Blue light attempted murder charges dropped

[IzZzy]

This constant besmirching between House and Paul is getting really old really quick.

It's theory verse practice, repeated nonstop.

Paul, you come across very arrogant for someone who, I believe, is just quoting textbooks?

 

[House]

yes a case that the State managed to bungle over a period of almost 5 years is a reason to defy recent precedent on the doctrine of murder
shot House your legal wisdom defies all imaginable grasp
</sarcasm>

Nope.

You absolutely have no criminal law experience. Again, if you are proven wrong the courts are bungling over everything with incompetent prosecutors and magistrates.

However, you are wrong again. I can point out more cases on the Internet where people were found not guilty when discharging firearms and not wounding people. I can point you to a couple of courts where exact same charges have been withdrawn.

 

[Paul Hjul]

No actually I have some criminal law experience and its all been very successful sans one acquittal, with a charge sheet I drew up draft, where despite the noble effort of the prosecutor the accused was acquitted but the evidence required for civil proceedings that are now being prepared.

 

[Paul Hjul]

This constant besmirching between House and Paul is getting really old really quick.

It's theory verse practice, repeated nonstop.

Paul, you come across very arrogant for someone who, I believe, is just quoting textbooks?

except we've established that House actually doesn't have the practice he claims - which is the problem.

 

[IzZzy]

But he hasn't claimed that? AFAIK he has been involved in criminal prosecution but nowhere did he say he was a lawyer. All of your posts I have read have resorted to being personal attacks, an "I'm always right" attitude for someone who is assume isn't admitted as an attorney? Or if so, isn't a practicing criminal lawyer?

Humility is key, and all of your posts for the last two weeks have been lacking that. For someone who espouses liberty, you have
been quick to shut down House's contrary views - many of which have actually been correct.

This isn't a peeing contest.

 

[House]

But he hasn't claimed that? AFAIK he has been involved in criminal prosecution but nowhere did he say he was a lawyer. All of your posts I have read have resorted to being personal attacks, an "I'm always right" attitude for someone who is assume isn't admitted as an attorney? Or if so, isn't a practicing criminal lawyer?

Humility is key, and all of your posts for the last two weeks have been lacking that. For someone who espouses liberty, you have
been quick to shut down House's contrary views - many of which have actually been correct.

This isn't a peeing contest.

Thank you IzZzy

It was not my intention to enter a peeing contest here

I know everyone is sick of all the blue light brigade incidents, but I am also of the opinion that the courts' decision was correct in withdrawing the attempted murder charges.

And yes, I probably should have expected to be challenged again by members...

 

[Paul Hjul]

But he hasn't claimed that? AFAIK he has been involved in criminal prosecution but nowhere did he say he was a lawyer. All of your posts I have read have resorted to being personal attacks, an "I'm always right" attitude for someone who is assume isn't admitted as an attorney? Or if so, isn't a practicing criminal lawyer?

Humility is key, and all of your posts for the last two weeks have been lacking that. For someone who espouses liberty, you have
been quick to shut down House's contrary views - many of which have actually been correct.

This isn't a peeing contest.

Go look at the history - look at his dealing with DJ and just about everybody. He has been caught lying recently in so many threads its beyond sensible. In fact have a look at the interactions with JvZ, House takes on the same line as Marine1.

Also compare discussions between different posters - you'll notice that any post on a topic prior to my having established a few things is inquisitorial and I state when I have a suspicion or something is an opinion or a possibility; I am verbose because I qualify things.

Its not House's contrary views that bother me, its the fact that he is 90% of the time materially wrong - for example in this thread his assertion is that it was the court that made "the right call" in a system such as ours it is of material importance that the court had no such opportunity. In the copyright threads he is advancing that downloading "pirated" material is legal but any form of upload is not. This is seriously not the case and somebody who believes as much and decides to download content to play in a shop will find themselves dealing with both the civil and criminal shakedown that is coming. His ramblings on the CoJ matter is particularly grotesque and MD4E has confirmed the legal position with other independent counsel. House is wrong and he persists in pretending that he has some magic inside knowledge. In the toll roads matter we similarly find absolute bull**** spewing.

But frankly the solution is very simple as I see it is simply to assume that the flak for dealing with Bull**** outweighs any value in not leaving it unchallenged. So thank you izZzy for making up my mind on this one. If House participates in a thread, regardless of how ludicrous, fraudulent or outright dangerous his spewing I simply will not comment for now. It gives me a bit of time to finish up some work I've been putting to the side for a while - and maybe the opportunity to fully formulate my fears on the direction the dti is steering things on the corporate veil.

 

[IzZzy]

Go look at the history - look at his dealing with DJ and just about everybody. He has been caught lying recently in so many threads its beyond sensible. In fact have a look at the interactions with JvZ, House takes on the same line as Marine1.

Caught lying? All I've seen is House postulating a view. I couldn't care less who takes on the same line as him. What does it imply if he takes the line of marine1?

Also compare discussions between different posters - you'll notice that any post on a topic prior to my having established a few things is inquisitorial and I state when I have a suspicion or something is an opinion or a possibility; I am verbose because I qualify things.

No actually I have some criminal law experience and its all been very successful sans one acquittal, with a charge sheet I drew up draft, where despite the noble effort of the prosecutor the accused was acquitted but the evidence required for civil proceedings that are now being prepared.

You having established a few things "is inquisitorial"? What exactly are you saying here? You have a tendency to opine rather than apply. I see from your Liberty Party SA website that you are "avoiding becoming a legal practitioner". How exactly then do you have criminal law experience? I am quite intrigued. Are you admitted as an attorney?

Its not House's contrary views that bother me, its the fact that he is 90% of the time materially wrong - for example in this thread his assertion is that it was the court that made "the right call" in a system such as ours it is of material importance that the court had no such opportunity. In the copyright threads he is advancing that downloading "pirated" material is legal but any form of upload is not. This is seriously not the case and somebody who believes as much and decides to download content to play in a shop will find themselves dealing with both the civil and criminal shakedown that is coming.

House may be wrong, and I really don't care if he is wrong, but I remain unconvinced by your arguments as to why you are right.

His ramblings on the CoJ matter is particularly grotesque and MD4E has confirmed the legal position with other independent counsel. House is wrong and he persists in pretending that he has some magic inside knowledge. In the toll roads matter we similarly find absolute bull**** spewing.

I've never heard of "ramblings" as being referred to as being grotesque. You seem to take his differing opinions personally.

But frankly the solution is very simple as I see it is simply to assume that the flak for dealing with Bull**** outweighs any value in not leaving it unchallenged. So thank you izZzy for making up my mind on this one. If House participates in a thread, regardless of how ludicrous, fraudulent or outright dangerous his spewing I simply will not comment for now.

This is an overreaction Paul.

 

[Paul Hjul]

Research and consulting
and when you are were researching in an area before it re flared up to become a going concern and it lights up you get some really interesting exposure to things; moreover I have an interesting family dynamic that has had me spending a considerable amount of time with prosecutors and magistrates - many of whom I have absolute regard for.

Its not an overreaction at all its formulating a decision on the basis of feedback I have been waiting to receive. For the last week or so I have been weighing up whether or not to completely disengage with House on this forum on the basis that it really isn't my problem if people are misled by him. The critical component is whether calling him on his **** would impair on my research and ability to interact with people who I respect on this forum. The fact that you don't care whether he is right worries me and sets a dangerous tone in the forum.

I'd be very interested in how you interpret the provisions of the Copyright Act because everybody who actually made direct reference to the Act has spoken in unison that House has no idea what he is talking about.

 

[IzZzy]

Research and consulting

So you aren't admitted then. Okay.

The fact that you don't care whether he is right worries me and sets a dangerous tone in the forum.

And I suppose you are never wrong at anything in life ever?

to become a going concern

A business is a going concern, opinions aren't.

I'd be very interested in how you interpret the provisions of the Copyright Act because everybody who actually made direct reference to the Act has spoken in unison that House has no idea what he is talking about.

Why? I am not an expert in intellectual property law and my opinion would carry no weight. The argument that an opinion is popular, therefore it must be right, is a fallacy.

 

[koeksGHT]

Oh you people..

Embrace you will always have different opinions. Shake hands, have a beer and go watch some sport or something you enjoy.

No sense rambling on a forum

Our law system does need some serious changes, or at least the people running them

 

[Paul Hjul]

no I am often wrong and have on several occasions returned to a thread to indicate that I was wrong.

moreover I am very often unsure in which instance I ask or set an IIRC or AFAIK or any other qualifier.

Popularity of an opinion is never a measure of the correctness or validity thereof but opinions backed by reason or authority ought to carry weight - a system built on reason rather than personage. I also have been assuming (and am therefore wrong) that in between NDAs and so in corporate matters on you would have picked up expertize on the Copyright Act: particularly in the context of protecting trade secrets.

 

[IzZzy]

I also have been assuming (and am therefore wrong) that in between NDAs and so in corporate matters on you would have picked up expertize on the Copyright Act: particularly in the context of protecting trade secrets.

The problem is that I would not profess expertise by incidental exposure to an area of law or by reading articles. I do not do it day in and day out like our IP Law Department. So while I may know what to do to contractually exploit IP, I would not give a legal opinion.

 

[Albereth]

Well why else would one fire a weapon at a person then, multiple times? What other intent is there, other than to kill them? And the outcome of hitting them is death. Any sane individual knows this...

So we are basically saying that the police are too incompetent to murder anyone?

 

[House]

So we are basically saying that the police are too incompetent to murder anyone?

Scary thing is, even though they are not policemen, if it was indeed their intent to shoot and kill the person, yes, then they are too incompetent to even kill a person....

 

[koeksGHT]

See if your favorate series has been cancelled

Just noticed

 

[House]

Just noticed

Thanks, fixed.