Re: Codie's fantasy world

More | Report Post

johncodie:

Oh, johncodie, Esq., are you deposing me on the board? You a lawyer now John, telling the legal
professionals how to practice?

You need to go back and read the posts, and one more time here, stop making false assumptions and
bad conclusions. You could find yourself innocently wrapped up in apparent lies, just because
you're incoherent and as I believe, don't really know what you are saying. Address that problem of
yoursb, get a grip on it. Find someone you trust, let them read. Let them tell you how many times
you leaped to conclusions, and made contradictory statements.

On 6/27/03, johncodie wrote:
> Mary has to ask Phares if a client should post, if he/she is in litigation. If you have never
> been in litigation, or or deposition, you should know that you can't bagger your witness being
> disposed of having any specific knowledge. It just gets you own to the next question. If you do
> have specific knowledge that later comes back, and you responded negative, it indicates you were
> being untruthful. I told you before Frank, if you don't have any specific knowledge, just say
> you don't.

If johncodie tells you something, it's the law. He calls the shots. He's the board boss.

Nobel (NOBLE, Nobel is for you and Wingate)) to try to defend Dr. Shoemaker,

Indicative of your problem, there is no defense necessary. Now, you can continue to fabricate, but
there is no need to respond to your fabrications. John, call Sally and get it over.

but I don't think he would return the favor.
> On 6/27/03, ff wrote:
>>
>>
>> Mary"
>>
>> What? Too many flaws inherent in his post/thinking for me, or is it just me? How truthful is
>> the response if the attorney cannot make you answer because you responded "I don't have any
>> knowledge."
>>
>> ff
>>
>>

MCS/MCSS Chatboard

LATEST POSTS | BY TOPICS | SUBMIT A POST