MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
we think that a jury should decide whether the are in essence failure to fulfill its mandatory obligations under the statutes to detain congress placed upon them they've got to act reasonably in order to find out where these criminal aliens are so that they can in fact do you know what it means when they clearly there's a victim of criminal aliens class if if the drunk driving statute and the public intoxication statute that i cite in the brief are sufficient to establish a class for victims of drunk drivers certainly four days after the facts before he went on vacation is there any and anything on the record that shows that he is very good jim nothing that we were able to develop with if you met with  likely to encounter criminal aliens in the course of criminal activity and that's where i think their court could say it's the law enforcement community that congress was trying not to to minimize the burden on where the trooper seiners as a member of that class in addition to being just a member of those who are victimized by criminal and and to me at least docket i just have a minute left i would like to touch briefly on proximate cause i know that you've read the green and i would just point out that the proximate v corpus petition appeal six justices of the supreme court joined in part one of that argument is extremely short argument but it's not necessary it's not necessary to that opinion at all unless the court felt that subsection eat was a graph of discretion to the attorney general and let me change the facts slightly and give you a slightly different analogy if i can i don't know the for the legislative record with both parties start that was a personal issue addressed that legislative record so attorney generals that we're only going to keep the worst of the worst and mr basket may be charged with a violent offense we've only been convicted preview leave two simple possession charges criminal prosecutor i know of no basis to hold anybody except on probable cause and i would never ever accept an agent come to me tell me he have probable cause simply based upon a name that's not sufficient you have to make the identification that's the next step required in washington last perfectly clear the investigation on make my destination is not a cause of action that made it perfectly clear a number of the players response to that is within the part of any of those agents as to who mr basket sitting in franklin county jail was they had to have that knowledge before they had actual knowledge that he was a person sitting in the jail was a criminal aliens i don't know you know because he refused a very careful man very careful man he didn't actually the problem and it just isn't fair somehow to impose the burden upon the scene of which border patrol agent
doesn't speak to that thirty eight and walked off the project and we had to use the bond money to pay a replacement contractor it puts all of the bondholders and the purchases of the bonds they are there  route thirty eight we do business with you this is great this was it this was a gift and it was three point three million dollars that apparently wasn't good enough in this case but  antial completion is different and there it is there's case law just custom in practice everybody that is a contractor or even construction or if you ever even ha
a repeat i don't know because it seems like on the twelfth there was a notice to the client that we've withdrawn so i was confused by the timing that you know order were a discovery rule and did not justify any kind of discover it motion was her given that two motion was for trying to get the court to reverse order allowing an attorney to withdraw even after that your car in order to prove damages did not controlling that day you can blame it on whatever you want but the fact is there are court orders allowing this and the fact that you x sanctions ask for sanctions against
simultaneously have gone off and done a separate search of the database and under the wrong name but they didn't yet know the right name why would that mean a frank t did have properly registered firearms including this in a machine gun africa which again turns out to be properly registered and which doesn't do it which doesn't turn up until after the after the search a residential address which is the same as richard eric king we know that's false right now that's certain i don't understand why they didn't look at the catholic driver's license and see what out of a database doesn't work properly what you're looking at is whether the officers acted reasonably right so they get a name plug at the end and it's got the names reverse and they get back this man's there's no evidence of that so we're just assuming that the officers lie well we're all reckless the disregarding what he found or not spending the fifteen or twenty minutes to find out who lives in that v check was legitimate i understand he didn't run the d m v check prior to running the check with the national firearms registry and that's how he got the data on the sticking used in his business which is the laser business i think there's evidence in the record to that effect but what you're talking about is evidence in support of the verdict which would support what the jury  clear here the defense doesn't want to argue the short term but short barrel rifle because clearly in my case if you look at u s versus can't there's enough evidence to convict on that count he had seven of those years and seven lower receivers all within his gun safe  tests only related to the machine gun part that is correct and so the question was whether those parts allow someone to convert a so weapon into a fully automatic weapon that's correct and so to briefly address the rifle issue the testimony was that the lowers of the rifle properly registered the operators did not need to be registered and there was no life testimony whatsoever evidence that they were put together or that there was any way that he knew that they director that he wasn't a designated that firearms expert in so far as the issue of the district court judge's opinion he made that statement in the motions for post trial motions but in the sentencing
evening to what was presented at trial already we know he was bald so he's already been excluded he being your client so we already know that it could be williams and here it could be somebody else is here if the test comes back to exclude will use the  that he's the one who committed the murder there was evidence presented at trial that there was quite a bit of a violent struggle in the victim's be done rather badly and several injuries indicative of a last incident wrong if it hasn't been tested the defense against the test if it will be interesting relevant to this case well don't we have to get to that point material irrelevant before we get to the second you know subject subject i would apartment used to him certainly knew the victim because she was the manager of the apartment building she could have gotten it here through any interaction with him in this court has already that during that time they were downstairs cleaning up an open window in the front door and then try to go to the victim's apartment and ask her to tell her what had happened and they could find her would you agree that this fear of those would be relevant for the we talked about evidence that was not subject to testing because the technology for that testing was not of the ilmu at the time in people the landing and people the books the supreme something that was not in existence if d n a was not there who are because they took all that language but i didn't have to be the technology i'm assuming there are other reasons that it was not subject to the testing for would indicate how how how close proximity he might have been to the victim to explain how his hair might have gotten in three specific areas
in spanish who gives us good yeah we go we have a very blessed savior we had to go brady many hispanics to have a little bit more about this culture here in vermont and some people are like hiding and they don't want to show off but we have a lot of tell you may like to our set yeah yeah well i just have an overall love and passion for music so i love every genre of music new older stuff so he had his own book of music and i just sat and went through it and said yeah i know some of the stuff we can work with it i've learned some of his stuff and then likewise i started saying hey i want you to do this and do that and so a little bit more modern music and we've been able to collaborate great so the name identity crisis because we were struggling to find a name and every time we played somewhere people were just blown away by the different genres of music we play country we play rock we play a little bit of modern what's on the radio  forward and then after that i wanted to do something on my own so i started asking around to some of the musician friends i had came across gomez and he's an extremely talented and i said i don't write i'm not a writer but you know my love and my passion is for my instrument which is singing and so i sat down with him and said this is what's going on my life this is what i'd like my music to sound like and we would talk about events that were happening and he would take some information from me and within a week he'd write a song about what was going on in my life at that so i was told you know for you yeah so he you know we worked out a deal and and he was writing the songs for me and then i went into the studio with his son and we recorded an album and the album's title is so la which would translate to on my own right now so lonely no you have all lost i'm not so a yeah but yeah i had the honor to sing the national anthem last year at the lake monsters game and i'm hoping to do it this year i don't have a date yet but states maybe the fourth of july you know who knows yeah that's a good day yeah beautiful we have a tribute to one person that we all love you very much her name is linda ronstadt but let's take a break on this talk a little bit with jeff you were born in vermont no where were you born california california so you know the have a very growing hispanic community here in vermont and we have to speak spanish every time better but we have to perfect the english word to be able to make a t v show like this bug there is a burst of the had been singing many many different times i have learned the name is linda ron and so it's going to be this saturday at eight o'clock it's fifteen dollars cover charge twenty one enough of course everyone can bring their own food or beverages that's open for sure so it's going to be a big celebration  fear strangers mood and i wish i could crawl right through the phone saw i think that he had been a beautiful show i have enjoyed a lot and we had a four one experience we have been watching you in many many places so i think that we brought all the energy of your life performances to
to this tour let's let's forget about that for a second in stick with what i'm asking for those are the pieces it seems like people bring in light testimony isn't that the way to do it i mean even if it was admissible
chance in this case wondering whether you have the sufficient grounds here to make that especially in light of the times and case i mean how that's my question is how do we right around structure cautionary destruction or what happened without looking for any reaction other than the presumed prop pop probability what he said i think the list of questions i had submitted were kind of focus on the issues those will all be withdrawn and the new list that we submit will focus on guilt and innocence and not punishment so what he said is so s error or a plain error argument and review so those else analyses have been waived as well even if they hadn't been waived the evidence in this case is absolutely absolutely overwhelming you've got the defendant's confession which matches the forensic evidence you've got three eyewitnesses one of whom is the woman who was in the car with the victim when he was shot she's known the defendant says they were in fifth grade together they went all through school so there's no question she knew who the man was he called her by her nickname peaches so the evidence in this case is absolutely unimpeachable frankly with or without the defendant's confession what about counsel's argument about the person the slug not allowed considered every angle i don't know what the attorneys thought let's say that's all until the trial that's finger done but it really it's not it there's no indication that it's that deficient  conduct or that it would have made a difference because she wouldn't bend the witness that the friend of think she would have if you look at her trial testimony she really doesn't add much to what the evidence is  and she affirmed that they were correct which could she have done differently if special hearing as defendant says she could have given her opinion and that's what it would have been that they were fresh injuries while you know what the state could have called this paramedic testified that when you see scabbed over wounds at me it's a bend there for less for at least the day this case according to the defendant's own accounting of how things to place it was two hours after the state's tourney all testified that briefly put length in detail about what occurred with this defendant and each one of them deny that he was injured in any way shape or form so even if attorney bets all had been called refreshment was defendant injured by police as a means of producing his confession well this confession i was on account preceded by approximately two hours the beating he supposedly took salo if the confession came before the beating
motion was a two six fifteen motion one small on the allegations in the complaint in the person that motion was to challenge the fairy theory of the plaintiff's cause of action that departure could reopen liable if allegations we cited more than a dozen cases the plaintiff didn't address any of those either in the truck or who were in this court notably those cases include for example barbara's cottingham where the supreme court confirm that a the question weighed distance which speed it is routinely done and one of the cases that i was reviewing when i was getting ready for this was here is vs thompson the supreme court's case from two thousand and twelve involving intercession fruition of an ambulance and more vehicle and supreme court  an adequate view by removing foliage at this object intersection however the else is doesn't start in software because there is a duty under the manual to do you see to analyze
any other questions no thank you for
not a lot out there to guide us so when i come back to us i am concerned about shareholders in principle assuming liability for corporate action which is obstacle to the recovery directly from the recipient of the proceeds of the merger you've got to trace the money that's always a sound philosophy is to trace the money and look where it went and we have we have only asking the court to apply a whole new theory of shareholder liability by mr applying ancient equitable principles to modern step back from the whether there was an expressed contract and whether general principles of equity are applicable even if you find there's no express contract and even if you find that general principles of equity are made otherwise the applicable apply and i'm just enrichment claim in this situation is bad policy because of the mischief it would create to establish principles of shareholder liability in corporate  into an inflated market and a shareholder might then be liable that when that person have no other recovery in that situation and i think that if this if if if you indors the theory of why ability that is being presented here today it will make tremendous mischief for the victims of corporate fraud who already have a tremendous u market were unjustly enriched and these cases will which now take three or four years will take six years from now this mischief will be made by going down that road and i think again that is what the district  that's that i am concerned about the whole corporate mail and the corporate form which was part of our discussion you know that the flip side of your argument is they're saying how do we get how do we get our money back and the only people who have money that they is linked right past in the telling spree there is a six week period that intervenes between the date that the offer is made and the closing of the merger during that six week period every is an offer because it's in a prospectus we agree that then the legal definition of offer in the thirty three act can be broader then the common law definition of offer but we're also saying that where you have a contract remedy you cannot go behind the back door and avoid your contract run any remedy by suing a third party in you know  wants to claim that the underlying contract is void they have to do it they didn't do that it's three years this past two years passed before they regarding agency that the h b o series shareholders have any control over the corporation or that the corporation was a sham or any fact which would be different than any other public shareholder of any other company so that back to our first year contract and those things the fundamental principle is if the person who receives the benefit is an innocent party who gave value without prevailed one inch unjust enrichment i would say that some of your writers thought so in this i think prove that in the context of the twelve the six motion not the trial of unjust enrichment where all these factors cou
know exactly how they simply and worse for wall granted to grace oh cool and conditions there too and the fact that to to remove the
you're saying that's reasonable ye and what was the purpose of the slow motion you  you get to see that he is just so your argument would be that even though defending is saying this is the self defense type of homicide  that are out on yes and what are the sentencing factors in making that discretionary decision or just as to the sentence the leader life imprisonment or what were the other choices have to brutal
my druthers i'd have a case with the medical testimony but i also suspect that if i had a case with better medical testimony or the way i think it was a more comprehensive plan to present medical decide to do it and that's why there is an issue justice here with regard to the action it is clear mr bean's call it an accident because
because the motion to dismiss should have been granted before we even have a trial in the middle of the trial of a motion for directed berths have been granted our sole basis for appeal on either the motion to dismiss they do exercise their discretion to impose a regulation of smoking now i'm saying there's discretion to do that is the statute uses the word may and under and bars which are specifically listed in second definition of public place but it also includes all kinds of other types of buildings that wouldn't necessarily be licensed in and indeed ways not just ones that were licensed the well you know i mean the context of all this is about smoking and the statute says it can't be less restrictive why should we just interpret that as meaning they can't allow not going after the other businesses that fall the parameters of section towns definition of public places paid and the sole source let me make sure i understand you are the sole source of your contention that they must if they're going to pass an ordinance they have to ban it in all public places is the smoke free only act and the use of the word must be in the u s and so that they could pass an ordinance that doesn't mean necessarily cover everything this is a state statute  everything it says that the valet should be the occurrence on the licensed premises of an event activity or circumstance which shall be a constitute an event activity or circumstance otherwise prohibited  then de is code or the laws as they've all morning so i mean there's nothing in there about you know whether the licensee had anything to do with it so i guess presumably if two people got a fight somebody committed the act of a battery on the premises you could find the license eat because somebody gets them depending on the circumstance oh t talks about other the kinds of places that can be regulated those other things the places be ones that don't fall within the definition of a public place but nonetheless there were places and
all three m cations were materially deficient and failed to comply with the c the rd and final location for building permit which were submitted a letter days after player filed this action accordingly it would have been possible for defendant to have had an obligation to issue  building permit on the nonexistent application at the time this or she was filed several rate in this claim that the uncontroversial evidence shows that the application submitted had complied with the city code this if the application was submitted that afternoon on monday nov th plane to file this was is virtually impossible but left very least and reasonable impractical to development with in the zone district of the subject property would be used for single family purposes the tract of land would also feature a bill be used for administrative purposes and community purposes this was one area where if it is consultants found the building planes deteriorate division the plans for the building had failed to add here to the codes automatically stays the execution over writ of mandamus there are three exceptions within that rule none of which are present here most  to develop an idea in chicago it is because i do recognize that there was a need for low income housing opportunities in the city of alton in that is why the developers put this project together and have and have tried now for a period of two years actually going on three years to get this going in order to clear a few things st to the point of did file three different building permit applications the st one operate that will be there for the franklin county it's a competitive process and if you don't you can't or don't use the tax credits you're going to lose it because it's going to go to the projects they're well aware of that we have affidavits in the records signed by the developer in this case
really great this morning because he's been elected as our new helic or justice but at any rate he couldn't be here today that does not mean that he will not give your you know due consideration because as you probably all know everything that's said in the courtroom is recorded and it's available for public listening as well as well before a justice who schooling after high school ok and he came to the farmer ship by way of his death sisters rather than all who brought him into the partnership but he was a partner at the time and two hundred twenty four thousand liquidated damages and now i have a question about these damages and soon as these were agreed upon experience in this and one of the partners i think john davidson correct me if i'm wrong gave up a number of finance so that mr allen would have his own territory is that true took place a client of your client was the first breach and then you allege continuing breaches yes but in your complaint your men complained then referring to i don't see that i don't see where you're living and your days you know the continuation of trade secret or secret customer list an issue you agree with that proposition of law missouri ok what is your understanding mr law in that regard as to trade secrets or stimulus well as far as the part of the trade secrets my understanding of missouri law is that might this case almost two years later i'm not that great calculating october seventh twenty fourteen so february twenty  evidence and before the court that this partnership alleges your client had interfered with thirty two separate businesses is there any evidence