MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
important he didn't rely simply on his past interaction with this particular doctor we feel the fact that he brought in all these other assessments of the plane haven't talked about her own list if you think it's po apparently had some expertise in the area program i leave when i later you know having some knowledge about what is important and what diagnostic techniques are questions or areas
both of those motions were in fact i and then they would also granted me some three thousand dollars a month relief that we get requested in the of that considering his permanency considering the fact that he may have a need for that issue monies for the possibility of future surgery in the granted under fifty thousand dollars for a normal life thousand one hundred thousand for pain and suffering and seventy five hundred dollars for medical expenses and then he was awarded three hundred thousand dollars for pas separation and it went through october so there was about eighteen thousand dollars that she would have been paid out of his income but then we got to a division of  do legally he is still making seventy two thousand dollars a year even by taking all of managers again who i follow him some with i mind if he can do it but still i client is making is first of all that in the sharing of sad but first of all he says that the reason that we are here primarily because this guy can afford well they have live a very very frugal i at the same time a very very good life i doubt if there are many people in this country that have two million dollars worth of property definitely i doubt if there are too many people in this country that has debt free living but then i think you have to look at the other side of the coin this man has two million dollars worth of property let's say he can't we still have a situation where my client missed the attlee did not attempt to take away any of his farm machinery realize that he had to have a farm machinery and all that to generate income but even if with a straight face i mean i i i know why we're here but sixty forty when you've got two million over here but four times what she died and she had she had  then a very limited non marital strain he in fact had a very large state but you look at back any of his vision of property the length of the marriage of twenty two year marriage when you look at the health on the demeanor why do you think that's just it's just not supported by fact i keep going on i think we all know where i was just going obviously that's in your head but if the facts are they are the law is and it is the only other twenty four thousand over a period of time to pay for their gardens or go to college he is a very frugal man and the rest will also show that when the party separated in october of two thousand and one i believe
when spring brings its welcome green grass lush green the moisture litters knows another cycle of growth begins the grass is basic cattle feed the animals harvested themselves and convert the nutrients and vitamins into generous frames as they grow frames that will carry the forthcoming load of me living proof of the value of good breeding is this variety under geos or heritage of excellence to approved was ability to transmit his quality to his offspring is established much of the responsibility the same purpose as spray diseases that at one time seriously crippled cattle prod the old branding iron is still with us but a new fangled heater as replace the old campfire there is no doubt now th fellow in the squeeze chute belongs to the and all this young stuff is headed for the high range country where they will spend the summer just  becomes one big dusty ro while the cattle drive of the old west so almost half of the value of the earth vanished during the long trek and a short drive to a nearby rail had results in little or no destination of the railroad to those familiar with it a feeling of ritual accompanies the movement of the cattle a ritualistic surge back to the old days when a cattle drive was not just a commercial enterprise it was a moving page of western history written this case where the cattle are sold to a buyer at the shipping pens they must be regarded any way to determine the total do with the rancher gentle handling to avoid bruising and damages still the order of the day as the cat directed through the plains unloading chutes into the waiting stock car it takes real know to build a railroad to have the necessary cars on hand at the right place at the right time cattle shipments can wait on the great plains the promise of approaching litters spurs this cattle loading operation here the entire herd will be loaded at one time transported to market as a single expedited ship on the way to becoming quality before the cattle will be sold at auction the feedlot operators who specialize in finishing off the top integrated with the lot there's the mill where specialized diets are formulated and mix subject of animal nutrition is one of the attention of some of the best research brains in the country that is new areas of nutritional science are being told that the controls exercised by the laboratory will be reflected in the quantity and qualit being produced in the feedlots the gavel industry has welcome you in your traditional developments that lead to improved quality be an opportunity for better profits feed to the cattle in measured quantity at the proper time another important step in the production of good eating provides a uniform feeding method that prevents wast
worked most of my life in a rubber factory now retired feeling good enjoying life sometime less when they retired moved away but not me yet there still aren't you there sure everyone yourself you know i guess i'm pretty dumb about rather company make things out of it right here in town you know all about it i never think of it well i wouldn't worry about that when i was your age i didn't know much about reverie that no reason to made up my mind went to work for the rubber company more of the people you know we had to make that meant more people like me running more machines thousands of people making something that other it all seemed kind of exciting to me so i stayed you might say i worked in rather and retired on it pretty good hey this is pretty good most of it's turned into dry rub
related injury in the medical records about six months later so what's your take on that i think the october tenth entry shows complaints i think it related to a neck related injury i don't think it claimed is this it is mandated to be able to self diagnose themselves and say hey symptomology you say i have a my arm of things in my hand i think come intentionally withhold what you really wanted and what was drained and what may have been able to do something with the move of entry point of view right up to the date of the actual hearing i think it's significant issue it compromises your case honor this case is a manifest weight issue and i believe after reviewing all of the evidence in this case i don't think there's an issue with that it's way up first the petitioner failed to report for work related accident titian or never filed a report backs with the company and was never made aware that she suffered a work related injury now a petition has alleged is that the company knew that she had some kind of issues because she was given the company was given  that whatever injury she's suffering from is somehow related to her work and she did not do that here same with you to proffer to testify in this case coworker of the definitive court of the petitioner on a daily basis i testified that she never saw the petition  showing work related injuries purses again some some medical issues the medical records do not support the price allegation that she suffered a work related accident as your honor pointed out the original application had a date of september twenty  document prior to the hearing taking place however during the hearing he used it an arbitrary mccarthy asked him whether or not you've been withdrawn his objection to that piece of evidence because he used it and his i believe his
determination of the credibility of the state's witnesses so me johnson adrian brown and the complainant are our jurors never given an opportunity to return to reliable burning because defense johnson never told police about as alleged statement by mr franklin that the state treated as an admission and also evidence that johnson had a motive so that testimony about mr franklyn statement statement evidence and it doesn't get better than that  and then mr franklin's version of events was him that only the defendant had laid on top of her so she did not say to the officer that that the fan had sex with her and incurred cross examination of johnson and is now solicited the johnson way one and a half bath before they went to the hospital hospital to be examined defense counsel argued in closing that for a variety of reasons neither johnson brown nor s r were credible as well in our brief defense big statement that happen and he did not need for it to happen it was a wholly damaging admission the prosecutor was merely arguing that indeed the evidence was on contradict it certainly with this could be effectively contradicted by cross examination although that did not  testimony and in redirect examination johnson has stated that the prosecutor told her that she needed to testify truthfully and the second trial doing was defended testified that he never had sex with this or that he denied  no apparent reason and in fact the record shows that it seemed like defense intended to call this into question but just for some reason didn't do
when the winds in the
and a really really long time and she came and picked me up afterward and we picked up a little come from new jersey and i moved to las vegas and i won my wife in a poker game and after thirteen years i was thirteen a wedding anniversary we were married on the thirteenth of september oh we moved to present missouri and then from not well just
relief even under the regulations for having suffered a aggravated felony kind of equal protection and now punk is understand if you travel back to the mexico before the before being placed into proceedings and is understand that that's not excluded by u v b i don't know  may not review the immigration judges in iowa two twelve c released because it was a discretionary decision pursuant to eight u s c section twelve fifty two each of the that's not the decision of the b i e b i e a winter well actually the looking for a hearing before an immigration judge to make a discretionary germination and this case he already had that humane and immigration judge did indeed render a discretionary determination finding that he was not entitled to the release therefore there's really facts that she made up out of thin air for instance she failed and missed the suit is that a sixty seven percent chance of are you thinking the testimony was that he had a negative one percent chance of refilling according to the static possible that this victim was not a victim in some hell the judge the judge even says the victim is not a victim possibly under mistimed house how's this analysis and it
prompting he says well maybe maybe my recollection wasn't right maybe it was like seventeen when there's some degree of difference between three and seventeen days and he was intimate lee involved in it she testified both that her documents had been seized at the airport and that they hadn't been seen at the airport when the rest of them said that starting out passport was taken in that it wasn't taken she said that you know she had jewelry which was supposed to be declared and that's why she was seized and then she said well no it was because she had documents that they st whether she had been hospitalized also and that's when he clarified that it's you have been hospitalized for about seventeen days so and so on the total number of visits was retained and also when the sun testified the hospital for seventeen kind of puzzled here maybe you could just tell me you have a near eighty year old woman she was i don't know this was she was late seventy's when this was all she has to win this piece it was going on she has two grown sons who are legally in the united states is not correct even with our grant asylum we don't know what the current status and you are but i got you know there's the government take that into account but you have a elderly month after she entered the united states such a major in significant a mission from her application standing alone provide specific and cogent reason for the obvious credibility determination in this case as she was head of the minimiz before she's made the stock aeration she affirmed in court before the immigration judge that she was familiar with all the information in your asylum application and that it was completely complete and true and accurate that was sa testimony before the immigration judge she had no time with any mention of being either beaten or tortured while she was detained by the k g b and november of ninety ninety two rather her testimony regarding the details  claim was in the briefcase that i dropped at the airport and was taken by my fellow daschle party members the reason this is not a reasonable explanation that she had more than five years from the time she entered the united states and was to try to
honor he was aware of that but he was aware of it as much as it related to the six point one gram drug deal and that was basically to be the enforcer for this one drug deal and he was doing that in exchange for having done a write up from denver and he needed the right to pick up his little brother who was getting released from a juvenile facility up here and bring  down denver with them so it's a very limited role to sit in on this six point one gram drug deal and play a good part as the enforcer and he was to go back to colorado after that and th he actually makes it worse for him it seems to me well i think your honor what it indicates is that he didn't have knowledge about what was going to go on with that deal and the reason he didn't have knowledge well i wish it was because there's no real law sense here the four hundred fifty three green deal as jones stated the law enforcement was a fictional deal but it wasn't conduct at all it wasn't related conduct  you are twenty nine discovery and if one were to like the supplemental excerpts of the record ages seven through nine it discusses in detail not only the the facts concerning the distribution of one looks at the truth of the record page twenty three it talks about guideline calculations that and and certainly i don't think that we did anything to to i mislead the defendant about what the scope of his relevant conduct might be in this matter but turning to the issue of the the proof underlying this i think it's clear when one looks at the record that this defendant actually participated in some of the negotiations with the confidential informant concerning the purchase of a pound of methamphetamine and he talked about prices and you know the defendant i think to portray him simply as a minor player in the us i don't think that that's accurate
reinstate the case the circuit court then reverses the commission it's not what is the status of the case at that point in time it necessarily has to go back to the commission for a hearing
shouldn't happen is that your clients get their cake and eat it too they're not going to be able to tell remove the trustee or get the residual thirty million dollars at stake with our idea and then come back know about at this point in time and it's also completely unfair for the trustee to say i have to hold on to your state in case you see me that way i have a fund to protect myself but really what's going on  order in place june of two thousand and three there was an appeal to the district court that order was affirmed there was a further afield to this court and that appeal was dismissed that order is final final final final the trustee has been proceeding under the june two thousand and three closure order and in fact there have been further proceedings further orders and further appeals on how to use steps the closure order to make a long story short over seven hundred boxes of documents have been produced the document production phase of the closure order should end next month or move into the next phase and it is approaching closure which is not to say the trustee will not mediate the trustee has always if the court does reach the merits of this appeal i really want to emphasize that it is an easy appeal we have a debtor who made a motion to move the trustee and submitted a ton of evidence returned to him until the claims are all finally disposed of so afterwards it was a short order of giving you some time to make that decision in other words not submitting this case and giving you a few weeks to come back to us and tell us whether you want to spend time meeting tha right thank you
the relevant conduct issue touches three points the drugs attributable to mr ortiz the scope of his role and also whether the firearm enhancement should apply and i think the the argument the district court references that or standard and the second party does references that and slash or in the briefing but when you look at how the facts were presented and how he's interpreted in those facts the twelve pounds that came from ramos was involved in more than just caldwell and that's clear from the transcripts and the record in this case mr ramos and other people sowing in the twin falls area that doesn't necessarily investigate this is something that happens quickly during trial and the distinction here for the court is this is not simply the government saying believe us because we bring these people for valjean here yes the initial vouching is where the government is going through a series of questions about the plea agreement the truthfulness and the you will agree with me that the most important rule is to tell the truth yes and then go on it's in the closing argument though your honor where the government then brings in and the court as the keeper or the determination to the determining person for who's telling the truth or shifting it from the jury and making that credibility on the witness to the judge by the statements that the judge will make the final determination if these witnesses are being truthful when they go to sentencing knowledge of the scope of conspiracy that covers both of those factors in addition directly below there in talking about the foreseeability with respect to the firearm enhan eliminates that occurred there after during the course of the co and what he said to the jury was what that you try to do at a trial is to create a crucible of truth to bring people in with knowledge and allow you meaning the jury to look at it and make your determination that's the crucible and if you believe that ultimately the court will make the determination as to whether or not that cooperation has been appropriate and their testimony truthful in this crucible and if we're discussing the court making that determination th could not rise to the level planer particularly given the enormous amount of factual evidence against the defendant in this case the transcript is six seventy one twenty three that's where the government has shifted the burden over as as you've pointed out your honor from the jury making the finding of fact to the judge making the finding of fact on other because in the argument it was highlighted that this this whole process was designed to come to determining if these witnesses were being truthful or not and when you compare that up with the arguments on me on the  remains and then telling the jury at this point it's the judge that's going to determine it so what you do later is not going to have an impact the judge's instructions at the end of the trial i don't think were sufficient to
what happened was when i was going through my excerpts of record preparing for the case and i noticed in my copy pages twenty five to forty five or whatever those were not in my answer to record and i didn't know if they were yours or not so just in case i brought an extra co doctor had in the last case said claim it would not work well with the public giving her anxiety and disorganization and so the judge says well she can go back and work with her cashier job the very nature cashier job is to work with the public if you're not making change or taking change from the public you have nothing to do i mean that's because your job that's what it is and so he accepts dr brown's findings yet he also doesn't really take us through an analysis of what  sasheer must do and i think by common sense we know that what a cashier has to deal with the public and that's that's all she does is deal with the public eight hours a day miss laura never did work at this job full time she says she's occasions and she said that resulted and a problem with her manager obviously it would these he's going to be worried about liability all sorts of things with her family or three different times and she said that's one of the reasons are ours were cut and if you look at our armies record she average fifteen hours of work per week her first year she worked there twelve hours the next week and i now hours per week for the next year and then finally the job ended as a cashier  job and she she indicated that's the reason why i was in part because of the problem she had with the manager because of her missing work because of the almost her condition also deteriorated over time she actually going to stick treatment while  he was working as a cashier job and trying to get control of the situation because she had had some extreme dramatic childhood incidents of sexual physical and emotionally being abused in some very young age when she the other thing i thought was kind of interesting was the judge at the very beginning of the transcript where we started i gave him exhibit eighteen which is mr wright statement and he says i understand you want to make a statement about this mr wright statement i mr wright addresses he's got thirteen years experience it's relevant to this case because if he can't work and that's it that's the issue and he says well this is a non adversarial proceeding so i will allow you to enter it as an exhibit
ahead yeah mr avila let me ask a question you know relief from state is really almost entirely procedural it's not going to get at the merits of a question most of the time it's just a question of you know if there is something to be decided here is there a reason why the bankruptcy code should prevent that decision from happening so i mean i think there's one get to the ambiguities as to what interests you did or didn't have in this property w really claim and let me let me stop you then what do you actually own do you really own any interest in mr he manage his property i thought you told the bankruptcy court you did not know he on so why did you list this were you were deeply involved in the man's case right in that case somebody went to a bankruptcy judge to talk about these issues that bankruptcy judge made a ruling that ruling got appeal i remember very directly you proper to challenge that by filing a bankruptcy case and then pretending that you have an interest in the property which you just told us you don't i mean there may be problems but you can't challenge it by basically starting off with don't i listen i've looked over the record i've listened to or i met i can tell what interest mr rivera had has had may have did have will have right a but there was something there that honor that is a good point so interest that to begin i don't think he has any interest to the record though i mean unfortunately the briefing the briefing makes statements back and forth there's nothing on the record to establish nor has it  take any further questions from the panel ok good all right mr rivera you have about let's see you have about two and a half minutes left please go ahead you said you would be no