tell whatever they think is her story. Many WS members have told snippets of what they think is the story through her eyes in their posts here.

    To answer your other question, there could be lots of loopholes in the statement "there is no deal to sell Casey's story." But wasn't JB asked a much broader question about deals relating to the case? I didn't watch the hearing, just read the updates. And, of course, a deal could be made down the road.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94

  28. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to AZlawyer For This Useful Post:


  29. #316
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,794
    Thanks AZ I started a topic about this a few hours ago, it seems to me like someone outside the Anthony's or the lawyers should have the rights to Caylee. She is the victim here and I do not see how the alleged killer of her could still have the rights to her, like her photos, videos even her name, such as the Caylee Marie name.. The Caylee Marie Anthony foundation uses her name and it trademarked or registered..... So even her story of her few years could be sold... and I dont like that idea.
    JUSTICE IS COMING HALEIGH AND CAYLEE

    YOU GOT TO LOVE JUDGE STRICKLAND
    At it's core, the defense counsel's motion accuses the undersigned of being a "self aggrandizing media hound". Indeed. The irony is rich.

    Motion granted.

    Stan Strickland
    Circuit Judge

  30. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to butterfly1978 For This Useful Post:


  31. #317
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,519
    snipped

    Anthony's custody status forbids her from having any contact with other inmates.

    http://www.wesh.com/news/22878005/detail.html

    What repercussions would there be, if any, for violating her "custody status"?

    ETA

    would this be it? I guess she could just get a reprimand. I think she should get some kind of sanction.


    from jail handbook on Pg 6 and 7 (sorry - it's a pdf and I can't link to it.)


    CATEGORY III: When an inmate is found guilty, any combination of the following sanctions may be imposed:

     Disciplinary confinement of up to twenty (20) days,
     Recommended loss of up to twenty (20) days of gain time earned or earned but not credited as of the date of the
    hearing,
     Restitution,
     Loss of one or more privileges for up to twenty (20) days,
     Confinement to quarters for a maximum of seven (7) days, and/or
     Written reprimand.

    One of the violations listed is

    3.26 Violation of mail, telephone, property or commissary regulations
    Last edited by Tiki; 03-19-2010 at 09:19 PM.

  32. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Tiki For This Useful Post:


  33. #318
    I thought JS gave JB a deadline (sometime in Feb) to come clean on the evidence he said would prove Casey didn't commit the crime. The time line came and went and I never heard another word. Did JB ever give this information? If not, why wouldn't JS enforce his order?

    Tks.

  34. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to jon_burrows For This Useful Post:


  35. #319
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Middle Florida
    Posts
    109
    I asked this in another thread, but I cant find it...

    I am wondering if Baez can be terminated by the state now?
    ...for any reason?

    Thanks in advance

    "The only one I have pictures of, is my daughter. I wish she was going to be there Great. Iím going to make myself cry, if Iím not careful. HmmÖ I wonder what Iím missing for lunch. If Iím not careful, I may end up enjoying my absence today. At least I will miss one crappy meal."

  36. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to OKaraMia For This Useful Post:


  37. #320
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    6,097
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiki View Post
    snipped

    Anthony's custody status forbids her from having any contact with other inmates.

    http://www.wesh.com/news/22878005/detail.html

    What repercussions would there be, if any, for violating her "custody status"?

    ETA

    would this be it? I guess she could just get a reprimand. I think she should get some kind of sanction.


    from jail handbook on Pg 6 and 7 (sorry - it's a pdf and I can't link to it.)


    CATEGORY III: When an inmate is found guilty, any combination of the following sanctions may be imposed:

     Disciplinary confinement of up to twenty (20) days,
     Recommended loss of up to twenty (20) days of gain time earned or earned but not credited as of the date of the
    hearing,
     Restitution,
     Loss of one or more privileges for up to twenty (20) days,
     Confinement to quarters for a maximum of seven (7) days, and/or
     Written reprimand.

    One of the violations listed is

    3.26 Violation of mail, telephone, property or commissary regulations
    I think you figured out the answer to this one on your own.

    Basically the jail administration gets to decide what's reasonable to enforce their rules. But I suspect they are more upset about the guard who helped pass the notes.

    Quote Originally Posted by jon_burrows View Post
    I thought JS gave JB a deadline (sometime in Feb) to come clean on the evidence he said would prove Casey didn't commit the crime. The time line came and went and I never heard another word. Did JB ever give this information? If not, why wouldn't JS enforce his order?

    Tks.
    Assuming that order was never modified, it would not be up to the judge to raise the issue. It would be up to the SA. Maybe the SA would rather just interpret the failure to file the disclosure as an admission that no such evidence existed.

    Quote Originally Posted by OKaraMia View Post
    I asked this in another thread, but I cant find it...

    I am wondering if Baez can be terminated by the state now?
    ...for any reason?

    Thanks in advance
    Terminated as in fired?? No. Paying costs (or fees) for an indigent defendant does not give the state control over the attorney-client relationship.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94

  38. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to AZlawyer For This Useful Post:


  39. #321
    Quote Originally Posted by jon_burrows View Post
    I thought JS gave JB a deadline (sometime in Feb) to come clean on the evidence he said would prove Casey didn't commit the crime. The time line came and went and I never heard another word. Did JB ever give this information? If not, why wouldn't JS enforce his order?

    Tks.
    Quote Originally Posted by AZlawyer View Post
    Assuming that order was never modified, it would not be up to the judge to raise the issue. It would be up to the SA. Maybe the SA would rather just interpret the failure to file the disclosure as an admission that no such evidence existed.
    Thanks for answering my question, I have one more concerning the subject. I keep hearing the lawyers say something like 'just for the record'. I'm assuming one of the reasons they say this is to lay the ground work if they have to appeal. Shouldn't the SA state 'for the record' that since JB never met his deadline imposed by the judge, the court concludes no evidence exists? It seems odd that JB can be given an order, not comply, then everyone seemingly ignores the non response. Couldn't JB come back later and say I had the evidence but forgot to comply and no one reminded me. It seems odd because there have been so many minor issues brought up 'for the record' but this one (IMO) is huge. He states he has evidence that his client is innocent, the judge says show it to me, then nothing?

  40. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to jon_burrows For This Useful Post:


  41. #322
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    6,097
    Quote Originally Posted by jon_burrows View Post
    Thanks for answering my question, I have one more concerning the subject. I keep hearing the lawyers say something like 'just for the record'. I'm assuming one of the reasons they say this is to lay the ground work if they have to appeal. Shouldn't the SA state 'for the record' that since JB never met his deadline imposed by the judge, the court concludes no evidence exists? It seems odd that JB can be given an order, not comply, then everyone seemingly ignores the non response. Couldn't JB come back later and say I had the evidence but forgot to comply and no one reminded me. It seems odd because there have been so many minor issues brought up 'for the record' but this one (IMO) is huge. He states he has evidence that his client is innocent, the judge says show it to me, then nothing?
    Even though the judge gave a specific disclosure deadline for this one type of evidence, in reality as long as the defense discloses it (if there is any such evidence) in enough time before trial for the State to respond to it, it will be allowed at trial. So it would just be a waste of the taxpayers' money to make a big deal out of this. Maybe the SA thinks the taxpayers' money is going to be wasted enough in this case.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94

  42. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to AZlawyer For This Useful Post:


  43. #323
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    313
    Now that Casey has been declared indigent, will the state take any money that is put into her jail account? Seems like, since she is using tax dollars for her defense now, that any assets (like $100.00 added to her account from time to time), should be used by the state for the defense money instead of KC using it for cocoa and chips.

  44. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Kathy1964 For This Useful Post:


  45. #324
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    249
    If a client tells a third party about atty-client info,is it still atty-client info?

  46. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to 5stars For This Useful Post:


  47. #325
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    6,097
    Quote Originally Posted by Kathy1964 View Post
    Now that Casey has been declared indigent, will the state take any money that is put into her jail account? Seems like, since she is using tax dollars for her defense now, that any assets (like $100.00 added to her account from time to time), should be used by the state for the defense money instead of KC using it for cocoa and chips.
    I really don't know the answer to this one. It completely makes sense that any $ in her account in excess of the daily jail charge SHOULD be given to the State to defray the cost of her defense. But I don't know if this will actually happen, unless the amount in her account becomes so large on such a regular basis that it is no longer reasonable to call her "indigent."

    Quote Originally Posted by 5stars View Post
    If a client tells a third party about atty-client info,is it still atty-client info?
    The privilege is usually waived if the client reveals attorney-client communications to a third party.

    "It would seem to me that June 16, 2008 was the last time that the victim was viewed by her grandparents. It became quite evident that from the OS of the Defense that the 16th was a date of great importance and that a so called time line of activities dealing with CA, LA, GA and ICA on the 16th and what, if any, activities took place on the 15th, 16th and 17th of June on 24 hour cycles would have been, at least, of a minimal requirement of review. I take it at some point you had a computer expert look at that data?" HHJP, 6/21/11
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...139910&page=94

  48. The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to AZlawyer For This Useful Post:


Page 13 of 68 FirstFirst ... 3456789101112131415161718192021222363 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Questions for our VERIFIED LAWYERS*~*~*NO DISCUSSIONS*~*~*
    By Kimster in forum Zahra Clare Baker
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 07-20-2011, 04:04 PM
  2. Replies: 458
    Last Post: 06-28-2011, 02:16 PM
  3. Legal questions for our VERIFIED lawyers on the board
    By Capri in forum Haleigh Cummings
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 09-12-2010, 04:36 PM
  4. Legal Q&A Answers from VERIFIED Legal professionals only
    By JBean in forum Somer Renee Thompson
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-17-2010, 02:40 AM
  5. Legal Questions
    By daisy7 in forum Byrd and Melanie Billings
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 09:18 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •