If a court makes a ruling that is unfair and in violation of the truth of a case, is it better to lose self-respect by obeying it, or to disobey and be held in contempt? Isn't it the duty of a person to stand up for what is right in this way?

I have a family member who thinks that the electoral college discriminates him, because his vote is worth less than the vote of people in other states. Furthermore, his race is the minority in his state, where the race with majority votes for the opposite political party and always wins. He believes the vote of each person should be worth the same anywhere in the country, regardless of the state. One person, one vote.

I dream of owning my own restaurant someday. Frankly, about 70% of the reason for this dream is the desire to stand up to shitty customers on behalf of my employees (other former restaurant workers will understand!) If this dream ever comes true, would it be legal to charge a so-called "asshole tax" to tables who were true assholes? My idea is that it would be a ~10% fee and would be disclosed on our menu, website, and in reservation confirmation emails alongside the more typical policies like autograt and cancellation.

My thought is even if it is legal, it might end up being more trouble than it's worth with potential chargebacks or even accusations of discrimination, but it's still fun to think about!

Say a corrupt cop causes a city $30 million in payouts due to wrongful convictions and the city being self-insured. At some point, those payouts start to have a measurable impact on the city's budget, general services, etc..

Obviously the guy(s) wrongfully convicted because of the corrupt cop have standing to sue, but what about a random resident of that city? You could argue that this corrupt cop's actions have harmed anyone who lives in the city, pays taxes, etc., especially if it can be shown that funds must be diverted for the payouts. Is there a case to be had by the random citizen against the cop? What about by the random citizen against the city?

Relatedly: can the city sue the corrupt cop for costing it money?

Let's say someone is living alone and drunk in their house at 3 am, and all of the sudden, they get an emergency alert on their phone and computer saying NUCLEAR BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND, SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. It's totally real and they freak out. They live in the middle of a city, and feel like they're done for unless they can quickly drive out of the city.

So in the interest of self preservation, they jump in their car and book it, trying to drive out of the city at a fast but not ridiculous speed. They get only 2 miles down the highway before a state police patrolman pulls them over for speeding, and notices immediately that they're intoxicated. The driver tries to explain the situation frantically about how they need to get out of city because it's about to get blown up by nuclear weapons, and advises the officer to do the same. (Many people may just try and flee police in this situation, but let's say this driver is just too scared to). The officer has no idea what this drunk driver is talking about, he hasn't seen an alert, and assumes perhaps the driver is addled by other controlled substances and is believing false realities. The driver is incredulous, so an arrest is quickly made. The driver continues to plea their case to the patrolman to no avail.

The driver gets more and more bewildered that the attack doesn't come as they're driven by the officer to the police station. Once they arrive, a chemical is done and the driver is proven to be intoxicated and is charged with a DWI.

As it turns out, although the emergency alert was real, it was a false alarm and was sent completely by computer error. Millions of people around the country are irate, and many situations around the country have been negatively affected by the alert.

Generally speaking, would the driver have a plausible case to have this DWI charge dropped?

If my trash was put on the ground instead of in our neighborhood’s dumpster, would someone be free to take pictures of my mail that found in my trash and post it online?

I want to know if someone has a federal offense from another County and live in a different County on bond. And they don’t report there new address to their Pre trail officer 👮 will they really issue a warrant for arrest ? How bad is it and do they really find everyone quickly ??

I have a family member conflicted disappeared cause he got in a fight with spouse and left. Didn’t leave the country and plans to show up to court date that makes the final decision.

Can I cover my 1991 toyota pos edition with disco ball mirror squares, potentially blinding any car with those stupid LED headlights, or no?

State is Idaho, sometimes I drive to the West coast though and don't want arrested there either

If this is the wrong sub, please tell me where to post! I live in a city of around 100K people. There is one prosecutor that only works one day a week because he also is the prosecutor for two other suburbs and has his own firm. It is very difficult to get in touch with him (I'm a victim's advocate) and he seems more overworked than the average city prosecutor (yes it seems a lot of lawyers are overworked, but this guy seems way beyond the average). I'm just wondering what's the average number of people a city has before they hire a dedicated prosecutor. Any insights?

Hi All,

I was impaneled for the first time last week and it was a remarkable, worthwhile experience. I was sent a post-jury-duty survey to my email today and it has left me both providing this feedback to the Court and curious for further knowledge for myself.

During deliberations, our group couldn't help but wonder why the Judge's instructions on things like Beyond A Reasonable Doubt, Moral Confidence, and other legal terms and the things we were supposed to determine guilt by were not provided on a printed sheet alongside evidence during deliberations. The Judge was clearly reading from a script, so what's the issue with providing us that script during deliberations? It would've allowed us to come to a verdict with much greater quickness and confidence, since much of our deliberation was spent worrying whether our verdict / lines of reasoning met the specific requirements the Judge outlined during instructions. This led to us needing to request further clarification from the Court for three separate issues during deliberation and costed at least an hour of the Court's time (not to discount the value of the time spent.)

So again in summary, why does the Court not provide the juror instructions as a written document alongside the evidence? Do other jurisdictions provide this info? It seems valuable, important, and discounted given that we're supposed to listen and remember on the first go.

So lets say that a woman and a man are married. The man has been werry clear that he doesn't want children, and they've together come to the conclusion that the woman will take birth controll as a form of protection. Both parties agreing on it.

But then at some point, the woman decides that she wants a child, so she stops taking the pill and doesn't tell her husband, even though they're still having (now unprotected) sex.

The woman get pregnant and tells her husband about what she had done.

Whould this be considered SA, since the husband was not aware of her not being on the pill? The sex was consentual, since he thought that his wife was on the pill.

Would this just be a super fucked up thing to do or would it ba classified as rape?

I was just watching the practice and I got to the episode with the nun killer.

The episode in question revolves around the following situation:

A guy with previous convictions for violent crimes is arrested because the police found, in a closet in his house, a nun cut up into pieces, along with the murder weapon with his fingerprints on it. He says she was not kidnapped as she went to his house willingly. The other nuns at the covenant confirm this.

The reason the police were in his house is because after killing the nun, he lured another girl to his apartment (willingly), they had sex (consensual), but the morning after he left to get coffee before this other girl woke up, and he locked her in his apartment while he went out.

Other girl wakes up, panicks, calls the police, police come and bust down the door, girl is free. However girl says "the guy said he has guns in his closet". Police use a crowbar to open the closet and the finely chopped nun falls out along with the murder weapon.

Meanwhile they arrest the guy while he is outside the building, heading back from the coffee shop, with 2 coffees (for him and the girl he locked in the apartment).

The conclusion of the episode was that the guy had to be set free because the protagonists joined the case and argued that the police had no warrant for the closet, and once they had freed the girl who had been locked in the apartment, they should have waited for a warrant.

Now, my questions are:

1. what would be realistic to happen here, where the guy is very, very likely guilty, but all evidence is suppressed? Half the nation knows his face and what he allegedly did and the very clear (but inadmissible) evidence. Does he have a claim with reasonable chances of winning against the police or state because he is now in danger? (in the episode one of the protagonists was hit with eggs thrown at her)

2. Is the police out of luck unless they can find another way to implicate him? The other nuns know that the dead nun was friendly with the killer and they know she went to his house. Can the police do something with this? Like get a "retroactive warrant" to get the suppressed chopped up nun back into evidence? My gut says 'no' because the rules of evidence are designed to punish an attitude of "get evidence now and find a way to apologize for it later" but I am not sure.

3. Any other likely outcomes from this situation?

Is stamp duty paid on the purchase price or value of the house?

If it's paid on the value of the property? Could the stamp duty amount be less if an independent valuation of the house puts it below the price it was bought for?

If the stamp duty is calculated on the price paid for the property. Could someone sell it for 1 pound? Then the other person, out their own free will, decides to gift the value of the house to the seller, out of gratitude.

Yeh.. this is an hypothetical to pay less stamp duty.

DV monitoring

Hi all,

I was recently speaking to a friend of mine who has been using ChatGPT to try and understand and respond to texts from an ex who was emotionally abusive so that they can set better boundaries which got me thinking…

If AIs are getting better at things like understanding speech, sentiment analysis, etc

What would be the legal ramifications if…

1. Someone recorded and shared a conversation or uploaded their text based communications with someone to an AI?

2. The AI provided advice on whether said communications were risky?

3. A monitoring AI agent was able to provide an escalation path eg an emergency call if it felt like things were going to escalate to physical violence?

4. The AI provided counseling tips on how to better relate to the person in question?

I’m in Australia but interested in different views from different places.

Thanks!

Is this covered in the constitution?

https://youtu.be/uIryKLJ9yPE?si=GA-TmIbA8X4VGkoh

Flanders is not trying to prevent a murder here exactly in the traditional sense of self defense but I guess it would be illegal to cause a disaster.

A nuclear reactor cannot blow up like this, but I imagine it could potentially be analogized to something like destroying a dam holding back water leading to a populated area. Trying to push a button where the only possible outcome is an explosion seems like a sufficiently grave threat that perhaps might allow the necessity defense.

AITA Cat ownership?

So here's the details for everyone. Genuinely really just want to view others opinions. I myself have 2 rescue/strays, that I now have full legal ownership for and take of. About a month ago my friend that I have been let sleeping here because he is in a tough situation brought a cat in here at 1am after he was "working" claims he found the cat, food, liter, a carrier, toys, proof of papers for adoption, and also a note explaining he couldn't take care of the cat anymore due o financial reasons. I decided to contact someone that helps me and is also a professional in regards to helping strays etc.. I sent her the paperwork and she was able to see where she exactly came from. Because I was never told the full truth it is always a mystery with this man. The cat came up chipped and owner regretted what he did, he really wanted his cat back. Then my parents and I, got the guys information and we decided to let him take his cat back. My "houseguest'' Shows up at my house 2 days later angry and breaking shit in my parents house and threatening us and just scary... Who is in the wrong here?

my mom is giving my girlfriend her old car in michigan. we live in colorado and we are trying to figure out whether or not we need to go to secretary of state in michigan before driving the car back to colorado. obviously we will need to get a colorado title once we get back and i found this website regarding that subject, but i'm really confused as far as what needs to be done in michigan when we receive the car in order to be able to drive it back (other than insure it).

thanks for your help

For example, if enough people wrote in Beyonce Knowles, even if she wasn’t running, and she won the electoral college, would she have to become the president of the U.S.? Obviously, she (or whichever candidate you want to think of) could resign, but would she legally have to swear in as POTUS in January?

A local church is part of a worldwide denomination. The local church is legally separate (individual ownership of real property, assets, determines it own board/elders, etc) yet the church maintains an ecclesiastical contract with the denomination. This contract is basically local church pays denomination portion of tithes, and in return receives access to materials, certain goods/services etc. provided by the denomination.

The local church is concerned about liability in an SA case and is also struggling with declining membership and decides to disband. This disbanding process includes liquidating all real estate assets, endowment etc and donating proceeds to the denomination.

Does this “ecclesiastical probate” action possibly work to shield those assets from the plaintiff? Can plaintiff sue the denomination ?

Can you receive 2 strikes for the same felony if there are multiple victims?

Pretty much title. Pretty far fetched but I guess it could happen.

If I record myself giving a notice to my leasing office, is that the same or better than certified mail? The whole point is to have proof they received the letter right?

So for more context, I came across a post saying that the city of Odessa Texas, "You can now sue a trans person for $10,000 if you catch then using the 'wrong restroom'."

I google it and an article about it says:

Under the amended ordinance, the city can seek fines of up to $500 and trespassing charges if a transgender person uses a restroom that matches the gender they identify as. The sweeping new terms also allow individuals to sue and seek no less than $10,000 in damages plus the cost of the lawsuit and attorney fees.

But I really don't understand what this changes or does because could you not already sue anybody for anything? That's how civil lawsuits work. You can sue somebody for existing just because you feel like it. I can sue my neighbor for a million bucks if they look at me funny. They are allowing people to do something they could already do?

Let's say a military or diplomat couple has a child while overseas, and through the child's entire life continue to be stationed overseas. When the kid turns 18 they presumably have the right to vote. What location does their vote count in? How do their votes affect the electoral college?

isn't lighting something on fire in a public place literally criminal mischief/fire code violation..something like that?

For those that haven't seen it, India's largest news Asian News International (ANI) has sued Wikipedia for defamation because the Wikipedia article on ANI correctly points out that the news outlet is little more than a propaganda mouthpiece for the increasingly far right and authoritarian government.

Wikipedia pointed out that the content is created by independent authors who have no affiliation with the Wikimedia Foundation or Wikipedia, and the court then ordered it to disclose who made the edits to include the offending content, which Wikipedia has now said it would do under seal to the court (boooo!)

Now, let's say I, your regular Joe America, am one of the editors (I'm not, but let's say I am!) Assuming that ANI gets this list (likely) and decides to pursue suits against them (also likely) and then wins (likely, because that's what happens in far right authoritarian nations), how would that affect me? Would they be able to pursue a judgement against me in the US? Would US courts honor an Indian defamation judgement despite their standard for defamation running afoul of the 1st Amendment? If I publicly flat out refuse to pay, and the courts in India sentence me to prison (which is a thing, as far as I understand it,) and they request extradition, will the US comply?