Spring forward.
To delete this message, click the X at top right.

General Law and Lawsuits

Post Reply
User avatar
Azastan
Posts: 1765
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:48 pm
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#226

Post by Azastan »

Foggy wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 12:51 pm Honestly, it wouldn't hurt to call the DA's office if you want to volunteer to testify. If they talk to you, you might even suggest you'd be a better witness than the vet, because you saw the horse for many more hours than the vet. But be careful, because prosecutors are not easily persuaded that they might not want to call a witness. They tend to want overkill. The best you can realistically hope for is that IF you testify about the condition of the horse and the DA really thinks she doesn't need the vet, maybe she can release the vet.

But if the prior owner was abusing the horse, maybe your testimony could be really helpful to the DA. :shrug:
The DA didn't call my vet, the defense attorney did. That's why I am wondering if I should contact the DA's office.
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17654
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#227

Post by raison de arizona »

Azastan wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 1:35 pm
Foggy wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 12:51 pm Honestly, it wouldn't hurt to call the DA's office if you want to volunteer to testify. If they talk to you, you might even suggest you'd be a better witness than the vet, because you saw the horse for many more hours than the vet. But be careful, because prosecutors are not easily persuaded that they might not want to call a witness. They tend to want overkill. The best you can realistically hope for is that IF you testify about the condition of the horse and the DA really thinks she doesn't need the vet, maybe she can release the vet.

But if the prior owner was abusing the horse, maybe your testimony could be really helpful to the DA. :shrug:
The DA didn't call my vet, the defense attorney did. That's why I am wondering if I should contact the DA's office.
Do it. If nothing else, it will alert the DA to what to expect in court.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9554
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#228

Post by Foggy »

Azastan wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 1:35 pm The DA didn't call my vet, the defense attorney did. That's why I am wondering if I should contact the DA's office.
Ah, I needed moar covfefe.

What can the defense show with the records? That the horse didn't need much treatment, thus it was not abused? Even if the records don't show much, if the vet saw abuse and can testify about it from her own personal observation, then yeah, that's going to be the most powerful testimony the prosecution can get (but I'd put both of you on the stand if'n I was the DA :mrgreen:).

But bear with me here: If the vet is going to be a powerful witness against the defendant, and she REALLY doesn't want to testify, even to help convict the bad guy, then she should call the defense attorney and say "You REALLY don't want to put me on the witness stand," with a few choice details that will make the defense offer her a vacation in Ukraine instead. :mrgreen:

That way, maybe neither of you testify, but such is life. Otherwise, you pretty much have to obey a subpoena.
Out from under. :thumbsup:
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9554
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#229

Post by Foggy »

However, if the records don't show much and you saw a lot more evidence of abuse than the vet did, then you definitely should consider calling the DA, in the interest of justice.
Out from under. :thumbsup:
jcolvin2
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:56 am
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#230

Post by jcolvin2 »

Azastan wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 9:48 am She called and was told that she could NOT testify remotely.
What county is the case in? My impression is that most Washington State courts have allowed remote testimony because of the coronavirus. I'm not sure that is still the case, but it wouldn't hurt to check whether she received correct information.
User avatar
Azastan
Posts: 1765
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:48 pm
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#231

Post by Azastan »

Foggy wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 2:31 pm
Azastan wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 1:35 pm The DA didn't call my vet, the defense attorney did. That's why I am wondering if I should contact the DA's office.
Ah, I needed moar covfefe.

What can the defense show with the records? That the horse didn't need much treatment, thus it was not abused? Even if the records don't show much, if the vet saw abuse and can testify about it from her own personal observation, then yeah, that's going to be the most powerful testimony the prosecution can get (but I'd put both of you on the stand if'n I was the DA :mrgreen:).

But bear with me here: If the vet is going to be a powerful witness against the defendant, and she REALLY doesn't want to testify, even to help convict the bad guy, then she should call the defense attorney and say "You REALLY don't want to put me on the witness stand," with a few choice details that will make the defense offer her a vacation in Ukraine instead. :mrgreen:

That way, maybe neither of you testify, but such is life. Otherwise, you pretty much have to obey a subpoena.
We *think* that the defense is trying to show that the horse wasn't in such bad shape as to need to have been seized by Animal Control. But, AC had had the animal(s) for at least a week before the one horse was brought to me for HOSPICE care, and my vet came a week later for the exam (so two weeks after the horses had been seized).

By the time my vet came out, I'd cleaned off the masses of clumped manure hair and gotten some weight on her, so although my vet is the medical professional, I was still the one observing the horse at least four times daily for over a week before my vet came out for the exam.

I really don't understand why the defense attorney would want to call my vet either! My vet wouldn't help with her defense.
User avatar
Azastan
Posts: 1765
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:48 pm
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#232

Post by Azastan »

jcolvin2 wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 3:08 pm
Azastan wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 9:48 am She called and was told that she could NOT testify remotely.
What county is the case in? My impression is that most Washington State courts have allowed remote testimony because of the coronavirus. I'm not sure that is still the case, but it wouldn't hurt to check whether she received correct information.
I think it's Snohomish County. She does have a partner who is immunocompromised, too.
jcolvin2
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:56 am
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#233

Post by jcolvin2 »

Azastan wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 3:39 pm I think it's Snohomish County. She does have a partner who is immunocompromised, too.
In light of the immunocompromised partner, perhaps the vet could contact the assigned prosecutor and ask if the local practice in Snohomish County would permit her to testify remotely. If the prosecutor is unwilling to assist, there are procedures for a witness to request a protective order if compliance is unreasonable, oppressive or unduly burdensome.
User avatar
Azastan
Posts: 1765
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:48 pm
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#234

Post by Azastan »

jcolvin2 wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 4:16 pm
Azastan wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 3:39 pm I think it's Snohomish County. She does have a partner who is immunocompromised, too.
In light of the immunocompromised partner, perhaps the vet could contact the assigned prosecutor and ask if the local practice in Snohomish County would permit her to testify remotely. If the prosecutor is unwilling to assist, there are procedures for a witness to request a protective order if compliance is unreasonable, oppressive or unduly burdensome.
Thanks, I will let my vet know that!
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9554
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#235

Post by Foggy »

Good. Again, if you contact the DA and testify before the vet, there's a chance the defense won't call the vet to testify, on the basis of the don't-shoot-yourself-(or-your-client)-in-the-foot rule.

HOWEVER, if the DA gets wind of what is going on, she may subpoena BOTH OF YOU to testify for the prosecution.

Here's why that's ... oh, never mind. :shrug:
Out from under. :thumbsup:
User avatar
Azastan
Posts: 1765
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:48 pm
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#236

Post by Azastan »

Foggy wrote: Mon Apr 25, 2022 6:21 pm Good. Again, if you contact the DA and testify before the vet, there's a chance the defense won't call the vet to testify, on the basis of the don't-shoot-yourself-(or-your-client)-in-the-foot rule.

HOWEVER, if the DA gets wind of what is going on, she may subpoena BOTH OF YOU to testify for the prosecution.

Here's why that's ... oh, never mind. :shrug:
I'm waiting to hear from my vet as to what's going on before I do anything rash.

I have to add, though, that it's really interesting that the defense attorney knows my name (because she specifically requested vet records under my name), and yet does not realize that I have two months worth of PHOTOS and COMMENTARY on this particular horse on my farm's FB page!
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14351
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#237

Post by RTH10260 »

Texas Court Halts Execution of Mother Convicted of Killing Child
Melissa Lucio had long maintained her innocence. New evidence and expert testimony emerged casting strong doubt on her guilt.

By J. David Goodman
April 25, 2022

HOUSTON — The highest criminal court in Texas on Monday ordered a halt to the execution of a Hispanic mother of 14 convicted of killing her 2-year-old child more than a decade ago in a case that has drawn bipartisan outrage.

The mother, Melissa Lucio, has long maintained her innocence, and calls for leniency have become widespread in Texas, including among dozens of Democratic and Republican state legislators, as new evidence and expert testimony emerged that cast strong doubt on her guilt.

In a three-page decision ordering a stay to the execution that had been set for Wednesday, the Court of Criminal Appeals found that several of the claims raised by her lawyers needed to be considered by a trial court, including that prosecutors may have used false testimony, that previously unavailable scientific evidence could preclude her conviction and that prosecutors suppressed other evidence that would have been favorable to her.

The case now returns to a lower court to resolve those issues, postponing the execution indefinitely. Ms. Lucio would have been the first Hispanic woman executed in Texas.

The case had drawn national attention, including a documentary film, as lawyers for Ms. Lucio argued that evidence presented at trial undercut the case for murder in the death of her daughter, Mariah.




https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/25/us/m ... texas.html
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9853
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#238

Post by AndyinPA »

I'm surprised they did that, but pleased.
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 11589
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#239

Post by Volkonski »

Deputies protect school shooter Nikolas Cruz after potential juror threat
A pool of potential jurors was filing into the courtroom when a man in his 30s, began “mouthing expletives” toward Cruz, Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer said.


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/de ... d_nn_tw_ma
Deputies protecting Florida school shooter Nikolas Cruz had to pull him aside and surround him Tuesday after a member of a jury pool mouthed possible threats toward him and caused others to become “excited,” leading them to fear a potential brawl, officials said.

A 70-member pool of potential jurors was filing into the courtroom and taking their seats when one of the first to enter, a man in his 30s, began “mouthing expletives” toward Cruz, Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer said.

Cruz, 23, is facing a possible death sentence for murdering 17 at Parkland’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Feb. 14, 2018.

Bailiffs moved in quickly to remove the man, who shook his head vigorously and muttered “that’s horrible” repeatedly as he walked past reporters seated toward the back of the courtroom.
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 11589
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#240

Post by Volkonski »

Florida school shooting judge reverses; confusion follows

https://apnews.com/article/shootings-fl ... ce=Twitter
The judge overseeing the penalty trial of Florida school shooter Nikolas Cruz reversed herself Wednesday and said she is not dismissing more than 200 potential jurors who survived a first round of screening earlier this month.

In the latest confusing turn since jury selection began three weeks ago, Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer overturned her Monday decision to start jury selection anew because of a possible mistake she made. She had said then that she would throw out 243 potential jurors who said they could serve from June to September, the expected length of the trial.

Now, she said, she will order 11 potential jurors she dismissed on April 5 without questioning to be brought back to court this Monday to be queried by the attorneys. Referring to the 243 potential jurors that had faced dismissal, she said, the first 40 would now be brought back for the start of the second round.

The decision left attorneys from both sides confused, including the lead prosecutor Mike Satz, who served as the Broward County state attorney for 44 years before leaving office last year. He is now working for his successor on a special assignment to lead the Cruz prosecution team. At one point Satz interrupted Scherer to ask her what exactly her plan was.
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17654
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#241

Post by raison de arizona »

He angered The Mouse with his tribute. But yeah.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 5830
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:25 pm

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#242

Post by Suranis »

Hic sunt dracones
User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7541
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:07 pm
Location: Rescue Pets Land
Occupation: 21st Century Suffragist
Verified: ✅🐴🐎🦄🌻5000 posts and counting

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#243

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

:faint:
"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7541
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:07 pm
Location: Rescue Pets Land
Occupation: 21st Century Suffragist
Verified: ✅🐴🐎🦄🌻5000 posts and counting

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#244

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

https://news.yahoo.com/noel-clarke-sues ... 55492.html
Noel Clarke Sues BAFTA For Defamation After UK Police Stop Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims

Actor Noel Clarke is suing BAFTA for defamation, following the Academy’s decision to suspend his membership following allegations of his sexual harassment and bullying.

BAFTA last year awarded Clarke (Bulletproof, Brotherhood) an award for outstanding contribution to British cinema, but made the decision to suspend the award after the Guardian newspaper published a report including claims by 20 women of abuse, bullying and harassment – all of which Clarke has denied.

His lawsuit comes after the Metropolitan Police’s decision last month to suspend their investigation into the allegations, saying they had “determined the information would not meet the threshold for a criminal investigation.”

Clarke is also suing The Guardian Media Group, and Condé Nast, the owner of GQ magazine, which ran an interview with the two journalists who broke the story.
"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17654
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#245

Post by raison de arizona »

Dunford's thread on the inane Griffin lawsuit. The basics of the lolsuit is that this dude behaved badly in public, was videotaped and posted on the interwebs, Griffin retweeted the video, vastly amplifying its audience, and the dude suffered. Which is obviously All Her Fault.
Mike Dunford @questauthority wrote: Good morning everyone -
A Tennessee man has filed a federal lawsuit against @kathygriffin for being mean to him on the intertubes. I've had time to look at the complaint, and even do a small amount of research.

Let's dig in:
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17654
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#246

Post by raison de arizona »

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14351
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#247

Post by RTH10260 »

Bloomberg: Court docs reveal J&J’s role in prison tests comparing talc to asbestos

Research of Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder included a prison study in which inmates, mostly Black men, were injected with asbestos. The study was intended to assess how asbestos’s effects on the skin compare to talc, the key component of baby powder.

By FRANK VINLUAN
Post a comment / Mar 7, 2022 at 6:19 PM

Johnson & Johnson’s research into the safety of its baby powder included a study in which inmates, mostly Black men, were injected with asbestos to compare the cancer-causing compound to talc, according to unsealed court documents reviewed by Bloomberg.

While the human experiments involving prisoners at Holmesburg Prison outside of Philadelphia was previously revealed in books and newspaper articles, J&J’s involvement in the studies comparing talc to asbestos was not made public until the Bloomberg report on Monday. The court documents were unsealed in two trials last year over claims that J&J’s baby powder causes cancer. J&J expressed regret over the company’s involvement with Albert Kligman, the University of Pennsylvania dermatologist who conducted the baby powder tests. But Bloomberg said that the company also noted that the tests did not violate research standards at the time.

“We deeply regret the conditions under which these studies were conducted, and in no way do they reflect the values or practices we employ today,” Kim Montagnino, a company spokeswoman, said in an emailed statement to Bloomberg. “As the world’s largest healthcare company, our transparent, diligent approach to bioethics is at the heart of all we promise our customers and society.”

Asbestos is often found in locations where talc is mined. Scientists determined that asbestos was linked to cancer in the 1950s. J&J did not dispute that it had hired Kligman in the 1960s to conduct baby powder tests. The unsealed court documents state that the asbestos test in 1971 involved recruiting 10 prisoners who received injections of two types of asbestos, tremolite and chrysotile, along with a talc shot in their lower backs.

The revelation of J&J’s involvement in the Holmesburg tests comes as the company continues to fight litigation alleging that the talc-based baby powder contained asbestos. The pharmaceutical giant has consistently said that its baby powder never had asbestos. Nevertheless, J&J has lost some of the lawsuits alleging harm from the product, which the company stopped marketing in the U.S. and Canada in 2020.




https://medcitynews.com/2022/03/bloombe ... -asbestos/
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17654
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#248

Post by raison de arizona »

Why a Jeep Owner Is Being Sued for a Mechanic's Death During a Dealership Oil Change
A teenaged employee with no driver's license ran over a coworker, who died. But Michigan law says the family can only sue the Jeep owner, not the dealership.

In March of 2020, a customer took his Jeep to Rochester Hills Chrysler Jeep Dodge in Rochester, Michigan for an oil change. That’s when tragedy struck. According to FOX 2 Detroit, a 19-year-old dealership employee got behind the wheel of the Jeep and accidentally ran over another employee, 42-year-old Jeffrey Hawkins, who died instantly. Now, Hawkins’ family is suing the Jeep owner—not because that person held any responsibility for this tragedy, but because that’s the family’s only path for recourse under Michigan law.

By all accounts, this was an avoidable tragedy. As FOX 2 Detroit reports, the 19-year-old employee did not have a driver’s license and did not know how to drive a manual-transmission vehicle. When the employee got in the Jeep to start the engine, he took his foot off the clutch pedal and the Jeep began moving, striking and killing Hawkins.
:snippity:
As Femminineo explained to Jalopnik, the Hawkins family can’t directly sue the dealership or its management. Michigan workers’ compensation law says you cannot sue a fellow employee for negligence while on the job. So the Hawkins family’s only option was to sue the Jeep owner. But that doesn’t mean the Jeep owner will be held responsible for the accidental death.

According to Femminineo, when the Hawkins family filed suit against the Jeep owner, that person immediately sued the dealership for indemnification, and won. With that victory in place, whatever results from the Hawkins family’s suit against the Jeep owner will be the legal responsibility of Rochester Hills Chrysler Jeep Dodge (and their insurance company). Basically, while the owner of the Jeep is named in the suit, that person won’t face any repercussions from the trial or judgment.
:snippity:
https://jalopnik.com/why-a-jeep-owner-i ... 1848884952
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7541
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:07 pm
Location: Rescue Pets Land
Occupation: 21st Century Suffragist
Verified: ✅🐴🐎🦄🌻5000 posts and counting

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#249

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... settlement
Walgreens to pay $683m to settle claims it exacerbated opioid crisis in Florida
Pharmacy giant agrees to pay state government over 18-year period but does not admit to wrongdoing as part of the deal


The settlement includes $620m to be paid to Florida over 18 years, plus $63m for legal fees. Florida is the first state to settle its opioid claims against major pharmacy chains Walgreens and CVS, collecting more than $1.1bn from the two companies.

The settlement ends a trial that began on 11 April, after Walgreens decided not to join a combined $878m settlement with four other healthcare companies, including CVS. Walgreens did not admit to wrongdoing as part of the settlement.

Before settling, Walgreens had argued it should be immune from being sued based on a $3,000 settlement it reached with Florida in 2012.

Florida had called Walgreens’ position “absurd”, according to court transcripts, saying the 2012 settlement addressed only a single record-keeping violation.

Judge Kimberly Sharpe Byrd of Pasco county court agreed with Florida, and the trial began while Walgreens appealed her ruling.
"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17654
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#250

Post by raison de arizona »

Brian Fung @b_fung wrote: Listening to the oral arguments on Texas's social media law and ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

One of the judges just conflated "interactive computer service" with "internet provider"

The same judge does not seem to recognize Twitter or Facebook as websites.

Another seemed surprised that Twitter could wake up one day and decide to ban all LGBT speech, and then asked why Verizon's phone business, a common carrier, can't decide to block individual phone calls based on the speech expressed in those calls.

The hearing has wrapped. It's obviously foolish to predict what the court will do but the questioning seemed to reveal a poor grasp of the basics underlying the case.
https://twitter.com/b_fung/status/1523680557045096448
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
Post Reply

Return to “Law and Lawsuits”