never an attorney, paralegal, In Pro Per, and negotiator for law firm,

that is why I would never give legal advise, had too many complaints to the bar and other jurisdictions for my supposedly doing that. So I only say what I would do if I was in their position based on my personal knowledge, experience and research.

Okay, let's look at the difference between assault and battery and then apply it to your fact pattern:

Assault is either an attempted battery (see below) or the placing of the victim in apprehension of receiving an immediate battery. ENDANGERMENT is a related offense to assault (but usually a misdemeanor) that involves recklessly endangering the safety of others.

Battery is the unlawful unconsented touching of an individual by another individual or object/apparatus/equipment connected to or under the control of such an individual.

In your case, there appears to be no Assault because 1) the attempt SUCCEEDED and 2) there are no facts to suggest that they were put in apprehension of receiving an immediate battery.

So in your case, it is battery. Now the only question is whether it is an AGGRAVATED form of battery which may result in a stiffer sentence.

Cool deal, that's why I put a DISCLAIMER at the beginning of the thread. This is just for entertainment purposes only :)

very good, was wondering if you would catch that or not. there is no assault

No this is not free legal advice just a test of Bar/Bri comprehension. Unfortunately, your question is not covered in the Bar/Bri materials I read through. Your best bet would probably be going to your local city Clerk and asking for the types of categories you need to have a business license for and if there are any requirements for this specific type of business. Depends on your local city ordinance, really.

Good point. But this probably will fall under a different charge with differing penalties.

Check out snopes.com to see if its in their database. This wasn't covered in the bar/bri stuff.

The problem with Johnny Cochrane's catchphrase is that, even if you discount the glove, there were other blood evidence that ties The Juice to the crime scene. :2 cents:

OK. the main way that the state attorneys are using ( abusing ) this law is fro guilt by association.

For instance, an old friend calls you can says, hey, I just moved back to town and wanted to know if you wanted to go for coffee and catch up on old time. Of course you say yes, and the person picks you up. As you are driving to the coffee shop you are stopped by a cop and both are arrested for possesion of the 2 kilos that the guy had in the trunk. They use that fact that you are frineds, that you are in the vehicle with him, and the phone call to say that you are as guilty as the person that owned the car and the drugs.

Can you win it??? If you are lucky.

hey $5 just do everyone a favor with the G/F or wife..

Make sure that she is a straight shooter when it comes to money from clients...

I am so sick of attorneys ripping people off.

50

2000 words per minute... how do you read so fast?

I did one of these threads one time.. I could help answer a few legal questions related to criminal law or atleast how law enforcement interprets it :glugglug

She's a straight shooter. Kinda idealistic.

:thumbsup :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Go for it, bro. The more the merrier. It's all purely for entertainment purposes.

That may change, in fact probably will. A few years in the DA's office should do it.

Not trying to be offensive, just realistic.

I took a class, Evelyn Wood reading program. I have a problem reading normally... I get really bored. To compensate, I read quickly. Check them out. They have a Money Back guarantee if you don't dramatically increase your reading and comprehension rates. Do a Google search for them.

I'm also taking the bar in February. Speed reading usually doesn't help on the bar, because a single word frequently changes the answer. Here's a few for you to dig out.

In a brief sentence, explain the subtle differences between depraved heart murder and involuntary manslaughter.

Do the same for larceny by trick and larceny by false pretenses.

Both are highly tested fine-line distinctions on the MBE.

ok here is a question if I shoot you for spamming! Can I be prosecuted?

Okay, here's one for you. In CA, if you are legally blind and carrying a cane in plain view, crossing a street a non cross walk, and someone hits you, who is at fault?

Or, same question at a cross walk.

above my paygrade =) I did a lot of arrests on larceny, but they were all cut and dry and pled out..

In FLA. every motorist has to yield to every pedestrian regardless

They are supposed to in other states as well, normally doesn't hold up well.

I just got back. Okay, here's the answer to your questions


Question 1

Involuntary manslaughter at common law is defined as
reckless or criminally negligent homicide. This is often confused with "depraved heart" murder which is defined at common law as
extreme recklessnes which rises to the level of malice aforethought--a requirement for murder charges. The difference between both (in addition to severe penalties if you get dinged for murder) is the SEVERITY of the risk. Some jurisdictions require that the AWARENESS of the risk be high as well. However, many jurisdictions, at common law, view Involuntary manslaughter as a "general intent" crime.


Question 2

The difference between larceny by trick and larceny by false pretenses is that in larceny by trick the defendant gains POSSESSION of the item in question through lies, deceit, etc whereas in larceny by false pretenses, the defendant gains TITLE of the item in question through lies, deceit, etc.

You can be prosecuted. The crime depends on whether you kill me or not. Assuming that you kill me, the amount of time in prison you spend or whether you qualify for the death penalty (assuming it applies in the state you shoot me in) depends on your state of mind at the time of the shooting. It also depends on whether you were so pissed off by what I wrote that you just went apeshit and shot me (lower degree of homicide) or whether you hated me all along and wanted to kill me and set up an elaborate scheme to shoot me (premeditated murder).

Defenses: I can't see any. At least from the Bar/Bri stuff I've read. You can't claim self-defense because my actions do not put you in reasonable fear of imminent grievous bodily harm. I am just typing a message at an online message board. Necessity? I don't think so...there are countless other ways to avoid whatever harm I may be causing and the harm is not grave enough. Diminished capacity/Insanity? Maybe.

Very good.

Hmmm, this question is less about RICO than with the common law crime of conspiracy and also whether you were an accessory to his crime of illegal narcotics distribution (inferred from the large amt of coke).

For you to get convicted of conspiracy, the prosecutor must prove...beyond a reasonable doubt... that

1) there was a common goal to commit a crime among two or more people

2) you knowingly agreed to pursue that goal

3) some person that you agreed with actually acted to accomplish the criminal goal. NOTE: this means just an act... ie., putting gas in the car and driving to the drop off location with coke in the back is good enough. A co-conspirator does NOT have to accomplish the goal


Going back to your fact pattern, since you were just meeting a friend and didn't talk about any illegal plan, you're not a co-conspirator. You weren't even aware about the coke in your friend's car and had no reason to believe something funky's going down.

As for being an accessory (ie., assisting) to the crime there are two types:

Accessory before the crime-- giving support, encouragement, or assistance for the commision of a crime


Accessory after the crime -- KNOWING that a crime has been commited, giving aid or ATTEMPTING to give aid to the defendent to prevent arrest

Since your buddy didn't ask you to do anything before he got busted nor did you give him any support, you are not an accessory before the crime. As for accessory after the crime... you guys were both arrested at the same time.

just remember if you ever have a legal problem and think you are screwed get a good lawyer and tell the court you want a long drawn out very expensive jury trial that uses up all the courts time and resources (although I wouldnt say exactly that because you will get charged with contempt- trust me ;) but basically they really don't want this and they will drop it to a lesser charge and you will get off with a fine as opposed to jail time etc.

Thanks for all the participants in this thread. It was a blast.

:thumbsup

Are you researching some of this in Google as you are going along answering the questions, for example looking up the "exact" definition for "RICO" ? Or is all of this information from the top of your head from reading your gf's study materials? If it is from just reading, you are incredible!

just off the top of my head from what I've read through. Not really that incredible, my gf reads at least 3 times better than me. Unfortunately, she's just too stressed right now. LOL. She's definitely the smarter of the two of us when not pulling out her hair about the finer points of the Strict Scrutiny standard of the Equal Protection Clause. At least I know how to spawn triple optin lists from public sources, I guess that's worth something :winkwink: :thumbsup

is it now legal to modify your own equipment such as PC, xbox ps2 for use other than the purpose intended, even though you own the console?

I don't think this is in any of the materials I tore through. You might want to check Millenium Digital Copyright Act that pass some time ago, there may be a provision that governs this. I am not exactly sure.

Ok, so you're a speed reader... I think I'm a fast reader too, faster than most people, but sometimes when reading complex things like about law or scientific stuff, it just goes in one ear and right out the other, I can read it fast, but if I want to really understand and absorb it I have to go word by word.

But if I'm reading easy meaningless stuff like Cosmo magazine or GFY I can read fast and understand it. How do you read complicated issues like law fast while still understanding it?. Especially with issues like the difference between battery and assault, to me it's almost the same thing, there's so many technicalities, and it's so complicated just reading what you wrote about it gives me a headache. :helpme

Dude, way to fucking go. Here's my question. How did you learn to read 2000 words a minute and comprehend it all?

I mentioned that I took the Evelyn Wood speed reading program. They have techniques re increasing comprehension. There's a technique were you pick up on certain concepts then try to find patterns. Look for something memorable or interesting about an acronym or concept. This allows you to spot seemingly similar concepts and pay attention to subtleties. With enough practice you'll gain confidence in your ability to spot these problems.

For example: If somebody had an apple orchard and the apples were ripe. If you came in and took the apples from the tree at common law this is a very different situation than if the owner picked the apples and set them on the ground and you took them. The latter is larceny while the former, at common law, was not.

RICO stood out because of its distinct name. and its expansion on the law of conspiracy. Anyway, no worries regarding getting a headache--apparently, the California Supreme Court recently began promoting an easier set of jury instructions. Those crafty lawyers have a pesky habit of mystifying the language of law so that laymen like us would continue forking over $200 per hour. :BangBang:

There's no way to catch it all. I'd say I'm lucky if I get 60 to 70 %. Unfortunately for my gf, she has to get a higher % of understanding/memorization/analysis if she wants to pass the Bar. Crim law, at least from the bar/bri stuff I read, is more approachable than the other bar prep law materials my gf has. Crim and torts seemed to be the most fun. Easier to comprehend than say Contract Law or Real Property (damn Rule Against Perpetuities is almost incomprehensible), from what I've glanced of the latter subjects that is.

It's not a good idea as wreckless driving is not an offence of any kind. Most of us here do wreckless driving every day.


Unless you mean reckless driving?

LOL, Richard! I wish there's MORE wreckless driving and less reckless driving LOL