#not legal advice

[blatentmisinformation]

Jury nullification is a fun pair of words that have no significant meaning. Make sure to let people know about it if they are going to be in court anytime soon.

[kittyoverlord]

Criminal Law Basics incoming:

This is why the standard for proving guilt in a criminal court is Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. There is a ton of discussion regarding what Reasonable Doubt is*, but in general it is the highest burdan of proof that exists in the US Justice system. When creating this standard of proof, the idea was that circumstantial evidence and/or a lack of evidence can be twisted to imply guilt, which would lead to more innocent people being unfairly prosecuted. In theory, the prosecutor has the burden of proof because we should be absolutely certain the the person that we're sending to jail/prison/death is actually guilty. Defense attorneys spend a lot of time working on the best ways to describe reasonable doubt to a jury to help increase the chances of a not guilty verdict.

In this instance, it would be up to the prosecutor to show evidence that the Loam's received this money, it is not the Loam's responsibility (via their attorney**) to provide evidence that they did not receive the money. Sklonda's argument would be likely focus on the prosecutors and cops failing to meet this standard by not providing this key piece of evidence.

Also, I know this is done for story purposes, but this is all flagrant disregard for attorney client privilege, which doesn't go away just because the client died.

*We actually just got a ton of cases back from an appeal decision that determined that judges in our state were using an incorrect analogy to describe reasonable doubt to jurors. On that basis a lot of cases have to be re-tried because the jury wasn't applying the correct standard. That's how important this is.

**Another interesting legal fact, if both of the Loams were being charged with the same crime, they would not both get the same attorney. They would be what is known as co-defendents, and at least where I work, one of them would wind up with a private attorney who is paid for by the state due to the public defender's office having a conflict of interest. This is basically because in theory the best defense for either one of them may be to blame the other one, and so one attorney cannot act in the best interest for both of them. If they both got their own attorney and decided to work together to prove both of their innocence, that's totally fine, but there would be more of a process to ensure that no impropriety was going on. Again, I know this is for story purposes, but just a little fun fact from your local public defender - admin assistant.

[chiefmuffin]

Be happy

Be gay

Do crime

[alexandramrobertson]

"Isn't that entrapment?"

Why Fraser is jumping to conclusions

It’s me, your friendly neighbourhood legally trained Canadian. Here to tell you law stuff that is just for fun and definitely not legal advice.

The Due South fandom remember the moment in the pilot movie, when Fraser meets Ray and calls him out for trying to entrap a garment buyer into buying stolen merchandise.

The problem is, while he could be right, Fraser didn't have enough information to make that call.

What is entrapment?

Let’s look at Canadian law, because it’s what I know and what Fraser would know (unless he studied Illinois law on the plane).

In Canada, entrapment occurs when:

(a) the authorities provide an opportunity to persons to commit an offence without reasonable suspicion or acting mala fides, or, (b) having a reasonable suspicion or acting in the course of a bona fide inquiry, they go beyond providing an opportunity and induce the commission of an offence.  R. v. Mack, [1988] 2 SCR 903

Let's call these "Category A" and "Category B" entrapment.

Fraser didn't know enough

Fraser can't know whether Ray's operation is Category A entrapment because he doesn't know whether Ray has reasonable suspicion or what his motives are. He may have guessed that Ray doesn't have reasonable suspicion based on his inference that the prisoner is not really a garment buyer, but he hasn't said that yet.

Fraser may have assumed Ray had reasonable suspicion but crossed the line into Category B entrapment (inducing the offence). But Fraser probably didn't see enough of the conversation to make that call.

He's just jumping to conclusions and being condescending about it. In another country where he doesn’t know the law. No wonder Ray is annoyed.

[havinganormalone]

Hey listen. Listen. This is important.

The police are not experts on the law. NEVER trust what they say when it comes to legal matters.

Even IF they are well meaning (they aren't) they will tell you stuff that is straight up incorrect. I had an officer tell me that there was nothing they could do about an ex threatening to out me as trans to my family the first time I talked to the police about him posting revenge porn. The second time, another officer told me that was a hate crime and could be something additional he was charged with. Which one was correct? I'm not gonna find out by talking to the police. THEY DON'T FUCKING KNOW.

The police did not study law. Do not trust them to understand it. Get a lawyer.

[chantylay]

Oh hey, I actually work in landlord tenant law. Absolutely do contact the city for an inspection if you have an issue like this and keep meticulous copies of your conversations with your landlord (get things in writing). Landlords must keep your apartment in good condition (including things like the plumbing) and if they do not fix it you can take legal action (and potentially withhold rent but you should talk to a lawyer if you are gonna do that. How to go about that without getting dragged to court for non-payment of rent is a complicated subject).

This AI knows what’s up

[alexandramrobertson]

Governments litigating badly

I just rewatched the Due South season 2 episode “We Are the Eggmen”. While this episode is a lot of fun, it's legally absurd. The Canadian government wouldn't respond to a lawsuit by immediately handing over millions of dollars when their employee claimed it was fraudulent. Instead, they would:

Retain local counsel. Cloutier probably isn’t a personal injury defence lawyer and even if he is, he’s not called to the bar in Illinois. He would be instructing local lawyers from behind a desk in Ottawa.

Deny responsibility for Fraser's actions. He wasn't on duty, so he's not our problem.

Dispute jurisdiction. We have diplomatic immunity. If you want to sue us, you'd better do it in Canada, where we appoint the judges, the damages awards are peanuts, and you'll owe us big if you lose.

Hire a private investigator to investigate Fraser's fraud theory.

Demand a mountain of documents. You're asking for ten milion dollars? We'll need twenty years of financials and medical records for every sniffle and scraped knee you've had in your entire life. If any pre-existing condition might have caused your current condition, they'll argue it did.

Claim the driver caused the accident. Actually, sir, you were the one who was drunk, weren't you?

Drag their heels and delay, delay, delay.

Realism sure is less fun, isn’t it?

I'd also forgotten that Fraser pretends to electrocute himself while unlocking the door. It's a big step for him and Thatcher since until this point the only person we’ve seen him joking around with is Ray. And of course this is after lying (badly) to help her earlier in the episode.

Your mask is slipping, Fraser. You’re smitten.

[annionebutme]

I todays episode of "I have found out something that's been confusing me"

Academy can mean school and also academy can mean like "institution of special smart people gather to promote their feild" because why the fuck not. It comes from the name for platos garden so it sounds smart and every smart person wants to use it regardless of how confusing it can be. School came first though (16th c vs 17th c) so fuck you, united learned persons of the world if i want to start a fan fiction writing school and call it the academy of literature then you can't stop me.

[explodingice]

Guys, gals, and nonbinary pals

Lend me your ear-ussy

If you feel like the next four years your life may be in danger might I recommend

Buying a gun

With this quick and easy lifehack you can turn any would be "your body my choice" motherfuckers into fertalizer

*legal disclaimer I'm not advocating for murder,just proactive self defense. Stay safe cuties ;3*

[chantylay]

Related note since the seccond person was talking about evictions: another good legal doctrine in the category of squatters rights to keep in mind is adverse possession. If you fix up an abandoned property and tell people it's your home, the legal owner of the property only has so long (please note that this period may be up to ten years depending on your state) to report you and request your removal from the property. If they fail to do so a court may declare you the rightful owner. After all, the person whose name was on the deed left it to rot.

If they do report you, they still have to go through the legal eviction stuff. It's a slightly different set of proceedures from non-paying or lease violating renters, but you still have protections against harrassment (please find out if your local area has pro bono housing law programs as you may be able to get a free lawyer to help with that case).

Mostly this doctrine is used by neighbors who have fences in the wrong place to claim small parts of an other person's yard or such the like. But it is possible to legally take over property from a negligent and absentee owner.

[necarion]

My client: "Anyway, Judge, that's why I think you should go suck a dick."

Judge: "Did you just tell me to -"

Me, going into desperate damage control: "Objection, your honor, hearsay!"

[aridotdash]

Legal hack: donate blood before your hearing so the judge has to be nice to you

[elderinternetresurrection]

All real people are public domain characters. Including famous people. Don't have allegorical tech bro characters. Name your character Elon Musk. Allegory is for cowards. Dante was right.

[kittyoverlord]

Yes all of this!

Cops are not your friends!

Even in cases where abuse takes place, which is what a lot of people assume is the only time to call the cops if at all, abusers are good at manipulating the cops so that victims of abuse often wind up being the ones charged with assault, and it's a really hard charge to fight because it's mostly he-said/she-said.

Cops are not your friends.

[gamerwoman3d]

Hello! I have a question, is it stealing when you credit the original poster even if there was not a watermark? I have been accused of stealing and I don't know what to do.

To my knowledge they have not mentioned anything about reposting and they have not been active for months. I am overthinking, please help...

Anon 🐈‍⬛

Hi, 🐈‍⬛️ !

TL:DR - Message the artist directly and move the posts to "Post Privately" until decisions are made.

Extended answer below the cut.

I'm coming at this ask from a place of compassion because I wanna make sure you feel okay by the end of the answer. Step one, deep breath and chill. It isn't the end of the world, and you are not a bad person. Bad people won't even bother asking if they did something wrong - because they legitimately do not care. So breathe in, you're gonna be fihe.

Judging by the number of asshole billionaires on the planet, I think it's safe to say that it's only stealing if you get caught. Otherwise it's arguably "Archival purposes."

However if you want to smooth things over with your accuser, begin by moving the post in question to "private." This stops it from being available for use outside your own blog. You can still archive it that way using a python script at a later date, but also it prevents *you* from accidentally distributing something that is not yours to distribute.

Distribution is the key word here. Taking something that an internet artist gave you/made available to you and using that thing for personal purposes only isn't Distribution, it's consumption. Giving that thing to others so that others can use it, IS distribution.

Some folks get mad if you redistribute their Intellectual Property [I.P.] without their consent/without a licence/without an agreement. Some don't. The only way to know for sure is to contact the artist - not the accuser.

If the accuser IS the artist, move their art posts to "Post Privately," inform them that the posts were removed, and ask them if there is anything you can do going forward to support them. Then just negotiate from there, every artist is different and may ask for different stuff. You are not obligated to do anything to support them, just try not to cause them injury [by for example illegąlly redistributing imagery that they charge a lot of $$$ to unlock on Patreon].

If the accuser is not the artist, reach out to the actual artist. You may even find the permissions you need in their pinned post [mine for example is in pinned and about pages at the end.]

In any case, don't lose sleep over it. Nothing on this hellsite is worth losing sleep over.

Also, all you can do is your best. If you reach out to the original artist and they don't respond in 2, 3 months, then... I'm not really sure they're using art as a career path anyway? Or if they are, they/their team is being a bit irresponsible for not replying.

And legally in the USA anyway they have to actually give you, in writing, a cease and desist letter, before they can take any further action. And if you DO desist [by putting posts private/removing posts] then there's not much else they can do to you at that point.

All that being said, I'm NOT a lawyer. And this is NOT LEGAL ADVICE. I hope it goes well for you. Promise it ain't the end of the world though.

If the person accusing you is not the artist, and you have permission from the artist to post the work... then tell the accuser that you took the necessary steps to ensure the artist wasn't injured by your post, and ask them to leave you alone.

If you haven't heard from the artist or the permissions are in limbo, tell the accuser you are waiting from a response from the artist. You can also ask the accuser for updated contact information for the artist, and if they cannot provide that info... then question wtf are they doing trying to represent them?

Permissions summary: YOU HAVE MY EXPRESSED PERMISSION TO USE ANY SCREENSHOTS, GIFS, ASSETS OR CONTENT THAT I HAVE MADE OF THE GAME MK1 [MORTAL KOMBAT 1 (2023)]. EVERYONE has my enthusiastic consent. You don't have to make something I *enjoy* with those assets. You're under no obligation to please me with your content, even if it's made with bits of my content. Enjoy yourselves, go wild! Any MK1 screenshots or gifs that I make can be used for your fanworks as long as you have the legal rights to do so. [I'm pretty sure you all have the legal right to make any fanart/icons/reposts/headers/photo edits/collages/parody that you like, but I do not know every single law for every country. You're on your own to research whether you'd get in trouble for SubScorp art in Indonesia or the PRC or Alabama or wherever you are where all the rules get weird. But as long as you're not getting punished for using my MK1 gameplay in your work, go nuts! You have my permission to use the assets I've made from the game.]

[roguehr]

Drafting a new cannabis policy, let's get into it.

With few exceptions (mostly heavily regulated industries- check your local laws) employees in the private sector are protected from discrimination based on legal (you gotta be 21) recreational cannabis use during their own time, off the employers premises and without use of company equipment (sorry, you can't hot box the company truck).

This includes at hiring, most companies have stopped testing for cannabis all together. It's illegal in NYC.

If you live in a state without legal weed you are SOL.

What about medical?

That's a bit more complicated but in general it should be treated like any other mind-altering prescription.

What about post-accident or reasonable suspicion testing?

This is where they're going to get you. Best practice is to use a cheek swab to narrow the window of use. It's not required so you still may get sent for a piss test, pop hot, and get fired.

Consider getting a med card to bolster a wrongful terminated suit.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in the courts.

How can you protect yourself?

Get a medical card. Even in a recreationally legal state. Doing so will guarantee your privacy at hiring. If you test positive on a pre-employment test the medical review office will reach out to you to confirm if you have an Rx, if you do they'll return the results as negative to your employer.

Read the company policy.

During the interview process its totally appropriate to ask “what is the onboarding process?”. If the recruiter seems cool you can ask them more directly (OVER THE PHONE. Don't put that shit in writing)