MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
back in two thousand she pled guilty to a charge of eleven three seventy nine eight of the health and safety codes which is one of those california violation that deals with seo transportation importation wasn't her plane was not counsel replete with guilt or milk on the plane was guilty to the charge of sale of methamphetamine and that was an account to count one which charge manufacture was dismissed and but the plane was guilty the plane was not the factual basis was a well the plea guilty plea just plead guilty to every single thing stated and  preliminary to the actual play you're talking about the factual basis the standard with the plea agreement that she she can't plead guilty to part of the charge by correspondence can she recall that it wasn't sufficient to plead guilty to a violation of the statute where it is set forth in the disjunctive and only transport could have been  nearly upon dismissing and i filed a good score of attrition i arrived at the same place that i would have arrived had the court dismissed the petition for a view i just got there about three or four months earlier and therefore less time than my jurisdictional why should we require that they exhaust remedies well first of all your are there are cases in the circuit particularly noriega lopez castro cortez and a case called  mention even in passing what kind of documents are to be considered and certainly in this case we do have sufficient documentation in the form of her plea agreement on in the indictment and again in this case is just level prevail you have to be able to argue it seems to me that's something that was said in the in response to question number twenty one and for page sixteen does it and also he says there is on july second two thousand in personal use exception for methamphetamine she was transporting for the purposes of trafficking there is no way that she can get around that in addition this counsel which she planned involved another individual she was involved in a conspiracy to traffic methamphetamine and that's transportation was part was it was a trafficking hat that transportation was not personally used or for any other reason why do we know that because it's because of the way the statute  alien was involved in this type looking at the indictment looking at the count there's another individual there's another individual involved and also the law says that it's there's no exception for personal use then it's record the complete record of this case demonstrates that she was transporting and that's all under california law person can be convicted of trash what a controlled substance without any commercial alimony and whatsoever i can take my methamphetamine last the statute on its face clearly demonstrates such a trafficking statute then there must be some type of commercial element to the activity itself that's why they said one of the reasons eligible for cancellation of removal a remedy that's available to long term permanent resident in her case the one who's lived here since she was able pre teen three united states citizens children entire family here has
six good morning your honor as the record may wish that i did not represent the respondents in the immigration court proceeding i got this case  going on what happened and even almost a year after the case had been concluded he had no clue what had happened in the immigration court proceeding i spoke with his daughter and she was night restrict immigration judge the attorney who appeared on this case and i'm not making a straightforward claim of ineffective assistance of counsel even though i referred to as i don't want to confuse issues before attorney what are you doing you know what you're doing what's going on he had no clue about the procedure there's a difference in my grief and it's very clear even in the oral decision that they ask some kind of unique task force but i don't think i mean this is i'm not trying to present evidence that is not before the court but mark my understanding is that he just got what he was getting like everybody else he wasn't getting anything black and white decision from the immigration judge that he was so incredible that the basic and the fundamental of his claim of our void he was in the air force that plane was never disputed the for whatever reasons or for no reason a lot of afghans or the review is limited that's the difficulty i'm having with your argument your argument to us is broached as if we were making the initial determination but now we're reviewing the determination that's already been named and actually is to determine whether or not there is substantial evidence to support that adverse credibility ruling so we don't look at it as if we were the first group to look i know that right well he i believe you testified that he left for a particular period of time an unfortunate months later he went back and served again another and consistency again much really goes to all of  his application and declaration say nothing about his christian leanings or wanting to convert to christianity are planning to convert yet he testified he didn't convert only be heard before he process if he were to leave the country would it still be processed i believe so your honor you know unless counsel withdrew and i used to be there you couldn't but i think under the new law if you're still here even may have something you know in my belief or argument that may not be completely one hundred percent i asked what he told me to do to be in it in my brief i mean i've done my best to be accurate but of course my position was different and i'm coming in trying to clean she can in terms of trying to determine you know whether the petitioner is credible and that the i think there is able to hear the testimony of able to observe the demeanor
because she was asked what indicated that the numbers were of the bible he was to explain generally the sources that she relied on and into which the numbers that she cited as reliable and she did so it's not an accurate characterization to say that she knew nothing about these numbers or that they were completely unsubstantiated when asked what made the numbers but indicated to her if the numbers were reliable that he said that she  statistics which is a publication that the regulations also permit the administrative notice of she also indicated that the numbers also came from field research employees of scale trends going out into the field to i'm only aware of cases with similar testimony to this that the phrasing in terms of widely used are used by other experts in the field to your point regarding the commonality of this issue and i believe that that goes to my point earlier that there is no affirmative requirement that ease go into this analysis at all if they're not asked by  a different job so she was able to cross examine the full patient that spirit and that when it came time to the child numbers she was again given the opportunity she asked basically one substantive question what indicates to you that these numbers are reliable sexually presupposing that they want and the street gave the response here indicating that she understood the components of those numbers and that it was well respected in her field  and other cases where the numbers usually come from they are they do come from skilled track and one thing to know is that skull train is actually the company one of the softwares that they use this common in this area is called job as are and so the case often uses in the past some of the cases i used to source called the occupational employment quarterly i believe which only gave numbers at eight at all and then they were hired to use their own experience to distill the numbers down to the actual jobs so that is a source that was you saw in the past and isn't as much anymore so with the technology changing and sources constantly changing the sources that are identified as the basis for the testimony sort of come and
is and i believe we have done exactly that with a letter showing a number of ways why a guilty person has a different interest than an innocent person and in a package deal ago a year ago five years ago ten years ago i believed the  in october of last year after being appointed in june so nobody was aware of the conflict between the two lawyers or the connection between the two lawyers until two years ago that's
need to be given but then the judge went on to do two things at the trial court told jurors that he didn't look specifically at opposition's instruction in that that would tell them exactly what they needed to do
the act purpose of developing these claims the statutory rights council must impose some obligation on time it's all in terms of their performance at this third station and developing a record home and that's why a match be with respect to the opposing counsel discussion a foundation foundation has specific elements where the conversation took place when it took place who fact that the contents of her conversation in this persons should have been excluded because it didn't have a proper foundation in the states aren't really fall by the wayside because there's nothing to rebut mr perfectly and his mother
and i request permission of the poor to sit and talk because i'm not very well you may do that you just please keep your voice up so that we can hear you ok question is for example you said you heard that your family was sending money but who do you know who was sending the money in the complaint doesn't say anything about who they are no names for example that someone so was sending us specific amount of money and it doesn't say to what bank that was sent now we would typically assume that if someone is has a concrete reason to believe that someone is sending the money to a particular bank or a particular bank account they would be able to say a name and person advised me that he or she was sending a specific amount of money to a particular bank  indeed and is that is that you know is there any documentation that anyone if someone's transferred money to you wouldn't that person have some record of what they ordered transferred and where they gave it you know what bank in india was supposed to transfer  from one bank to another because of that was there then someone would be able whether or not it's appropriate for this quarter we have jurisdiction or whatever but at least someone would be able to look into this allegation well documented we have your papers we will study them and this is an appeal from the fact that your case was dismissed by the district court so we will render a decision on that after we
well in detail on page one fifty five through one fifty seven in the record and he stated any and i quote him in response to the question how did you participate in the boycott he says well actually i gave them twenty thousand rupees  it's like an election campaign and ask one can participate in leading up to election day and that should be construed as participation here he testified unequivocally and that and with sufficient detail i consistently that he participated in may or may not have been aware of this but his father made that made that promise to the police he was not persevering witness he was never confronted with whether or not at least hearing with whether or not he was ever whether he had knowledge of honor he could not even remember if he had been beaten and detained mistreated by the police he couldn't tell the single incident and you tell him officer repeatedly asked him to tell me about any harassment that happened to you none of this is  think not credible case over and the problem was that that was no way for the b i e or this court to review the i g s findings as a matter of administrative law that's not proper here the i j a did she identified material argued before the court i do not believe that
defendants in this case have tried to make the case about magic words and about whether mr her and whether he has  been targeted you know that plaintiff hearns was going to deliver the next shipment from inmate where his family of prayer directly to inmate where and he knew depending upon specifically knew that  leading enemies that plaintiff earns does not believe in this you know and believes that there is a prophet after mohammad these are according to the complaint these allegations would require that these leading  another yard mr horn's himself once he was attacked on the first charge was there was an investigation into his safety concerns and he was transferred to the next charge for that very reason so he put in what seemed to the court all the facts he knew about what had gone on thread tying together these allegations to infer that there is a connection between the plane after sampling kinds of bad motives and what and the fact that ultimately it became aware of who sent himself was transferred to another yard for safety concerns so he really the kind of himself supported that prison officials act when they have knowledge it's required anything else really requires them to be cla that he needed to be done away with and then the lights went out and the chaplain just walked out and then they these other guys jumped in  allege that there was anything wrong with that and somehow inmates team into the chapel presumably after being checked at the door and then the lights went out and then he was twelve and then yes he was runner and we don't know those through her inmates are very good at hiding weapons people get stabbed unfortunately in prison often and it's not for the lack of them being checked it's because they hide them very discreetly so again a lot of inferring would be required to get  course i'm being an artful in my my argument at this moment but i think the point is that the entire argument is based on magic words to use the word negligent but if you look at the facts behind what he said he said this was either left in the chapel
dollars but there's a sale today you can be sent off to forty to fifty ok or just a moment i'll be right back
ship's medical units initial briefing will be held to date fifteen hundred summer second nine hundred forty four initial briefing something was up ships to board place to great quantities of medical supplies were ready after receiving treatment at the age station casualties were not serious were able to bypass rear medical units and were taken directly on four thousand five hundred  unit was practically our main source of fresh water it will having them what we brought in by ship was exhausted and the spraying of twenty five thousand japs was the high standard sanitation maintained on the island with the enforcement of rigid rules and frequent inspections as indicated by the fact that there were no outbreaks of  over ninety eight percent
introduced me to create a fashion show in a conversation that should have gone to the jury in other words she showed for purposes of summary judgment that what how kind of her would not have happened if she hadn't made her complaints every terrorist with respect to the first point two years later my direct supervisor is continuing to retaliate against me and has harassed me during the past two years as well and she was given a choice she could leave the department that she loved and continue teaching her courses but escape the conduct of her tell you tory supervisor she could stay in touch she didn't want to leave but she chose the latter after she left
third country without river and with a little rin
rudeness testified in that position the last year but as a separate agreement a separate offset services agreement referred to by name in the contract that's still not enough to give it an exception to the usual rule that a third party cannot see one of the contract directly in rows from or even if the sasco had been a third party deposition testimony referred to questioning about a deposition exhibit that was a draft of a contract that would have been directly between a sasco and ts seat it's undisputed that was never signed and never implemented contract to which t s d is a party and that's why a sasco was forced to pursue it bass for third party beneficiary claim but it can show that it clearly and definitely was a third party beneficiary the same course of action addition before because the a sasco contract stated that it would end automatically upon the end of the contract between ts city and bono there was nothing else about the fact that it came to an end it would dollars a month at times at a time when tester on systems was reducing its worldwide use of the consultants the compensation was reduced to five hundred dollars a month and  have been given pursuant to this agreement that's first and second bed no additional payments except for reimbursing expenses no additional payments shall be paid to a sense go and that makes sense precisely as american companies your own business abroad while the contractual certainty of specifying what obligations and got monetary obligations do or don't exist when riding out a consultant abroad for a potential sale and that fails in the first line of this court's decision in h s b c and what the court observed in that case like in this case is that reliance on supposedly misrepresentations that contradicts the terms hand expressively clue does exactly what it's asked was seeking so unlike in kendo where the contract is silent on the subject and opens the door to more perhaps here are two supposed to catered commercial entities express
granted leave to a man which you are not any allegations that suggested your client had some kind of contact with the defendant or you know or his is people in some limitations if she doesn't know she's being followed can you clarify what you are yes if your client didn't know that mr stern or any of his affiliates was following her if she excused from filing a timely complaint she had thought she'd ha relegation is in her state court complaint which she finally two months after the district court's order dismissing her case in federal court and after she had already obtained all of the doubt and massachusetts gaming records and the place  spying was because in two thousand and eighteen when the wall street journal article was published it was the lead was the source for the wall street journal and there was an allegation that he was there after follow none of that information relates in any way to the plaintiffs demonstrating why in two thousand and six when she was terminated she did not have sufficient and mation that was concealed by my client from her to allow her to allegation really is that i was scared that if i did go forward i would suffer some serious and burst out so it's a direct threat or intimidation if we take and what he told there was i can find you at any time in your family any time events holford you're going to pay if you say anything about me then at least two occasions he drove by in his patrol car stuck his finger out the window like a gun looked at all of the very fact that you're talking about and consider was there a reasonable threat that she could rely on not to file the session on a timely and the court points out no one threatened to murder her kidnap her  remained employed for another year didn't call the cops didn't take any other action a la argument that she truly fear for her safety and the police i see the clock is ticking down so i do want to is absolutely no authority in support of a district court judge having to recuse himself and because one of the attorneys in one of the cases before in them is considered as a candidate or a magistrate judge and then ition there is simply looking to change venue to move this case to california where she believes it will be more favorable for this isn't about a case the fact happened here the relationships were here this is where the case is properly  that she's got to demonstrate that she rely on some active action by the defendants to prevent her from filing a complaint kindly back in two thousand and six and she's got to explain to you amended complaint when there was was a request for judicial notice of a massachusetts gaming commission report now that that massachusetts gaming commission report was a document that was replete with  hearsay it actually had heavily redacted portions in it it actually used pseudonyms throughout the report so you don't even know what they're gaining commission who they were speaking to this is not the basically house was being vetted by the district court during the entire pendency of this case there was no disclosure there was apparently an obligation to follow after we filed the complaint seems that
other month they are subject to geographic restrictions in their movement in the united states at the present time they are not allowed to leave the state of california they can be taken into custody at any time to assume the  that you know that they're going to do has any definitive step and taken to remove them that is not something that we are given any information on so but i think where i'm wrong coming from is i'm trying to figure out how you know this is somebody additionally as i was saying due to the ongoing three years since they've been released from from custody usually ongoing requirements the department of homeland security has imposed on their restrictions on their liberty requiring that's the end of the matter they're released they go on about their lives and even though they do not have the ability to immigrate and become a naturalized citizen they are for all practical purposes here for the rest of their life they are not subjected to these intensive monitoring albeit illegally present in the united states they were living otherwise obscene in lies in the united states they were caught up in a nightmare they made some stupid mistakes there certainly negative discretionary factors fraudulent bs application process and then to boot the guy they were involved in was apparently or at least allegedly involved with helping to fund terrorism well that  explain it when you think i would agree your honor it certainly explains the initial interest but to start with immigration judges and board of immigration appeals have to have cleared both of the petitioners in this matter from any involvement moniker whether it be fairly or unfairly and maybe this is you know since nine eleven and the fact that the state department and others were not as careful about keeping tabs on people that later turned out to be not so wonderful i mean i can understand where they would be err on the side of caution i fully agree with your honor and we have an extensive record in this case though a large record  that it is a matter of fact the record claims that they have no terrorist ties at all but but that they are in effect being painted with the same broad brush and that's the reason why the o j or homeland security you can certainly attempt to apply for withholding from your country and there would be general removed so i was asking when they'd be in a position to say well wait a minute i can't go there because i'm likely to be  we're used to getting calls you know for the old days from the junctions where they're at the airport you know ready to get on the plane that kind of thing is not i think what judge preggers and that's not what's in the cards here that would have to be a lot more going on here before they'd be able to be
the the order and that then nothing else could be done with respect to the to the rest of the order because it was a it's not that it's not a continuation of the old well potentially would often creat property and then one hundred percent cheap one hundred percent give or take away he would end up with no marital property here either the you think that's a result i honestly he brought this whole thing on himself evaluating you know dollars and cents appropriation so that's why you can that's why it's against the merits if you all the sudden start carving parts of the marital settlement