#4681
I have been busy lately with a very young babby and also moving house (as mentioned in the Birding thread). Now that i have returned to my studies for the year you can probably expect my terrible posts to appear with more frequency again as I try not to go slowly mad to the sound of a young nordic-accented lecturer talking too closely into a lapel mic she insists on holding directly in front of her mouth so the speakers freak out once or twice per minute

E:
#4682
How is babby?
#4683
Baby advice: get all the other leftist babies (ie. babies of leftists) in your region to form an All-Babies Union. You would educate them on some of the ways capitalism oppresses babies and prepares them for a life of hard work and consumption. For example the babies could all turn up at a maternity ward and demand that the TVs be turned off. They can meet expectant parents and hand out drool-covered literature about how advertising targets babies.
#4684

getfiscal posted:

How is babby?

Formed.

swampman posted:

Baby advice:

Good advice. An irl mate, who also happens to be a red, recently had a baby also. The mothers like to joke about how we will indoctrinate them as communists from an early age. We laugh along with this joke but then immediately catch each other's gaze and share a meaningful smirk. The revolution is in safe, but extremely small, hands.

#4685
grats on teh crotchspawn
#4686
Thank.
#4687
👶 👶 👶 👶 👶
#4688
ive started practicing tarot reading again, its a nice way to relax and meditate, plus you can use it to divine the future, which is useful
#4689
that is actually a common misconception. the only way to accurately and reliably predict the future is by using the invincible science of marxism-leninism
#4690
i do marxist-leninist tarot reading. checkmate.
#4691
10 days ago i had the worst hearing of my life. went in planning on basing most of my argument on the fact that I had documents relating to the opposing party's abuse of both my client and their shared child in a previous (child protection action). but then the judge sustained an objection based on their "irrelevance," found my client in contempt, and ordered her to pay attorneys fees. as a hail mary i submitted evidence relating to the fact that my client and her two kids are at 50% of the federal poverty guideline so maybe she could at least get more than a month and a half to pay the fees? but nope, no go, based in part a uncited reference to a "media story" about the unemployment rate

so for those of you keeping score at home, that's "thirdplace trying to submit court orders relating to domestic abuse that occurred less then three years ago": 0, "redneck judge doing his own research based on what he saw on the morning news": 1

Edited by thirdplace ()

#4692
in other news I think i might quit my job and learn SQL or something. or maybe i'll hold out long enough for trump to eliminate LSC and shut down our whole office. decisions, decisions!!!
#4693
just pretend i replied to your posts with your sig
#4694
D to the dizzle, T to the tizzle, A to the merikkkizle
#4695

thirdplace posted:

10 days ago i had the worst hearing of my life. went in planning on basing most of my argument on the fact that I had documents relating to the opposing party's abuse of both my client and their shared child in a previous (child protection action). but then the judge sustained an objection based on their "irrelevance," found my client in contempt, and ordered her to pay attorneys fees. as a hail mary i submitted evidence relating to the fact that my client and her two kids are at 50% of the federal poverty guideline so maybe she could at least get more than a month and a half to pay the fees? but nope, no go, based in part of the fact that "On the date of this Order, a media story indicated Wisconsin's total payroll employment number of people working is at the highest level in recorded state history. The overall unemployment rate of 3.9% is the lowest in many years."

so for those of you keeping score at home, that's "thirdplace trying to submit court orders relating to domestic abuse that occurred less then three years ago": 0, "redneck judge doing his own research based on what he saw on the morning news": 1



imagine someone's life riding on if evilweasel watched tv that morning

#4696
studies show that there are more people now than ever. not guilty on first degree murder, not guilty on involuntary mansl
#4697
[account deactivated]
#4698

roseweird posted:

don't quit your job thirdplace and definitely don't EVER learn sql


#4699
Only learn SQL if that's shorthand for Squirrel and you're learning how to hunt squirrels for when our society collapses and you desperately need protein.

Anyhoo, I'm declaring this thread a success, because I went outside, and even secured a low-paying job in a field with no future employment prospects.
#4700
please don't learn sql
#4701
unless that's an acronym for Suck Quite Longly in which case good on you, sex work is work
#4702

thirdplace posted:

10 days ago i had the worst hearing of my life. went in planning on basing most of my argument on the fact that I had documents relating to the opposing party's abuse of both my client and their shared child in a previous (child protection action). but then the judge sustained an objection based on their "irrelevance," found my client in contempt, and ordered her to pay attorneys fees. as a hail mary i submitted evidence relating to the fact that my client and her two kids are at 50% of the federal poverty guideline so maybe she could at least get more than a month and a half to pay the fees? but nope, no go, based in part a uncited reference to a "media story" about the unemployment rate

so for those of you keeping score at home, that's "thirdplace trying to submit court orders relating to domestic abuse that occurred less then three years ago": 0, "redneck judge doing his own research based on what he saw on the morning news": 1


what's the main things that hold people/you from appealing? is it just shitloads of work time to do that?

#4703
well, it's not a final order; interlocutory appeals are uphill battles at the best of times. plus, the most I could hope for is overruling the determination to keep out the old child-abuse stuff; the rest is pretty much just discretionary judgments of the evidence that it's almost impossible to overrule (especially when the third old white man one a first name basis with everyone else in the courtroom, the GAL, was basically in agreement). they'd then remand down to the same judge who would undoubtedly make the same decision. plus, yeah, lots of time and money.
#4704

thirdplace posted:

well, it's not a final order; interlocutory appeals are uphill battles at the best of times. plus, the most I could hope for is overruling the determination to keep out the old child-abuse stuff; the rest is pretty much just discretionary judgments of the evidence that it's almost impossible to overrule (especially when the third old white man one a first name basis with everyone else in the courtroom, the GAL, was basically in agreement). they'd then remand down to the same judge who would undoubtedly make the same decision. plus, yeah, lots of time and money.


if the child abuse stuff isn't excluded and the judgment is the same, is there not a wide variety of precedent that abusing your child means you don't get to have them anymore that the judge would then be ignoring and justifying in whatever bullshit handwaving way that would not stand up to review? i'm not telling you how to do your job, i'm just mentioning these things because i'm curious what the reality is. are appeals restricted only to errors of law and not errors of discretionary judgment or "balance of the evidence"s or whatever?

i mean i saw on the tv that justice is always served.

#4705
[account deactivated]
#4706
you can definitely appeal evidentiary determinations, it's just a very high burden. also, in family law, the GAL recommendation carries a ton of weight on those and like I said he wasn't really with us on this one. there are favorable presumptions related to domestic abuse, but they don't apply to (nominally) supervised visitation, just primary placement.
#4707
i got to leave work early because there was a terrorist attack in london or something
#4708
it pretty much made up for having to spend the earlier part of the day working with someone who kept saying im not racist but, over and over, fml
#4709

getfiscal posted:

Anyhoo, I'm declaring this thread a success, because I went outside, and even secured a low-paying job in a field with no future employment prospects.



it can seem like wishful thinking to treat something other than already being connected in that sort of field as anything but a crapshoot but while i don't know anything about what poli sci means in canadian terms, i do know that you're head and shoulders above most u.s. students at least in terms of knowledge and reasoning ability, as well as your power to demonstrate that in writing through clear communication, so keep that in mind at least... gl

#4710

thirdplace posted:

you can definitely appeal evidentiary determinations, it's just a very high burden. also, in family law, the GAL recommendation carries a ton of weight on those and like I said he wasn't really with us on this one. there are favorable presumptions related to domestic abuse, but they don't apply to (nominally) supervised visitation, just primary placement.


ahh I had to look up GAL. thanks

#4711
It's called a WOMAN actually, if you don't want to be reductive.
#4712
and yesterday one of our volunteer attorneys got murdered by her client's abusive ex. if i don't learn SQL, i might buy a gun?
#4713
Jesus Christ dude I'm sorry
#4714
fuck
#4715
Sorry about your bad life.
#4716
I never met her, so it's not anything I deserve or need sympathy for. Just more of an occasion for classic and and heartfelt FTGE!
#4717
Go watch gideons army and hug a criminal defense attorney
#4718
[account deactivated]
#4719
the adversarial trial system is absurd at best and tragic at worst
#4720

Petrol posted:

the adversarial trial system is absurd at best and tragic at worst

the #1 thing I got out of my time as a law clerk was that when both parties are pro-se (or when the attorneys who are there are so far out of their elements that they don't count), good judges transition to a de facto inquisitorial system while shitty ones stick to what they were taught

Edited by thirdplace ()