Re: Kelman v Kramer ruling 12.29.09
Posted by Sharon on 1/19/10
What? You mean you are not going to help me out by educating to the first whatever? Gee, I
thought you were my friend. You have definately been a HUGE help the past couple of weeks.
Been using you as a way to gage where perception biases might lay.
Oh well, guess you don't want to help anymore. Thanks anyway.
On 1/19/10, johncodie wrote:
> On 1/19/10, Sharon wrote:
>> "In our american history and democracy what case, before there was case law, was the
>> foundation for our first admendment? Who was the defendant? Who was the plantiff?
>> Who was the sucessful defendants lawyer? Where did he go to school? And what legal
>> description of attorneys did his sucessful defense coin a popular sterotypical phase?"
>> I don't know the answer to the above of how the First Amendment came to be, but would
>> like to.
>> "Sharon could this be your defense?"
>> Ultimately yes. But only part of it. Its more than that and has to do with fair reporting
>> of a legal proceeding ie, "privilege".
> If you don't know the history of the laws and constitutional foundations as to who brought
> forth the rights to free speech and free press and don't have the brief time to look it
> up ; there should be no need for you to continue in your effort to reverse judgement at
> trial, or declare anything more in public. For those who know the answers you have just
> convienced every historian of deomocracy or of the legal profession you are truely at a
> disadvantage at winning any judgement in your favor.
> What ever you argue has no merit. Perhaps some of your friends that are history teachers
> could help you out in a time of need.
Posts on this thread, including this one