MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
and so both officers testified that they saw him with a gun in his hand yes you're correct so how does the relevance of the jaclyn pattern play into that that may might go to the used whether they they saw us talking when we got to his hand but if the circumstances of these describe surrounding their observations with him with a gun in his hand or proven to be physically impossible i would submit that no rational jury would find the defendant guilty of even a dusting the gun beyond a reasonable doubt and again this is not a case where we even if they believe that he had a different gun in his hand when they was across the street  case and i think it's it's not hard to guess why clearly there was a lot going on that evening there was somebody firing a gun in the parking lot there was somebody different we now know firing from western avenue happened said he thought mr clemente with a single gun in his hand the entire period of time so i don't believe that it's a permissible inference from the officer's testimony that  clemente switched guns except to the extent that clearly there are there are testimonies was impossible mr clemente could not have fired the luger western avenue we know that and something else happened and in the parking lot i know that possibly can't possibly the case because i know the ballistics evidence now but that's still the way i remember it so even he acknowledged that his recollections an observation were physically impossible given the later just ignore what happened and what's really happening but i don't think you can because the government wants to treat it like it's two separate distinct events and they're not they were separated only by the matter of seconds and as i said the officers recollections were that they
the i think pretty much hands down gays and lesbians want the option to have a union or better yet to get married and if you were you also want the same thing let me think  church love thy neighbor as they self and this whole thing basically put yourself in someone else's position i mean that's basically one of the teachings of jesus christ is love thy neighbor as thyself and the gay thing in the lesbian thing kind of goes against every because you're not you know allowed to love that neighbor as much because they're sinners so there's kind of two different things going on but what you had to say is i think kind of how it sums it up in the region in other words we're talking about it today a little bit about the gay thing as you said but not that many people really care about it up here you know what i mean you know we don't i don't you know i don't get it we want we you got a lot of work ahead of you you got a family you're on your own what is it i mean what's a got a family right and just like everybody else you can hoping that everything works out and everything gets paid right you've got it yeah everybody that's a tough one yeah i don't care who you are right now in the last four or five years other than maybe just a very small percentage of the population you're living paycheck to paycheck and everybody is and we're trying to get by this gay thing just has not gotten much traffic traffic traction up here i've tried to talk about it i think it has a huge effect going forward and there's no but very few people i think you're right people are bored with it and you know when i really need to talk about i don't talk about you know this topic very often i think it's important and i probably push it a little bit more than you know like sitting around you know yucking it up and so forth because what's happening in the general assembly is the mostly republican base that wants to push this through in a hurry is doing just that and they got stuck yesterday you know hugely surprise move a  perhaps some folks are getting cold feet i mean you heard it from governor mike pence here when i asked him said everybody knows how i stand on this one and he's writing you know you want to gay marriage a amendment and that's  fine i don't know he's not able to kind of push that one through i guess you know i mean there's a lot of people that are hanging on the fence including big companies and big donors so you know you got to give it to governor pence he's he's voting is conscience gay you know some of the smartest that's me the shins i mean just look around and it's just you know it's reality it's what it is i mean i'm sorry but you know people are just born that way i mean really i feel for them and that's you know they're part of our future and that's our future and thrown it away or scare it away scaring away the large progressive companies yes sir all right hey andy thanks for calling in
that is correct your honor and the the way this ties together we have a local rule that provides the procedure when a judge like judge king wants to sanction you for highlighting code of conduct that are in local rule eighty three point three district court here has adopted essentially the same standard that would apply to anyone in the state of hawaii so if you come in pro hockey chait for example you have to study the local rules of professional conduct for the state of hawaii and found by the same standards as any attorney practicing w confidential except where there are sections to it so the procedure that has to be fault for the sanction is to have a hearing committee appointed they decide if there's probable cause is all in eighty three point four they issue  any rule other than the the general rule seven that allows you to make motions if that's actually not the way it first arose the way first arose was in an opposition memo to other motions that have nothing to do with sanctions they explain himself before the motion for sanctions over the issue in order to show cause which mr dupe and did not respond to that question is that is that true that is true but it wasn't in the i don't believe it was in order to show ca things one could imagine felt he didn't need to add any more attack point but then nothing happens then there was a motion for sanctions a formal motion to which he respond that you could say look you didn't file anything so i'm going to sanction you for not filing something again but you can't say i'm going to make a finding that you breached the attorney code of conduct and that's different because that requires evidence that requires him to make a judgment about mr dubin subjective state of mind will hear it here argument it is not about two specific instances with regard to the fourth dealership and also with regard to the bank secrets that were in permissibly disclosed he they certainly were not related to the subject of the quiet kind of medium ladies if you if you read the entire record what judge king was really concerned about was over publication he kept coming back to that why did you send these five pete well that's what troubled him or and i don't see that he ever answered that question nor did he try to retrieve the material from all the people but he was ordered to get it back for what was his excuse for that once you have a basis to file trying this class action into his own private action so he could leverage it and get a big settlement for himself mr newman felt that these statements made by mr guile or that were false to achieve that end he should present to put over a week and in that week he wrote a letter apparently from references to that letter in the second transcript he was asking for evidence free but be that as it may that would be my second preferred choice obviously i would prefer an outright reversal but i certainly think new york university he was order of the quiet editor of the lot of us he's not a fly by night practitioner he represents usually people who are being foreclosed on that's his principle practice and he's the only guy in town doing it it's about sixty percent of the
correct in somehow secured the person and then after that went back out and put the face in the window or somehow shut the person out and that scared off another bank teller i mean how is it that when you're polk county you know outside to the another matter so i'll deal with the first one first she was outside the door of the bank in the back of the bank early in the morning and we don't really know that there was any other people around at that time anyway she's coming to work and she was about to cross the threshold she had a key in the involve somebody who was taken at gunpoint from outside the bank then inside the bank into a room the only case similar is a rape case where a woman was taken into a motel and  we can't have this kind of disparate review done by our state courts where the same crime is some people are doing terms to ten years and some people are doing right for this exact thing think just because  that she was brought from the outside where there were people within earshot there are people who heard the second bank employee yell the things being robbed and the second employees important because she went to the same threshold of that bank door and she there and she saw the other woman jeanette he went inside and she did not cross that threshold and she got away she ran away she alerted people the bank was being robbed people heard her yelling this is a busy close knit community of businesses  to get the money if you haven't put her in the storage place but that maybe have them incidental to the robbery sure if you let's say well let's see if you hadn't i would argue that no because it's that you're crossing a substantial threshold and it's in that in as it related prong the nature of the movement in the context of the environment it may have and it's the nature of the context important even in the first problem so that's a huge movement right there from the outside to the locked close thing but even if she had stepped into the  thing and she was that into the bank and then been accosted and led to the state that might have been incidental but in this case we also have movement to the storage room where she was pushed to the ground and tied up and then they anger up after threatening her and other things in the storage inside the premises again over and over again in this case she was definitely taking from a position of relative safety into a closed bank where she was threatened held at gunpoint and used it very risky ploy to lure other recall the final case on today's calendar helping vs children's hospital san diego
sentencing issues in this case even though they weren't raised in a brief i think the court can do that through handling and actually would move the courts allow me to supplement the record with a sentencing transcript in this matter i think the  letter to the court by mr brice meter is accurate and it involves the issues in the following way there was no jury determination as to what and whether or not any of the animals in this case were trophy animals there was no jury determination as to the value of the big horn sheep in this case that was hotly contested in front of the judge there was no value of any animal established by the jury that was taken in this case and there is no jury determination that the issue raised by mr bright's meter and is free the issue then it is whether or not the jury convicted my client under sixteen a of the tribal code or unfortunately i forgot to bring the guidelines with me so i don't i don't have the answer to that and it was not able to get the whole of the guidelines to figure out but if it was a six level increase that much is clear so i'm not i think politicians are not able to answer that it does have some time  range one would expect that the six level increase that would make a difference you don't know i'm not sure maybe the government's got that figure but i'm sorry i don't have them other than that of those issues that i brought i think my if you recall the festival and the the agents of the tribe that worked in the office issuing the tags in the licenses never once said we're not going to give you these types of licenses you're going to have to go so that's that's the position we took throughout the trial so let's there's other questions i don't have anything f the permits that were issued by the shell and then i tried to mr marsh the jury found based upon the evidence that there was a intentional false statement that was made by mr marsh when those  issued and of course that he with the fact that he was he claimed to be a resident of the reservation and based upon substantial evidence that he was not a resident that was introduced to trial the jury found that
there are two main issues in this case one is the medical opinion evidence and the second is the claimant credibility determination on the second i'm just i'm just going to mention that the district court took it upon itself to of younger have three six one would preclude any work activity has five nine eight so the question becomes d l g provide the minute or does that mean six minus one minute and then he said listen six hours of sitting so that can add up to a variety of different numbers but the point is on it it's for left unsaid injury work because sedentary work and defined by the commissioner in ruling eighty five fifteen states that injury work requires the ability to six hours out limited opinion that's not the same at all not even close to what dr porter and dr carey did in terms of sitting here the limitations secondary to pain no i won't argue that there isn't well in this case the claimant mr palmer said you stop using drugs on or around december two thousand and seven and afterwards it's clear that he had some mental or psychological problems that declined what she said in december two thousand and seven but by july two thousand and eight she no longer said that she said well i think she's actually not able to work this is a back problem she made no mention of not being unable to work due to mental problem concentration he said those would not preclude work but then he also said that they would be frequent for the l g actually look at the entirety of that pain assessment mr hall is asking you to just look at a couple of the responses that he gave and conclude that that means that he was disabled on rejecting it i think again what they told you was doing was taking this opinion that seemed to tell us a couple different things and making sense out of it based on what it actually said and in fact a lot of a logistical limitations are more restrictive than any of those  psychological opinion right and in this case that's kind of what was left of because palmer really stopped seeking treatment for psychological problems on a regular basis in the middle in the middle of two thousand and second we had two appointments at about the one year mark and then to get about see your mark after that with any psychological professional and during those appointments he basically told the professionals that everything was fine he was doing well his home life was good he was taking care of his two young daughters i think were age five and six at the time at least and some cases for extended period and then he has teenage son who is kind of roughhousing with who seem to have a really good relationship with it so he's reporting to the psychologist that he's doing well and i think that's borne out by his testimony to the tail jail where he says you know i'm not taking my depression medication anymore and my only real problems is he prevented from work for at least twelve continuous marks and so he may have carried a diagnosis of depression or depression like symptoms for a long time but the limiting effect seems to be really limited to december two thousand and seven to the middle of two thousand and eight your hono
and when i say stem from i'm referring to the language contained within the indictments count one trying to push the murder strong probability theory that count was ultimately withdrawn by the state comes to th the defendant had in the course of committing a felony arson knowingly damage property knowing that somebody was there the next count alleged residential arson the destroying of the building of another in the jury found the defendant guilty of counts two through seven again that first count had been withdrawn by the state without comments the coroner judgement on the remaining towns except for residential arson and  the same element as aggravated arson that being arson in a way it's parallel to a first degree murder count an aggravated battery count and a battery out and the last charge is being subsumed by the in the in the grand scheme because he's going to be there for life the guard or there was a statement regarding concurrent sentences and whether there's really any impact on the defendant and it was made clear in both of those cases that prejudice isn't really at issue because we're dealing with the second prong that being the integrity of the the i don't want to it's own formalised to say the piling on here but it's been deemed inappropriate or for very long time in our jurisprudence to penalize somebody more than once for the one and that's where it comes into
the general issue raised in the certificate of appeal ability doesn't seem to be seriously disputed between the parties where there was a prison lockdown or policy which is a general matter events a the legal starch that was not to that was not challenge with respect to that plate and a number of other constitutional issues but he wasn't able to present in there and argue clearly the fa appropriate for this panel to certify the issue of time in this for our hearing but second of all your honor this court should refuse to entertain wilson's claim because you failed to properly preserv in the district court and the reason that you say this is that the first indication we have of any of the facts that he now alleges should be grounds for his equitable tolling came with his notice of appeal and another set of appeal that would entitle him to equitable tolling instead of doing that when he filed his opposition to the state's motion to dismiss he simply talked about other matters that went to the merits of the claims that he was seeking to present so the third thing is even if you were to look at the facts that he has presented in the documentation that accompanies his notice of appeal he does not make out a promise facia case for equitable tol claiming that he still short of time isn't as best i can tell from what he submitted i know how difficult it is to tell but this is not a case where you can sit and say ok he says he was in walk down from for this many days and even if you give him a day per day credit for every one of those days it still is not time and this is mark that kind of cases that i'm not sure on are looking at  he claims i believe in his allegations in this pleadings a much longer period of being walked down throughout and entire still and there are holes i don't think it too much significance needs to be attached to that particular comment but what's the point of putting pressure if the district court won't hold a hearing on i think the point of if the panel were to decide to remain it's possible that a careful factual examination of actual periods of lockdown would reveal court's prior precedent the question is asked her how many years but i looked at the issue in terms of what's the prejudice here what's the disadvantage here and in this particular case there is there is none to hearing maybe i don't know what hearings mean maybe means that he wants to just read all the evidence doesn't want to hear any witnesses
shouldn't be considered that shouldn't matter in terms of whether or not it was torture when in fact your honor what happened to him at the young age of when the military soldiers bargained with the house had stabbed his like attacked his mother and the country condition reports really indicate that this government act without impunity and looking at the country conditions the government allow it punishes individuals who speak against the government and they feel to prosecut based on these reasons and this and the fact that the government itself is the government itself does not intervene in taking actions against second visuals and my kind of spoken about how private actors will will will any of the links in this hypothetical chain of events as cat claims necessarily fails would your view would your view on that be the same had the documents or the purported documents from anything authenticated well i think that the the  agency gave those less weight because they weren't authenticated but also the board did consider those documents and in his considering his claim that he would be sought after because of his father's former political activities and  less weight so any reason to think he lacked an opportunity to authenticate them i mean that that wasn't brought up that wasn't explained in the record i don't personally i don't know and i wouldn't have access to that because you know that would have been something for them to develop on the record i mean if if they wanted to bring that up before the immigration judge i don't think on the immigration judge would have prevented that there's nothing in the record that suggests he would up so it was something that they had an opportunity to do and it just doesn't look like they did twenty years ago he also didn't show that even if the guinea and government remained interested in him or interest in this parents that they would necessarily connect barry to his parents upon returning to get it he contended that the government would recognize a  sexual activity but the record evidence does not support various plans that the last prosecuted there was no evidence of that at all granted the immigration judge credit is his claim that it's under reported but there's
but i've been going on these camping trips with the family ever since i was a kid and you know how it is yeah i know well i see and so we don't forget to send a postcard  her out of it maybe i would if my family show me as much consideration as my friends do that's enough parents yes see everybody's always picking on me maybe he can see in any case we're going away to help wants we don't want anyone along with doesn't want to come you'd rather stay here alone oh i won't be alone i've got my friends it's never mind you'll be our rights here son it's you can charge your food at the day yesterday who is thirty and the day before nobody home i'll call jack and now he's gone away on vacation why haven't any of my friends call me i'll call george my tennis racket anyway that's no good he's taken a job wanted me to go to work t wish i had a car wow might as well eat breakfast and go out and see what i can stir up must be somebody around way i've got some time and i could use my tennis rackets oh well i do have a date to play saturday and my record is broken but of course if you have it back to you saturday ok fair enough i'll come around with it in the morning that's right i'll pick it up at your i've got lots of time ok thanks very yeah a real pal so long  with you friends or anyway it was his folks went away my mother would be quick enough to ask him for dinner yeah she sure was mom's mighty good about things like that that the family enjoyed their dinner tonight lively conversation that not much fun eating alone not much fun spending the day alone where is everybody well at least burglar range party saturday night funny thing about dad he always comes through if you give him a chance hello it hi lorraine how's a party shaping up forget about going to go and maybe wish dad were here so we could talk it over wish dad were here period or if i were with dad he's having the time of a little i get a good fisherman too and a good sport always have a good time with dad he has a good time with what would lorraine think a do the kind of things you expect of your friends friends that's it that's i can get the car in top shape if you let me drop you with the office and take the car to the garage mr simpson says i can work on it whenever there's any slack time and of course it
i think the trickiest one quite frankly was not a document  it what you know reasonable sure sure that particular case  i don't think the judge  circumstances that's very