Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    rec.audio.opinion    |    Everybody's two bits on audio in your ho    |    255,659 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 253,781 of 255,659    |
|    mINE109 to ScottW    |
|    Re: What a surprise    |
|    17 Aug 23 13:13:45    |
      From: pianoforte109@yahoo.com              On 8/17/23 12:54 PM, ScottW wrote:       > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 10:36:50 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:       >> On 8/17/23 11:13 AM, ScottW wrote:       >>> On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 5:04:03 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:       >>>> On 8/16/23 11:17 PM, Art Sackman wrote:       >>>>>> Thank you, I already quoted the original document. This confirms that       >>>>>> Biden's lawyers claim the agreement was made with the prosecution and       >>>>>> didn't involve the judge.       >>>>>       >>>>> Duh!!!! That's the normal course of business.       >>>>>       >>>>> that is typically how it us.       >>>>> JUDGES DO NOT NEGOTIATE PLEA DEALS.       >>>>> They are negotiated between prosecution and defense attorneys.       >>>>> BUT, they are subject to the eventual acceptance or rejection ut the       judge,       >>>>>       >>>>> YOU       >>>> You wouldn't go wrong if you made it a practice to edit out anything       >>>> you've typed in all-caps.       >>>>> A plea deal not is NOT a binding contract, if NOT accepted by the judge.       >>>> Hunter's lawyers are saying they have a valid diversion agreement, not a       >>>> plea deal, which does not require a judge's approval.       >>>       >>> Stephen doesn't understand, Judges can't file charges.       >> Who mentioned charges?       >       > You were your teacher's worst nightmare.              Good answer! The filing:               1 The Government stated in open court        that the Diversion Agreement was a        “bilateral agreement between the        parties” that “stand[s] alone” from the        Plea Agreement, and that it was “in        effect” and “binding.” (Hr’g Tr.        46:9–14) (Government: “Your Honor, I        believe that this is a bilateral        agreement between the parties that the        parties view in their best interest.”);        id. at 91:6–8 (Government: “Your Honor,        the Diversion Agreement is a contract        between the parties so it’s in effect        until it’s either breached or a        determination [sic], period.”)...              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca