yea, they mighta picked the wrong one this time
Gates: Yes I yelled at the Police Officer in My home.
Ogletree: Why?
Gates: Because after I complied with his requests and showed him 3 Photo ID's in My Own home, and the Officer confirmed who I was by calling My work place (Harvard), I asked the Officer for his name and badge number (something of which the public is allowed to inquire) he ignored Me and turned and continued to walk out. I continued to make my request louder because I thought he could not hear Me. When I got to My doorway, the officer asked Me to come out on My porch, and I stepped out.
Ogletree: Why did You step out Professor Gates?
Gates: Because I thought that the Officer was going to give me the information I requested. When he did not, I became insensed and demanded it again. When I demanded it, the Officer arrested Me.
Ogletree: Did the officer "Provoke" you to anger by ignoring seveal reasonable requests inside of Your Home.
Gates: Yes, he "Provoked" Me, then lured Me out of My home (in the hopes that he would acquiesce to My requests of geting his name and badge number.)
I'd go through the GREAT Summation that Ogletree has but don't have the time.
Jury: NOT GUILTY
Next Trial...Civil Court>>>Case for: Wrongful Arrest, False Imprisonment...
Be Well, Live Well
I Am Most Excellent - Affirmed Only Of GOD.
I wish for You, what I pray for Myself: Wellness, Happiness and Success In ALL Things Good!
I know for Sure I Control: My Attitude and Effort, My Health and Happiness.
i'll get back to skip in a minute but i'm genuinely curious as to why you aren't ever capable of respectfully disagreeing with an opinion (anybody's) without simultaneously being insulting to the opiner?
Gates: Yes I yelled at the Police Officer in My home.
Ogletree: Why?
Gates: Because
there doesn't need to be a because the law aint about how the **** you feel, it's about the evidence - the state's burden is a preponderance of the evidence, is it more likely than not that he's guilty? now there's an existing definition of what disorderly conduct is all the state needs to do to meet their burden is show that he met that definition and just between us, a defendant who says yeah i meet that definition pretty much wraps the case up.
my point didn't have anything to do with cambridge or boston or whether he's justified in his feelings, i think he's perfectly justified. don't confuse the following: the incident itself happened because he was black, the arrest happened because he got loud and the guy he got loud with had the authority to arrest him for it. the DA won't pursue cuz it's not in his interests to do so.
prima facie would only apply if gates brought a charge, he hasn't. could he win? maybe, hell i'd pump a fist for him, but it's not on the table, the only charge being discussed was brought by the state. p.s. for anybody blinking and thumbsucking along with me, i looked up what prima facie meant LOL - "a case which at first glance presents sufficient evidence for the plaintiff to win" - the plaintiff is massachusetts.
i got some 3 buck chuck from trader joe's to crack open. g'nite gracie.
eta - the plaintiff is the city of cambridge, apologies.
Basically, I have a LOW tolerance for stupidity and/or ignorance, especially when what's involved is NOT just Opinion but special professional requisites. All these "street corner" lawyers, doctors, accountants... are why we have problems as a people...we go with ignorance over knowledge a lot of the time, as long as it makes "us" FEEL good. There are folks still trying to cure AIDS by taking laxatives! Give Me a break. When I respond to something or someone I deem worthy of responding to, I try to pass on some knowledge that may help what I'm responding to. Good evening to You too.
Be Well, Live Well
I Am Most Excellent - Affirmed Only Of GOD.
I wish for You, what I pray for Myself: Wellness, Happiness and Success In ALL Things Good!
I know for Sure I Control: My Attitude and Effort, My Health and Happiness.
good morn'ting.
--------> 
------> 
<-------- 
It IS what it Is. Would YOU go to an Attorney who did NOT think that she/he are Exceptional? Is it OK to brag about losing 50/100 lbs. but not believe that I am great at what I do for a living? If there are any Professional Sisters in the House, please stand and tell us that You Believe that You are mediocure at Your Livelihood; AND if someone who did not have a clue about what you do tried to give You expert advice and it made NO sense...what would You do/say. I became condescending to the woman when she tried to tell Me my business and is soooooo wrong. If a used car salesperson gave you a diagnosis of lung cancer when you went in to buy a car, what would You do...that's how far she is from knowing what she is talking about, but she don't know THAT she don't know, and is taking errything personally. The difference between an intelligent person and an arrogent person is one's ability to say "I just don't know...when they DON'T know." The Other Responses were giving OPINIONS/Feelings/Thoughts about the situation, THIS woman began to give LEGAL OPINION...AND it was WRONG, ALL of It! Other folks seem to know the difference in Personal Opinion vs. Professional Opinion, EXCEPT Her! I corrected it and she continued to espouse ignorance on a subject matter she knows nothing about. I refuse to dumb down for anyone. I guess it is like football: The Refs always see the retaliation/response but they never see the stuff that brought on the response.
Anyway, this case is Old News. The next time she starts a Thread, I hope her "opinion" has some relationship to the Title...instead of changing when the first few responses seem to oppose it. It's ok to be a "people pleaser" but My goodness stand out in the crowd sometimes, don't go along with every porch monkey that comes along showing their teefs. But I don't have nothing against her, we will probably agree on something down the road. Shoot, I DO NOT hold grudges, can't afford to...the person that is My ally today, may very well be My adversary tomorrow. That's the Law, and I'm a hired gun.
Be Well, Live Well
I Am Most Excellent - Affirmed Only Of GOD.
I wish for You, what I pray for Myself: Wellness, Happiness and Success In ALL Things Good!
I know for Sure I Control: My Attitude and Effort, My Health and Happiness.
yup, still relentlessly entertaining.
they deliver jd's with the mail up in buffalo huh? 
at your next meet ' greet you and the other board trolls need to come up with new screen names that are more appropriate and indicative of who you are personally. you value no one, including, hell, espcially, yourself and if you were to take a minute to rifle through the shoebox and turn over wunna those sheepskins you might find step by step instructions about avoiding orangutan-foolassery altogether. i know that was written far beneath your station, but apologies, i've only got the one degree.
, YOU found Your Niche.It's strange...it is always a "certain type" of woman that HATES on My Screen Name.
Be Well, Live Well
I Am Most Excellent - Affirmed Only Of GOD.
I wish for You, what I pray for Myself: Wellness, Happiness and Success In ALL Things Good!
I know for Sure I Control: My Attitude and Effort, My Health and Happiness.
you didn't follow the thread, my opinion never changed, believed he was justifiably angry, still do. believed the da could've won a case for disorderly conduct still do. believed whole thing wouldn'tve happened if he were black, still do. the only thing that surprised me was his reaction considering the courses he's spent his life teaching.
you're struggling with your definitions - preoponderance is the burden of proof required in non-criminal lawsuits (jury or not). beyond a reasonable doubt is for criminal matters. google me, get your black's law dictionary, whichever, it'll have the same result. cambridge only needed to prove that skip raised his voice in order to win.
p.s. there's no U in mediocre....."counselor"
