MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
no matter which way you look at it be it through the lens of cases like taria because i don't think it is all clear that the that the judge did make an adverse credibility decision in this particular case and an opposite result from that which was determined by the judge for example in the court is going to require corroborat evidence where there might be reasons to question where there is a failure to provide corroborating evidence easily available and there is not a good reason first of all there is the judge and the hospital as well as a number of individuals and what they were asking him about and who was there and what happened to each individual of his home when he was arrested and went into details about what happened in the hospital the name of the person  after he escaped from the hospital and and how he left with regard to ethiopia again runs into great detail about what happened where he was taken to how broken that would certainly constitute past persecution and based on the record nothing has really changed if the court feels that it was so tainted by it that the ninety three referendum and basically made a statement that made him into the moral equivalent of the of the dirt of the previous regime against whom they were fighting the same thing with regard to ethiopia when they came happened having this happen to a man in both he was asked you know what some of the tenets about religion and medical practice and he said i don't we don't give blood but was there anything else in regard to medicine i can't remember and what else is there a very good medicine and that's why we were asking her if the court reaches that issue that  and so therefore certainly with regard to there's no reason to remain because the judge has already made a finding with regard to that and his plans have to do with precisely the issue that religious persecution in eritrea now with regard to you know this is the issue of whether or not they were deporting people back to two or three in the
quickly say what they are and then go into each one in detail first because he is an adult and second because the near term and factors will actually consider it and found naturally just as culpability in this case how are they considered  doesn't it doesn't show that he did not appreciate the some consequences of the crime because he certainly did because he got rid of the guy and he alerted police back to two months after he was named in this case it was naturally particularly
obviously confused by the fact that there was things going on from one thousand ninety seven to two thousand and two that was sort of it made manifest when they when they came in with their question about pinkerton i just admit that we would have to be given at the same time a new trial on these perceptions of offenses because we cannot say beyond a reasonable doubt that the th errands never look for anything he never asked for anything for running these errands he was working for he was just carrying out what his supervisors told him to do and the only thing he got out of this was a couple of these counter questions about whether a not there there there could still be an overall conspiracy in the fact and and right after that after they didn't get the instruction that i think that they needed they came and found one person right instead of maybe they and so they very well may have been considering this is an overall conspiracy and maybe they were thinking of acquitting because i had very carefully although i didn't get specific instruction on that i had argued just precisely instructions so if i may interpret now so they really understand what's going on so they me that the government just might win the case if i may right and still just said i'm just going to read back the instructions that were i originally ga the course what he's doing is really backed instructional stuff created the problem in the first place they've already been told that an informant for example or one person is an informant that they cannot be that a part of the conspiracy and i say anything that would indicate that what i had said was correct these simply sent them back to the drawing board well right not only have heard those instructions but they have them in writing so they have gone over them we have to assume that they had gone over them
morning we have a very heavy calendar this morning we often are trying to be a little bit flexible on rebuttal time and all we don't have much flexibility today so i'm we're going to hold you to your time so that's kind of fair warning to all the lawyers watch your time and reserve what you want for rebuttal but we because we have another two to three hours here are not going to be able to give you additional time this morning so meaning chris warner honors david cohen  that there was no evidence presented on the question of whether there was a mailing and other words each of tense has several elements of the government i mean i'm making the argument that i'm for the sake of argument i'm saying let's assume that the government presented no so that's point number one let's look at that it's my understanding of the government's position that that environment is spatially invalid and the court can't look behind the question of whether or not any upon the evidence now if the grand jury is presented with no evidence it's true that later on and in the case i posit there could be a piece of paper present of the grand jury indictment later on there's a trial a from when these facts take place that you know and we're going to be further yes you can always appeal right and the all those points are correct there's no doubt that there's a rule twenty nine votes and there's no and falling from that there has to be evidence some evidence of each element of the past present and the grand jury now in this case judge has not reviewed we saw a snippet of the transcript and in the snippet of the transcript that we saw interests that cannot be reviewed as a final judgment i do you say you can't review this at this time or at the final judgment if there is one because because the there transcript at this point which is in camera and have us review the can transcript when we can do it at the end of the case because what is that case i think middle and asphalt and bird together indicate that i know that  he's directly on point that says that you know addresses your issue why isn't it just a slippery slope that if we expect your view that everything every you know every ruling that people don't in the other direction well but every time one people if they win at the end as opposed to winning later no one really likes that the that isn't but the law doesn't say that you're entitled to when early on reviewable ground but you also you had where you got a district judge you can't have it reviewed at the end when that when the government rest their case and then you can have it reviewed again on appeal so it's not that it's not reviewable it's just not proceeding so they also rejected that he said you waive those arguments you're not allowed to raise those arguments and you have to pay an additional one point one million dollars or i mean put you in jail  thank i strongly disagree with the government's contention that there is no existing consequence
can be nearer citation it's a close case without any further elaboration or or the citing the fact that there are thirty havior during litigation was not that fake i think the mere fact that they just found that particular was too specific and that very narrow limited case yes there's no discretion however even if you do find the still some discretion certainly there hasn't been a factual finding them balance the scales to overcome that extraordinary situation certainly not the citation of saying that it's a close case all these courts cases in which they are fertile or course decision in which the court cited the fact that it was a close case there was never  with all due respect i don't believe it made a state the fact that this court believed that book to other issues was close but i mean when the judge is making this decision it doesn't consider what this court is going to do or what i to view that particular decision so while it is a bit interesting i don't believe it is a form factor in deciding for the district just consider a entire proceedings certainly more from a year than we will ever be and what you want why you why is it up to us to say that that was an abuse of discretion because if you allow this record to justify denying attorneys fees that you would essentially take it without take it out of your hands the ability to review the lower court's decision it other words you're saying the fact that it is an absolute discretionary decision because all the other fish are or have to say it's a catch phrase regardless of therefore we're in a firm but that's not really unfair i mean this court has said that discretion is not under strain it's got to be guided by the policy well the policy of shifting fees is to prevent the exact type of behavior  that's not enough because the jury in jurgens necessarily found afaik due to the jury instruction and therefore it is not it was an abuse of discretion for the district court to rely solely and to finding is that were terminated by the that district court took into consideration the fact the jury found willful infringement and again she didn't find an exceptional case here but that doesn't mean that she was forced to make a decision to  finds that that is in fact the definition of bad faith then the next question is what is required order to show it's the first shifted to to strike or to show
and that right that is a decision for the real estate purpose and in reaching his opinions he cited to the fact that one of the things he relied on was the report of your arborist that's right just compensation for
welcome to ben behind the scenes half hour show devoted to previews we've use interviews and short films on this week's episode we're going to be celebrating arm national hip hop history month right right hey check out the stars she will eat eight hundred four five three eighty five hundred so the drugs used by sending nine hundred ninety nine plus three dollars shipping and handling to break in a bargain for forty three west fiftieth street new york and eventually break it off is great for all ages have your mom or dad order now this in german this concludes this week's episode of been behind the scenes join us next hour for more previews reviews interviews and short films until next time this has been a
know i think you know what i mean it's not a form of shopping it's possibly to prevent the plaintiff from once the plaintiff becomes a defendant from removing the case out which is which led was to end the litigation because you thought that it was proper either because of reinstatement or plaintiff is in control of the litigation there's no reason to go forward so it's dismissed under whatever label of the statu defendant says wait a minute we don't really want this mess because we'd like to bring in counter claims and inference they were worried that if we file a separate lawsuit against you something may happen in terms of choice of forum that we think is disadvantageous has everything i said so far been accurate is and once you take that away then there's simply no no avenue to attack the dismissed on technical grounds or not a cost to notice it would appear at this point that defendant wants it to stay alive to file his counter claims acknowledges that the claims could still be ripe or ready for adjudication if a separate lawsuit was filed but it would be more insulate claims f it's not it's not w
that was presented to the trial court and why the testimony of this current court park and the support of officer on the s having any tendency to make the existence of anything that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable then  influence this three panel board that made the recommendation for termination on mr shouted and on top of that there is independent clear evidence that mr shadow violated the rules and regulations while i was a trial counsel in this case your honor but i'm very familiar with this case and i'm very familiar with the record in this case and i believe what the record says is he was very truthful about his statements about not knowing anything about that termination none whatsoever as to the second point is second point on appeal john that the trial court ruled specifically that mr porter's testimony or testimony about the other caucasian managers was not relevant and particularly in the in this reporter's case wasn't relevant because that wasn't the purpose of the free trial and up until  testifying that he experienced discrimination total turn around at trial you know i want to submit this report is testimony saying that mr porter was treated differently mr porter was given preferential treatment investigator around the time expect these checks to come back from the bank as this one hundred he goes on to say yes i'm responsible for these controls i admit cashing checks based on my relationship with the league and i acknowledge i didn't fall was a minor point when weighed against the other factors for which we presented the importance of this three panel as a factor first is the independence of the seven zero one of that decision that's when reviewing the effect of erroneous evidence or rulings we will begin with of her sumption of prejudice that presumption can be rebutted by showing that is more probable than not that the jury influencing the panel in this decision and that the infractions for which mr machado has been charged with have never been refuted in fact if anything the other non asian pacific american history providers he made clear findings about the relevance of that information he made clear findings about the prejudicial effect of that information and  we argue that in addition to that there is no temporal proximity which allows the plaintiffs in this case to even raise those claims i think they would decide again she chose of the better of two choices  and i am believe they will a jury would find in this case there's no pretext here
goals that have to be met or things that have to be achieved that are fortunately for them they were not able to achieve those goals are specific to your country and so when we give them the training they also community media you're watching channel fifty three aku green government and public affairs
have is that if they would have their staff actually see each of the counties but that has not been approved
and her mother unfortunately died when she was young she went to work for her cousin max rosenberg who was an independent film distributor so she you know she cut her teeth on that she also as weak as a young girl before this went to school to learn drama she was married the end of the thirty then into the forty's and then suddenly her husband jack abrams died leaving her a little in nineteen fifty eight and that's where it all started she needed to have income she needed to pay the rent as it were and so what she did a year before his death the new york  sort released the ruling allowing nudists films on the big screen thanking her and idea she borrowed ten thousand dollars from her sister and she immediately started making newest films i could list them but we really need to get into the show a little more action with it and and so it goes she pretty much retired in the eighty's from being a director and a producer of such films and i retired in florida she died in two thousand and two i wish i could come on in between each of these trailers and clips that you're going to see in play just a little bit more about them but we are so packed so  just to enjoy them well some of you won't enjoy them because of their nature but wow what a woman doris wish none this is for you i'm david the br all obsessed with the taste of flesh here are the thrill seekers corrupt and immoral and remote and mysterious she had no time for love until she met bobby and then there were no holds my brother's wife mary the first time i saw her i knew there had to be trouble woman too much for  she said i was a cad a scoundrel thrill seeker why because i love the feel of women's bodies because i to caress their lovely limbs marry my wife corrupt and immoral as their passions run r there wasn't anything they can do to gain their own those stakes were high she was his mother deadly weapons she was his tool to be loved and then cast aside until he met his fate by the skiis a film that is fast furious really why did he want to destroy  this is the super movie with all the impact of  see the biggest event in the history of motion picture
ok i see in my records here indicate that we have a six o'clock opening is done ok how about the five o'clock no order why don't you just tell me when you would want to schedule an appointment and why even talking to anyone what is a sweater creepy can you student class is taking their standardized testing the seniors had a wonderful breakfast in the cafeteria today complete with horrible music and decent food and we decided to go and ask him some questions and see what we came up it is the new fuel source for the twenty second century do you harvest your own feet would you rather eat a bowl of hair or a bowl toenails toenails stepping away yet you are meeting the president and your fly is down your zippers now do you fix it yes taxi he points it out he's like i
brothers and this is their final cartoons that they did together paramount had bought the fletchers studios and during the production of the superman cartoons they had spun it off into the famous studios and the fetcher brothers drifted apart this is it this is the last of such of those you know they did betty boop and they did popeye they did so many great so many great cartoons anyway in this one we are showing the mechanical monster we're showing the bulleteer is and we're showing the magnificent the magnetic telescope three really great cartoons oh in color just a word about the voice actors but call your plays superman and joan alexander plays lois lane what's special about these two is that the previous to the animated series superman other than being a comic book was a radio series and it played one thousand six hundred episodes like wow that's amazing extremely popular back in the day one thousand six hundred so connected where their voices to the characters that they also it's what are you doing here just getting the woman's angle on this toy yes i'll give you the details later chief all right l one more step and she's d room this looks like a job for superman um superman you were wonderful you're pretty wonderful yourself how did you get here thanks
you were limited to two years it doesn't matter that you didn't get notice that we are taking your property because it's important to know that and that we're going to mean this feel right now as time ends it just goes to whatever is in the public record  collaterally challenging would have to have the ability to redeem and a current interest in the property and that simply is not the status of standing law and there were only especially as it relates to tax to proceedings in illinois standing is extremely lincoln title case and this was a question of standing and asked whether a certain party isn't take entitle to have the court decide the merits and would entitle town to title company who had no interest in the property will because the allegations can never rise to the level of creating a for a taxi i don't fall asleep under certain circumstances could create a variable order i agree with that and that's why we have to go s i received publication when it was a complete stranger to the property at the time he had to make the publications so for five fails on its face as a matter of will there is no way that they can make that claim because of the was in the eight hundred ninety s i get that but the course here before the district in the third district most recently in twenty thirteen has sided with approval to the lower vs crow proposition the problem solution that i argued the proposition
but yet that's exactly what this circuit court did the soup people who are saying there is a conflict because the landlord is absolved from building that second bathroom but nonetheless that's very or a movie that really is focused on complaining about the language in the complaint on the day they complain that it's a big media they complain that it's unclear on the basis that then a motion should have been granted they don't say it like that because the did not appeal from the denial that motion so they don't say with they do say is that what you have the power to complaint exhibits was raised the specific issue the core focus of the trial for style had been the restroom agreement was not something that was extensively argued but it was during the general with respect to the the the other issues that council had brought up i don't agree in the court's ruling in the first the ruling of the court did not specifically address literally if the court had addressed every every specific allegation was made with respect t she she did not with respect to this ruling they had been ruling on specific occasions with respect to at least three of the prior amended complaints and we've said they're also in motion as well as in our brief the f did roughly thirty the first thirty paragraphs of the complaint were very consistent with prior allegations that had been stricken hon prior motions with respect to the fifth with respect to not supported by the record most program of the fair good that the plaintiff contends now there's no question of that they were paying rent and he goes so far as to say that the leonore who is collecting rent for the restroom that we were paying two hundred fifty dollars to the chinos but it wasn't really that it was just for supplies and maintenance the last page of the appendix to the briefer tower and unable to contain