MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
were they were located they were incomplete because they weren't signed by the challenge and they were incomplete because she had cut a piece of the sections and there was no provisions for c except for the sale of any company as this were a two thirds vote required the trial before looked at this and said if i don't recognize what's happening here then you've got certain sections of totally have no meaning whatsoever you look at the four corners of the document in correctly me term and that this was the only logical understanding you could have to give all the provisions meeting in the agreement expenses the possibility that people could be living there having expenses that are known to be other if you know numbers of the group how does it or that this what's the control on it is actually the expenses on both the bowling alley side down the farmers side where as they have been for years now but all the records were kept at the mother's house bass where the operation where the records are kept for the ball side and  go to truth secrecy all give and this is the most important thing here or certainly keep part of it was a transaction was between interest but we had no idea what this expenses were they were never shared with us to claim that we received these is simply disingenuous the records were kept at the farm or they were given to  about what was going on when the prices were different for him by ambush jennifer by the girl said john for the record john how come a piece of property to shelling had a different pri
never created it's not created because the state police failed to fulfill their statutory duty to create i mean it's just a fine line between creating it and going to the way or just not reading well this there was actually an order in there for the state to preserve the take and the state violated that quarter that was injured in that case right and so it's certainly a different situation than we have in any of these three cases in  the state would have to produce it in discovery if they didn't have anything to produce so that's ok go ahead but i'm just i'm just trying to get past that initial cause i mean i don't think anybody here has taken the position that if there was a tape it would have had to been produced i don't think anybody's arguing with whether your argument in this case takes class a step further if not only do you have to preserve it if there is a take but you have to make it take that just that pretty absolute yeah ok because i think that if you don't make  evidence produces what draws it in line with the discovery process better says that he has another witness who also says the officers being untruthful to you this is be enough prejudice to show to ever sanction to exclude the evidence the tape i don't
victimized by the feds predatory repeated misrepresentations that occurred over the course of a two year period will this be necessarily mean that there is a constant action in iraq under the circumstances in this substantial i mean they were talking about meeting on the internet you know of course of two years the defendant is coming up with this movie set of characters twenty different individuals including the little kid reese who was the  had no idea that behind all of this behind your use of communication in a box full of e mail you know correspondence letters phone calls there's just one woman who is doing this because she finds it amusing you say that women are capable of doing the things that  be able to communicate with one of the sango to be gone by those whose terms i guess my question is who are they trying to protect they're trying to protect individuals from one another so when you register on  allegedly predatory nature and what my client is alleged to have done in other circumstances or what the home page of her own website sex as falling in love with the individual and when that individual indicates that she wishes to meet this love of her life  complaint that my client necessarily knew about the ad i am sure the representation to date from counsel is he presented his argument but there is no allegation to their effect in this complaint that my is whether or not what is fundamentally of cause a big action or a commercial context for a business context should be extended to this type of fifty three
you know th
so once you have something that pertains to the current government in affairs you can do those four things so you can regulate them with coach epis fifty seven does the regulations and you can license which it does under check twenty use with conditions attached you know that i don't know probably don't mean but the point is that there is some oversight and that's why they can't put out to casinos because best players probably doesn't want to be seen as we can't
title author publisher etc including the identification of any potentially questionable material i request is could the next sentence be this saki men shall be made available to parents guardians and students upon  before the regular meeting where it would be voted upon and the reason for that request is having come to the board meetings for five years i have seen multiple occasions where parents have come to object to textbooks that were adopted after they were adopted so very late in the process just trying to make sure that there is an opportunity opportunity for them to be educated on those books before they are actually voted upon
circumstances argument leading and everything else of the case that it does say there are but if you look at the transcript of the proceedings over and over again  on a particular factor that must be the basis upon which the court makes of this decision even though there are other factors involved the order of the court indicates other factors and other albums or other factors were presented either in them show or an oral argument but because the court followed up on the question and consecrated him in the it's questioning me particular factor that have to whatsoever to be anything other than rubber stamp i think that or he has to read you what specifically there and not trying to guess what's meant by general statements about i consider the all  s only the gross amount that was paid by th suffered some very minimal injury from an improper transfer or bruising from somebody being a little rough with her and who and in order to begin to hate her rights she has an attorney to do that and he and he really exercise discretion in finding that the attorneys make a petition for reasonable and when you look at his record and the evidence to be presented it cannot be
that if if you're looking at my life is position here would be whether or not my complaint was more appropriate for a small claims complaint versus a complaint for ten thousand dollars and one cent i think assuming even if the company was changed or that there hasn't been any renewal will i'm not aware of the terms and conditions have changed during the duration of the business and maybe you would have to allege that this is the terms and conditions that were in effect then and are in effect now break if the terms and conditions are in effect today when i use the car you'd say do you agree or disagree that you would also have to legitimize the terms and conditions which were accepted at the time that the current was initially accepted for lack of  in light of the trial court's position the only threat is i cannot recover attorney's fees or interest on behalf of my client without a written contract and that position by the trial about how this contract is formed so how do we tell the transport or more importantly the defendant who has a right to respond to move to dismiss to admit have an assignment so that where kurds the motion was granted he was all out please remember where i was allowed to look at it again i mean the ironic thing here is you know of thinking about this case i think this case the actual order was granted accepted the plastic card issued to you isn't it just to your point that when i accept a card from your plan except the credit card use a credit card except some terms and conditions but what are the terms and condition with that you did not have to listen to the transfer well of the trial judge who was telling me specifically was not consistent with the law he was citing and so it didn't really seem to be for my benefit
here's a happy song from italy of central america so no no what they're doing this is sad as magic observatory what wonderful instruments the years go the talent talker that knows everything the cosmic telescope the master or i nothing that happens on earth  child was is the love of his parents maybe they do and maybe they don't but still they may by now the truth well he's already sleeping we might be able to see a dream that let's see no lion ears santa claus please bring me a little brother here is merlin the wizard a little absent minded perhaps but sad as most devoted helper i think you'll agree it's a real work of art it has no equal i knew it the devil is nearby these three certainly are up to no good yes it is christmas and christmas always makes me feel sad has determined to get in he'll find a way he's not one to give up well there's more than one way to beat the devil said i will jump down using his magic powers r these two seem to know that sound is in the living room look outside and they'll see you why of course sandra can handle this all he has to do is use the magic dreaming powers prepared by mr whalen and it isn't long before our two little stay up late are sleeping hands first you'll see if it's hot or not what do you think of that the company of his mother and father i know all those toys don't make you happy but i will do something for you that i only do for children who are very good i would like to see me as i am and therefore i will use the powers that will make you dream that of course i love you sonny just as much as your parents because no one love the child as much if only at times the parents don't understand the children and the children don't understand their parents yes of course they love you and you must believe they love you now go back to sleep again when you awake and i wish you much happiness reward for those who love sincerely is love itself so drink my cocktail and you will become aware of that love which is closest to your heart in those without and they couldn't drink this cocktail as it would burn the  and there goes the power to disappear and now santa won't be able to make himself invisible what are you going to do now s let us hope the flower to disappear doesn't fall into bad ha is not afraid of the dog if he goes after him still thinks he can disappear so once again santa returns to his palace from his yearly christmas rather here's happy day once again has brought joy to the children of the world  goodwill toward men merry christmas
libby testified to his girlfriend testified that they had experience with convenience stores gas stations that they were familiar with spills and and the operation of stores and mr they could himself testify that the skill in question itself was two to three feet and
happy for you but think of the things that may happen to or them must have got together they've come back together this time is no attempt to land on the did they say  and
which fail to reflect information regarding the sons would have come in the questions that were sought to be introduced were simple questions it's the first question  have to address the concerns that you would keep it out and miss chase you have an interest to avoid confusion to a boring problems with the completeness doctrine but just don't justify with regard to this right to show that she should not the jury should give scant weight to her credibility to her testimony it was necessary that he should have been a in their way it was on the him and this information the current state higher false accusation the information that she had a reputation and community they worked with it by jury whatever i think the  statements to the police but said nothing happened that was before the jury i do not think that any reasonable person would agree with this with a court that is just defective going through each of these is exactly the truck were hit here and i think that the looking at not only that line of work inquiry as far as the cross examination impeachment that the defense right to impeach the witnesses not impaired  that they were right here but still find that there is a reasonable doubt because it's not you know every life is not right that i got it they just have some residual doubt you know th some kind of object of proof you know something like d n a evidence proving that there could have been no crime or whatever not this he said she said because as a trial court noted cannot be impeached with evidence that at some former time they lie about some other matter that that's a general rule be in course i'm the supreme court seemed to created particularly given the fact that the defendant stated i will make an offer proof as to what i want to bring him and then never did it so we don't know for sure what it is that was going to  i make an offer proof as to what i want to present and they never did if a victim sex case admits that she had made prior false accusations against others party has to be linked to the defendant there has to be some rational way that the motivation that cause the first  car she can't she wants a car she can't have the sons get to use it to do what they want she's not in that position so whatever motivation she had for those accusations against the son is necessarily a inconsistent state situation where the compromise is simply to avoid confusion we're confusion to necessarily to avoid problems with conflicts where it didn't necessarily it's not sufficient and in that regard there
emotionally sort of affected by by this alleged pornography additionally there was no evidence that the father in that case had intended or done anything intentional way to inflict emotional distress on the children in this particular case testimony to father but also the ick and that was the connection that mother had tried to connect with regard to that i use it was that he used it kids get access to it therefore they were in danger because they had access to that specific i pad with the argument i think of that that goes to the issue of other things in this in this case certainly there was in the street the father and the daughter mother's testimony specifically i think indicates that this may have been hours reaction or some type of discipline call on when one of the a palace was not seen to be as focused on the issue of the border protection in favor of this virgins and so i will shift most of my focus of my argument on to the children because  want to get the right language beats their son his and all the time in the face for the bite of your leg or whatnot hossam in the face fifteen times per month and beats this but once a month that was her testimony there was also testimony that stumble on the pornography i think also in that case they came across neither the children or actually father pornography in this case the testimony was in fact the parties daughter did see the pornography on the puter as always when she gets home the first thing she does is she cracks open a bottle of wine i wave my dinner hour three but she always has then he talks about other nine march twenty seventh they decided to go look for a new car and in the same sentence where he said she had cracked the bottle while she filled out a copy before they went to the car or even talked about coming home and drinking his bottle of wine the police officer when he has to fight indicated that when he talked to m imony was not called into question he didn't refute a lot of the allegations about their history and in this particular case it's our position trials were primarily around that both his merchant and the children had been used as  she absolutely impacted deny that that abuse occurred he said i've never done that never get my wife i've never sexually abused her certainly there were some discussion about prior instances that these parties had had back when they lived in texas when they lived in i  evidence and apart from the testimony of the parties these physical acts you know incidents that happen there was no other corroborating evidence i mean this one of them where they say to clarify certainly we can make allegations back and forth that we look at the totality of the  think a lot over the course and that day specifically references events things that didn't occur in evidence that wasn't presented conclusions that were drawn but there was no expert testimony in doubt how children who were involved in dysfunctional relationships may or may not respond in
he was the one who was paying us because he was the client now there were a number of people who were involved in the case who have to provide evidence and had to be scheduled for depositions and so forth so i can't speak to the specific entry that you're talking defend this determined solely based on the face of the pleading income missing the suit for which the defense has sought as a result the analysis of the duty to defend consists of a comparison of his rights everything that he was interested in protecting against was at issue in that perceiving he was there was a fraud charge directed at him everybody understood there was a fraud charge directed at him and that that was a proceeding that was going to decide whether he had committed fraud and therefore it was a suit against him if every meaningful since the world except perhaps that his name was a title i not possibly be held liable for concerning the role of his counsel would not render any decision binding on the council in a later legal malpractise action because the pennsylvania appellate courts have held that it attorney does not i participate in the underlying case in the car in the manner in which he could have a fair and adequate opportunity to defend himself against the factual determination is going to be necessary for a legal malpractise act purpose of collateral stoffel and i don't believe it's ever happened because to hold back would see in this video we prejudice any attorney in any case where he's representing his client where some time during the context of that amounts over the settlement that is compensatory dogs in addition to yes that mr won't be held responsible for attorney's fees for the fraud which under pennsylvania more you could recover as consequential damages if it were when he even went into claims against the third party not the insurer it would require resolution of allegations about the insurance contract is exactly our case but it could not have resolved the allegations against idea without resolving the all of the allegations
a little bit more typical kid you're going to find that there are gaps in their learning too so our job as a parent is to try and support the teachers whether they're lab teachers or there are local teachers in our local school district and help them fill in the gaps because they can't do everything
it's something you say about you have a key issue in your brief only if they have evidence living there is they have something about multiple people i don't know found doesn't really say anything other than maybe perhaps i sought under the bed i found it i mean i don't know that that says i actually took possession but the second part i was going to sell it ok is a future statement of something you're going to do evidence of constructive possession or present possession perhaps it is an evidence of defendant across a case where evidence of documents tied to a person on related to the address were in this case documents that have a different address have never been used to support but when asked about the email that the officers recovered from that same back bedroom he said look that he recently moved him to be here met with her girlfriend and his fiance but for the last couple of weeks the city what exactly did the guess he did but there was no evidence other than this border that established he was actually living there was there no end of it what do we do with the evidence that everything right that's cracked and then the exhibit came running out the door there was also extensive evidence this it will evidence of residency the actual mail addressed to him at that particular location so spencer i think has certainly more the actual information regarding the crime itself as opposed to this case and the probably evidence of the statements to corroborate defendant statement it doesn't bring to prove the crime beyond a
should disappear if there is contrary evidence that appears from the defense but it remains to be considered with the other evidence and has to be weighed by the jury guess the direct evidence offered by one of the defense's big arguments was that the timing was off because the plaintiff's witnesses testified that the show had been going on for ten or fifteen or twenty minutes or maybe it was in the middle of the sho in addition he reported that twenty nine people were treated at the scene and three people were sent to the house but one of those people that assigned to the hospital was mr positive the plaintiff in this case the russell came to the port a potties within seconds of hearing the is a case regarding the discretion of the trial court to make decisions and the for true turned by a jury after a week long trial with over fourteen witnesses in the course decisions and the jury verdict should be this is i think i could put this trial on without him as a matter of fact he was a terrible and this he suffering very terribly and he needs help i didn't rely on the idea i use the better  that's why he kept the depositions from mississippi but he refused to sanction the defense of the picture and go through his testimony referenced the mississippi depositions because even though he said he
hard to say you may know rescue not trying to escape and in fact when we look at he was he was he really the most important of these factors which would be the seriousness of the of the part yes it is first degree murder but we haven't defended he was claiming justified use of force this is a person who is claiming that even though this is an extraordinary and a tragic event that he was in flames you've been acting reasonably the entire time this is not a person who though it was getting getting towards midnight it would seem at this point the claim is that mr shannon at verbalise whoa whoa whoa and something to the effect of it doesn't have to be like this there are children in the home and then and that seems to be pretty logical inference from his point of view and so you think he did they had to they threaten two members of family and two people have testified to that so the facts are different and again diamond barnes did not arrive at the house and was let inside in the question of fact i came up there was disgusted me a reasonable solution to that case could have then you're not shackled while you're sitting down there at the table when you're going to be sitting here three feet so we don't have to believe distance mother and defendants brother and defendant but that the victim came out of his car with two not functioning guns threatening everyone we don't have to believe that because there just isn't tired to believe the victim's wife who said that he had nothing in his hands when he confronted defendant on the floor and that when the marcus because one he has to defend this grandmother that he loves so much but shoots in the house that she's living in and to if he didn't do that the victim wants to get hearing the sounds of again being loaded he he followed an armed man into his house i could probably just stop right there
three eleven and two thousand and see it by understand your you're basically saying you've got a written document that gives me peace but just you're saying the trial court looked at this and realized it could not combination the court did look at the written document validate it in its present condition statement really didn't satisfy the intent of the parties and so back to the parties what