MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
time here and i think the garden was is a real creation of my great grandmother's car because i grew up playing in her garden so things had to be told things had to be overgrown like a victorian garden if that's all you've got the idea right but that i think that's what a lot of gardeners recreate what they didn't from a childhood and it was in her garden we played in life we played among the flocks so if you look around here you  ee big things that they had to be bigger because i grew up i think that's what the whole garden is about plus proportion i kept moving things until the proportion pleased my eye well the divisions were  we originally divided it up in quadrants that we could mow and then i ended up filling in the quadrants with gardens are all ok we've been here twenty five years now all right so and then things were needed to be moved in and the garden started back and it's moved up to the proportions please my eyes so i'm most likely somebody else's but it pleases my eye when i walk through it so this is a manmade pong resort in here mainly for water lil my husband in law one of the reason our big pond down below so we put this one in so that we could have water in always and we can see them from the kitchen sink so it's very pleasant to have frog n has been designed around the magnolia tree may right you said that gardening is for you a kind of painting right that you see what's happening and you make changes because of what you see so it's a sort of if i understand you well almost a conversation with the garden it's a conversation with a garden if it doesn't grow the way i think it should then i have to obey it would what he wants to do in trying to also i think there's a similarity of this painters that  express who you are because you make certain decisions which are you or another gardener would or different things right my garden has to dance if you look at it you'll see that there's different levels and things are different this kind of a rhythm to it another gardeners have everything very formal and things don't move there very but i like my garden today in this garden here is one of native plants and i remember i thought i wanted things tall so i have a milkweed that is growing giant and this here is a giant anjelica which grows on the river and i managed to find a company that had the seed so i put it in here this walk here is a native pom and i designed garden so that i have something over my head and i also design gardens or choose plants that while i feel used and the wildlife will come and take every single palm off i'm here by the end of from one size to another quite a bit when we got interested in alice in wonderland we can charles johnson who was a professor at the time and he had dinner parties with all of the people of the time and he incorporated the science of the day plus experience in itself it is so different you are telling so many stories and so i've really enjoyed it thank you thank you for coming i really appreciate
issue in each case is that i have to ask a jury to acquit a drug dealer and i think that that is really hard for jurors believe that the jury was irrational in resolving them against my client i think the evidence shows that on all  mainland source so it wasn't a buyer seller between high men and raise capital was a conspiracy among the three and not only as you pointed out in your question was that the case probably and it was also case on the debt so what happens is to come down the carrier gets taken off and now the plan changes because now i'm as complaining you know i want i want my money i want my money somebody's got to pay me
and never mind about whether i had a good reason for my being there the first time i mean i think you know if you stand this country long enough something will come up that will give you a leg question we are confronted with is not necessarily coming to the end of what our own decision or what this court's decision would be as to whether we would grant that relief but whether he has been given an opportunity to get to the starting line in front of the appropriate no you have a bit of a different situation and in a much as far as i can read it in addition there was an application application for adjustment of status with supporting documentation included with a motion to reopen and here is far as i can tell from looking at this record correct me if i missed something but your client did not include an application for adjustment of status with this motion reopen i think that brings up and am i right about that i think and around that he didn't know who this guy was and that he was using other aliases i think that we now are in a different reno if you will from where we were pretty september eleventh and satellite litigation on the relationship between the attorney the client you get the privilege of knowing what a mess i think that certainly we are faced with that problem just as a practical matter on a day to day basis we hav client completely lied to you would you go and file a petition anyway based on what the client told you i think that then then certainly it would you would have to make a decision you would not go forward you could tell you quite no i'm not going to represent you these are the problems that you have
for illegal reentry what was a typical about the case was the way in which the district judge helped him aided the sentence and imposed it midrange sentence and not adhering to the factors set forth section thirty five fifty three i want to address a couple of points that i think are key to the analysis here and that is the first is lurking behind i think the government's view in this case is that there is a presumption that within guidelines sentence is reasonable there is no such presumption and i think that the court can look at and  your i think the government states that exactly in their brief and i'm not sure the exact number but there were numerous felonies and misdemeanors convictions including a prior conviction or two at least for illegal reaction and convictions of the correct and it is in in that analysis that the that the court's reasoning is flawed it is that the court did not address these factors and in thirty five fifty three the arguments but there was no real discussion now colloquy between the court and counsel about what the basis for the departures were simply a recitation of the departures and a rejection of them i don't believe that that's the kind of consideration i think getting back to the subject reinhart's question about whether i would agree that the first step in the analysis is the calculation of the guideline range that is correct but i think an additional area where the court  and to look at the the record fairly and i don't believe that that's a risk that i don't believe that that is a risk that should not be undertaken here i think that mr castillo deserves a hearing where the thirty five fifty three lacks jurisdiction here because the defendant failed to file a notice of appeal in a particular case where he is seeking appeal from his eighty six month sentence the the failure to file the notice of appeal is a complete not exactly as if nothing was filed as to the case where eighty six months was imposed nothing was filed your honor noticed with nothing for out of that number there was an appeal filed with a different number but the grief related to the eighty six months that is true  correct and that argument for that idea was presented for the first time this morning that's why i'm prepared to address the us law it's not matter what he wants or what you want it's the law it well if the defendant for
that made clear that statutory jurisdiction is subject matter jurisdiction subject matter jurisdiction goes to the power of a court to hear a case  admitted in the record he has that undisputed fact and the judge proceed without saying i now find that i have subject matter jurisdiction and make a specific finding that the vessel with stateless and you're saying any time correct so if the if the if the proceedings went forward and it wasn't challenged at the outset and and then the defendant comes in and says jurisdiction under the statute and then proceeds on that would have been ok yes ok i got to say this crisis chremes out for an empty exercise what possibly is going to turn out different in this case and it's i guess the most you're asking for is for three man for the court to say that but is anybody doubt that the district court concluded it had jurisdiction no you're right then why are we why what's the argument what i'm not quite sure why we're here or what more needs to be said we're here because i disagree that it is something that can be determined through an admission i think it had to be a judicial what better evidence or can there be than the guy who got picked off saying yeah i got picked up without a flag because we didn't have a flag we're stateless and that pretty compelling evidence that there's your instruction that that that certainly i sounds as if the united states can confer the the jurisdiction by iterating him in the indictment that it would simplify this if you win what order do you want us to enter the defendant would like to be reminded  with the mandate of the statue well assuming that if there is such a mandate in this in the district court didn't comply with that if if on de novo review this court looks at the record and the jurors the jurisdictional facts are present then conclusion from his mouth but it seemed pretty apparent he was trying to touch that base and move on i think that was exactly what he was clear from the question was asking you're not disputing however that it is the jurors  of the elements of the offense was the government had to prove that it had jurisdiction by virtue of the fact that he was on a vessel subject to that jurisdiction the united states that was done in this case as well and  court indicated that she was waived because the defendant pled guilty unconditionally when being advised of that particular element thank you ok the next case i'm calendar
the power of the knowledge in a victory over the limitation of life but open heart surgery is only one of many wonder look how much has changed in one generation i don't think most of us spend much time thinking about it so we never see the patient we get to know the name of the diagnosis and a little bit about the person involved says a patient who's being kept alive because able to tell h sodium and potassium several times a day and without the mechanical devices that we had this patient probably would have been dead already matters that are of great value to people as a whole but it cost a lot of money these patients twenty four hours a day this is not just nursing personnel we've got to have a technician in the lab to do a protest we've got to have someone on duty in the x ray was a trained x ray technician twenty four hours a day for every patient i would say we have about three point two employers this is one of the reasons why hospital care seems costly but it isn't when you think that at a given time of the evening or  during this new world of health requires a new kind of dialogue yes a dialogue that would also have been impossible thirty years ago terry health care insurance a new human technique for financial protection against the cost of care and loss of income individually and in groups health care insurance unable to us today to plan for the unpredictable spreading the cost among millions of people and over many years paying for care that could not be bought at any price a generation ago i don't know what's on the horizon but i do know that we're talking about plans that some of them will go up to as much as fifteen or twenty thousand dollars and all this thing was even thought of fifteen years ago that's how far it's gone it's pretty hard to say what's ahead in specific terms to cover every type of prescribed medicine diagnostic procedure in the hospital care doctor service guaranteed renewable major antibacterial medical agents health groups and blood groups personal health and impersonal statistics in a mixture the future this scene will be replayed so long as man remain where do we begin today ninety nine chances out of a hundred in the hospital the patient and her husband have invested an average is four hundred and twenty five dollars in the next generation together they are using not the instruments contained in one black bag but the entire instrumentation of medical s although he will still be faced with the uncertain days alive things will be very different for a newcomer in a way for the baby born in nineteen thirty as a result of the scientific progress of the past generation the chances are overwhelming he will not die of infectious disease ending dialogue with li
game for god so loved the world that he gave his only field god gave him a wife for a meal in there was no shame for god in his name created them sinless in grace but rebellion to blame they stayed not the same or they sinned they ruined the both were opened and they knew that they were naked and they sewed the glee to gether and made themselves aprons now other men you know was sinful and so we commence with him in our story as he continues his way this cat is the grass though of great he hears someone say that christ is the way that heaven look there goes the future there's no time to lose quick run and get out of the way it's grown now so small you can't see it all watch out there the single now friend
what things should remain in life and mystery some life should remain a mystery relationship with the person you love there should always be some mystery in that like you should get to know them really well but it's ok if there are parts of them that you don't fully understand because at that keeps things kind of interesting detail the actual you know what's going on at war in government interactions and stuff like that some of it these days is just too gory i guess your secret most inner dreams should be a secret die anything that happens after this life should remain a mystery otherwise it just causes problems there's too many different views so i just figured that's one of those things that's really a mystery there's an afterlife or not because there was  live life you always have to strive for something as you get older to look forward to and i think that if that remains a mystery that's a good thing because if you know exactly what's going to happen death maybe that's not going to keep you one of the that to be a good person so to speak so that's that's why i think i think the determination of end of life should remain a mystery
i prefer that you actually make your argument now and preserve iraq by the time for a battle i understand the rules and i intend only to make rebuttal and i know that very very well i believe that my brief and motions  if that was deliberate or an oversight or how that came to be if that's what i don't recall it would have it with the i don't remember a motion for summary judgment i think it was a motion to dismiss all right thank you there was first a status conference which where mr gagne did not appear and i informed the court of that time because i knew mr gaghan was in a jury trial in that case and that's why the court had stayed the matter pending the outcome of the criminal matter after during that pendency because parties were served at different times i first brought a summary judgment motion and then i brought a full view six to remain parties that were served there after that's the answer to this case whether or not case number one hundred case number two i think as the plaintiff wants to to divide up as being two different things are two different animals really is only two different cases because if you go for numbers but the record is very clear and the district court saw that the criminal case number one was reviled immediately in fact the same day and referenced the fact that it i think if the court looks to the heck rationale why heck even clive's the rationale is they go to the common law tort of malicious prosecution to determine whether or not there's a finale and whether or not there should be a conflict between do t case where there were two trials in the first trial and was a jury verdict and then that vertically to appeal there was a reversal on the first case and then there was a re second case resulted in involuntary manslaughter specifically i believe the court there found that the claims alleged by the plaintiffs did not revolve or  necessarily would not necessarily invalidate the second jury verdict in fact they reached the result from athens by the prosecutor in the first case which resulted from the court of appeal one of the reasons perjury burglary and how that came about and the ethical problems relate to that which is not this case at all cruel bar and a claim that is already accrued can't be part from having a crew because you can't go backwards in time the matter how one interprets act three the two cases and issue here were not the same case because as was set forth in the response to judge nelson's question there were additional charges in the second case that or a present in the the fly here clearly flies unless that isn't followed the plaintiff should prevail on this appeal because in the games lower case the facts underlying the conviction at each of the trials were the same though the conviction was for a lower species of homicide and gensler in the second trial and it was in the first trial and that's
call back and he does the somebody else in the house in fact he sees this woman in the house somebody else  owner of the house after they check out the promised service and they find no evidence of break and so this is not a situation where the people who are with good tools people that might have guns or anything of that sort police other than the resident who lived at that location this was his ex wife the officers had no information as to how long they had been divorced one hundred three answer how i have to treat someone who x y somebody who's they domestic relations prong that maybe as investigating it bears doing what they did the first time knocking on the door and asking questions and saying ma'am and you have a right to be here guns maybe they will come even then you can leave an officer outside to to watch to make sure they don't leave but in this case is this is the wife of the guy who owns the house or the ex wife but you're on just because they have a formal marital relationship without more information for the officers to know that she has an interest in the record a stranger in the house and somebody who is a friend a relative somebody they go to get a warrant if they go before a judge the judge would ask questions like is the screening what i would ask questions like when is the last time this neighbor talked to the homeowner would ask questions like do we know that reported to the nine one one dispatcher that somebody else knocked on the door and she answered it from inside the house that is reasonable cause for the officers to at least suspect that she was present in the house when i'm sure maybe that she came home well why didn't they have tried to find they didn't have enough information about the potential restraining order with what mr clinton had reported but they were there is good enough for them right now is her acted under the warrant he says there is a restraining order and they think well good enough for him she's not supposed to be there we know that you know your honor they never acted under the authority of the restraining order the restraining order was not the issue the facts and circumstances presented to the officers appeared to be a burglary in progress this case is no house ransacked to play with a gun in her head or her on the floor and handcuffs and that's what you do it with that much information that makes the last month you know with that coupled with the information that the house  u is there anything you need to
forty two thousand planes mains that number of tires multiplied many times man power has kept china alive now horse power is taking over we're putting the chinese war against japan on will this ferry carrying american top will be replaced in time by a bri
of jacobs good morning may please the court my name is bill my heart and i am here today represent i am the appellant in this matter this appeal brings four issues before the court the district courts determination that this claim is precluded the standard or review used by the district court what impacts the district court suspicions concerning ghostwriting may have had and lastly the question required notice under rule fifty six af it has been my position from the beginning of this action that while the may be some overlap of subject matter any similarities between the instant case and the predicate wescott matter are superficial there are different causes of action and there exist no common questions of law or fact that would require these two number is not unreasonable to trust the district court would have evaluated these two questions for these two cases for question comment questions of law or fact as it considers consolidation and finding no such common  grounds other than merit is any litigant represented by counsel as in devon or otherwise stumbles into an incurable procedural error and if this scenario is accurate this creates the obvious question of why did the court subsequently dismissed this case saying in effect that their work common questions of law and fact and a claim should have been consolidated by the plaintiffs into the original wescott case there's always a possibility that counsel for the board of supervisors made a powerful argument that swayed the court i do admit that that argument is on the record for this court to evaluate but i believe is another possibility a possibility that based on the record has a higher degree of probability district court was a reacting to what it saw as a blatant attempt at a fraud upon the court ghostwriting and not just ghost written substantive documents but a more despicable form where a faceless attorney criticizes another member of the bar from the shadows if one of ghostwriting the southern district here in new york has said it must bigger asli condemn i was admittedly my own zealous advocate i was assertive and critical on multiple points as my briefs in a filing show one of which the improper incorporation of reference by a prior memorandum of law the district court stated it saw as direct evidence of attorney assistance the unfortunate result of this was my good faith effort was deemed likely a fraud and a decision was entered i feel conveyed the court's displeasure not only on the issue of rescued but on the district court choice of rational basis as the standard to review standard which if affirmed would represent significant new law any of the protections afforded to our right to vote on an equal basis with otherwise qualified voters in our jurisdiction when selecting legislative
falsely told that you have to pay attorney's fees if he didn't prevail more than than the amount of the the court doesn't have an interest and an encouraging buyer's remorse it's not a question of bias was just because you're saying that the you might think she was not sophisticated in the lore she was unsophisticated in managing some of her affairs but the bottom line is that she was basically pushed out of court by her own vacating the judgment below the court is often noted that there is a compelling interest in the finality of judgments which cannot be lightly regarded and i believe that that is the case here and as in mi management agreement in this particular situation did not have an arbitration clause i can tell you that subsequently this company does have arbitration clauses within its management agreements to