A little heads up for all of you that post online about legal matters....

[S13SilviaGirl]

To include your accidents, your theft, how you were sick then decided to go get insurance and make them cover it....Don't say we have never warned you. This is a quote from a friend of mine, and by her talking online in a PUBLIC FORUM such as this one...things she wrote were admitted into her court hearing about a man that raped her while she was in the hospital recovering from a bad car accident....


PLEASE TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY!!!! I know this girl...she lives not too far from where I used to work. Seriously....dont put anything out on the internet that shouldn't be!!!!!

Originally Posted by MyFriend

How have you all been??

Missed ya!

Sorry for bailing on ya so suddenly!

A quick note... Please take me as an example and be VERY CAREFUL what you post!!! The reason I left was over my time in Criminal court, where I, as a victim, testified against my attacker. The lawyer for the man who attacked me showed up in court with page after page of threads printed off of *FORUM SNIP*. Posts made by me and by many of you! They were entered into evidence and read aloud. Snippets of the truth were used. Not even full sentences, but only the words that they thought would help their case. My life was exposed, bits of it that I had shared with my *FORUM SNIP* family was exploited in a court of law and twisted to suit the defense's needs. It was sad, shameless and totally their right. This is, after all, a public forum. Anyone and everyone has access to it! There is no privacy here, and no amount of trust in the friends you have here can protect you from everything, every last word posted here, being used against you someday. I found that out the hard way. I was blind sided by my own words while sitting in a courtroom in front of a jury!

I am very happy to say that I was not ashamed of anything I said nor do I feel that anything I have said was inappropriate, but if anything I said had cast even the slightest bit of doubt in a jurors mind and had set that man free I would have been devastated.

I just want to educate everyone, as I come back to *FORUM SNIP*, of the dangers associated with sharing personal information. I'm not talking about your address, your phone number, your birth date. Those are facts. I'm talking about rants, about your PERSONAL information. About your life, your financial state, your happiness, your health, your whatever... If you post that your sick, THEN you get insurance.. you could be prosecuted for fraud! And your post is PROOF! Just THINK before you POST! you may never have your posts used against you... but that's what I thought! I also thought I was safe in my hospital bed! That I would never be attacked. That I would never be sitting in a courtroom being question and accused in front of my attacker! But I was!

You never know!


All of that aside.... I am happy to be back and I look forward to posting about everything else!!!

[exitspeed]

Thanks Lisa. Good advice.

[IIIXziuR]

Totally. Thanks for the heads up.
Everyone should just double check themselves before they post anything too personal, legal, etc.

The internet is open to the public which is the world.
Sorry to hear about what happened to your friend Lisa.

[azndoc]

Thanks for the advice. It never made sense to me that people would do that. Kinda like how employers now and have been checking up on people's myspace accounts.

[jackjack]

i never post/talk about important matters online. not that i'm paranoid or anything. you never know who's browsing.... and i guess its true.

[Matej]

No freedom anywhere.

[S14DB]

Originally Posted by Matej

No freedom anywhere.

What does this have to do with freedom?

[g6civcx]

I enter Internet publications into evidence every day. In fact, I prefer Web documents because they are easier to search than paper documents. Everything on the Internet is admissible in court.

Originally Posted by Matej

No freedom anywhere.

If you want freedom, talk to a physician, a priest, or an attorney, but they can still turn you in depending on what you say.

You do have free. It's just that freedom isn't unlimited.

[let5l1de]

and even if you removed the info from the site you participated/posted to, there is a chance it was collected and stored to some server in the world...

[eastcoastS14]

how can they get access to your computer or even find out what your name is on a forum?

[beetlejuice]

Lawyers will go to great lengths to prosecute or defend. A bit of detective work or a subpoena served to the admin of a forum will do the trick. They have to turn over all of their info.

[OptionZero]

Originally Posted by eastcoastS14

how can they get access to your computer or even find out what your name is on a forum?

In a civil case, shit like someone's hobbies or interests would probably come out during discovery, and from there you check the local or big forums and do a little home work.

No discovery in a criminal case, so they probably talked to a friend or family member or co-worker or something and got enough info to track her screen name down.

Anyone that practices criminal law should have an investigator on the payroll.

[projectRDM]

I've said this for years, yet people are surprised when their cars are stolen. How do you think they knew which car to take? The one advertised on a forum with 30 million pictures of every conceivable part is clearly the one to take. All it takes is a picture of a license plate and you've made unwanted friends. Same goes for anything else, work related, family, friends, people are always browsing web boards looking to scam someone. The ones who provide a bit of info for them to latch on to always get fucked. The only thing that could be proven from post content is that I'm an asshole, and I'll gladly agree to that in court.

[johngriff]

I'm sorry, duh. I have said this here about 100 times. Pretty soon the cops and prosecutors will be on here doing the same, building cases against your for hot smogs, and street racing and speeding.

So shhhhhhhhhh loose lips sink ships.

[OptionZero]

This has nothing to do with freedom. Zilvia is an open forum, no paid membership required to post. There is nothing unreasonable about holding someone responsible for what they said; check yourself before you wreck your own case.

What your friend posted is admissible in court because it is a "party admission"- when the "speaker" is a party and it's being offered by the opposite side. If you are in the lawsuit, your words matter, even when produced out of court.

Now, the reading snippets to make a point (whether false or true) might seem shady, but if I recall correctly if the opposing party only read an exerpt into the record, you are entitled to read additional material into the record that is part of the same document/conversation to provide the jury and judge with context. We didn't hear if that person's lawyer did that, although it's not a foolproof countermeasure.

The lesson is, if you're in a lawsuit, shut the FUCK up until final judgement and someone is in jail OR you have cashed the check.

When I begin practicing, that is likely the #1 thing I'd tell any client I had, and I'm kinda surprised your friend's attorney never mentioned it.

[OptionZero]

Feel free to tell the attorney, psychologist, physician, or priest about crimes you did, but you should shut up about crimes you're gonna do.

generally^

oooh, or u could marry the person u tell and get marital privilege

[stinky_180]

the internet is the biggest information gateway. you can find out a lot about a single person by using a search engine and searching with the right query. look at myspace.... biggest personal information gateway for everybody to read. as mentioned, be careful what you post.

[Aeroscraper326]

Word. Thank you lisa!

[S13SilviaGirl]

BUMP....read it ppl!

[SlideWell]

Lisa is right. it can bite you in the ass if you post online about legal issues you have. back to the top!

[SlideWell]

and bump again! cuz god forbid someone sues over car accidents and shit over things they read online.

[blasting_speed]

(whistles) In that case i guess its a bad time to talk about my white slave trade.

[g6civcx]

Read what I write below very carefully.

"Anything you say can and will be used against you."

This means that anything you say is not taken as fact in evidence UNLESS what you say constitutes an admission to be used against you in court.

For example, if you said 3 things:

1. Bill Gates owes me $1 million.
2. I invented the Internet.
3. I committed crime X.

Statements 1 and 2 will be disregarded while statement 3 will be used to convict you of crime X.


If you have never been to court before in your life, the best thing you can do for yourself is SHUT THE HELL UP. Stop posting useless junk that can hurt you later down the road.

And when your online posts are entered into evidence, the entire forum could potentially be probed by law enforcement and prosecutors, which means anything potentially shady that goes on here will be open to scrutiny.

It's not just about you and your need to vent. What you do affects everyone and everything posted on here. If you want to talk trash go to a private forum, or get counseling. The public forum is not the appropriate source for this type of posting.


I know there are a few members with legal background as well so please chime in.

[OptionZero]

Everything you said above is true, but if you wanted to be technical about it, #1 and #2 could be admissible depending what the issue in the case was (i.e. if you were in a contracts dispute with Bill Gates, #1 might be admissible.; if you were in a patent dispute half a century ago, #2 might be admissible). Heck, even in a criminal case, #1 and #2 might be admissible if the issue were your sanity, but now i'm just picking nits.

The point above is still ...well, the point. Shut the fuck up.

[g6civcx]

Originally Posted by OptionZero

Everything you said above is true, but if you wanted to be technical about it, #1 and #2 could be admissible depending what the issue in the case was (i.e. if you were in a contracts dispute with Bill Gates, #1 might be admissible.; if you were in a patent dispute half a century ago, #2 might be admissible). Heck, even in a criminal case, #1 and #2 might be admissible if the issue were your sanity, but now i'm just picking nits.

I disagree. #1 and #2 cannot be admitted into evidence per se because they are not admission to be used against you.

With #1, if you said "I owe Bill Gates $1 million" then it would be held against you. Litigants' assertions per se are never taken as facts unless it's an admission to be used against the speaker.

With #2, Litigant's claim to be first-to-invent per se is never taken to be facts in evidence without further proof. Under current patent practices, you either have to go to interference, invalidate the patent, or petition to have the patent undergo reexam. A lot of companies are trying interlocutory appeal but I'm not sure where that is going.

If you're trying to prosecute to get a patent then it would constitute mere allegation of patentability without specifically pointing out how the claimed invention distinguishes over the prior art.

If you said "I wasn't the first to invent the Internet", then that by itself would be used against you.

The last part I agree with if the totality of the evidence goes towards establishing character.

[OptionZero]

Originally Posted by g6civcx

I disagree. #1 and #2 cannot be admitted into evidence per se because they are not admission to be used against you.

With #1, if you said "I owe Bill Gates $1 million" then it would be held against you. Litigants' assertions per se are never taken as facts unless it's an admission to be used against the speaker.

With #2, Litigant's claim to be first-to-invent per se is never taken to be facts in evidence without further proof. Under current patent practices, you either have to go to interference, invalidate the patent, or petition to have the patent undergo reexam. A lot of companies are trying interlocutory appeal but I'm not sure where that is going.

If you're trying to prosecute to get a patent then it would constitute mere allegation of patentability without specifically pointing out how the claimed invention distinguishes over the prior art.

If you said "I wasn't the first to invent the Internet", then that by itself would be used against you.

The last part I agree with if the totality of the evidence goes towards establishing character.

EDIT: I'm mixing admissibility with relevance, so I should explain it better...

Scenario 1
Contract dispute btw P and D

P says "D owes me $100 bucks!"

D may admit P's statement as a party admission, as you mentioned.

P may also admit his own statement as hearsay evidence of the speaker's (in this case, P's) state of mind. This was a problem I helped another friend figure out; basically, P's statement isn't being offered for its truth, but only to show that P believed D owed him (P) the money.

In a contracts case, depending on the circumstances, I am fairly certain that mental state becomes relevant, such as if there were some reliance theory being put forth.
----------------------------------

In a patent dispute, it's harder for me to envision the same pattern working, since state of mind of a speaker doesn't really go to anything in such a case, but you're the patent expert, I'm studying crim law (where the whole "sanity" issue makes what someone says relevant). I hope that made sense.

[g6civcx]

Originally Posted by OptionZero

Scenario 1
Contract dispute btw P and D

P says "D owes me $100 bucks!"

D may admit P's statement as a party admission, as you mentioned.

P may also admit his own statement as hearsay evidence of the speaker's (in this case, P's) state of mind. This was a problem I helped another friend figure out; basically, P's statement isn't being offered for its truth, but only to show that P believed D owed him (P) the money.

In a contracts case, depending on the circumstances, I am fairly certain that mental state becomes relevant, such as if there were some reliance theory being put forth.

I agree. If it goes towards character or state of mind then the colour of the sky can be admitted. This is why I really dislike criminal and torts in general.

Originally Posted by OptionZero

In a patent dispute, it's harder for me to envision the same pattern working, since state of mind of a speaker doesn't really go to anything in such a case, but you're the patent expert, I'm studying crim law (where the whole "sanity" issue makes what someone says relevant). I hope that made sense.

I'm no expert, but I'll say that IP litigation is more "civilised". Registered practitioners are generally regarded as having good moral character and their statements are never questioned.

The only time I see this type of things coming into play is with enrollment and discipline when they may get disbarred.

[ryguy]

Damn, thanks for the heads up. I am having a hard time understanding something though, what does she mean by

If you post that your sick, THEN you get insurance.. you could be prosecuted for fraud!

I'm not quite sure I understand how saying you're sick will get you in trouble.

[SlideWell]

Originally Posted by ryguy

Damn, thanks for the heads up. I am having a hard time understanding something though, what does she mean by

I'm not quite sure I understand how saying you're sick will get you in trouble.

insurance fraud is what she is talking about.

[ryguy]

Originally Posted by SlideWell

insurance fraud is what she is talking about.

I thought thats what she was talking about, but I thought she was trying to say that if you are legitimately sick and before you go to the hospital you post it on a forum then you could get in trouble.