MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
imagine a more obvious case of arbitrary state action and what happened to mr jackson he was found guilty of violating prison rules after a procedurally flawed hearing at the potential punishment w during a one year term solitary confinement in the security housing unit or shoot but before he was sent to the shoe mr jackson appealed and before he was sent to the issue that appeal was granted voiding the submit that there are sort of four examples in the disciplinary context when you have such a sheer denial due process when there's no charge when there's no hearing when there's no evidence presented at the hearing to support of guilty finding or when there's no guilty don't cases applying standard dismissing ultimately affirming just missiles are on summary judgment mr jackson has alleged the reason he was transferred to corcoran is although the california state prison system has in excess of thirty different institutions statewide there are only three institutions that have a shoe and i think that right there is an example of what an extreme deprivation of liberty it really is you know that and the past  understand and to determine whether that test is matt and one of them is whether the prisoner the much material differences between the conditions in administrative segregation and to mr jackson have done that and i think that's the primary reason he was challenging caused a major disruption in comparison with the conditions and in general population which is the proper baseline for comparison under and for but first amendment rights must be adequate effective and meaningful hostile abusive sexual or threatening language in a written grievance the night this court held in bradley that's a violation of the first amendment and they rejected the government's argument there that well they were allowed to write grievances that's  matter you still go off and be punished anyway i mean prisoners would probably stop following me and that's sort of a chilling effect on their right to petition the government i see my time is running down spread like to reserve for thank you responsible or involved in the altercation or you know that he was beat up or something i don't know he would have gone back to non negative gone back to general population not necessarily and the streets nation can be used for different reasons the administrative charges been upheld by the hearing officer so he's just he's a ship dock worker and without having the opportunity complete the administrative process to challenge the char they're not the same as the wolf tied protection for instance in if you are at all what is required is probably he can be if he can present his side of the story or before be moved without any reason but by regulation the president you need a threat to the safety again we're talking about a prison management issue here we're not talking about us consulate that this is limit for when you know your disciplinary hearing is held which is thirty day time limit under no circumstances explicit flaying wish for five months and she will again where you cannot be incarcerated pending a disciplinary hearing in california and the regulations
because the appellate council does not have to have created every possible argument that is available he has to exercise his professional judgment to determine whether or not violation of his or her parole after release or metaphor supervised release for another offense this is saying that if you're if you're taken into custody you bombed out you're still there  that the legislature intended that somebody who is in custody was not on bond who is also in custody on that most are charged is still subject change the subsection a statute that says that your persons who are all bound and in custody on amazon are ration are no longer subject to this subsection a it clearly implies a legislator has intended all along that persons who
struggles i'm sorry i'm comparing this to it he said yesterday when his much lower there was a role than an average yes yes i would say that i'm sorry i'm and so yes this because of all these things he has this suggested system suspected of having any type of sex crime so he's never there's never been any suspicion of him for that it's only the south so it's not even the person it's not even the foot it's only in the s even said that i've done all i can and he said it wrong to happen is we should send him to a place where he is treated but it was pretty clear and i don't know that the state's going to dispute that the court didn't think they really had any he said it was available to do those things here's two problems with that first of all prozac has to be one of the cheapest medications on the market it can easily and that's pretty much wh  it seems to me that the primary focus here is punishment rather than attempting to restore him to and useful citizen and then provide say that she had scott those were her socks crack i don't recall the exact death of her testimony because she was not charged with stealing her socks so we know that the charges related
is speaking to police she really gave him the information they needed even though she continued to believe better than what frank was simply a victim of being in the wrong place at the wrong time it was a result of the operation that the police were able to get the confession that they that phrase but she but she's not arguing that she didn't want to ration within the meaning of the obstruction of justice that you so there's no basis for it or the definition of concealed
i agree with what the board is saying is a generic definition of murder two where you know the a lawful showing of a human being moving into the categorical approach under california law murder is as court has recognized in the past that sometimes a state legislature intentionally and conscientiously adds something to a statute not accident that we're we're going to get all the way off we're going to go back to empty gun argument exceptions to get into this but the bottom line is when we're looking at it categorically and i know we're going to the way these things were over was and i don't count i don't doubt that oh i don't doubt that it can go either but here's the problem the question is judge smith was asking is this i think is two different meanings of  wasn't at authorized medical procedure they seem to have somewhat different elements they have different defenses and as you just said the jury's instructed in a fetus case that you find a fetus it must find the other facts and in the nd degree murder case in general it's not so why aren't these two different two different ways to different crimes under the general category of nd degree  that we apply the modified categorical broach we look to see which drug was alleged match it up to the generic statute here what was alleged was the killing of a human being and this california l seems to require that if you're going to charge the killing of a fetus you need to say that so why hasn't this as george smith asked a case in which we apply the modified categorical well it doesn't sit in to me that they charging information in this case on which the goalkeeper he was taken those a murder of the human being however what we don't have or what i don't recall seeing as part of the record of conviction is what a jury if i'm mistaken about that i'm certain that my colleague is going to and i don't know that you are because it comes up from immigration court right to look at the record we don't necessarily get everything right that they had but but in order to get a conviction here the law does not necessitate a finding that it was one or the other let me ask you about see the charging document i finally right so i don't think we can read that if it is divisible that surely establishes that he wasn't convicted of the murder of a fetus is it not your honor you're never going to get me to agree to that pictures and they're going to get your  with that argument so i'd like you if you want to spend time on it i'm not sure why you need to but if you want to spend time on it i'm interested in your response st doesn't eight hundred and forty one create a separate  adopted after the i a e a i believe it was there are so you know if i'd i'm not sure why not answer why you think that there is no need to focus extensively on whether or not the better for all match the generic mission because the divisible statute and the documents in the record under the modify categor
you always said you could beat me on the draw
midway island not much land right enough but it's all about your front yard herd same nervous there's something in the air something behind that sunset of midway is over our front yard is safe but a big job is still to be done day off today on patrol planes search for survivors every tiny cottage every just a mile of sea such woman who fought to the last eight days nine days ten days without food or water his first cigarette borne it first drink your taste good
ninety seven years in prison was the fact of life and the phrase they use i think is significant it was on the surviv we know that ninety seven years is unsurvivable and we know that ninety seven years is de facto life sentence but here we have a defendant when we have a collaborative effort a problem solving effort in the court room to answer those questions it's not all ninety seven years but one hundred fifty years one thousand years but it's never going to be a number because it changes case by case
agree more and i also agree that african development and trade priorities are something that we must focus on this is also precisely the mission of us to promote development in emerging markets while creating opportunities for s exports and the creation of u s jobs how do we do this in particular we focus on areas where u s business is strong such as energy telecommunications transportation and the environment using this model we have seen the benefits that exports provide to host countries around the world and the u s economy in africa on a ten year rolling basis for every dollar of u s program funds expended we have a receipt in return of twenty four dollars in u s exports during my time here today i would like to provide you with concrete examples of how u s has assisted export activity and how these mean how african nations have benefited and how american built aluminum can manufacturing equipment in nigeria the company had identified nigeria as a potential new market and asked that the agency share the cost of the feasibility study to confirm the market potential  economic and financial viability of the manufacturing aluminum cans nigeria us provided the assistance requested by the small midwestern company recognizing both the commercial viability of the project and the likelihood for success project implementation ultimately baseline security contract thirty million dollars to build ships and reassemble an aluminum can manufacturing facility in nigeria it was financed by the export import bank of the united states and generally of this year i was invited to raise lines of stability and redbud illinois to witness the sendoff of this newly manufactured equipment during the visit i had the opportunity to meet with several workers them in nigeria my second example involves a major infrastructure major infrastructure needs common in africa energy just under a quarter of subsaharan africa has population has access to electricity to put this into perspective subsaharan africa generates sixty three gigawatts of power seven hundred and seventy million people about the equivalent of being provided for a population of extraction considered clean energy source in botswana once the project was determined to be feasible u s also funded a reverse trade mission that brought want to decision makers to the united states to examine production facilities and meet with u s industry representatives and potential two years of the project based on the positive recommendations for coal bed methane projects the overseas private investment corporation provided an eight point five million dollar investment guarantee the kal s companies small and large and expanding their markets both in africa and around the world we often work in consultation with the private sector including those testifying here today such as motorola the corporate council on africa and the u s chamber and we have a very close collaborative relationship with those on the panel here today in the department of commerce in conclusion i would like to thank the subcommittee for inviting me here today exports to africa benefit both
all presented a is whether i missed several is entitled to t v when she worked two jobs at the time of her accident her work accident as a result of that work accident she was given work restrictions which her physically incapable of working her primary job gibson area hospital and meanwhile if she had a concurrent as needed position at christie clinic that she was not offered the court should still overturn the circuit court and commission decisions reducing the amount of detail awarded to mr bell by the arbitrator because the were which was offered to her by this declining she would not be entitled the few people under an exception to the rule that even if you if the injured workers condition has not stabilize either offered work within a restriction this or that she refused any work with the nurse directions now the commission did also know that there was no supporting testimony supporting witnesses or supporting documentation for this rolls testimony at arbitration that she attempted to go back to work monday and was not yeah so long as the weight of the evidence is not against that testimony republican steele is one of those cases and others university of illinois first industrial commission and in this case the w that you should submit supporting documentation or or other evidence is an arbitrary requirement and so facts are undisputed in this case to his condition had not stabilize to temporary told civility but in the case itself it says the period in which a claim is temporary totally disabled is a question of fact so standard that household so them proven that we should be t t d all law the problem with that though is that if that's the standard that we're going to have to go to the supreme court ruling that there's never going to be any light duty release because in lust that she's working at and i think the commission found that that's why it was are upheld by the circuit court and that's why i think that the standard should be upheld here today i don't know that i met liberty to say whether it's the primary benefits from that but it would appear as such that they might and it is a unique situation where i did work two jobs at the same time with  has stabilized it's undisputed that if it's not stabilized so you think
ninety three it's our position that mr cole sato had told look through that in fact he was he was he was married i mean he was not married and the reason why this is because the evidence of service fas correct you weren't married to him because on november eighth you weren't even in the philippines so that's the ironic situation here if mr casado has said that he wasn't  with friends like this you don't need enemies yeah exactly exactly and the point is that he wasn't and let's assume that he wasn't for the sake of argument that that he wasn't quite candid with the immigration judge let's assume that she did tell him that she history this kind of complicated history here and send none of these people are telling the truth but the thing is that what he was focusing on this is their story about what happened let's assume for the sake of argument that that is the father of her child well that's not true at all wasn't it was somebody else the other thing is to be found a pattern with the cols not a family going back to the father and he says there's a pattern to this family which is totally unfair to  sato to to look at that and his father had come in and also on me as a married off so on and that the immigration judge made a comment well he came in and he came in certificate or the well it wasn't actually a it wasn't actually a marriage license it was a marriage contract that document said that on this day the parties appear before the  factors but then it seemed that he might have been mixed up about the difference between the two sections in terms of one was it three march or others hardship because he mentions extreme hardship so how do we know he didn't or they went through a wedding ceremony and in the beast application they say not married and they learn the next day that the per person they purportedly married the man married to three he's done here is because he feels to be truthful about this very bizarre situation a set of circumstances you call it drama the drama that surrounded that marriage he's essentially put himself in the position to say ok i'm going to be the one is that objective or subjective or i think i was saying so objectively i know so the united states government has no interest in ensuring that people who fisherman case so that he had been arrested when in fact he had been arrested but this court determined that because of the fact that it wouldn't that the outcome would not have been different that well standing on the fact that the judge when the judge says he was incredible on this and that and the judge never said that he was incredible when he said that he was when he was before the culture office saying that he was
the violence between ethnic groups a big part of me between religious groups decreased i think that that i don't think  mr pelly came into the attention of the government was good he complied with the request that he go in the register after zero nine eleven and  know i think we understand
given the fact that the teaching of it's credible in let me ask you do you have authority to support the proposition that the fact of jailed for her allegedly religious activities is because her son was only eight months old michael son was only eight months old it would have been sometime in one thousand nine hundred one dish that all of this was alleged religious persecution happened whatever according to her own to let it make sense and her explanation to the immigration judge let me back up a little bit throughout the entire hearing she never mentioned her second son at all until the very last and immigration judge said well we've asked all the questions is there anything else
thank you counsel counsel you may re
and vegetables of the season picking apples stronger the planning fields taking a hair out on a tractor feeding farm animals or picking the perfect pumpkins or just some activities that can be done at the farm of s interested in picking your own produce or flowers the local farm is the place the fall offers opportunities to select your apples flowers and pumpkins and the spring in summer you can look for the opportunity to pick your own peaches and strawberries in a few minutes we will go go back thank you  make sure they get to college a lot easier when you have a script to follow i learned that firsthand the day my son had a life threatening allergic reaction or an appeal axis anaphylaxis can happen when someone comes into contact with their allergic triggers it could happen anywhere any time to have to back i'm naomi judd darks but disasters like hurricanes and floods and tornadoes can only parents and other animals injured abandoned or l cared about and i'd be over thinking about what happened in iraq three months ago they're almost like a stranger when you come that everything's different you're kind of discombobulated people were asking me how it was but i got the sounds they've couldn't relate to what i had been through so i just stopped talking about it it made a tremendous difference in the life when i chose to get help in hindsight it probably saved my life save my marriage i personally believe that i'm also a better soldier sometimes when you come home it can seem negative distressing concerning you can all be out soon will be got through you're not going to be the same person afterwards that you were before you deployed and don't try to be accept who you are now figure out how to move forward and make that pos
not procuring such a translation to show that in fact that his claim was not fanciful that such a translation could have been procured on and so where in the law as there was a there was an interpreter or motion or use direct appeal despite a fair bit he knew what was being said on the tape and he knew there was a discrepancy correct that's correct so how was that not for the waves when he appeal on such to the extent that that issue could've been re assigned direct appeal it was but he could not have raised on direct appeal his counsels and effectiveness for failing to procure an independent translation because at that point it would have been words around the room aren't there thier is a phrase or word that unintelligible me that reads just here on my qur'an a couple su unintelligible i would go like this come up but i wouldn't put it this independent translator heard she did not share around the room and these are the kinds of things that can be further developed at that at an architecture hearing ideally you would have officer of arroyo the translator  that translated for his prose commission petition as well as the translator translated for the states transcript all come testify at a hearing as to this question there translation perhaps the translator could be a t or may not have been quite so ready to rely on this statement well with the court knew there was a discrepancy and the court had other evidence to rely on this one up although he did discuss the phrase around the had the luxury of listening to the recording multiple times to ensure their translation we're not going to have another independent translator who doesn't have the luxury of listening to the recording multiple times and she did not hear this phrase yes if what she rea so without that transcript how could the right enough i mean isn't this independent evidence that wasn't available that it's in the last independent and that it's his support for the discrepancy but her another independent translation that also doesn't include this phrase and have the court listen cross examination from officer arroyo that there's this discrepancy officer over oil does this translation provide support  that that was the translation of the transcript of the different words and how would cross examination of necessarily correct that the rule of thumb this you we don't ask a question you don't know the answer to accurate translation this transcript but has he been pointing to this discrepancy to do translation without tearing the ring around the ring phrase that least arguably shows provide support for the claim they she then would have said yes this is in this portion  and again when you have the court relying on this phrase so happily it's at least arguable that i didn't quite make and concluded that the phrase was not made with this additional translation
the library was locked but even station  really didn't understand what the correct militant tactic was so they asked us to leave looking
for having to run for in your part of the country