MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
simply impossible for the companies produce these products in a in a consistent manner they noted that original data on regarding impurities had been discarded so there's no regional data satirizing purity is they noted that there was no aluminum which was toxic and so they had a manufacturing process where they couldn't come up with a consistent recipe they are on they are producing toxic materials and even worse come january th seen they're actually selling those toxic drugs continue aluminum to commercial market and so those are available commercially just so i understand the argument are you make i understood you to be making an argument that that was a false or misleading representation with respect to we're utilizing or using c g m p and the manufacturer products this exactly that it's a statement about the standards for govern the manufacture of products at this company there were two products being one being about argument i don't agree that that's correct on its face but it's also not correct factually here because if we look at what was said mr lieberman tries to downplay what was said what was said was fairly significant if you look in the right misrepresentation rather they say you didn't say and not that's right and so someone listening in on one of those calls obviously had the ability to say rome told me a little bit more situation there are major violations to see happy and so the gap is an excellent example where there are major violations the company can't get its recipe right and companies putting dangerous materials in its products and the company continually is discarding on critical
take nice well not good field position someone coming up so but belmont prevail and he'll have a chance in hell scored right in the middle of a kick my jovial back on their own try li going to be the end of the game again here but another drive by b c high and that's the game well after an unbeaten season kind of hard fought championship game the belmont marauders come up just short
adjudication on the merits for purposes of entry of a judgment so i think that that case gets you to where you are to have a specific case that says exactly what your honor just said standing here right now i can't think of  but i think that the effect of what your honour's say isn't body in the case law that we cited because once the rights of appeal are exhausted which it clearly were in this case whether by virtue of the denial of service or by virtue of the eventual stipulation once those rights of the people are exhausted there's nothing more to do in a case it would seem does i take that point but i'm asking a slightly different point which is that if there is something more to going on in georgia there is no more finality to be had so it has to be in the plaintiff no longer wanted to pursue that litigation any further in georgia so that represented the end of that matter is wild we could have stated here it doesn't mean that when i think of it the plaintiff twice requested and maybe argument that personal jurisdiction was not valid so this will get to hear only the twice the twice made that argument it was denied twice including the summary georgia with respect to d p i at all the only thing left in georgia was written with regard to mr kim ok so we came to a situation where you could enter partial judgment for one defendant and not for the judge when for the entire case it was unnecessary the parties were done in georgia and because the parties were done in georgia the practical scenario there gets to your initial question is that that's judicata effect in any case you have to wait until no matter how many rulings have been made in the course of a case by how many courts all of those court judgments would have to be treated as situation for application judge wolf went further he said i've looked at the summary judgment record i think that applying each of the prongs the three prongs of section one forty eight be the massachusetts independent clearly and i think there's been a lot of confusion in the courts in massachusetts just just on the merits point before you sit on my right that the record shows that jam pro require unit franchisees to have brand name on their uniform jane pro is a franchise or like any franchise or it's going to ask that franchisees promote that brand in a uniform way in record me a franchise or in this is where there's some confusion below your orders could clear this is required to market and promote its brand consistently it's a trademark issue it's a licensing issue so in
the i'm david the bruce this is the creative good where we celebrate everything in the creative commons today episode of our ten part series on the woman's march on washington which happened january twenty one two thousand and seventeen we go to canada now if you've been following the series i hope you have we've been all over the world we've been to paris we've been to england we've been to germany  we go to canada canada and we're going to go to two major cities in canada and take a look at what happened all right you're in for a good ride you in for amazing stuff you're going to well if you're not in canada and you could be watching this we're going to as it were take you on a travel plane and take you to canada not just about the city but t so you can i witness what happened on the streets in canada in terms of people's reaction to the you know i get ration of donald j trump as president of the united states you're going to hear the outcry and the deep concerns about human rights absolutely you're going to see men women children all marching together this is really good here we go hello from vancouver this is january twenty first two thousand and seventeen i am here here in downtown vancouver and around the corner from the trump tower the second tallest building there is the current tower this is the front part of the march there's this gap and then there's all these other thousands of people still to come here in vancouver on the first day of the trump administration in the united states and people here in metro vancouver are participating in global democracy day i suppose as a way to put it first sign is another way to put it
in the play case which was the earlier case the fork made this comment that you're presumed you know that you're right if you were sexually abused anything that happened with the state's attorney would be totally wrong for all i think it would be hard for me to stand up here already tried to tell you that when he went to the state's attorney he wasn't aware that he was injured and that  my clients all you can see this like when did your client first contact he attorney regarding civil litigation oh my first contract is your client was going to indicate that he wished to have a criminal prosecution instituted or was he did you go there thinking that he was going to have a civil prosecution instituted i think you went there th right i don't want to know what you think i want to know if you know what did your client tell you if you know you're asking me to tell you i all relative to his contact say i think and i would like something a little bit more concrete than what you think i was subpoenaed complain just to see  well what i'm getting at is the message that you just related sounds to me like we're talking or are you're talking about the repression of a criminal prosecution not the repression of a civil action because unless emerson said something to the effect that he was going to or he was the party who was supposed to bring a civil suit i don't see how you can ascribe his statements in a way such that it would easily understand why they go to the state's attorney but if they are going to attempt to initiate civil proceedings to obtain recompense for their damages i don't know why they would go to the state's
elections so that he didn't run the risk of mr hassey are no longer be able to represent him because he was state's attorney and when they talked about not having the testing he spoke of which was a little odd but he talked about mentioning it to the jury which of course this did not have being a jury trial mentioning it to the jury as to why it wasn't in the getting back to my question so is he on a mandatory ineffective because he went along with what his client wanted him to do no no i mean i could you know the presumption is you've been in a campaign you want to take time off for your life was it to actually take the family somewhere or go someplace or was it to do more announced he was in court and they talked about his announcement and what it might need and he specifically tonsil of the fact that his client is asking him to withdraw his request for that testing due to him making that announcement and then afterwards the defendant files pro se although he was represented by counsel at the time it one thousand motion he specifically says i've talked to my lawyer about this and he told me pro se you know whatever that motion that was filed for the course suggests that your client said i don't want this out you know not that he said because my lawyer won't ask for it or my lawyer won't be available if he's just saying i'm i want to go forward i don't want th get my client to say explicitly front of the judge i realize i have a choice this is the choice i make rather than there are differences to be drawn from the record the defendant is currently giving up  there were other things they didn't test but the things that the state lab said they would to us or the state representative was a i think it was a switch or is it a sweat shirt and the bags that covered  games and then they tested the sweatshirt they had the bag for the same amount of time and they didn't test the bags but they didn't test the bags because they had an internal policy that the bag should be test
each other and realize that next meeting of the brotherhood of scouts in which they've been the founder of the scouting movement in one hundred nights the cheapos he was known to more than six million boys of every race color and creed throughout the world with seventy eight years old at the age of eighty four gigantic project in the arid desert was completely dependent upon a pipeline thirty inches in diameter and three hundred fifty miles long from the one daring we're near perth completed in one thousand nine hundred three through which two thousand seven hundred million gallons of precious water pumped every year  seen in action for the first time in this country the press was the largest in the southern hemisphere but they mean and the mother of eleven could not break away from her domestic routine even when i hold up in the efficiently with only his feet to control it always looking on the right side enjoys a cigarette but first to look after himself in this respect one practice has made it an easy job to take a  a gentle reminder that despite their primitive background the australian natives were masters of aerodynamics long before leonardo da vinci dreamed up his idea of a flying machine australian athletic medalist of those games however he later repeated his london victory in the took a leap jack make up jump ahead of his rivals in nineteen thirty five for the state government adopted a recommendation of a shock as advisory committee and regular systematic measuring with interviews in the first six months more than one thousand one hundred charts were caught and i had many whalers ingrain others that cost averaged about seven thousand pounds a year of these attacks i don't know that our patients combine to stage a demonstration designed to prove the breed with intelligence and gentle particularly to children yes it was a tough time for alsatians but they won through by leaps and bounds entertainer in the world today and you have arrived at that position by not making statements so a painting of surly isn't veiled in the fox studio dining room in hollywood the celebrated star is six has a party and makes a spe
or is there a curb on this pavement area that's right up but across the back of the house is there's no scuppers there anything to catch any of that water if it gets heavy rain to direct it down to not an inlet at the top somewhere because that there's a big that hill you're going to create a steeper slope on that hill and then the parking lot is going to be sloped there if it rains heavy it's going to jump that curb if it starts to build up water that's all that would be my today though so that dash line that you have there just to the left of that is actually the existing padre is that what you're showing original path is it would if it's already wide enough that would make it
action as well at a yes because it was during the period when he was going to get down to a new trial which had a time he is very close to the the rest was on april twenty sixth an amazing case against myself here by me the actual interview was the day before april i don't know if you have anything you'd like to say about it i support of mr phillips position there is a lot that has been taken off the table as a result of the argument that this court just heard and as it relates to the  brother just said that we are not arguing whether the elements of a fourth amendment militias prosecution claim that that issue is not before this court i understand that he's unwilling to argue that there may be a bit broader merits of this question i will make a point however that it is not our burden it's the burden of a party that's asserting outside immunity to prove it and as the appellant it's the burden took place that issue before the court and neither instance has that been done that being sad if the elements of the fourth amendment malicious prosecution claim they are satisfied in this case because the chanelle of it has been interpreted by courts to include not only the initiation but of course so we have heard or involved in the pretrial deprivation of his fourth amendment rights during that phase she provides advice to police officers about how to respond to a subpoena and she engages in what we are calling evidence tampering so we believe that there is this sufficient connection a sufficient nexus between the deprivation and her behavior that leaves arrest he's in he's in jail goes before a judge in a bail hearing it said that bail hearing which i assume is right around april twenty sixth twenty seven he used his  started to train down the track and nothing else matters yes but in addition she actively advocated for bail conditions that restricted his no knowing the fears explode one of two things file a motion in limine the wire and this is sort of a quirky part about me and that is the field is not diverse jurisdiction for the trial court during the pendency of the appeal so she could have gone back into criminal
evidence can be that way but i'm saying that this court can and should view the video to see for itself given that the state misrepresented the evidence in the closing arguments and press but the court never explicitly stated that this whole thing only applies to remaining in the court concerned he said in the past very clearly when their only hope when they're when they're limiting their polling to the the you know it tended to specifically target shoplifting offenses and have them prosecuted differently than burglary cases and we know that because the shoplifting statute is all encompassing it covers a has it provides for a differentiation between somebody who comes in and steals a candy bar and maybe it's their first offense or you know that sort of thing as opposed to somebody who has a professional shoplifters or for people with extensive criminal histories which is the difference and the court has talked about the prosecutorial discretion this involved prosecutors who have the discretion to charge of various crimes that might fit is is there and the possibility of terrorizing people in the store is there one in fief gets caught sometimes the security gets sta these more run of the mill shoplifting cases as occurred here where somebody walks and takes them where they walk into a store during business hours when they have the same right as the public to be there they walk into a shelf wherever that is problematic interpretation between residential burglary and murder or they were inter to be mutually exclusive and the legislature comes right out and to clarify that burglary is a lesser included residential or so even if you you committed any number of crimes will then you're not guilty guilty of murder and you're guilty of whatever crime you committed which i you see jamison leave the area he walks into the store to test it because when he was that there wasn't cameras in the area once he got out of the camera view by the registers they didn't have an idea where he was gone but he was you know we know from the record vacs i miss that james and has had police contact in the past and he you know when he walks out and see he doesn't have a right we don't know and there isn't enough here to say that he was fleeing because there's no evidence that he knew what happened he had a point you know there's no evidence that he knew where me with the police but that's not what we have and he didn't make any concessions or make any statement that implies that he knew what adrian had done or knew a jury was going to do anything or that he did anyway what would have been the charges
his commission doubted the commission did not rule on your request for vocational rehabilitation so in that particular case they said we did i don't have a final order to appeal from them it's the commission's order wasn't final and if the commission's order wasn't
and i think your honor for the purposes of determining what we settled we can't reach out of this case among others because the reality of the case is there were many others and i'm sure the trial branch wouldn't just not today raised in the g two complaint were settled there are no reference that i can see the claims that makes any reference to the ads and i want to make that clear the second point i wanted to make concerning what  respect to intensity and concluded that there would be coverage and that the earlier policies potentially for ads containing claims that were disparaging of her own in the ninety three to ninety six period but not not afterwards before i begin i wonder if the panel has any questions for me based on what mr ha issue and that's why we had a duty to indemnify feel that one they brought to the court's attention intellect one that phillips had run these ads saying if you use the gillette product you're going to get gum disease and that certainly is private spiritual seventy eight period or ninety three whatever i believe these things that's all ran in the ninety eight period but at this point i'm not prepared to say that expressly to the court because there are you know there is potentially at one time there were three hundred forty one as with several  difference between the two policies i'm in complete and total agreement with it with respect her duty to indemnify which is the issue before this panel i didn't have a problem with it on the duty to defend i think you do have to be ultra expensive mind and there was an advertisement in that case in which a competitor said this in essence don't buy his milk his trucks don't keep the milk at the proper temperature well that implied that there was a health and safety question w want to see what you wrote down and i want to see how it compares to the complaint and i want to see the factual support for the complaint including attachments there too ideally i'd like to see more but on a discovery as well i'd like to get a full picture of what went on in the litigation so we're only going to indemnify for the claims that they settled that fall within the coverage of our policy and that requires that we look at the settlement to see if there is any part of it that is the course of that and i think can mr hill briefing this not in its head at the appeals stage probably possibly before alluded to the fact that potentially you could have a problem with that with within driving insurers to do that but i don't think that
nflpa and then really the issue here my client was up on the wall climbing the very specific rocks again is a is a minute are facts what happens is haven't signed something saying i looked at the menu you know there wasn't did they didn't find anything this thing you know other man who leads saying i showed them the video work i was going to show the video but the customer declined it it's part and parcel yet too soon reverse is because of the fact that it's it's risky endeavor and it's a trade off if you want to do this risky endeavor you trade off that's the truest thing said here this might ruin the lousiest first day ever in the history of first dates but again she knew she was doing because she had done it successfully and she turned around and foot can't land on the black man and the same thing could happen so how did you slice the moment here i mean whoa why do you have to put up like you suggest shostak every single example you just can't do it and it's part and everything with her but you can that's why you're right just some part of it is that you know completely not how lawsuits will do this fair or not that's up to the courts and legislature but part of it is
your your kid or your wife or your niece of your own or whatever so and just one more relative of the defendant is to say he was there it's hard to imagine how that could possibly ha issue that makes this decision wrong so as i said is to blame the steel for not having a clear recollection of this conference is with the morning five or six o'clock in the morning he comes and he sees the defendant and his son on the couch together when in fact the defendant's girlfriend picked up the sun around one o'clock that morning not just going to be done and this is a man who's going to be able to maybe tilt the balance of scale of justice for the balance of galus so the jury could not believe the
basis and return to the question of country and i point out that this isn't a case where the evidence of a gun is particularly certain now we're dealing with the single fragments of ground brought here there's all of the states efforts to try to have because the the victim's family describes that he always worth this chamber that anchor man had and the jury that's purportedly with the defendant could have been convicted solely and her testimony that she's identifies him as the shooter she was present your head surely rest which is the victim's mother who identifies the ring at trial she says this really would be wrong to the victim this ring just happened to be asking for is that chance of hearing and then on one final factual matter as to the cell phone call your honor and i was unable to find the precise time either but i do recall it some hours after the offense and the evidence of the record is that
employer to go there i will say this she got a call from a woman who participated differed on volunteer activity asking bernard she participated and she said yes but she was not volunteer and i have difficulty with this because it if your argument is on there was some benefit to the pool or holds true then every perform outside of an employee's normal schedule and that was what happened in this case she was not on the clock when the scale lowell's new policy required volunteer