Premiere Thread

My original post here was promoted to the Front Page Article on the Home button above. I hope you will register and give us your best. I like that feature, if Admin or a Moderator likes your Posts, they can easily be promoted to an Article too!

I have also started my first blog, ever. I will set up Categories next. I am not sure yet, but having a blog, if you are not a suitor may require a donation to help run the website. We are planning to be here for a while - in that we have diversified rebuild and maintenance responsibilities so as not to fall the same way SuiJurisClub did, by having only one exclusively responsible owner.

The rules here I hope will be respected and when not, I hope moderators and Admin will interpret violations liberally and with compassion toward knowledge that we infringe upon intellectual property considered private to the Bar Associations. Therefore we can expect that a large faction of readers are very upset with myself and other suitors for helping the layman find remedy from the banksters and Fed as described in effective and current law. My experience is that what comes off as insulting posts, from intelligent yet emotional posters, builds our learning base considerably.

One precept of American law that I hope we will all learn about and integrate into our conversations is Innocent until Proven Guilty. I think that precept is likely the most broadly conditioned lip service around! Through news media prosecutions, and shows like COPS, conditioning us that a police officer can become a shouting monster who can violently tackle you on a whim, the precept is widely convoluted to Guilty until Proven Innocent. Seriously! Speaking for my own overcoming of that conditioning; it is still difficult to watch the News broadcast an arrested accused child molester's mug shot without convicting him already in my mind. Did you know that you cannot get local News and newspapers at the local jail? That means that defendant may go into trial without ever knowing he has an already tainted jury pool... well, let's not get me on a rant already!!

Just because I have been given an opportunity to write the Premiere Post, I hope at least, does not give me extra weight to express my opinions and (hopefully constructive) criticisms too. My hope for 'Saving to Suitors' Club is that it will provide an entertaining place to learn for many years.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Lip service to the "innocent until proven guilty" issue? Yes indeed it is. This will solidify that it is in actuality GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT today.

The following are citations from the California Evidence Code:
EVIDENCE CODE 550. (a) The burden of producing evidence as to a particular fact is on the party against whom a finding on that fact would be required in the absence of further evidence.
( b ) The burden of producing evidence as to a particular fact is initially on the party with the burden of proof as to that fact.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...01000&file=550

EVIDENCE CODE 604. The effect of a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence is to require the trier of fact to assume the existence of the presumed fact unless and until evidence is introduced which would support a finding of its nonexistence, in which case the trier of fact shall determine the existence or nonexistence of the presumed fact from the evidence and without rega rd to the presumption. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the drawing of any inference that may be appropriate.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...0&file=600-607

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldi

Lip service to the "innocent until proven guilty" issue? Yes indeed it is. This will solidify that it is in actuality GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT today.

The following are citations from the California Evidence Code:
EVIDENCE CODE 550. (a) The burden of producing evidence as to a particular fact is on the party against whom a finding on that fact would be required in the absence of further evidence.
( b ) The burden of producing evidence as to a particular fact is initially on the party with the burden of proof as to that fact.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...01000&file=550

EVIDENCE CODE 604. The effect of a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence is to require the trier of fact to assume the existence of the presumed fact unless and until evidence is introduced which would support a finding of its nonexistence, in which case the trier of fact shall determine the existence or nonexistence of the presumed fact from the evidence and without rega rd to the presumption. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the drawing of any inference that may be appropriate.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...0&file=600-607

---

That is a bit hard to swallow!

Quote:

---

The effect of a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence is to require the trier of fact to assume the existence of the presumed fact unless and until evidence is introduced which would support a finding of its nonexistence, in which case the trier of fact shall determine the existence or nonexistence of the presumed fact from the evidence and without rega rd to the presumption. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the drawing of any inference that may be appropriate.

---

That is about the most roundabout jumble of legaleze, presented in the very crux of the justice system, that I could ever lay my eyes on!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

That is a bit hard to swallow!

Yes it is for me too, but the proof is in the statement.

That is about the most roundabout jumble of legaleze, presented in the very crux of the justice system, that I could ever lay my eyes on!

---

Yes, but the proof is in the statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

* * * I hope moderators and Admin will interpret violations liberally and with compassion toward knowledge that we infringe upon intellectual property considered private to the Bar Associations. * * *

---

Well , just for any of you Bar Boys and Girls snooping around looking for a scrap . Read this then go away .

Some notes on the Copyright of US Statutes .

Simply put , Copyright of Federal Statutes / Codes , by West Publishing and others, applies to the format and layout of the publication only . Not to the content / wording of the Statutes . Fed and State “Laws” are in the Public Domain . No Copyright can be claimed as they are “Edicts of Government” .

Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Chapter 1100: ELIGIBILITY.

Section 206.01
“Edicts of government, such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents are not copyrightable for reasons of public policy. This applies to such works whether they are Federal, State, or local as well as to those of foreign governments.”

Section 206.02
“The copyright law provides that works of the U.S. Government, defined in the law as works prepared by an officer or employee of the u.s. Government as part of that person's official duties, are not copyrightable. This provision applies to such works whether they are edicts of government or otherwise. However, the fact that a copyright may have been transferred to the U.S. Government is not determinative of its status. U.S.C. 101 and 105. Similarly, the fact that the work has been printed by the U.S. Government does not determine its copyright status.

Title 17 USC Chapter 1 Section 105.
“Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government, but the United States Government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise.”

Back in the early 1990’s , West was threatening to sue people who copied their references for infringement . This provided some fun for my little circle of Compatriots at the L.A County Law Library . When confronted about copying for use in our cases we said “fine” . We’ll sue the Library for Enabling , Conspiracy , or maybe Entrapment , since there was no warning notice posted at the copying machine . The Library officials “knew , or should have known” about the issue and taken appropriate steps to prevent such infringement .

Truth turned up they were actually intending to sue over photo copying their West Key Number System .

The self declared “Representatives” of West Publishing faded away . Would not even accept our addresses to facilitate proper Service of Process . We were just trying to be helpful :rolleyes: