rcrocket wrote:I try jury trials for a living. I can assure you that if you were an expert testifying in your area of expertise before a jury, and it came out that you regularly insulted and maligned a major faith and its adherents all in the worship of the false god of anonymity, you'd be discredited and laughed from the stand. I can also say that those California lawyers who participate on this board with anonymous smears of known and living people put themselves in direct opposition to the promises they made when they were sworn in as lawyers.
Help me out here. I am not a lawyer, so I am confused about something you wrote. Why would an individual's derogatory statements about a religion and its adherents discredit them as an expert of an unrelated subject?
It doesn't.
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
rcrocket wrote:I try jury trials for a living. I can assure you that if you were an expert testifying in your area of expertise before a jury, and it came out that you regularly insulted and maligned a major faith and its adherents all in the worship of the false god of anonymity, you'd be discredited and laughed from the stand. I can also say that those California lawyers who participate on this board with anonymous smears of known and living people put themselves in direct opposition to the promises they made when they were sworn in as lawyers.
Help me out here. I am not a lawyer, so I am confused about something you wrote. Why would an individual's derogatory statements about a religion and its adherents discredit them as an expert of an unrelated subject?
It doesn't.
Maybe it would it Utah.
Damn! I just maligned a whole state. Hope I am never called to testify and an engineering expert.
"Sire, I had no need of that hypothesis" - Laplace
Damn! I just maligned a whole state. Hope I am never called to testify and an engineering expert.
LOL!
The ironic thing is, Bob is a California attorney, so I think you're safe in that regard.
Frankly, Bob's veiled threat to report Skippy to the California State Bar, and attempting to solicit her name via email, at the very least, seems like an unethical overature to me.
As far as attempting to "defame a brother lawyer", I think that Skippy may have some ammunition of her own. ;)
Last edited by _Yoda on Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
rcrocket wrote:Under the eyes of the law, at least, an attack upon one's religion is the same as an attack upon one's race.
Legal?
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
Oh yes indeed. I scour the internet for whatever the expert has written on any subject. I hire expert investigators to locate this stuff. Usually, in the cross-examination of experts, I have free reign. Particularly as to things they write. And, I find some pretty good stuff. Obviously, anonymous posts are hard to find.
The expert gets hit with a subpoena to produce all things he publicly has published That would include things like this Board -- anonymous or otherwise.
People like Guy Sajer are particularly at risk. I imagine he has or might testify as an expert -- it is not too difficult to figure out who he is.
Nobody's going to be all that interested in a poster liike me or Dr. Peterson who defends his faith. There's going to be a lot of fodder in a poster who denigrates the faith of another -- after all, religious classification is a protected class under the constitution. Under the eyes of the law, at least, an attack upon one's religion is the same as an attack upon one's race.
As far as whether the state bar would be interested in your posts, I work on state bar matters on occasion. If you would like proof in the pudding, email me your name. (It would be interesting to see how the state bar reacts to a complaint that a brother lawyer is publicly defaming another lawyer and that lawyer's religious beliefs. This is really rhetorical; I'd have no interest at all in retaliation for your buffoonery.)
If it's true, and anything an expert says about ANY subject, even completely irrelevant to the topic on which he/she is testifying, is "fair game" in the court, then our legal system is even more incompetent than I previously expected.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
beastie wrote:If it's true, and anything an expert says about ANY subject, even completely irrelevant to the topic on which he/she is testifying, is "fair game" in the court, then our legal system is even more incompetent than I previously expected.
It's not.
For instance, if I were to be defending a trial in a personal injury case, and my medical expert that I hired to refute the plaintiff's claims of injuries had a hobby that involved, say, refuting UFO conspiracists, there would be no way to introduce that as part of the plaintiff's cross-examination of that expert.
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
rcrocket wrote:Nobody's going to be all that interested in a poster liike me or Dr. Peterson who defends his faith. There's going to be a lot of fodder in a poster who denigrates the faith of another -- after all, religious classification is a protected class under the constitution. Under the eyes of the law, at least, an attack upon one's religion is the same as an attack upon one's race.
Those who are still members might be thought to have a right to complain if they so choose.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
rcrocket wrote:I contrast Dr. Peterson's faith, willingness to be a lightning rod and self-sacrifice of an academic career where money could really be made if he paid less attention to apologetics, on the one hand, to you -- sneering, smearing insults and mockery.
He sacrifices for his faith.
I feel a canonization coming on.
rcrocket wrote:Ah, yes, the "simpletons", those who are unworthy to clean the toenails of Rollo's feet. They were my ancestors in Europe just five generations ago. The dregs of humanity when they joined the Church. The aristocrats were glad to see them go. Since then, my ancestors can boast of two legitimate presidential candidates, the governors of several states, the directors of humanitarian efforts around the world, and enlightened parents whose children advance to higher education much more regularly than the rest of their peers.
Nothing burnishes the wounded ego like a little bragging and disdain, and I can see that you are above neither.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”