|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Lori Loughlin's lawyers believe federal agents are liars and criminals. |
| 1-9 of 9 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 12-16-19 05:14am - 1833 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
Lori Loughlin's lawyers believe federal agents are liars and criminals. Lori Loughlin's lawyers believe federal agents are liars and criminals. It has been shown in the past that federal agents can lie and steal. They can withhold evidence illegally. They can also plant fake evidence. Never trust the government, which has a mandate to lie and withhold actual news from the public. -------------- Lori Loughlin’s lawyers claim federal agents hiding evidence New York Daily News Storm Gifford Dec 16th 2019 4:37AM Lori Loughlin is crying foul. The 55-year-old actress and husband, Mossimo Giannulli, are claiming the Justice Department is refusing to turn over integral evidence in their college admissions bribery case. Now, they’re asking a judge to compel prosecutors to show it. On Friday, attorneys for the “Full House” star and her fashion designer husband filed a motion demanding the government produce the materials. Both pled not guilty to forking over $500,000 to Rick Singer, the admitted leader of a national college admissions cheating and bribery plot. The couple’s lawyers are also asking for all information concerning Singer’s representations to his clients regarding payments to the University of Southern California as well as information about “USC’s knowledge of Singer’s operation,” reported Yahoo! on Saturday. The attorneys also assert those documents would help support Loughlin and Giannulli’s contention that they made legitimate donations to the nonprofit led by Singer, not bribes. “The government’s theory in this case is that Giannulli and Loughlin knowingly bribed a rogue USC administrator in order to secure their daughters’ admission to the university,” reads the motion. “But the government appears to be concealing exculpatory evidence that helps show that both defendants believed all of the payments they made would go to USC itself — for legitimate, university-approved purposes — or to other legitimate charitable causes.” On “Full House,” Loughlin played Aunt Becky, the wife of John Stamos’ Jesse character. She also appeared in the Hallmark Channel series “When Calls the Heart.” But after her and her husband’s arrest, the series’ editors digitally edited her from the show as well as from all other Hallmark productions. Their trial is scheduled to begin in 2020. | |
|
||
| 12-16-19 02:17pm - 1833 days | #2 | |
|
rearadmiral (0)
Active User Posts: 1,453 Registered: Jul 16, '07 Location: NB/Canada |
Sure... because the investigators had a reason to make all of this up.  Talk about a sense of entitlement. | |
|
||
| 12-16-19 08:41pm - 1832 days | #3 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
Watch almost any crime on TV or at the movies: Yes, those are fictions. But the common theme that recurs is that "lawmen", which includes prosecutors, are the entitled ones. They are heroes fighting for justice. So when a cop shoots and kills some unarmed black teenager who is running away, the cop is only doing his job: and 9 times out of 10 (or more often), the cop is not arrested for murder. Instead, the police department praises the cop for doing his job. How many times in a year do cops shoot and kill unarmed suspects? Read the news. The cops are only doing their job. And they no longer have to say it was self-defense. (Although, they do bring up that defense, saying they thought the suspect was reaching for a weapon, or did not follow lawful orders from the cop.) Read newspaper accounts more closely. The cop orders the suspect: "Don't move." At the same time, the cop says: "Show me your hands." And then the cop shoots the suspect, because how can you not move, and at the same time, show your hands? You can't. You're breaking the law, if you show your hands. You're also breaking the law, if you don't show your hands. And it's a matter of pride (and maybe frustration) when you're doing your job: making the streets safe by arresting or killing suspects. "Sure... because the investigators had a reason to make all of this up." A large part of the job of investigators is to make a case. Get real. They are bullshit artists. Listen to politicians. From Wikipedia: Politicians should not forget that voters never grow weary of illusory promises...Politician must always tell people what they want to hear. Years ago, I was walking in my neighborhood for exercise. A couple of cops stopped me and asked what I was doing. This was around 10 in the morning. Broad daylight. I said I was walking. They asked me if I was on parole. I said no. They again asked me if I was on parole. I said no. They again asked me if I was on parole. I said no. Then they said, "Are you off of parole?" I said no. I was dressed in regular street clothes. I was not drunk. I drink rarely. I have an alcoholic drink maybe a few times a year, at a wedding or celebration. I don't do drugs (except for meds prescribed by my doctor). I was in my 60s. I wasn't acting strange. I was walking. For exercise. The cops finally said that a neighbor reported me for acting strange. I accepted that, not that I thought I did anything strange, but that a neighbor who did not know me thought I was a suspicious character on her street. I showed the cops my drivers license, that showed my current address was two streets down. That I lived there. (I assumed that gave me the right to walk on the streets, since I lived in the area.) The cops said I could go. They didn't arrest me. (They also asked what I did for a living, and a few other questions.) The cops said I could go. They were just doing their job. I very rarely walk in my neighborhood any more. Pains of old age, also I was frightened by the experience with the cops. A relative was married to a cop. I heard some stories about what some cops have done. And I read in the paper about cops shooting and killing people all the time, for little or no defensible reason, and the cops almost always get off. No punishment for killing or beating a person. (Any person who is beaten by a cop is guilty of re-sisting arrest, and not following orders.) End of rant. Edited on Dec 16, 2019, 08:50pm | |
|
||
| 12-16-19 09:38pm - 1832 days | #4 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
This is not right. A law-enforcement officer was suspended or possibly fired after a video was exposed that shows the officer trying to teach a student the proper way to show respect for the law. Support your local police. They are there to protect you. And surveillance videos must be removed from all public areas, unless the police have the fundamental right of disqualifying these snoopy devices from being admitted as evidence. ............ ............ Sheriff's deputy fired after video shows him slamming, dragging student: 'We were shocked' Gabrielle Sorto, AOL.com Dec 16th 2019 4:00PM A North Carolina sheriff's deputy was fired after surveillance video caught him body-slamming a middle school student. The deputy, whose name was not released, was terminated, "effective immediately," Vance County, N.C., Sheriff Curtis Brame told WTVD. State investigators are now deciding whether to file criminal charges against him. He was previously on paid administrative leave after the video surfaced on Thursday. The footage from Vance County Middle School shows the resource officer grab a student, slam him against his body and throw him on the ground. He then picks up the child and throws him to the ground again before dragging him down the hall. The video doesn't have audio, so investigators don't know what was said before the former deputy lashed out at the child. Brame said the former deputy has yet to offer an explanation as to what prompted his reaction. "When we first saw the video ... we were shocked," Brame told ABC News. "I don't expect my deputy or any deputy, or law enforcement in North Carolina to carry out their duties in that way." The school released a statement expressing it is "deeply concerned by the actions that took place." "School and district officials are working closely and in full cooperation with the local authorities to address this matter consistent with school board policy and state laws," the statement said. Vance County District Attorney Mike Waters told ABC News the unnamed boy suffered minor injuries. Waters said that he couldn't think of a justification for the "stunning" incident. "I don't know what was said," he told ABC News. "I don't think anything that was said or anything like that could justify his action. I don't think that will be relevant to any determination." A decision on whether to charge the deputy or take the case to a grand jury will be made early this week, according to Waters. | |
|
||
| 12-16-19 10:20pm - 1832 days | #5 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
I've been watching the new trailer for Wonder Woman. I thought the Wonder Woman movie with Gail Gadot was very enjoyable. But now I see that Chris Pine, who died heroically to save the lives of innocent people from bombs, is back again in the new Wonder Woman movie? Was Chris Pine re-awakened as a clone? As a cybernetic monster from Hell who will unleash his evil side when Wonder Woman is most vulnerable? Will the evil Gods of the Seventh Realm of Hades swarm into innocent virgin bodies to create un-imaginable evils throughout the land of the Free and Brave? Stay tuned for the new Wonder Woman movie, coming soooooooonnnnnnnnnn!!!!!!!! | |
|
||
| 12-16-19 10:34pm - 1832 days | #6 | |
|
careylowell (0)
Active User Posts: 40 Registered: May 22, '08 Location: Brigadoon, USA |
Something like fifty-five parents have been charged in this scandal. Back in Sept, when I was following this case closely, perhaps a dozen had said they would fight the charge(s). I regret that the majority of news coverage has focused on the two sets of parents with Hollywood connections.. this Loughlin and the Huffmans. That's understandable to a degree as both have displayed a 'let them eat cake' attitude. Meanwhile, who can name any of the rest without a google search? | |
|
||
| 12-16-19 10:58pm - 1832 days | #7 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
I haven't been following the case closely. But I can easily understand that the Hollywood factor attracts more attention than "ordinary" citizens who have not gained national prominence. My understanding of the cases is shallow. But the justice system is, to my belief, lopsided and strongly in favor of people with money, power, influence. Back in the 1970s, I read of a poor smuck who took an old chair from an abandoned house in Georgia, near where I was living at the time. The poor smuck was sentenced to over 4 years in prison for his crime. Taking old chair (worth maybe $2 or less) from an abandoned house. People who steal millions of dollars are sentenced to far less time. Better lawyers, I assume, along with associates who testify how wonderful these multi-million dollar thieves are. So the justice system is based on fighting for your rights. If Loughlin wants to fight, more power to her. This is completely different from what the Asian culture teaches: where people are supposed to confess guilt and shame after being accused. Just a different way of behaving, I guess. Look at Donald Trump. The telflon Don. Deny everything, no matter what the evidence shows. The evidence is only a bunch of lies, anyway. And Trump is proud of how smart he is: he tells lies, people believe his lies, and he is proud that he is smarter than they are. And if they don't believe his lies, they are thieves and witch hunters and evil scum who are trying to drag him down. Never surrender, never give up. Trump uber alles. | |
|
||
| 12-17-19 06:37pm - 1832 days | #8 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
Robert De Niro's company files $6 million suit against female ex-employee for watching TV while at work. $6 million? That would pay for a lot of TV watching. ------------ ------------ December 17, 2019 9:25am PT by Ashley Cullins Robert De Niro's Ex-Employee Asks Court to Toss $6M Suit Alleging 'Friends' Binge-Watching at Work "There is no case law holding that purportedly watching television during work gives rise to liability under any of the legal theories Canal advances," argues Graham Chase Robinson's lawyer. Frazer Harrison/Getty Images "There is no case law holding that purportedly watching television during work gives rise to liability under any of the legal theories Canal advances," argues Graham Chase Robinson's lawyer. Robert De Niro's former employee is asking a New York court to toss a complaint filed against her by her ex-boss — claiming it's nothing more than unlawful retaliation because she had threatened a suit before his was filed. De Niro's Canal Productions in August filed a $6 million lawsuit against former vp production and finance Graham Chase Robinson and alleged that she not only abused company credit cards, but also binge-watched Netflix (including 55 episodes of Friends) while on the clock. Robinson fired back with a gender discrimination and retaliation suit alleging that De Niro doesn't believe "men should treat women as equals" and that she was subjected to sexually charged comments and underpaid. De Niro's lawyer Tom Harvey called her allegations "beyond absurd." Now, Robinson is asking the court to either pause De Niro's "retaliatory, abusive and deficient" suit or throw it out in favor of the one she filed in New York federal court. Alternatively, Robinson wants the court to strike the requested damages as excessive and toss the claims related to binge-watching. "These inflammatory accusations are scandalous and prejudicial — so much so that they 'went viral,'" writes Alexandra Harwin in the filing, which is posted in full below. "The allegations are also irrelevant to Canal’s claims: there is no case law holding that purportedly watching television during work gives rise to liability under any of the legal theories Canal advances." Harwin also argues that the fraud claim should be dismissed because its "inherently implausible" that Robinson took almost half a year off "on the sly" because De Niro insisted that she be available around the clock and Canal was "keenly aware" of her schedule. | |
|
||
| 12-22-19 03:34pm - 1827 days | #9 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
Isn't a big part of the problem that she and her husband are entitled douchebags? sadly for the rest of us is that she just happens to be one of the people that got caught. How many entitled douchebags are there right now doing as bad or worse and we will likely never hear anything about it. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 1-9 of 9 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
