Orly's latest poopies.....

User avatar
Emma
Posts: 3905
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:25 am

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby Emma » Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:14 pm

Generally, one need not have the intent to break the law. One need not even know there is a law against the action. The intent is to commit the actions that are against the law. Sometimes, the mens rea applies to all the elements of the crime, and this kind of crime is a "specific intent" crime. For example, the old common law crime of larceny required that one intend to take the property of another and do so, intending to deprive the owner of it permanently. Grand larceny would be if the property were above a certain value, but in that case, one need not have a mens rea as to the value of the property.Other crimes, such as statutory rape, have a very limited level of intent. One need merely knowingly have sexual intercourse with the underage person. One could believe the person were above the age of consent or even have been deceived as to the subject.There are very few specific intent crimes where the actual intent to break the law, knowing that one is breaking the law, is necessary for the offense. Some forms of tax evasion or false tax filing are in this category, such that ignorance of the law is actually an excuse, especially when relying on the advice of counsel in good faith (that is one did not deliberately hire a lawyer for advice on how best to break the law). In most cases, though, even reliance upon the advice of counsel is not a defense, although good faith reliance might mitigate at sentencing.In the case of this unauthorized access law, the mens rea is likely limited to the intent to commit the actions (accessing the protected computer in excess of authority). The perpetrator need not know it is against the law to do so, and in fact, can commit the offense even if, in a delusional state, he or she believes it to be legal or justified.

Thank you for taking the time to explain.

User avatar
Butterfly Bilderberg
Posts: 6709
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:26 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby Butterfly Bilderberg » Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:22 pm




Actually, you got it pretty well. Apologies for the Latin. Old habits and all that.

Don't apologize. I'm learning a lot here!





So 'intent'. I missed that it was their intent to break the law, not just that they knew it was illegal. Makes sense :)

It's a bit more nuanced. It means they intended to do the act that violated the law. As opposed to inadvertently doing the same act. Their intention may not have been to break the law (if they did not know or believe it was illegal) but that does not excuse them if they purposely did whatever they did.








ETA: Oops. I see LL's excellent explanation

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 31516
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby Sterngard Friegen » Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:31 pm

But . . . but . . . but . . . how do you get into the mind of the person to know he or she intended to do the act?Well, there is a jury instruction. It usually goes something like this:

A person is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of her acts.


User avatar
MsDaisy
Posts: 3145
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:30 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby MsDaisy » Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:54 pm

Right, which is why there is ample evidence of mens rea in both the Hollister and Jordan cases. Both of those criminals, along with their aider, abettor, and co-conspirator, Orly Taitz, should serve jail time. I'll pay more taxes to house them, too. Also.

A partial thread jack.





Every time I hear the term “mens rea” I can’t help but think of this classic “mens rea misunderstanding”:











=)) =))





Sorry.... Carry on :mrgreen:

User avatar
TexasFilly
Posts: 14656
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby TexasFilly » Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:55 pm

But . . . but . . . but . . . how do you get into the mind of the person to know he or she intended to do the act?Well, there is a jury instruction. It usually goes something like this:

A person is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of her acts.

It is also helpful when they post shit all over the internet stating what was in their warped mind. (Jordan). I think Hollister demonstrated mens rea when he took his Exacto-knife to the envelope. Just sayin'.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 15866
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby bob » Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:20 pm

California spent a lot of money to come up with these "clear" definitions:

Every crime [or other allegation] charged in this case requires proof of the union, or joint operation, of act and wrongful intent . . . .In order to be guilty . . . , a person must not only commit the prohibited act [or fail to do the required act], but must do so intentionally or on purpose. The act required is explained in the instructions for each crime [or allegation]. However, it is not required that he or she intend to break the law.

To be guilty of [a crime involving general criminal intent], a person must not only commit the prohibited act [or fail to do the required act], but must do so intentionally or on purpose. It is not required, however, that the person intend to break the law. . . .. . . To be guilty of [a crime involving specific criminal intent], a person must not only intentionally commit the prohibited act [or intentionally fail to do the required act], but must do so with a specific intent or mental state. The act and the intent or mental state required are explained in the instruction for each crime [or allegation].

Many crimes are general-intent crimes; specific-intent crimes require the defendant to intend to do some further act or achieve some additional consequence.

The People must prove not only that the defendant did the acts charged, but also that (he/she) acted with a particular (intent/[and/or] mental state). The instruction for (the/each) crime [and allegation] explains the (intent/ [and/or] mental state) required.A[n] (intent/ [and/or] mental state) may be proved by circumstantial evidence.Before you may rely on circumstantial evidence to conclude that a fact necessary to find the defendant guilty has been proved, you must be convinced that the People have proved each fact essential to that conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt.Also, before you may rely on circumstantial evidence to conclude that the defendant had the required (intent/ [and/or] mental state), you must be convinced that the only reasonable conclusion supported by the circumstantial evidence is that the defendant had the required (intent/ [and/or] mental state). If you can draw two or more reasonable conclusions from the circumstantial evidence, and one of those reasonable conclusions supports a finding that the defendant did have the required (intent/ [and/or] mental state) and another reasonable conclusion supports a finding that the defendant did not, you must conclude that the required (intent/ [and/or] mental state) was not proved by the circumstantial evidence. However, when considering circumstantial evidence, you must accept only reasonable conclusions and reject any that are unreasonable.


User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 31516
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby Sterngard Friegen » Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:27 pm

But . . . but . . . but . . . how do you get into the mind of the person to know he or she intended to do the act?Well, there is a jury instruction. It usually goes something like this:

A person is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of her acts.

It is also helpful when they post shit all over the internet stating what was in their warped mind. (Jordan). I think Hollister demonstrated mens rea when he took his Exacto-knife to the envelope. Just sayin'.

I think that was "guilty knowledge."

User avatar
TexasFilly
Posts: 14656
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby TexasFilly » Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:42 pm

But . . . but . . . but . . . how do you get into the mind of the person to know he or she intended to do the act?Well, there is a jury instruction. It usually goes something like this:

A person is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of her acts.

It is also helpful when they post shit all over the internet stating what was in their warped mind. (Jordan). I think Hollister demonstrated mens rea when he took his Exacto-knife to the envelope. Just sayin'.

I think that was "guilty knowledge."

I would argue it was both. ;)

User avatar
TexasFilly
Posts: 14656
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby TexasFilly » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:55 am

3 Responses to “What to write and how to write, don’t waste time on lengthy research findings”





pi314


September 27th, 2011 @ 6:45 pm





Umm… I would condense that to, simply, “Don’t waste your time.” :lol:


Luella


September 28th, 2011 @ 5:19 am





I would add that even if you consider your elected officials lazy, brain dead or gutless, don’t let that show in your letters. A disrespectful tone will get your letter thrown away with no consideration.


dr_taitz@yahoo.com


September 28th, 2011 @ 6:46 am





[highlight]this was not send to them[/highlight]


;;)

User avatar
bob
Posts: 15866
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby bob » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:29 pm

Run, Rudy, run!








I watched the polls for the last 6 months. In spite of Obama’s drop in popularity he beats most Republicans. One that seems to be competitive among currently declared candidates is Romney. He is between 4-3% either ahead or behind Obama. The only candidate, who is consistently beating Obama is Giulliani. He beats Obama by 7-9%. I know, that Giulliani is not perfect and nobody is, but the main goal is to replace Obama, and Giullianni seems to be liked by the independents, who will decide in 2012. I think it’s time for the Republican establishment to start courting Giulliani . I listened to his speech at Cornell university during my son’s graduation. He mentioned South Carolina primary. He is definitely considering another run. [highlight]Giulliani is the person, who I believe, can carry Florida, particularly with former mayor of NY, Ed Koch, actively campaigning against Obama among NY expatriates in the leisure world of FL. Giullianni with Cain as his running mate with active support from FL senator Rubio might carry FL and other swing states[/highlight].





Just a thought

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=26064





Cf. [/break1]wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_%28United_States%29_presidential_primaries,_2008]2008 Republican primary.

User avatar
TexasFilly
Posts: 14656
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby TexasFilly » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:31 pm

Hey, Sarah Palin repeatedly referred to Herman Cain as "Herb Cain" on Faux, so why should Orly be able to spell her favored candidate's name correctly? Ricky Perry's gonna haz a mad at Orly for being so fickle too. Also.

User avatar
Clairez
Posts: 883
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:08 am

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby Clairez » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:34 pm

I don't know...if I was Orly I would try to persuade Christine O'donald to jump in the race.She had really great campaign ads. =)) =))

MaineSkeptic
Posts: 5295
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby MaineSkeptic » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:35 pm

Hey, Sarah Palin repeatedly referred to Herman Cain as "Herb Cain" on Faux, so why should Orly be able to spell her favored candidate's name correctly? Ricky Perry's gonna haz a mad at Orly for being so fickle too. Also.

And of all the leading Republicans around, Giuliani strikes me as one of the very least likely to show any sympathy for birfermania.

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 12722
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby Addie » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:40 pm

Poor Orly. Koch [/break1]blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/27/koch-endorses-obama/]endorsed Obama for 2012 yesterday.





Koch Endorses Obama in 2012 ...





“Whatever rift existed before — and there was — that’s gone,” Mr. Koch said in a telephone interview. He said that he was now ready to go out and make the case to Jewish voters that the president deserved their support.





“He’s got me to go out there and persuade them,” he said. “I have shoes, will travel.”

, particularly with former mayor of NY, Ed Koch, actively campaigning against Obama among NY expatriates in the leisure world of FL. Giullianni with Cain as his running mate with active support from FL senator Rubio might carry FL and other swing states.





Just a thought

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=26064





Shut up! We can't hear the mimes! -Jacques Prévert, Les Enfants du Paradis

User avatar
TexasFilly
Posts: 14656
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby TexasFilly » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:45 pm

She had a post yesterday along the lines of "45 percent of Jews disapprove of Obama". She linked to a website of some subgroup of the Jewish community, and the article was about a "survey" they sent out. So, typical of her uneducated and ignorant leaps of faith, she equates a "poll" and a "survey", of an already pre-selected and biased group. I think I learned about the statistical unreliability of surveys when I was 17 or so. She's a moron. She needs to stick to filing her brilliant stuff with the courts, and lay off the political punditry. :D

User avatar
raicha
Posts: 6998
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:10 pm
Contact:

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby raicha » Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:57 pm

Gee, she dumped her "heart" throb Rick Perry in a hot hurry, didn't she? Now Perry knows how CEL3 must have felt. :lol:

User avatar
esseff44
Posts: 9247
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby esseff44 » Wed Sep 28, 2011 4:44 pm

Hey, Sarah Palin repeatedly referred to Herman Cain as "Herb Cain" on Faux, so why should Orly be able to spell her favored candidate's name correctly? Ricky Perry's gonna haz a mad at Orly for being so fickle too. Also.

And of all the leading Republicans around, Giuliani strikes me as one of the very least likely to show any sympathy for birfermania.

Oh, I dunno about that. I would like to hear what Mr. Hard-to-Get Christie would say if someone asked him about the birthers. He doesn't mince words.

MaineSkeptic
Posts: 5295
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby MaineSkeptic » Wed Sep 28, 2011 4:46 pm

Hey, Sarah Palin repeatedly referred to Herman Cain as "Herb Cain" on Faux, so why should Orly be able to spell her favored candidate's name correctly? Ricky Perry's gonna haz a mad at Orly for being so fickle too. Also.

And of all the leading Republicans around, Giuliani strikes me as one of the very least likely to show any sympathy for birfermania.

Oh, I dunno about that. I would like to hear what Mr. Hard-to-Get Christie would say if someone asked him about the birthers. He doesn't mince words.

Yep, I said "one of the very least likely." I don't think he's unique in that regard.

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 12722
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby Addie » Wed Sep 28, 2011 5:02 pm

I meant to include this snippet about Rick Perry:





“I won’t say what he said,” Mr. Koch said, “but I said to him: ‘Mr. President, that’s the one guy you won’t have to worry about. Jews will never vote for anyone who doesn’t believe in evolution.’ ”

:P








Poor Orly. Koch [/break1]blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/27/koch-endorses-obama/]endorsed Obama for 2012 yesterday.








Koch Endorses Obama in 2012 ...





“Whatever rift existed before — and there was — that’s gone,” Mr. Koch said in a telephone interview. He said that he was now ready to go out and make the case to Jewish voters that the president deserved their support.





“He’s got me to go out there and persuade them,” he said. “I have shoes, will travel.”

Shut up! We can't hear the mimes! -Jacques Prévert, Les Enfants du Paradis

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 28156
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby mimi » Wed Sep 28, 2011 5:42 pm

I know, I know. Jews won't vote for Obama.

He's losing the jewish vote. /s #phnm RT @ppppolls Out of 476 people interviewed in #Florida, 1 was a Jew who would support Perry over Obama


User avatar
LM K
Posts: 8257
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:59 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby LM K » Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:44 am

I think Orly's "crazy" look comes from her hair and the way she holds her mouth open.

http://Alaska.net/~babyrne/ohhh.jpg

She really doesn't stop talking. She is talking in that pic. The blonde on the right has an interesting, :-? facial expression.

User avatar
realist
Posts: 30895
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby realist » Thu Sep 29, 2011 10:23 am

Orly's after Facebook and da Google... again. :P





:evil: [/break1]orlytaitzesq.com/?p=26093]http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=26093 :evil:





Complaint of abuse was sent to Facebook and Google





Posted on | September 29, 2011 | No Comments






attention abuse department [/break1]com]abuse@facebook.com





Dear sir/mdm





Some thugs have created a defamatory page under title “Orly’s world”. Those thugs have posted my name and my picture and posting defamatory messages and articles. I am requesting to shut down this slanderous page as soon as possible





[/break1]facebook.com/#!/groups/225611107468288/members/]http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/22561 ... 8/members/





Sincerely Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ





Attention [/break1]com]abuse@google.com





Dear sir/mdm





I am a licensed attorney and I was never disbarred. Some [highlight]thugs posted[/highlight] defamatory articles, claiming that I was disbarred and currently when one does a google search under my name “Orly Taitz”, they receive a message “Orly Taitz disbarred”, which is the most outrageous [highlight]defamation per se[/highlight], as I was never disbarred.





[highlight]I am requesting to delink those defamtory articles in Google searches and remove this defamatory statement from google search results under my name[/highlight]


Sincerely,





Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ





I am asking my supporters to help me fight these thugs of Obama regime, who engage in this most despicable defamation of my character.


User avatar
Emma
Posts: 3905
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:25 am

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby Emma » Thu Sep 29, 2011 10:26 am

I don't see that on a google search. She's hallucinating.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 31516
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby Sterngard Friegen » Thu Sep 29, 2011 10:44 am

Emma - Taitz has an "auto complete" function setting for her Google searches. Since she's typed in the full phrase herself in the past, it simply . . . auto completes the phrase for her.





Taitz's understanding of how simple functions on her own computer work are similar to her understanding of simple legal matters. It's all up her Yahoo.

User avatar
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater
Posts: 4329
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: East Coast
Contact:

Orly's latest poopies.....

Postby Dr. Kenneth Noisewater » Thu Sep 29, 2011 11:15 am

Orly's after Facebook and da Google... again. :P





:evil: [/break1]orlytaitzesq.com/?p=26093]http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=26093 :evil:





Complaint of abuse was sent to Facebook and Google





Posted on | September 29, 2011 | No Comments






attention abuse department [/break1]com]abuse@facebook.com





Dear sir/mdm





Some thugs have created a defamatory page under title “Orly’s world”. Those thugs have posted my name and my picture and posting defamatory messages and articles. I am requesting to shut down this slanderous page as soon as possible





[/break1]facebook.com/#!/groups/225611107468288/members/]http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/22561 ... 8/members/





Sincerely Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ





Attention [/break1]com]abuse@google.com





Dear sir/mdm





I am a licensed attorney and I was never disbarred. Some [highlight]thugs posted[/highlight] defamatory articles, claiming that I was disbarred and currently when one does a google search under my name “Orly Taitz”, they receive a message “Orly Taitz disbarred”, which is the most outrageous [highlight]defamation per se[/highlight], as I was never disbarred.





[highlight]I am requesting to delink those defamtory articles in Google searches and remove this defamatory statement from google search results under my name[/highlight]


Sincerely,





Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ





I am asking my supporters to help me fight these thugs of Obama regime, who engage in this most despicable defamation of my character.

Yeah she came in there posted a message about how she was going to take the page down. She invited her friend Florence Stone and then removed her comment.


Return to “Orly Taitz”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest