HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: O1ADAMS@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU (Debbie Adams)
Subject: Teacher problem in public school system
Organization: The University of Akron
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 08:39:16 GMT

I have a child through Children Services Board that I have temporary custody
of (and I'm in the process of obtaining legal custody of) who is having a
problem in school with one of her teachers.  The teacher seems to find any
and every reason to give her D's and F's and never gives this child any
kind of respect.  I must explain some history regarding this teacher first.
 
Three years ago my son had this teacher and there was a personality clash.
She did not like my son because she said he would not apply himself.  My
son was receiving D's and F's from her.  He ended up transferring to another
school and received A's and B's for the same class.  (By the way this teacher
teaches Honors English and Speech.) The very next year my daughter had the
same teacher.  She asked my daughter if my son was her brother and she said
yes.  From that day on my daughter had nothing but problems with this teacher.
My daughter was an honor student getting A's and B's in all of her classes
except this one.  She received D's and F's in this class.  She taught the
class about ethnic slurs and stated that she felt Jungle Bunnies was very cute
and funny.  My daughter told her she didn't feel that was cute nor funny.  She
told me that my daughter had a very serious attitude problem.  After several
more problems I had a conference with the principal, the teacher and my husband
and the outcome was that the principal felt I should report her to the
Board of Education because after making all the teachers fill out progress
reports on my daughter, she refused to do so.  All of her other teachers gave
her very high citizenship marks and this teacher refused to fill it out at all.
When the principal told her she must fill it out she gave her very low marks
for citizenship.  I finally went to the Board of Education and sent several
letters regarding her conduct.  But, by then my daughter was ready to graduate.
 
Now my youngest daughter has her and so does my daughter that I'm obtaining
custody of.  She has already started giving them problems.  I need to do
something before it gets too far into the school year.  Does anyone have
any solutions legal or otherwise?  I'm afraid my daughters will suffer with
their grades if I don't do something soon.
 
By the way, my adopted daughter gave a speech that we (my family) all helped
her with from an article out of the newspaper and she gave her an F because
she said she was protesting.  This was the day after open house.  Open house
was the day that this teacher found out that I had guardianship of my
soon to be adopted daughter.
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.native,alt.activism,alt.discrimination,soc.rights.human
From: Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Apartment Owners Sued for Discriminating Against American Indians
Organization: NDA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 10:09:47 GMT

Here is a press release from the U.S. Department of Justice.

 Justice Department Sues Apartment Owners for Discriminating
Against American Indians
 To: National Desk
 Contact: Amy Casner of the U.S. Department of Justice,
          202-514-2007

   WASHINGTON, Oct. 7 -- The U.S. Department of Justice filed 
a civil rights lawsuit against the owners of a Billings, Mont., 
apartment complex today, alleging they engaged in a pattern
and practice of discrimination against American Indians trying 
to rent apartments at the property.
   The complaint, filed in U.S. District Court in Billings, alleges
that Donald R. Lee Sr. and Richard E. Lee violated the Federal Fair
Housing Act when they discriminated against prospective American
Indian tenants because of their race, color or national origin.
   They allegedly made apartments unavailable to American Indians;
imposed different rental terms and conditions upon American
Indians; offered American Indians different privileges while living
at the property; and told American Indian apartment seekers that no
apartments were available for inspection when in fact apartments
were available.
   John R. Dunne, assistant attorney general in charge of the Civil
Rights Division, said, "Because of a long, sad history of
discriminatory treatment of Native-Americans in many areas of this
country, the Civil Rights Division has made a special effort
to combat such discrimination.  This lawsuit is a result of those
efforts and with this case, the department reaffirms its commitment
to ensure that all Americans have equal opportunity to secure fair
housing."
   The government's complaint seeks monetary damages for any
individuals who may have been the victim of the defendants' alleged
unlawful practices as well as a civil penalty in accordance with
the Federal Fair Housing Act.
   The complaint also seeks injunctive relief that would prohibit
the defendants from discriminating in the future on the basis of
race, color and national origin.  The complaint also asks that the
apartment owners be required to notify the public that its
apartments are available on an equal opportunity basis.
   The lawsuit is based partially on evidence provided by a private
fair housing organization, the Concerned Citizens Coalition of
Great Falls, Mont., and its affiliate in Billings.  Testers used by
the coalition uncovered the pattern and practice of discrimination
at Lee Apartments.  The testers, individuals with matching
characteristics and credentials other than race, inquired about the
availability and rental terms of apartments.  The evidence
indicated that the defendants treated American Indian testers less
favorably than white testers.
 -30-

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.censorship,misc.headlines
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Sinead O'Connor's freedom of speech
Keywords: Those croppies who will not lie down
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 23:33:31 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.054011.2337@Princeton.EDU>
egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Edward G. Nilges) writes:

>I won't refrain from (1) saying hip hip hurrah for Sinead's performance
>on Saturday Night Live, and (2) reflecting that the logic of the modal
>net "libertarian" position on freedom of speech would PREVENT Sinead from
>speaking.

Not the model I use.  But then, Ed, logic has never been your strong
point.

>  For the "libertarian" systematically winds up with a strong
>view of property rights (including rights acquired by force and fraud)
>such that the "right" of freedom of speech disappears, to be replaced by
>the PRIVILEGE, always exercised on what turns out to be some man's
>property.

So I conclude that, assuming that Sinead actually owned the picture
she tore up, she was acting in accordance with her property rights.

Of course, some people would consider what Sinead did to be "hate
speech".  But we libertarians would allow her to speak it all the
same.

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: vaccaro@novavax.UUCP (N. Trafford Vaccaro)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: student loans
Keywords: loans, student loans
Date: 7 Oct 92 05:59:12 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Nova University, Fort Lauderdale, FL

Hi,

A friend of mine ows about 10,000 dollars plus interest on a 
guaranteed student loan. He graduated and has a job, a condo, and
a year old baby, and can't afford the $140/month payment. He tried
calling the people at Student Loan Services and he talked to them.
He wanted to try and get the monthly payments reduced to about 80,90,
or 100 dollars/month, but they would not work with him. So, they
sent the loan info to the Guarantor (State of Florida) and he is
in a default status, even though he wants to pay the thing back.
He tried to get help from the County Credit Counseling service,
but they said they could not help with student loans. He wanted
to get in touch with whoever the Guarantor is, but was told by
Student Loan Services that he can't call them, he has to wait
until they call him. Now he's all worried about what's going to
be done to him, etc. Can anyone shed light on what can be done to him,
if he's going to lose his home, get his wages garnished? He wants
to pay the loan back, but he can barely make ends meet now.

Thanks!



Nicholas
Xref: sparky misc.legal:18597 bit.listserv.infonets:355
From: rc@depsych.Gwinnett.COM (Richard Carlson)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,bit.listserv.infonets
Subject: Re: On-line Legal: ABA/net
Date: 13 Oct 92 15:01:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: depsych.uX9ksB4w165w

mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:

RC:
> >  That
> >raises the question: just _who_ subscribes to ABA/net?
> 
> For the most part, ABA members with computers who like the service.
> I'm an ABA member who doesn't like the service. But, contrary to your
> statement here, I and most of the other lawyers online in this newsgroup
> have heard of the service. Perhaps all of us have. 

What would cause some lawyers to like the service and others to
not like it?  Does it cover some areas of law better than others?
Does it market itself to some segments of the legal community more
vigorously than to others?

I'd like to find some discussions of juvenile and criminal law. If
the Association (Society?) of Juvenile Court Judges had a BBS that
had conferences, I'd call it.  (Although all the books I find on
the juvenile justice system pit the offender against the system.
What interest me is the extent to which one juvenile can use the
criminal and civil law, e.g., tortious battery, to defend h/erself
from _another_ _juvenile_.)

--
Richard Carlson
Internet:              rc@depsych.gwinnett.COM
Bangpath:              {rutgers,ogicse,gatech}!emory!gwinnett!depsych!rc
CompuServe:            76605,470
Voice:                 (404) 881-6877
From: schin@acs.bu.edu (neil schier)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Are there any weekend law programs in the Boston area that are ABA
Date: 11 Oct 92 15:30:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: bu.98277
Organization: Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
Originator: schin@acs.bu.edu

Hello again.

Unfortunately, due to the relative early start of p-t law classes, I am unable
to attend during the week. I was wondering if there are any ABA accredited
law schools which offer week-end courses, in the Boston area?

Regards (and thanks to all who responded to my earlier post)
Neil Schier
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: LaFave too broad?
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 21:51:18 GMT

In article <VDRBsB2w165w@depsych.Gwinnett.COM> rc@depsych.Gwinnett.COM (Richard Carlson) writes:

>I think that was in the one volume Hornbook I found.  But the
>discussion wasn't thorough.

Did you read the cases cited in the footnotes?


--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"Liberty resides in the rights of that person
mnemonic@eff.org| whose views you find most odious."
(617) 864-0665  | 
EFF, Cambridge  |                           --John Stuart Mill
Xref: sparky misc.legal:18658 talk.politics.misc:51761 talk.politics.theory:4534
From: ald@clipper.ingr.com (Al Date)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Jury Nullification -- The Power is a Right
Date: 14 Oct 92 18:29:34 GMT
Organization: Intergraph Advanced Processor Division - Palo Alto, CA

In article <1992Oct9.014241.19836@yang.earlham.edu> allens@yang.earlham.edu (Allen Smith) writes:
>In article <1992Oct7.220311.5378@clipper.ingr.com>, ald@clipper.ingr.com (Al Date) writes:

>> 
>> So, it is quite important WHY the jury did what they did, and juries
>> are frequently polled in the wake of their verdict to ascertain
>> just what was going on in their minds.  I am surprised that a student
>> of law seems to be ignorant of this.  
>> 
>> But even if, as you say, the jury simply makes a "moral decision" with no 
>> implication of claiming the moral right to do so, the fact 
>> remains that they have the legal power to make that moral
>> decision.  It is up to you to show how they can have the legal power
>> to make a moral decision, and yet be denied the moral right to do so.  
>> 
>> Good luck.  There is always room for more tortured reasoning on the net.
>> (8-)
>> 
>>>>>What I was saying here was that I don't think the jury claims a "moral
>>>>>right to nullify." Again, I've never heard a juror refer to any such
>>>>>thing.
>>>>
>>>>It is implicit in their actions, if not their words.
>>>
>>>You confuse your inference with their implication.
>>>
>> 
>> I think you fail to see that an action undertaken for moral reasons
>> is done within the psychological framework of it not only 
>> being right to do so, but also that there is an overriding 
>> right to act rightly.  Right?
>> 
>> Think about it.
>> 
>> 
>	However, there's something you've forgotten. Does a dictatorship 
>gain the right to do something just because it can? Does might make right, 
>in other words? What you're saying is that jury nullification is a right 
>because it can't be prevented. So? A lot of things can't be prevented, but 
>that doesn't make them rights.

Perhaps you missed a post or two.  I have repeatedly made the point that
jury nullification is not only a legal power, but it involves a moral
decision.  In other words, is NOT JUST a legal power, but a legal
power to place conscience above law in the cause of a higher ideal
of justice.  The assumption of the Founding Fathers was that we should
never lose sight of justice, especially when the law was being used
in unjust ways.

This distinguishes it from might making right.  It is a combination of
might *plus* right making right, if you will.  I dont see how legal might plus
moral right can make a non-right, as some here (and some Supreme Court justices)
have argued in the past.

On another level, however, might does make right, because all rights are
products of human cultures, and the cultures which exist today do so at the
expense of those cultures which were wiped out or assimilated in the past.

But thanks for rebroadcasting the Subject.  


--Al Date
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.folklore.urban
From: pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (George Jetson)
Subject: Re: Presidential Succession History
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 21:47:35 GMT

In article <Bw7x0y.IDA@cck.coventry.ac.uk> cmh004@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Dave) writes:
>OK I don't know much about the line of succession for the USA president, but
>why have a line longer than about 20? Because if those 20 have been killed.
>Then there can't be much of a country left. Unless 20 assinations have taken
>place (on the same day?).
>
>Has your country every thought about having By-elections for the president?

That's a good question.  As far as I know, when a Veep takes over, he
does not then select his own Veep.  I wonder why not.

(The last instance of this was when Jerry Ford became prez.  As far as I
know, he had no Veep)

************************************************************************
A note to new readers:  the weasely :-) symbol is frowned upon in this
group.  Any questions, see Phil Gustafson who will gladly rearrange your
diodes for you.
			- From the AFU FAQ -

	- pynq@quads.uchicago.edu, who is still costing the net
	  hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars, every time he posts -
************************************************************************
From: jeet@point.cs.uwm.edu (Jitendra Kavathekar)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Not your everyday speeding ticket question question.
Date: 9 Oct 1992 01:41:48 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.2.5

Hello Netland,


  I would like some advice from those of you that would like you give it.

  I recently moved from Wisconsin to Idaho.  No that is not the problem. 
  The problem is that just today I was doing 45MPH in a 35MPH zone in Boise
  and got clocked and ticketed.   My sob story is that I am soon to turn 25 
  and I had a clean record before this incident, but this is going to be 
  ruined.  The glitch is that I am holding a Wisconsin License and insurance
  policy from Wisconsin right now.  Like probably most in my situation, 
  I am really worried about my insurance rates.  I give the state names 
  because laws are probably specific to states, although one of my questions 
  is, Is that statement true?  The rest of my question is as follows:


    By not being registered nor having a license from Idaho and having
    insurance from Wisconsin, I'm I "safe"?  That is if I quickly register
    in Idaho and pick up another insurance company (maybe the same 
    parent company) soon, will the ticket not be counted in the process?. 
    Or will the points carry over from Wisconsin?  


  Should I contest the ticket to buy time and in the process switch licenses
  that way the penalty if any would be charged on a license that has expired?
  (remember that the ticket has my wisc. lic. number on it) 

  How should I work with the insurance company to "ignore" this infraction?

  By now you have probably came to the realization that I want to weasel my 
  way out of this ticket.  You are absolutely correct.  I don't mind giving 
  the city the fine they have charged me, however I am not financially stable
  to be able to take a hike premiums.



Thank you very much for your help.  Someday I hope to be able to have enough
knowledge in this area to share with you all.



thanks again,

jitendra
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: How Can I Really Annoy Someone?
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 11:42:43 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.040528.1379@informix.com> proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts) writes:

>Get stepped on and not doing anything about it is harmful to your
>spiritual health too. 

Yeah. It really hurt that Jesus guy. And Gandhi and King, too.


--Mike



-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"I can solve this Orient Express thing without
mnemonic@eff.org| breaking a sweat. It's that simple."
(617) 864-0665  | 
EFF, Cambridge  |                           --Hercule Perot
Newsgroups: misc.legal,nj.general
From: chrisb@natinst.com (Chris Bartz)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Carjacking as a federal offense
Date: 15 Oct 92 05:33:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: eagle.1bk2voINN2nb
Organization: National Instruments, Austin, TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: eagle.natinst.com

In article <1992Oct14.230420.11032@wdl.loral.com> mab@wdl39.wdl.loral.com (Mark A Biggar) writes:
>
>I guess if
>any part of the car came from out of state, the law does apply.  Then why
>is steeling my Japanese TV not a federal crime for the same reason?

Do not worry - I am sure that Congress will pass such a law as soon as they
realize their oversight.

What I do not understand about this carjacking law is - whats the point.
I could be wrong but I'd be willing to bet that carjacking is illegal
everywhere in the USA - maybe not explictly but I think it would count
as theft, assault, kidnapping (?), etc.  Will the FBI, DEA, US Marshals,
or whoever be able to catch carjackers better than local police?

>
>--
>Mark Biggar
>mab@wdl1.wdl.loral.com
>


-- 
-chris bartz (chrisb@natinst.com)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: edwardk@cup.portal.com (edward chungfan kwok)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: JD != "lawyer" (was: What a Problem!!!)
Date: Fri,  9 Oct 92 23:18:57 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <4caD023Y25yE01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> <1992Oct9.213424.14213@eff.org>

>Before I received the results from my first bar exam (I passed), I was
>scrupulous in correcting people who called me "a lawyer."

I was scrupulous too.  I was sworned in December, at which point I allowed 
others to call me a lawyer.  And three months later, when the patent 
office informed me that my registration is no longer "provisional," I allowed
others to call me a patent lawyer.
Newsgroups: misc.legal,soc.history,alt.politics.usa.constitution
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: Marbury v Madison (US 1803)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 05:49:10 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.103645.1740@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil> bkottmann@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil (Brett Kottmann) writes:
>	But isn't the main point of Marbury v. Madison that the government
>openly said "you win" to the court?  After all, the executive branch could
>have simply shrugged and said "so what, try to enforce it".

Not exactly: More like, the Court said, "we win, and you can't do anything
about it." The case specifically required no action by anyone except
the Court. The ruling was that a congressional grant of jurisdiction, to
the Supreme Court, was unconstitutional, and therefore the Court refused
to take any action. This was one of the reasons John Marshall used _this_
case to establish supreme judicial review: No action was required by the
President or Congress to make the Court's interpertation stick. ("So
what, try to enforce it" actually came 20 years later from Jackson.)

                                                 Frank Crary
                                                 CU Boulder


                          
Newsgroups: misc.legal,talk.abortion
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Roe v. Wade for Men!
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1992 00:34:25 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14a by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In  <Bw741C.CC7@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>  kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l) writes:
>
>Hello Larry.  Here's a little proof that my summary of the pro-abort
>position is pretty darn accurate:
[...]
>We are going to petition the federal courts to
>permit a man, prior to fetal viability, to go into a family court and
>relinquish rights and responsibilities to the unborn child.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

That doesn't sound anything like the nonsense you've been babbling.
"Relinquishing rights and responsibilities" is very different from
claiming that the woman is solely responsible for the existence of
the child.  In fact, petitioning to relinquish responsibilities is
implying an acknowledgement that those responsibilities exist.
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory
From: titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas)
Subject: Re: Jury Nullification -- The Power is a Right
Organization: SPS
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 06:41:17 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.030234.21330@eff.org>, mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct14.000120.2196@newsgate.sps.mot.com> titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas) writes:
|> 
|> >Mike has difficulty accepting criticism and admitting error.
|> 
|> Who enjoys it? You certainly don't seem to. 

I have no problem accepting criticism.  Mike,  on the other hand,
is extremely defensive.  His postings reek of ambiguity,  sometimes
reaching the point of outright error.  Mike tenaciously denies
all criticisms and always attempts to have the last word.
-- 
Eric Titmas      Motorola ASIC       titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com               

It is impossible to take in more money than Congress can spend.  - Thomas Sowell
Newsgroups: misc.legal