Re: LI Here is the definition of sex Mr. President
"Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi there - I might have mistyped, I meant the victim must have been a statue. Oh well... long as it gets cleared up! And anyway, who knows? :) LDMF. Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: Dr. L. explained it as a statute. Still doesn't explain why it was allowed in the Paula Jones case. :( Sue Hi Sue and Kathy No luck in my two cj. dictionaries. Of course, sexual relations are not usually against the law I guess. jacjuef Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI I'm bewildered! I'm Shocked! In reality I'm fed up with the BS
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Kathy: You know that I have been waiting for something to come out that really made sense. Well I think it finally has. I also think that Kathleen Willey was very credible. :( And his lawyer didn't come across too good. It looks to me like Clinton is really in trouble now. :( I saw the lawyer on Sam Donaldson this morning, and it didn't look good then either. After reading the depo's, and listening to her, he had better have some answers for everyone, and pretty darn quick. Sue After watching 60 minutes tonight and thinking back on the official word from the WH concerning these allegations launched against the Prez, all I can say with 100% certainity is we have the most bewildered and shocked president in the History or this country! During tonights interview I counted Bewildered and shocked being used at least eight times each concerning the reacton from the president! So now we can say we had Reagan in the 80's running up our debt, and we had Clinton running up our confusion with all his shocked and bewildered statements. Me? I'm personally fed up with the same old statements no matter what the allegation. And I did watch that interview closely, all I can say is Mr. Prez Kathleen Willey was VERY believable and your PR person wasn't, and for the first time I do think Mr. Prez is in trouble if the statements made on 60 minutes are true, especially about perjury and the Prez denying her allegations in his depo. -- Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: EMF/Jackie
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue You know most people feel that weather has something to do with crime, suicide, etc. rates on the thinking level, but seem to forget this when they do things. I use the LA riots as a good example of this. I have them figure out how time of day, the day of the week, the time of year, and the weather all were a factor in explaining the riots. It is not only negative things that seem to be affected by the weather, etc. Look at the stats on infant births. And, even the day of week has an influence. What is amazing to me though is that way back when--can't remember the exact historical period--they wrote about the time of days babies were more likely to be born. They also wrote about the effects of alcohol before we discovered (?) FAS/FAE. Have been reading a little about adult FAS/FAE and I shake my head sometimes at the researchers. One of their profound findings, according to the way they write, is that FAS/FAE has long-term effects and will affect the person as an adolescent/adult. *Duh* But at least now they are identifying the areas of the brain that are affected, even for those who do not show mental retardation (wish there was a better word). They are recognizing that many are not being assisted in school because they do not qualify for special education based on present criteria. Another positive outcome is that the person is not being misdiagnosed and treated chemically for a psychological disorder such as depression. I read a letter written by an adult person who finally was diagnosed correctly and she tells how she was misdiagnosed for years. I can send you the file privately if you are interested. jackief Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: It also gives you an insight into why kids turn to gangs. :) Did you know that the stats on suicide also run high in the hot, humid weather as well as during full moons? They really do. Don't know why but they do. I am anxious to hear what you think of that book. Sue Hi Sue That should be an interesting book. I know that sometimes they do look at specific crimes and note a seasonal trend. I have heard there is speculation that this is why the crime rates tend to be higher in the southern states, in addition to differences in culture, etc. I can hardly wait for the book now--you have peaked my interest. jackief Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Friday The 13th: Evil Or Excuse? It doesn't hurt to be prepared:
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue Now the big question--if I go to the site and want to included the address in an e-mail to someone, how do I make a link?? I know I have an insert icon and it says link, but I really don't know what to do with it. Oh the brilliance of me, sometimes. I have all this modern technology, but don't know what to do with what I have. jackief Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: Oh, You are more than welcome. :) Yes just click on the address and it will take you right to them. I checked out everyone to make sure it worked. :) Sue Hi Sue You sent all those sites on superstition. There were a few that will be great for cultural differences and cultural beliefs. To make those links do I just highlight it and then go to insert or what?? jackief Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Jokes for Sunday
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Top Ten Signs You Might Need a New Roommate: Another Original by Scott Pam! 10.. Has posters of creepy Newsweek covers with "Doe" and "Lewinsky" over his/her bed. 9.. Sings the ending to the Flintstones as "an all gay time..." 8.. Mumbles incoherently to a now green piece of cheddar cheese. 7.. Frequently looks down at crotch and argues "Lipid, SOLID, Lipid, SOLID...". 6.. His/her toothbrush has tried to make a "run for it". 5.. Claims he had an affair with Bill Clinton and has never left his home state of Montana. 4.. Bought a cage for the dustbunnies and keeps food and water in it for them. 3.. Is the sole attendee for a 12 step program no-one has ever heard of. 2.. Glows when sleeping. 1.. Believes that "up" is relative to the rotation of his home planet. - The Great Dog Fight The Americans and Russians at the height of the arms race realized that if they continued in the usual manner they were going to blow up the whole world. One day they sat down and decided to settle the whole dispute with one dog fight. They'd have five years to breed the best fighting dog in the world and which ever side's dog won would be entitled to dominate the world. The losing side would have to lay down its arms. The Russians found the biggest meanest Doberman and Rottweiler bitches in the world and bred them with the biggest meanest Siberian wolves. They selected only the biggest and strongest puppy from each litter, killed his siblings, and gave him all the milk. They used steroids and trainers and after five years came up with the biggest meanest dog the world had ever seen. Its cage needed steel bars that were five inches thick and nobody could get near it. When the day came for the dog fight, the Americans showed up with a strange animal. It was a nine foot long Dachshund. Everyone felt sorry for the Americans because they knew there was no way that this dog could possibly last ten seconds with the Russian dog. When the cages were opened up, the Dachshund came out of it's cage and slowly waddled over towards the Russian dog. The Russian dog snarled and leaped out of it's cage and charged the American dachshund. But, when it got close enough to bite the Dachshund's neck, the Dachshund opened it's mouth and consumed the Russian dog in one bite. There was nothing left at all of the Russian dog. The Russians came up to the Americans shaking their heads in disbelief. 'We don't understand how this could have happened. We had our best people working for five years with the meanest Doberman and Rottweiler bitches in the world and the biggest meanest Siberian wolves." "That's nothing", an American replied. "We had our best plastic surgeons working for five years to make an alligator look like a Dachshund." - Man Meets Train This fellow who had spent his whole life in the desert comes to visit a friend. He'd never seen a train or the tracks they run on. While standing in the middle of the RR tracks one day, he hears this whistle -- Whooee da Whoee! -- but doesn't know what it is. Predictably, he's hit -- but, only a glancing blow -- and is thrown, ass-over- tea-kettle, to the side of the tracks, with some minor internal injuries, a few broken bones, and some bruises. After weeks in the hospital recovering, he's at his friend's house attending a party, one evening. While in the kitchen, he suddenly hears the tea kettle whistling. He grabs a baseball bat from the nearby closet and proceeds to batter and bash the tea kettle into an unrecognizable lump of metal. His friend, hearing the ruckus, rushes into the kitchen, sees what's happened and asks the desert man: "Why'd you ruin my good tea kettle?" The desert man replies: "Man, you gotta kill these things when they're small." --- The ABC's of Ex-Girlfriends... A is for Arteries. You know, the things that your ex-girlfriend ripped out because she really didn't care for you you twit she was only after your money and could have given a shit about you. B is for Bitter. Who, me?? No way. I really hope things between them do work out. I hope they get married and have 2 children that are little devils and her hips get huge and his eyebrows finally grow completely together and they get fat and old together and then DIE!! C is for Call ya later. She won't. She never has before. D is for Dumped. Does D need to be explained? E is for Eating like a pig. Remember when you took her out and she said "I'm not hungry" so you figured you could take her to a nice place because you were able to afford a nice meal at this fine restaurant. Then she ate more than your Uncle Roy (you remember Uncle Roy the one with the mustard stains on everything). So you flip the bill and are broke for the next two weeks and she wonders why you were unable to call her that week and go see movies. F is for Friends. That is what she just wants to be. As if you can even stand to look at her. G is for Gun. And yes
Re: LI Another Woman
"Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi - I missed it; could you sum up the 60 minutes program along with which of the several women were interviewed? Thanks a lot, ") LDMF. Sue Hartigan wrote:--- Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Dr. L.: I would have bet on it too. Until I saw that interview tonight on 60 Minutes. :( Did you see it? That woman is really very convincing. Sue Hi Sue - Betcha a marzipan bar (my favorite, I surf the web for them) that: his ratings will go up. :) LDMF. -Sue Hartigan Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI I'm bewildered! I'm Shocked! In reality I'm fed up with the BS
Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: After watching 60 minutes tonight and thinking back on the official word from the WH concerning these allegations launched against the Prez, all I can say with 100% certainity is we have the most bewildered and shocked president in the History or this country! During tonights interview I counted Bewildered and shocked being used at least eight times each concerning the reacton from the president! So now we can say we had Reagan in the 80's running up our debt, and we had Clinton running up our confusion with all his shocked and bewildered statements. Me? I'm personally fed up with the same old statements no matter what the allegation. And I did watch that interview closely, all I can say is Mr. Prez Kathleen Willey was VERY believable and your PR person wasn't, and for the first time I do think Mr. Prez is in trouble if the statements made on 60 minutes are true, especially about perjury and the Prez denying her allegations in his depo. -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Another Woman
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Dr. L.: I would have bet on it too. Until I saw that interview tonight on 60 Minutes. :( Did you see it? That woman is really very convincing. Sue Hi Sue - Betcha a marzipan bar (my favorite, I surf the web for them) that: his ratings will go up. :) LDMF. -Sue Hartigan Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Report: Windows 98 Will Be Released
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue I guess we all have real troubles with "Virus95" Ed just sits and shakes his head when I go on the computer. He knows eventually I will be talking to the computer and telling it how dumb it is : ). Of course, it just answers me back by freezing up. I can almost hear a little voice instead the darn thing taunting me with "Nah, nah, nah, nah). Ed yells in about that time and says "I'm waiting." And sure enough, I come through with--"no machine is going to get the better of me, I'll figure you out yet!" jackief Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: I haven't seen that one yet. But now that I have heard about it, I'm sure that it will happen. :( I have no idea what Windows 95 can or can't do. Whenever the thing starts acting weird or something, and if I can still get mail out, a big KATHY HELP goes out, if I can't get mail out, then I have to wait around here forever for my son to get home and fix it. He usually pushes a couple of buttons and waa-laa, all well. Then he goes off muttering something about Mothers and the inability to comprehend the simple things of life. BG Then there are times when the server goes down. Now that is really frustrating. Last week the server got spamed and was down for days. I could get mail but couldn't send anything. Talk about frustrating. Sue Hi Sue Lately mine has been bringing up the boxes attached to my icons, when I haven't touched my icon. If anyone can run Windows95, I think they are computer geniuses. jackief Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Nature vs Nurture
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue I don't know whether to laugh or shake my head on this. This sounds like reincarnation without having to enter another organism and they are making sure they can be reincarnated. Can't take credit for the psychic ability bg. I think this exercise came out of discussions some of us were having, but sure enough the next edition of a sexuality book had one very similar. Guess social scientists minds run in the same direction at times g I think we are going to see a lot more of this type of questions being asked about the role of technology in our lives. A lot of demand is being placed on having ethics courses in all the colleges and making them a required course for many fields. I am talking about in addition to the general philosophy course that looks at morality issues. jackief jackief Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi jackie: You got it. BG The idea is that someday they will be able to transplant the head onto a body where the person has died of some kind of brain damage, but the body is in perfect health. snipped I guess this is another case of psychic ability, on your part. :) The father is going to have to pay the child support, but it really brings medicine, law, and ethics to the forefront, IMO. Sue Hi Sue Would love to visit but I think I'll pass on the frozen bodies, especially the heads. What in the world are they going to do with the heads?? Fasten them on an artificial body? Or on a human body that the head has been damaged? Oooh. The ironic thing is that we use an exercise in which the students have to discuss the implications of a couple doing that very thing and then getting a divorce before the baby is conceived and fight for custody. In the meantime the child is being raised by a foster mother. Now, who should get custody--one of the donors, the surrogate mother, the foster mother, or one of the ex-spouses? This was a ficticious exercise--sounds like it really isn't so imaginary. jackief Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Study Confirms Deficit in the Brainstem of SIDS Victims
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue Thanks for letting me know about Loma Linda. Guess it is more than one researcher BG. Do you know if they have a 'homepage?' They might have some of their research on the web. I wonder if their doctors have written on the causes of conjoined twins. The hospital must be like Mayo here in MN., but with a different focus. Here, I think infants are sent to the U of M hospital. They have a really good neonatal unit I am told. The spraying of Malathion doesn't sound very safe to me after you posted all the precautions they want people to take. DDT was once thought to be great, wasn't it. Are they still spraying Malathion there? Would be interesting to look up stats (oh horrors) on incidences, prevalence and causes of death in the areas they spray this stuff in and compare them. Oh, I bet government agencies etc. hate having an informed public VVBG. Proof readers only look for mistakes in grammar, spelling and punctuation, I think. They don't read for content. I bet they couldn't even tell you what an article was about. Gripes, our paper didn't even see the tie between the two school teachers being accused of the same crime at approximately the same time. I would have thought that MN newspapers would have followed this more closely--no such thing occurred. jackief Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: I'm sorry I should have said. :) Loma Linda is a big University here in Riverside. It also boasts Loma Linda Hospital which specializes in infants. In fact it is the place where most of the physicians around the country send their cardiac infants who need transplants. sinpped The reason they were spraying Malathion was because of the fruit fly. This thing could demolish our agriculture. They said the spray was harmless, but I still wonder when they take all those precautions. I thought that they had proof readers at the newspapers. But it has been so long since I have been around one that I am sure things have changed dramatically. We don't even have paperboys anymore. That is how much it has changed here in So Ca. Sue Hi Sue At the risk of exposing my lack of knowledge G, who is Loma Linda? I assume a medical researcher?? Don't they have people who are hired to read newspapers to connect stories that seem unrelated? I thought I heard that at one time. That spray stuff you mention may be one factor that could be considered in any research, especially when you are told to bring pets in, and cover inanimate objects. Of course, then we would have to determine what was more important--possible effects on the unborn vrs our comfort in sitting outdoors with no insects. (Just being cynical, here). jackief Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI TRIPLE WHAMMY
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue ROTF... No psychic, just a weird thinker at times. But there is hope for everyone--there is only about 3% of the population that have this personality. Aren't all the rest of you happy BG. jackief Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi jackie: Your'e the psychic, you tell me. BEG I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist. :) Sue Hi Sue How come we don't get paid for this? jackief Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Jim McDougal
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue I don't know who leaked it finally, but I would imagine someone at the Pentagon after the digging started. Somehow I wonder if Tripp doesn't have a direct hotline to someone or something--like you say, she is always there in the background. I watched 60 Minutes too, as did Ed. Ed found her very creditable, but I was a little cynical. I kept wavering back and forth as she talked. I can see ole Bill (C) doing the number with Jones and Lewinsky, but somehow I would think he was a little smarter than to try it with one of his friend's wife out of the clear blue sky. I am not saying that she invited this if it occurred, but common sense tells me most people don't sh## in their own backyards, so to speak. It seemed in some instances though that she was trying to close up some of the arguments that the defense could suggest in the Lewinsky affair. One thing I caught (or thought I heard)--it wasn't in the Oval office, but his study, right?? Little detail, I know, but those little details are sometimes important. Another thing that bothered me somewhat is the naive, hesitant little girl that was on 60 Minutes (my, my, such cynicism this morning). This is no 21 year old intern and this was someone who did not want the story public. If someone had made my story public, I would not be this hesitant little woman--I would be angry that a friend had made a pass and a friend had made it public and drew me into this mess. But, I am not Willey. I have a tough time with Bennett sometimes--he is a good example of the good ole' boy network and their ideas about women. Remember his remark about Jones? And, sometimes I feel he is about to make another wonderful statement like he did then. So I am still waiting--but I still think the money could be spent in better places and I am wondering more about the deal where a private citizen cannot bring up ethics charges on a Congressperson, only another Congressperson is allowed to do that. Hmm. jackief jackief Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: Hey you might just have hit on something there. BG Who did leak it finally do you know? I saw the Katherine Willey interview tonight on 60 Minutes. And she did come across as being very creditable. But then the Presidents lawyer talked for a few minutes, and his explanation sounded good too. The part about her being very upset and couldn't find her husband, etc. ) Her husband committed suicide while she was there talking to the President that day.) But she did sound very creditable... Linda Trapp..er I mean Tripp was there then too. That woman sure knows where to be and when to be there doesn't she. Sue Hi Sue Read the post earlier about how Tripp's lawyer said she was set-up. H. She just happened to have the goods in her purse. How much you want to bet that Starr wasn't aware of this when he gave her immunity. What I find interesting about this is if this is the case, and the w.h. was so guilty of obstructing justice and smearing their accusers then this should have been leaked to the media ages ago. Could that mean the w.h. were not engaged in those tactics, I wonder. I'll have to figure out what you should be the expert witness so we both can rake in the millions vbg jackief Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Verdicts Decisions/Kathy
Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Okay I'm sending you my bookmarks in private email :) The only thing I ask is you delete all of them under the title of Account and Mailing Lists, the ones you'll be interested in are under: Crime Justice Serial Killers (maybe) If others would like them just let me know and I'll send them to you :) matterfact I'm going to play with these and see if I can't make up a separate book mark file to send out to those who want it first :) That way none of the stuff you don't want is included :) Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff wrote: "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: :) Kathy, what a great offer, yes please do send the bookmarks! Meanwhile I am going off to try the ones you have sent in your post; thanks a lot! LDMF. ---Kathy E wrote:- -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI InterNight - Jerralyn Merritt (again)
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Alex Butler wrote: "Alex Butler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Following a contribution I made several months ago, I continue to watch MSNBC's InterNight and get ever increasingly annoyed with the performance of Jerralyn Merritt. Mornin' Alex, I echo your opinion. She has herself destroyed any credibility that she may have had herself. She is highly biased and at times a hypocrite. I hold her opinions on the same level as Susan Carpenter McMillian. ...Mac Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: law-issues-digest V1 #695
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: Hi Sue, Mrs. Wyler (I think her name is) comes across as so truthful and sincere on "60 Minutes," I think she will be the one to cook his goose. Even Hillary won't be able to swallow Willie's pathetic lies as a defense in this case IMO. These women probably didn't find him that attractive, but worked for him or went to him for help in obtaining govt. jobs and found themselves subjected to his crude sexual overtures. This particular woman's morality and smarts caused her to reject his advances, which gives her account of what happened enormous credibility Vi ___ You wrote: They just announced on CNBC that yet another woman has come forward with yet more allegations against Clinton. She is appearing before the grand jury tomorrow or Tuesday. _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Bray - Ayers: Murdered Mom trial - summary and verdict
Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Amber Bray, 20, and her boyfriend, Jeffrey Ayers, 23, were charged with murder and conspiracy to commit murder in the beating and stabbing death of Bray's mother in January 1996. Bray and her mother, Dixie Hollier, had a strained relationship, and prosecutors claimed that Bray coerced Ayers into killing her mother with promises of marriage and his share of an inheritance worth $300,000. In addition, prosecutors said Bray told Ayers that she would kill herself if he did not kill her mother. In a videotaped confession, Ayers admitted to his role in the murder and insisted that although Bray knew about his intentions, he alone planned the crime. During his confession, Ayers said that he decided to kill Hollier when Bray threatened to kill herself because her mother allegedly abused her so much. (At one point, Ayers even breaks down and begs police to let him take the blame for the murder and spare Bray.) Ayers's attorneys argued that Bray manipulated his love for her and forced him into the slaying. On the other hand, Bray contended that Ayers decided to kill Hollier entirely on his own. Bray's defense claimed that she is only guilty of associating with Ayers. Deterioration of a Mother-Daughter Relationship The victim, Dixie Hollier, was a divorced single mother who was a manager of special projects at Warner Brothers and was involved in management of the Red Hot Chili Peppers. She lived with her two teen-age daughters and five-year-old son in a modest duplex in Burbank. According to Bray's younger sister, Bray and Hollier fought about issues such as curfews and household chores. Their relationship became increasingly strained in the fall of 1995, when Bray began cutting school often and was transferred to Monterey Continuation High School, a school geared towards students with academic or attendance problems. Sometimes the arguments between Bray and her mother escalated into shoving matches, as they fought over Bray's schoolwork and the crowd with which she associated. Around this time, Bray also started dating Jeffrey Ayers, a high school dropout who lived with his mother and was an avid "Dungeons and Dragons" fan. Ayers soon became Bray's confidant, especially after numerous fights with her mother. Eventually, Ayers became convinced that Hollier was abusing Bray and became concerned for her mental well-being. According to friends of both defendants, Bray and Ayers began making plans to marry and live together. The Murder On January 16, 1996, Ayers entered Bray's house just before 5 am. Police suspected that Bray met him at the door and let him in. Ayers then entered Hollier's room and fired five shots at her. Two bullets hit Hollier, grazing her forehead and shattering her upper right arm. When Hollier started yelling for help, Ayers began to beat her in the head with the butt of the gun. Then Ayers went into the kitchen, grabbed three knives, and stabbed Hollier 24 times. Awakened by the gunfire, Bray's younger sister ran out of her room to find Ayers attacking her mother. She tried to call police, but Bray pulled out the phone cord. The younger sister put the plug back in, but Bray then allegedly pulled the phone out of the wall and ordered her to look after her younger brother. As the attack continued, Bray barricaded herself and her siblings in the back bedroom. A neighbor heard the gunfire and called police. When they arrived, they saw Ayers through a window straddling Hollier and continuing to stab her. With Hollier's blood covering his hands and clothes, Ayers surrendered without resistance to police. He confessed on video three hours later. Police began to suspect Bray after her sister told them that she had pulled out the phone cord when she tried to call the police during the attack. The authorities also found various letters between Bray and Ayers in Bray's bedroom that outlined their plan to kill Hollier. "Someday in November" In one of the letters between Ayers and Bray, dated "Someday in November," Bray suggested that she and Ayers arrange to have her sister and mother killed while they take her younger brother out to a movie. "I come home and discover them, call the police...and it goes on record as another unsolved homicide," she writes. In that letter, Bray also discusses how she and Ayers would spend her inheritance from her mother. Ayers responded to the letter by writing, "Your mother and sister will trouble you no more." Bray and Ayers were tried together in front of two different juries. (Ayers's confession was not shown to Bray's jury.) Prosecutors attached two special circumstances to the defendants' indictments or first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder: (1) the murder was intentional and carried out for financial gain (2) Bray killed the victim while lying in wait. If convicted of first-degree murder under special circumstances, Bray and Ayers faced
LI BrainBenderz: The Joker
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: -=Today's Puzzle: A total of 21 cards consisting of 4 kings, 4 queens, 4 jacks, 4 tens, 4 nines, and 1 joker were dealt to Alec, Bill and Carl. Then all jacks, tens, and nines were discarded. At that point: 1) The combined hands consisted of 4 kings, 4 queens and 1 joker. 2) Alec had 2 cards, Bill had 3 cards, and Carl had 4 cards. 3) The man with the most singletons did not have the joker. 4) No man had more than 2 kings. Who had the joker?* -=Yesterday's Answer: How Many Liars? - One. Since the finned Martian did indicate that he was a truth-teller, then the Martian with feathered ears was obviously telling the truth and must be a truth teller. If the finned Martian was lying, then the horned Martian was a truth-teller. If the finned Martian was a truth-teller, then the horned Martian was a liar. So, no matter how you look at it, two of the three Martians were truth-tellers and one was a liar. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Verdicts Decisions/Kathy
"Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kathy - can bookmark files be swapped? In other words, can I go into my filelist and rename my bookmark file, as in 'bookmark.med' for medical, and then swap it in as 'bookmark.htm' when I want to? Or something similar. (I am just wondering how you managed to subdivide your bookmark file.) But I guess it would become complicated; say I had my medical bookmark file active and saw something on law, and didn't want to save it in the medical bookmark file. If there is a tip on doing this please post; thanks a lot, LindaMF. Kathy E wrote:- Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Okay I'm sending you my bookmarks in private email :) The only thing I ask is you delete all of them under the title of Account and Mailing Lists, the ones you'll be interested in are under: Crime Justice Serial Killers (maybe) If others would like them just let me know and I'll send them to you :) matterfact I'm going to play with these and see if I can't make up a separate book mark file to send out to those who want it first :) That way none of the stuff you don't want is included :) Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff wrote: "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: :) Kathy, what a great offer, yes please do send the bookmarks! Meanwhile I am going off to try the ones you have sent in your post; thanks a lot! LDMF. ---Kathy E wrote:- -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Media Trial
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Mac, Great post! I agree with you 100% I also wondered why, after being dragged kicking and screaming into the Grand Jury, that Ms. Willey was so willing to appear on 60 Minutes. The question is whether she has any ulterior motives of her own, considering the huge debt she is under because of he husband's illegal activities. I know she didn't get paid for the interview, but perhaps she has been promised something by another party. Who really knows at this point. And I'd still like to see how all these accusers hold up under cross examination. Bill On Mon, 16 Mar 1998 07:55:12 -0500 moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mornin' All, Before everyone jumps to the conclusion that Ms.Wiley is credible I think one should ask themselves "..why did she ask someone to lie about this incident.." If she was so damaged and upset about this why are just now hearing about it. Why is it that the case of Paula Jones, who's story seems to change as fast as the weather here in New England, has been coupled with the Whitewater investigation. IMO, both the Paula Jones case and the Monica story and now Ms. Wiley are about money. Monica has been offered 4 million for her story but is holding out for at least 5 million. The two state troppers that brought forth the Paula Jones story to Mr.Brock are being bankrolled by a GOPAC group headed by one of Clinton's arch enemies. A right wing group is funding the millions of dollars for the Jones case. Jones herself is raising money for herself under the guise of a defense fund. Ms. Wiley is being portrayed as a reluctant witness but wrangles a deal with 60 Minutes to air her reluctant story. This is a case that is being tried right now in the media for the reason that in a court of law it is a loser. All of these women have very serious credibility problems and through the media they can put forth their stories without cross-examination. Why did Jones's atty's dump all the Lewinsky info in their brief to the judge in Little Rock when they know it has already been ruled inadmissable? Why did they give it to the media BEFORE they submitted it to the court? These are some of the many questions that you must ask and get answered before you can jump to any conclusion about the guilt or innocence of the president. This whole mess is a political game. The media has provided the stage and the money for the perfomers. The damage that this has already caused the office of the president is terminal and will affect anyone who seeks that office and will have lasting effects on the publics view of politics and the media. We the people are the one's who will suffer the most damage from this cheapening of the office of the president and the decline of true journalism. ...Mac Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI I'm bewildered! I'm Shocked! In reality I'm fed up with the BS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Kathy, Certainly if the statements Willey made on 60 Minutes are true, then the President has committed perjury and should resign immediately. The question is, who is lying? Willey or Willy. G Bill On Mon, 16 Mar 1998 02:11:42 -0500 Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: After watching 60 minutes tonight and thinking back on the official word from the WH concerning these allegations launched against the Prez, all I can say with 100% certainity is we have the most bewildered and shocked president in the History or this country! During tonights interview I counted Bewildered and shocked being used at least eight times each concerning the reacton from the president! So now we can say we had Reagan in the 80's running up our debt, and we had Clinton running up our confusion with all his shocked and bewildered statements. Me? I'm personally fed up with the same old statements no matter what the allegation. And I did watch that interview closely, all I can say is Mr. Prez Kathleen Willey was VERY believable and your PR person wasn't, and for the first time I do think Mr. Prez is in trouble if the statements made on 60 minutes are true, especially about perjury and the Prez denying her allegations in his depo. -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Sleep Apnea
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Sue, I've heard a few psychologists talk about dream interpretation and their main point was that the dream is always about the individual dreaming and not really about any of the characters in the dream. So, if you dream about someone doing something it is really about YOU doing it and has something to do with your fears, hopes, likes/dislikes etc. And they had a bunch of common things in dreams that symbolized something else. I wondered at the time how they knew all this stuff was true. Bill On Fri, 13 Mar 1998 22:04:49 -0800 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: The only thing that I have ever really read about dreams said that they are a way of letting off emotions that are pent up in your mind during the day. Your mind is completely relaxed so therefore your fears, wants, whatever are free to roam. They can be a mixture of the real and the imagination. You can mix real experiences with those your read about, see on television, or whatever. Most people dream off and on all night long, but don't remember them. And if you do remember a dream it is more than likely the one you had just before you woke up. I have also read that people do dream in color, and that they can actually feel whatever it is that they are dreaming, such as fear, love, etc. I read that in some med book a long time ago. And it didn't really interpret dreams, it just tried to explain how the brain works. Have you ever read so many books that you get them all mixed up and can't really remember which book said what? I do that all the time. :) Especially when I was reading all those Simpson books, or when I get into reading one author like John Grisham. I get all the plots mixed together. LOL Sue _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI InterNight - Jerralyn Merritt (again)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Alex, I am not familiar with Jerralyn Merritt and have never watched the show. But I DID catch the show with Marcia Clark for the first time last Friday and I agree with you. I was very impressed with the way she moderated the discussion and thought she did very well for someone who had not had a lot of prior experience in the media. Bill On Sun, 15 Mar 1998 22:04:05 - "Alex Butler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Alex Butler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Following a contribution I made several months ago, I continue to watch MSNBC's InterNight and get ever increasingly annoyed with the performance of Jerralyn Merritt. For those who do not know of Ms Merritt, she is a defense attorney and was part of Tim McVeigh's legal team. She takes offense when ever anyone is accused of breaking the law. If she had her way, there would be no need for trials or prisons. Her statements are one-dimensional, usually bland and insubstantive. I don't now why the TV station pay for her appearances, when they could use a young actress and a script writer to churn out her nightly mantras. The main reason for me bringing this subject up was that over the past several weeks it has become very noticeable that John Gibson, the excellent host of InterNight cannot abide her attitude and has made that quite obvious. Does any other viewer agree with this? On a more pleasant note, it is great to see Marcia Clark again and hear her comments. As usual I find myself agreeing with most of what she says. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: This and that was LI Photo Gallery
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, LOL...you're right, I forgot about how creative students can be in the pursuit of an assignment. :) Always pushing the window. Perhaps that could be another area of study. One group of students observing another. Bill On Sat, 14 Mar 1998 02:52:07 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill I love giving the students these types of assignments. However, you can get yourself into trouble at times. Students are creative, so you have to try and foresee why may occur. The big problem area is having them observe deviance--now, as instructors we are looking for them to observe things like littering, deviant dress, etc. and other people's reactions to the deviance. Not students--they want to go to the area of town where "real" deviance occurs. This also happens if you have them break a norm and capture people's reactions--you tell students they are to break folkways not laws, but you know students. But as you say there are a lot of things you can assign that are easy and "fun learning" for students. I have had them watch sit-coms, listen to music, and go through magazines advertisements. Keeps them out of harm's way, I hope. This quarter the Intro students are going to do application papers--this assignment sound like no problem, but have had a few occasions where it could have led to problems. One of the nice things about computers is the chance to learn from others things that might work in teaching, especially teaching abstract concepts. jackief _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Sleep Apnea
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, LOL...I thought that when you're pregnant the ball is in the front, not the back. Bill On Sat, 14 Mar 1998 03:37:31 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue LMOF. You know Bill would be one of the few who would know what it was like to be pregnant if he did manage to get on his back g. jackief--Poor Bill, we will be nice for a little while. Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: Or one of those big "medicine" balls (do they still make those things) that weigh a hundred pounds. Can you imagine if he did manage to roll over on his back. :) He would be like a turtle trying to get back up. BEG Sue Hi Sue Not a funny condition to have, but I am LOL at visualizing the ball in the bed. Of course you know fantasies, the ball is a basketball or one of that size. Better than duct tape, why not sew a piece of Velcro on Bill's back and the ball. He could simply Velcro before retiring for the night. g jackief -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI I'm bewildered! I'm Shocked! In reality I'm fed up with the BS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, I agree, Bennett was a very poor spokesman on 60 Minutes. As Kathy said he used the same words over and over. I got the impression that his appearance was a last minute decision as he had declined to appear when they first invited him. I guess they figured he better get on there and say something because of the allegations this woman was making. But we all still need to keep in mind that this was a very friendly and supportive interview. I wonder how she would do under cross examination. And we still need to wait until the findings of the Grand Jury are announced to see where this thing will go. Bill On Sun, 15 Mar 1998 23:24:13 -0800 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Kathy: You know that I have been waiting for something to come out that really made sense. Well I think it finally has. I also think that Kathleen Willey was very credible. :( And his lawyer didn't come across too good. It looks to me like Clinton is really in trouble now. :( I saw the lawyer on Sam Donaldson this morning, and it didn't look good then either. After reading the depo's, and listening to her, he had better have some answers for everyone, and pretty darn quick. Sue After watching 60 minutes tonight and thinking back on the official word from the WH concerning these allegations launched against the Prez, all I can say with 100% certainity is we have the most bewildered and shocked president in the History or this country! During tonights interview I counted Bewildered and shocked being used at least eight times each concerning the reacton from the president! So now we can say we had Reagan in the 80's running up our debt, and we had Clinton running up our confusion with all his shocked and bewildered statements. Me? I'm personally fed up with the same old statements no matter what the allegation. And I did watch that interview closely, all I can say is Mr. Prez Kathleen Willey was VERY believable and your PR person wasn't, and for the first time I do think Mr. Prez is in trouble if the statements made on 60 minutes are true, especially about perjury and the Prez denying her allegations in his depo. -- Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI The Nanny Case - A British Perspective
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Alex, Thanks for the update. Yeah, I certainly can understand the emotions of the people in England who were supporting Woodward. Heck, I can even understand the emotions of the people who were supporting Simpson. And those who expressed their emotions when he was found liable in the civil trial. Understanding and agreeing are two different things, however. But I never had a big problem with any of that. IMO, the more interesting issues are whether the legal process worked and a correct verdict and sentence was given. Bill On Sun, 15 Mar 1998 19:44:09 - "Alex Butler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Alex Butler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill In Britain, the appeals matter is just being reported as a normal news item Our SKY news channel is the only one that is giving it intensive coverage and that is only because following their presentation of the Simpson trial, they know that their viewers are interested in these real-life legal dramas. At the end of the Trial proper, you will have seen the scenes of elation from the Woodward "camp" in England. The TV pictures must have appeared unseemly to people in the USA, but I feel that they only represented the reaction of a group of people bonding together in a common cause (rightly or wrongly) and giving vent to their emotions. When I have heard them talk in detail about the case, they invariably mention the sadness of the baby's death. So their celebrations are not meant to diminish the tragedy of a baby's death. Alex Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- From: William J. Foristal [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LI The Nanny Case - A British Perspective Date: 09 March 1998 17:02 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Alex, Nice to see you again! Thanks for the information. I guess the appeals hearing starts today. What is the current sentiment/opinion in England about the appeals? Bill On Sun, 8 Mar 1998 21:05:09 - "Alex Butler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Alex Butler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In the UK, our TV Channel 4 has shown a documentary on the Nanny Case. The documentary included an assessment of the medical evidence by British experts. If you are interested in the case, an abridged transcript, and other information can be obtained from:- www.channel4.com/news/dispatches/ Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Message from Ed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Kathy, Wow, you MADE Ed's computer crash Remind me never to get you ticked off about anything. :) Don't worry, I won't tell him. Bill On Sat, 14 Mar 1998 02:16:12 -0500 Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill :) I think that commercial is a riot! Here's a secret just don't tell Ed, I know I can trust y'all to keep my secret (G). Ed's computer didn't REALLY crash, well NOT like he thought, I sent him this message the subject being "ED READ do not do anything else even breathe before you read this!" I figured that might get his attention! LOL Then as soon as he opened up that little message Kaboom! Bye bye computer LOL And we could all have some fun and he would be none the wiser :) :) The things I must do to satisfy everyone! (SEG) William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Kathy, ROTF...reminds me of the commercial where the boss calls in from the beach to say he's cut his vacation short and will be in the office in 10 minutes. Bill On Fri, 13 Mar 1998 10:59:27 -0500 Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Aww damn! The fun times are over, time to be good again. NOT! LOL Thanks Doc for the message :) -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: EMF/Jackie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, When they do begin to measure these things and explain things that were unexplainable before I wonder what effect this will have on the religious communities around the world. Bill On Fri, 13 Mar 1998 11:39:08 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill I hadn't thought of all those observable things that people mention about death, etc. Seems like the things that scientists said they couldn't measure may change. jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, And also the instances where people say they saw some type of wispy material leave a body at the time of death. This was to infer the soul leaving the body, but it could simply be a dissipation of energy as the body died. Also, that light people see who have died and come back may simply be the start of this process. And I think all major discoveries are made on the cutting edge of research. :) Bill On Fri, 13 Mar 1998 05:27:04 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh, oh Bill Cutting edge!! As one of my students said when we discussed psych. disorders--remember Jackie, there is a fine line between being normal and having a disorder. H, cutting edge or something else?? Poor Ed, he has to listen to this stuff all the time--imagine it is difficult for him to live with someone on the boundary g. I find that info you mentioned on auras very interesting--we sometimes laugh at those ideas, but if we are made up of electrons, etc and as you say we encounter another body wouldn't the attraction/repulsion create an aura colored differently around a person?? I think I will see if I can get ahold of that book--I have nothing else to read (hahaha). jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, Wow, you are way out there on the cutting edge of theory here. :) I would think that anything you've suggested COULD be true, but it would take a lot of clinical studies and other research to prove or disprove it. One thing I wondered was whether the "aura" that many people have talked about is indeed there and caused by some magnetic field that each person has around them. The Celestine Prophecy dealt with this in an interesting way. I'm not sure about the physical cause of the gravitational force, but I think you've hit pretty close to it. The combined effects of the charged particles or ions within the molecules of each body acting on the other body. I know the force of the pull is determined by the inverse square of the distance between the bodies and the difference in mass. There are a lot of theories one can offer with respect to magnetic fields and their affects on humans. I assume there is a lot of research going on about this. Bil l On Thu, 12 Mar 1998 04:13:41 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill Ok, if it is gravational pull then isn't that the attraction/repulsion of negative and positive ions?? (Jeez, I better take Physics 101 again). If so, then aren't we talking again about magnetic fields?? If so, maybe those ole' wives tales have a bearing in reality--changes in behavior according to the phases of the moon for some people some of the time. If that is true to a degree then let's really go out on limb and look at how interference in that attraction/repulsion could affect us and our natural environment. (I know you are humming the theme from "The Twilight Zone--grin). About minerals, I was speculating (hallucinating some might say) whether they balanced our negative/positive ions in someway and that is why they are essential in our diet. From there we can make the leap (maybe not logically) to an idea that after exposure to teratogens an increase in minerals in the diet may help to offset the imbalance. Boy, this is muddy as heck, I know, but it does seem logical in my own twisted thinking process. jackief _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI I'm bewildered! I'm Shocked! In reality I'm fed up with the BS
"Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill - will the Grand Jury findings be made public for sure? Have they been in the past? Thanks for any illumination, and best wishes.:) LDMF William J. Foristal wrote:-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, I agree, Bennett was a very poor spokesman on 60 Minutes. As Kathy said he used the same words over and over. I got the impression that his appearance was a last minute decision as he had declined to appear when they first invited him. I guess they figured he better get on there and say something because of the allegations this woman was making. But we all still need to keep in mind that this was a very friendly and supportive interview. I wonder how she would do under cross examination. And we still need to wait until the findings of the Grand Jury are announced to see where this thing will go. Bill On Sun, 15 Mar 1998 23:24:13 -0800 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Kathy: You know that I have been waiting for something to come out that really made sense. Well I think it finally has. I also think that Kathleen Willey was very credible. :( And his lawyer didn't come across too good. It looks to me like Clinton is really in trouble now. :( I saw the lawyer on Sam Donaldson this morning, and it didn't look good then either. After reading the depo's, and listening to her, he had better have some answers for everyone, and pretty darn quick. Sue After watching 60 minutes tonight and thinking back on the official word from the WH concerning these allegations launched against the Prez, all I can say with 100% certainity is we have the most bewildered and shocked president in the History or this country! During tonights interview I counted Bewildered and shocked being used at least eight times each concerning the reacton from the president! So now we can say we had Reagan in the 80's running up our debt, and we had Clinton running up our confusion with all his shocked and bewildered statements. Me? I'm personally fed up with the same old statements no matter what the allegation. And I did watch that interview closely, all I can say is Mr. Prez Kathleen Willey was VERY believable and your PR person wasn't, and for the first time I do think Mr. Prez is in trouble if the statements made on 60 minutes are true, especially about perjury and the Prez denying her allegations in his depo. -- Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Media Trial
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Mac, Great post! I agree with you 100% I also wondered why, after being dragged kicking and screaming into the Grand Jury, that Ms. Willey was so willing to appear on 60 Minutes. The question is whether she has any ulterior motives of her own, considering the huge debt she is under because of he husband's illegal activities. I know she didn't get paid for the interview, but perhaps she has been promised something by another party. Who really knows at this point. And I'd still like to see how all these accusers hold up under cross examination. Bill Afternoon Bill, What cross-examination? I have serious doubts that she will ever be called to testify. As a matter of fact I don't believe there will ever be a trial in the case of Jones v. Clinton nor in the Starr investigation, which is starting to become one and the same. The Jones camp has already made public their case and if you throw out the inadmissable there is virtually no case. I am of the firm opinion that they are having their day in court right now. these accusations alone are causing great harm to the president and that is the result that they have been set out on getting from the beginning. What started out as allegations of sexual harrassment have now been alluded to as sexual assualt. I have faith in the American people and I just hope and pray they remember what all this was really all about come election time. ...Mac " The answer lies in the world of Linda Tripp" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Another Woman
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Dr. L.: I'm not too good at doing that, but maybe we could get Kathy to do it. She is wonderful when it comes to those sorts of things. I was impressed with this woman. I still haven't taken her word as being the absolute truth, but I can't discount her either. She sounded very sincere, and her story did sound very plausible, IMO. And she certainly didn't fit the image that we have been having of these women who are telling these stories. She was more mature, and came across as not the kind of woman who would be soliciting sexual advances. Someone here is lying, and the problem now is to find out which one. If it is the President then he should step down, and let the country get back to what it should be doing. I just don't know how we are ever going to find out who it is though that is lying. :( It certainly was a bad day for Clinton, that is for sure. His own Friday the 13th. One thing that I did notice about Ms. Willey, she mentioned that her husband was in real financial problems because he had stolen money from some of his clients. This was a similar problem that Susan McDougal had. What is it with these people that the President was friends with anyway. Are they all a bunch of crooks? Also another thing that came up was that the Presidents lawyer said that when Ms. Willey came to the WH that day, she was upset because she had no idea where her husband was. *She* said that while she was at the WH her husband committed suicide. Those two stories sort of go together, IMO Sue Hi - I missed it; could you sum up the 60 minutes program along with which of the several women were interviewed? Thanks a lot, ") LDMF. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Media Trial
"Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Mac - concerning the underlying politics, do you or does anyone here know anything about Web Hubbel (spelling?) being a common link between Whitewater and these particular "witnesses?" Best to you, :) LDMF. --moonshine wrote:--- moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mornin' All, Before everyone jumps to the conclusion that Ms.Wiley is credible I think one should ask themselves "..why did she ask someone to lie about this incident.." If she was so damaged and upset about this why are just now hearing about it. Why is it that the case of Paula Jones, who's story seems to change as fast as the weather here in New England, has been coupled with the Whitewater investigation. IMO, both the Paula Jones case and the Monica story and now Ms. Wiley are about money. Monica has been offered 4 million for her story but is holding out for at least 5 million. The two state troppers that brought forth the Paula Jones story to Mr.Brock are being bankrolled by a GOPAC group headed by one of Clinton's arch enemies. A right wing group is funding the millions of dollars for the Jones case. Jones herself is raising money for herself under the guise of a defense fund. Ms. Wiley is being portrayed as a reluctant witness but wrangles a deal with 60 Minutes to air her reluctant story. This is a case that is being tried right now in the media for the reason that in a court of law it is a loser. All of these women have very serious credibility problems and through the media they can put forth their stories without cross-examination. Why did Jones's atty's dump all the Lewinsky info in their brief to the judge in Little Rock when they know it has already been ruled inadmissable? Why did they give it to the media BEFORE they submitted it to the court? These are some of the many questions that you must ask and get answered before you can jump to any conclusion about the guilt or innocence of the president. This whole mess is a political game. The media has provided the stage and the money for the perfomers. The damage that this has already caused the office of the president is terminal and will affect anyone who seeks that office and will have lasting effects on the publics view of politics and the media. We the people are the one's who will suffer the most damage from this cheapening of the office of the president and the decline of true journalism. ...Mac Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Media Trial
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Afternoon Bill, What cross-examination? I have serious doubts that she will ever be called to testify. As a matter of fact I don't believe there will ever be a trial in the case of Jones v. Clinton nor in the Starr investigation, which is starting to become one and the same. The Jones camp has already made public their case and if you throw out the inadmissable there is virtually no case. I am of the firm opinion that they are having their day in court right now. these accusations alone are causing great harm to the president and that is the result that they have been set out on getting from the beginning. What started out as allegations of sexual harrassment have now been alluded to as sexual assualt. I have faith in the American people and I just hope and pray they remember what all this was really all about come election time. ...Mac " The answer lies in the world of Linda Tripp" HI Mac, Yeah, you're right. I doubt if we'll ever see a criminal trial involving the president. And the house won't impeach him either But if the judge doesn't throw out the Jones case and there is no settlement then it will have to go to trial and I would expect Jones's lawyer to call Willey. Then we would see a cross examination. Bill . _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI I'm bewildered! I'm Shocked! In reality I'm fed up with the BS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hello Doctor, That's a good question and I'm not sure of the answer. Certainly there are things that are revealed in a Grand Jury that would be embarrassing for some people if they are made public. And that includes more people than just the target of the inquiry. So perhaps the details would not be made public, even after the findings of the Grand jury are final and decisions are made about indictment or impeachment. The only thing that is supposed to be open to the public is the actual trial, if there is one and the impeachment hearings if there is one. Bill On Mon, 16 Mar 1998 12:23:35 -0800 "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill - will the Grand Jury findings be made public for sure? Have they been in the past? Thanks for any illumination, and best wishes.:) LDMF William J. Foristal wrote:-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, I agree, Bennett was a very poor spokesman on 60 Minutes. As Kathy said he used the same words over and over. I got the impression that his appearance was a last minute decision as he had declined to appear when they first invited him. I guess they figured he better get on there and say something because of the allegations this woman was making. But we all still need to keep in mind that this was a very friendly and supportive interview. I wonder how she would do under cross examination. And we still need to wait until the findings of the Grand Jury are announced to see where this thing will go. Bill On Sun, 15 Mar 1998 23:24:13 -0800 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Kathy: You know that I have been waiting for something to come out that really made sense. Well I think it finally has. I also think that Kathleen Willey was very credible. :( And his lawyer didn't come across too good. It looks to me like Clinton is really in trouble now. :( I saw the lawyer on Sam Donaldson this morning, and it didn't look good then either. After reading the depo's, and listening to her, he had better have some answers for everyone, and pretty darn quick. Sue After watching 60 minutes tonight and thinking back on the official word from the WH concerning these allegations launched against the Prez, all I can say with 100% certainity is we have the most bewildered and shocked president in the History or this country! During tonights interview I counted Bewildered and shocked being used at least eight times each concerning the reacton from the president! So now we can say we had Reagan in the 80's running up our debt, and we had Clinton running up our confusion with all his shocked and bewildered statements. Me? I'm personally fed up with the same old statements no matter what the allegation. And I did watch that interview closely, all I can say is Mr. Prez Kathleen Willey was VERY believable and your PR person wasn't, and for the first time I do think Mr. Prez is in trouble if the statements made on 60 minutes are true, especially about perjury and the Prez denying her allegations in his depo. -- Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Willey Calls Clinton a Liar
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Willey Calls Clinton a Liar By PETE YOST Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House today questioned the credibility of President Clinton's latest accuser, saying Kathleen Willey's account of an alleged sexual advance is ``contradicted'' by the former White House volunteer's positive attitude toward Clinton. Mounting a defense of the president in appearances on morning television talk shows, White House spokeswoman Ann Lewis said Mrs. Willey's description on national TV Sunday of the 1993 Oval Office encounter with Clinton ``surprised'' her. ``What I saw last night was someone who talked about being angry, feeling that she has been taken advantage of. And yet in 1996, when she was no longer associated with the president or the White House, she came to see me and said 'I really want to work in this campaign,''' Lewis said on NBC's ``Today'' show. ``There was such a contradiction between what I saw and heard last night and the person I met with in 1996.'' After offering nearly identical comments on ABC's ``Good Morning America,'' Lewis denied that she was trying to spread a White House ``message'' to rebut Mrs. Willey's account the night before on CBS' ``60 Minutes.'' ``No, this is my personal message,'' Lewis said. ``Watching last night, I thought, gee, if I hadn't had my personal experience (with Mrs. Willey), how would I feel about it?'' Mrs. Willey said the story she was telling on television was the same one she swore to before a Whitewater grand jury last week. Clinton, meanwhile, has given a sworn deposition denying her account. The conflicts in their stories means that one of them has committed perjury, in the president's case an impeachable offense. In a soft, sometimes halting voice, Mrs. Willey said on ``60 Minutes'' that the president embraced her, kissed her on the lips, touched her breasts and placed one of her hands on his genitals. ``I thought, `Well, maybe I ought to just give him a good slap across the face,''' she said. ``And then I thought, `Well, I don't think you can slap the president of the United States.''' ``I didn't feel intimidated. I just felt overpowered,'' said Mrs. Willey, 51. ``Later on ... I was feeling angry. ... I was there, asking a friend, who also happened to be the president of the United States, for help.'' Mrs. Willey's family finances were in a state of collapse and she wanted a paying White House job when she came to see Clinton on Nov. 29, 1993. Unbeknownst to either Clinton or Mrs. Willey at the time, her husband committed suicide the same day. Mrs. Willey received new support today from a leading feminist and from Gennifer Flowers, with whom Clinton has admitted a sexual relationship. ``Perhaps we need to redefine what a good president is, what a good man is,'' Patricia Ireland, president of the National Organization for Women, said on the ``Today'' show. ``This is beyond the idea of the likable rogue or the womanizer and really on into sexual assault, sexual abuse.'' ``I think she spoke from the heart,'' Flowers said of Mrs. Willey. ``I ask the American public why this woman would have any motive to come out. She wanted to take some control of it and tell what happened,'' Flowers said on ``Good Morning America.'' Clinton ``has no idea why she said what she did or whether she now believes that's what happened,'' said a White House statement Sunday night. Clinton's lawyer, Robert Bennett, said on ABC's ``This Week'' that ``there is substantial material of what she has said which is under seal, which has not been released, which seriously undercuts'' her story. ``I think in fairness it's important ... to note that there have been at least five versions of this encounter,'' former White House counsel Jack Quinn said on CBS' ``Face the Nation.''
LI Kathleen Willey Interview Excerpts
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kathleen Willey Interview Excerpts WASHINGTON (AP) -- Excerpts from Kathleen Willey's interview Sunday night on CBS's ``60 Minutes'' in which she detailed an alleged sexual encounter with President Clinton in 1993 in the White House. ``Then he kissed me on my mouth and pulled me closer to him. And ... I remember thinking -- ... `what in the world is he doing?' he touched my breasts with his hand ... and he whispered ... `I've wanted to do this ever since I laid eyes on you.' And ... then he took my hand, and he put it on him. And, that's when I pushed away from him and ... decided it was time to get out of there.'' -- ``When I think back on it, it was kind of like I was watching it in slow motion ... And, at the same time ... I thought, `Well, maybe I ought to just give him a good slap across the face.' And then I thought, `Well, I don't think you can slap the President of the United States.''' -- ``I have gone over this so many times ... `Did I bring this on? Did I send ... the wrong signal?' The only signals that I was sending that day, was that I was very upset, very distraught, and I needed to help my husband. ... I didn't feel intimidated. I just felt over-powered. ... I just could not believe ... the recklessness of that act. ... Later on ... I was feeling angry. I was feeling that I had been taken advantage of. My circumstances had been taken advantage of. ... I was there, asking a friend, who also happened to be the President of the United States, for help.'' -- (Willey declined to talk in detail about Democratic fund-raiser Nathan Landow, with whom she says she discussed her upcoming testimony in the Paula Jones case. But she described talking to Robert Bennett, the president's lawyer in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case.) ``I felt pressured by Mr. Bennett. ... He mentioned that he had just ... been at the White House, and ... the president asked for me and told him ... that he just thought the world of me. And, he said, `now, this ... was not sexual harassment, was it?' And, I didn't answer him. And he said, `Well ... it wasn't unwelcome, was it?' And I said to him, `It was unwelcome and unexpected.' ... I felt pressured. Especially when he threw in the ... business about `Well, the president ... thinks the world of you.' I found that a little laughable. If the president thought the world of me, why did he do what he did?'' (Willey said Bennett suggested she find herself a criminal lawyer.) ``The insinuation to me was that Mr. Bennett was implying that I was going to face some kind of a criminal charge for perjury ... or something else ... and I didn't, and I don't.'' -- (In an interview with The Associated Press, Bennett said, ``Any suggestion that I threatened or intimidated her in any way is a bald-faced lie.'' (Bennett said he was asked by Willey's lawyer ``if I could name a lawyer he could talk to'' and that Bennett did so, providing the name of prominent Washington attorney Plato Cacheris.) -- Willey says that she was doing volunteer work in the 1992 campaign when Clinton called her from Williamsburg, Va., at her home in Richmond, ``and he asked me how far I was from Williamsburg.'' Clinton was having trouble with his voice, she said, and ``I just jokingly said, `It sounds like you need some chicken soup.' And, he said, `Well, would you bring me some?' And ... I don't really think I answered him because I thought he was just being facetious. And then he told me that he was surrounded by Secret Service agents, and ... he would try to get rid of them ... if I would come down. And he said he would call me back later, which he did. And I declined to go. ... Because my instincts told me he wasn't interested in chicken soup.'' -- (A friend, Julie Steele, says she was asked by Willey to lie about her White House encounter with Clinton.) ``My person belief is that she was pressured. ... I think that the White House wanted to try to discredit me, and they found a pawn in her.'' -- (Friend Linda Tripp says Willey confided the sexual encounter with Clinton just after leaving the Oval Office, but Tripp says Willey seemed joyful.) ``I remember saying to her ... `you are just not going to believe this.'' And we went outside, and I told her what had happened. ... In defense of her ... if I get into a very ... tense situation ... I fall back on my sense of humor. I think when I said, `you are not going to believe this one,' maybe she took that as joyful.'' -- (A few months later, Tripp was moved out of the White House to the Pentagon, while Willey got a paying job.) ``She said, `I know you're here because the president wants you here.' ... She was very angry. Very upset. Very bitter. ... She ended the conversation by saying, `I'm going to get you,
LI OT: Rodeo - Jerome Davis
Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all sorry for the off topic post, but some on here would have me send them the results and such, one person y'all may recognize is Jerome Davis, he earned the title of world Champion Bull rider last year, and he's a all around good guy from North Carolina. This past weekend he was riding "Knock 'em down John" a bull I have seen perform myself, one we call an eliminator, he's one of the largest bulls we have in the rodeo circuit right now, and he's pretty hard to ride, he weighs over 2,000lbs. Unfortunately about 5 seconds into the ride Jerome was in the wrong position and he butted heads with John, and his horn also broke Jeromes jaw, he was then tossed into the arena, they got john out of there right away so he couldn't hurt Jerome anymore, Jerome was airlifted to the hospital and is in guarded condition now, the doctors aren't sure if he'll live or not, he is paralyzed in the lower extremities so far, and he has crushed his spinal cord in his neck, they performed surgery on Sunday to relive the pressure off of the spine. The good news is Jerome is awake. Yet he's still in guarded condition, I'll let you know what happens in the near future. For any who would like to send Jerome a message a page has been set up where all the messages will be delivered to him at the hospital. http://www.pbrnow.com/Davis/comments.html -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Clinton 'Mystified' by Willey Sex Allegations
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Clinton said Monday he was "mystified and disappointed" by sex allegations made against him by Kathleen Willey and stood by his statement that their White House encounter was innocent. "Nothing improper happened," Clinton said, noting he had already denied making a sexual advance toward Willey, a former political loyalist who had worked first as a volunteer and then as a part-time employee at the White House. "I am mystified and disappointed by this turn of events," he told reporters during an appearance at a high school in suburban Maryland. White House officials launched a public relations offensive to deal with allegations made publicly by Willey, who said in an interview broadcast Sunday that during an encounter in November, 1993 Clinton groped her after she asked for his help in finding a job. White House Press Secretary Mike McCurry said Clinton did not watch the CBS "60 Minutes" program, which attracted millions of viewers. "He doesn't need to ... He was there and he knows what the truth is," he said. Clinton has admitted meeting Willey in the Oval Office and in his private study near it, but insists his actions were misunderstood. He acknowledged hugging her, but contended he was merely trying to comfort a woman distraught over her husband's financial crisis. McCurry refused to accuse Willey of lying in her account, but said: "You have two witnesses in conflict." The sexual scandal engulfing the White House stems from a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by former Arkansas state employee Paula Jones. As part of Jones' effort, her lawyers obtained sworn statements from other women regarding alleged sexual advances by Clinton -- including Willey and former White House intern Monica Lewinsky. The Willey interview weighed heavily on the minds of White House staffers Monday, returning some of them to the gloom that hovered over 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue when allegations involving Lewinsky first surfaced in January. In this case, however, Willey said advances made by Clinton were unwelcome. According to one White House official, Willey "is a well-spoken person who definitely put a different face on this than Paula Jones, but at the end of the day, are there more than two people who know what happened? I don't see how it changes anything." A former senior White House official, assessing the latest development, acknowledged that "this one is more disturbing and more difficult than any of the other ones." "It's clearly more disturbing than Monica Lewinsky," the former official said. "Willey is a mature woman and if she's telling the truth, it's an abuse of friendship and it's also predatory. It's clearly taking advantage of a situation." In a sign that the latest accusation may be politically damaging for Clinton, Patricia Ireland, the head of the National Organization for Women, offered her most blistering assessment of the president since the scandal accusations surfaced in recent months. "This is beyond the idea of the likable rogue or the womanizer and really on in to sexual assault, sexual abuse," Ireland said. "It's not verbal harassment, this was an unwanted touching, and I think that's a very serious allegation against the president along with the allegations of covering that up," she said on the NBC "Today" program. Willey's husband, apparently distraught because of legal and financial problems, committed suicide in their hometown of Richmond, Va. the day Willey met with Clinton, although neither of them was aware of it at the time. In pretrial testimony in the Jones lawsuit, which goes to trial May 27, Clinton said he remembered hugging Willey and may have kissed her on the forehead in an effort to console her, but insisted "there was nothing sexual about it." Asked by one of Jones's lawyers whether he put Willey's hand on his penis, the president said: "I emphatically deny it. It did not happen." Willey last week testified before a grand jury investigating allegations that Clinton tried to cover up business, legal and personal indiscretions by seeking to alter the testimony of people who could damage him. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Long weekend
DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-03-14 02:09:41 EST, you write: Enjoy yourself :) Also if your email bounces for more than one day I'll set you to nomail until you return and can empty your mailbox. Hi Kathy -- I'm back. Doc Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI I'm bewildered! I'm Shocked! In reality I'm fed up with the BS
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: Someone here is lying big time. And now at least we have some of the transcripts. I thought that Kathleen Willey was very creditable on 60 Minutes. The President must have thought so too, because he is finally talking. Sue Hi Kathy, Certainly if the statements Willey made on 60 Minutes are true, then the President has committed perjury and should resign immediately. The question is, who is lying? Willey or Willy. G Bill Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Media Trial
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff wrote: "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Mac - concerning the underlying politics, do you or does anyone here know anything about Web Hubbel (spelling?) being a common link between Whitewater and these particular "witnesses?" Best to you, :) LDMF. Evenin' Dr., These particular witnesses are not associated with Whitewater. These witnesses are being used to try and show that Clinton is a sex maniac and has tried to suborn perjury and obstruct justice regarding these same sexual allegations. Ken Starr has failed to nail Clinton for anything having to do with Whitewater so, he has now married the two investagations together and from my view from the beach he is still failing. ...Mac Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI List limits
Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi All :) Just FYI if your sending a file to the list watch how large the file is, if it's longer than 27k it will not go to the list, it will bounce to my email, because the file is to large for the list. I suggest if you are only sending that for one person you send it in private email instead. If a group of people would like it you'll have to send it in parts to the list. I will usually repost the bounced messages but the last couple I received had all been transferred into numeric numbers so it made it impossible for me to split up the file and post it for the person forwarding it. -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Willey Letters
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Evenin', It didn't take long for Ms. Willey's credibility to get blown out of the water. I think if Ken Starr did his homework she never would've appeared on 60 mis. Sorry Ken, your little ruse to get this info out has backfired. If this was your smoking gun I think you just shot yourself in the foot. How many holes does that make now? IIMO, she will never make it to a court room to either testify or be charged with perjury. Today's revealing events again bolster my claim that this is nothing more than a political witch hunt and the slandering of the president is now becoming criminal. I'm beginning to think that the one person that should be investigated for obstruction of justice and subbornation of perjury is the dishonorable Ken Starr himself. ...Mac Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: Schooling was LI Re: Disparity in Infant Mortality Rates
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue We all were floored when she mouthed off like that. Needless to say, it was not a course I recommended to any of my students. He pushed for parent-child interaction to be on an equal footing. Sorry, my developmental psych and socialization in sociology says this ain't so. I too wonder what we happen when she gets older. jackief Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: How far do you think you would have gotten if you had talked to either your parents or teacher this way. LOL I *know* how far I would have gotten. And it wouldn't have been pretty. I wonder what is going to happen the first time this father gets a call from the local P.D. telling him his little girl is in jail for something. She is going to have, already does IMO, no respect for authority at all. And it could cost her, her life. I certainly hope that the school rethinks this program, it is not good, IMO. I would be willing to bet that if this kid ran into something on her rollerblades, this father would be the first in line to sue the school for everything he could get, and then some. Sue Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Verdicts Decisions/Kathy
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Kathy Would really appreciate you sending them to me. Thanks a heap jackief Kathy E wrote: Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Okay I'm sending you my bookmarks in private email :) The only thing I ask is you delete all of them under the title of Account and Mailing Lists, the ones you'll be interested in are under: Crime Justice Serial Killers (maybe) If others would like them just let me know and I'll send them to you :) matterfact I'm going to play with these and see if I can't make up a separate book mark file to send out to those who want it first :) That way none of the stuff you don't want is included :) Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff wrote: "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: :) Kathy, what a great offer, yes please do send the bookmarks! Meanwhile I am going off to try the ones you have sent in your post; thanks a lot! LDMF. ---Kathy E wrote:- -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Sleep Apnea
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Geez, Bill We give you a toy and now you want the whole toolbox VBG jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, Can I have the ball AND the vibrating bed?? Bill On Sat, 14 Mar 1998 20:24:56 -0800 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: I think *we* could have fun with this thread if we kept it going, but I dunno how long we would remain on the list. BG Sue Hi Sue Didn't you put the radio on and then the quarter in the slot? Bill might like that better than the ball, don't you think? jackief Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Freemen: Trial update
Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Four anti-government Freemen arrested after an 81-day standoff with the FBI were ejected from a courtroom today as they cursed the judge and a prosecutor on the first day of their criminal trial. Federal marshals had to drag three of the defendants in and out of the courtroom because they refused to walk and pushed the fourth in a wheelchair. Two defendants were allowed to remain at the defense table. The six are among two dozen people charged in connection with the Freemen's two-year operation from their isolated farm compound in a remote area of eastern Montana. The FBI says some 800 people from around the country took lessons at the rural stronghold on issuing the worthless liens and ``warrants'' the Freemen claim are legal tender. People also heard lectures on what the Freemen claim as their legal principles, a hodgepodge of odds and ends from the Bible, the Constitution, the Magna Carta and the Uniform Commercial Code. Members of the group deny that U.S. courts have any jurisdiction over them. Today's fireworks began even before prospective jurors were brought into the courtroom. Federal marshals said the Freemen refused to change out of their jail coveralls or to leave their cells. Marshals forcibly changed their clothes. As marshals dragged Steven C. Hance, 48, across the courtroom, he shouted insults at the judge and prosecutors. U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour ordered Hance and his son James E. Hance, 25, along with Jon Barry Nelson, 42, taken to a holding cell to watch the proceedings on closed-circuit television. James Hance joined in the outburst, saying he was placing the judge under arrest. He jeered at U.S. Attorney Sherry Scheel Matteucci, calling her an obscene name that is derogatory toward women. John R. Hance, 21, another son of Steven Hance, was taken into court by wheelchair. He was ejected from court later when he ripped up his name plate. Only two defendants -- Edwin F. Clark, 47, the original owner of the farm that became the Freemen compound, and Elwin Ward, 57, of Salt Lake City -- walked into the courtroom without disruption and were allowed to stay. The Hances are all from Charlotte, N.C. Nelson has been identified only as being from Kansas. All six are charged with being accessories by aiding federal fugitives, other Freemen in the stronghold, to avoid arrest during their 81-day standoff in 1996. Clark also is charged with attempted bank fraud for trying to deposit a $100 million Freeman check in the Garfield County Bank at nearby Jordan and writing checks on the account to pay real estate loans. Matteucci has said she expects the trial will last several weeks. -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Verdicts Decisions/Kathy
Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: all bookmark files have to have htm on the end. So what I did was saved my regular bookmarks to bookmark2.htm and I deleted the ones you wouldn't need then sent them to you :) You can do the same with your medical ones, just call it medical.htm and go into bookmarks and have it load that one instead of the default bookmark file :) Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff wrote: "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kathy - can bookmark files be swapped? In other words, can I go into my filelist and rename my bookmark file, as in 'bookmark.med' for medical, and then swap it in as 'bookmark.htm' when I want to? Or something similar. (I am just wondering how you managed to subdivide your bookmark file.) But I guess it would become complicated; say I had my medical bookmark file active and saw something on law, and didn't want to save it in the medical bookmark file. If there is a tip on doing this please post; thanks a lot, LindaMF. Kathy E wrote:- Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Okay I'm sending you my bookmarks in private email :) The only thing I ask is you delete all of them under the title of Account and Mailing Lists, the ones you'll be interested in are under: Crime Justice Serial Killers (maybe) If others would like them just let me know and I'll send them to you :) matterfact I'm going to play with these and see if I can't make up a separate book mark file to send out to those who want it first :) That way none of the stuff you don't want is included :) Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff wrote: "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: :) Kathy, what a great offer, yes please do send the bookmarks! Meanwhile I am going off to try the ones you have sent in your post; thanks a lot! LDMF. ---Kathy E wrote:- -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Media Trial
Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Mac :) I'm gonna have to disagree with you here. This is why. First off you have taken as truth something we don't know is truth at all. Your saying she defiantly asked someone to lie, I don't think she did. If you remember in the interview the one person caught in a lie was President Clintons own attorney not Kathleen. Now her friend is now saying she lied, yet when originally questioned she verified the story that Kathleen told. So to be fair how can you believe she is lying or telling the truth? When she claims when she was telling the truth she was really lying? Kathleen answered those charges on the show and said she felt someone had gotten to her friend. I think that is quite possible. I have a problem believing a women who already says she lied. I would think most people would. I believed Kathleen, why? A lot of reasons, first I watched her body language she didn't do anything most people do when lying, diverting her eyes when answering, wringing of her hands or such, that is unconscious actions people do when lying, she was straight forward. Also the fact she had been a supporter of Clinton, including being a volunteer for his campaign and donating money to his campaign. She went to him as a friend, nothing else. She was shocked by what he did, as would anyone be. She did NOT leak her story out to the highest bidder instead she was clever enough to go to a respectable news show and let them tell her story. You then question why do it at all? Let me ask you this, everything is being leaked to the press which is better to try to plug the leaks or to come right out and say this is what happened nothing less nothing more. And stop any rumors? I would do as she did. I now wonder how long did Clinton and his PR team try to work on a believable story? Their first story didn't work, where it was denied the meeting even took place, that could easily be proved to be a lie, so now they come up with the "bewildered and shocked". I'm tired of that line of BS. And that is exactly what it is to me Mac a line of BS. The new line now is he gave her a friendly hug and now he's even admitting he might have kissed her on the forehead. So what is going to be the next line? That he may have accidentally rubbed her breast? Come on! You question why she said anything at all, remember Mac she was forced to testify she didn't do it willingly. The next logical question is well how would they know to even subpoena her? Well it was obvious to me, right after it happened she talked to women around her telling them what happened. She was amazed he did that. Women who have had this happen usually will tell their friends about it, because they will try to evaluate every single thing they did wondering if somehow they caused it. That is what she did IMHO. I never heard her say she was damaged by this, I did hear her say she felt betrayed. I understand that, you don't expect a friend to do that. The other thing you have stated confuses me, you question why are we just hearing about this now? yet she herself said she planned on taking this to the grave but she was tired of seeing people's lives destroyed and all the lies being thrown around. Why do you question what she has already clearly answered? And IMO her NOT talking before blows away your she's lying about this to make money. If she wanted to make money she could have, without any problem. She didn't do that Mac, she took the higher ground and told what happened to her free of charge. Tell me what credibility problem you had, I am clearly interested in that. I saw no problem with her credibility matterfact she had a very good record and that is the problem the WH is facing this women is believable because she is relating something that happened to her by the president, and they haven't been able to put a chink in her story. That's called a PR nightmare. She is more credible than the president IMO. Just look at consistency she is consistent the president is not, his story has changed. If he has to change things that means he is trying to hide something to me. moonshine wrote: moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mornin' All, Before everyone jumps to the conclusion that Ms.Wiley is credible I think one should ask themselves "..why did she ask someone to lie about this incident.." If she was so damaged and upset about this why are just now hearing about it. Why is it that the case of Paula Jones, who's story seems to change as fast as the weather here in New England, has been coupled with the Whitewater investigation. IMO, both the Paula Jones case and the Monica story and now Ms. Wiley are about money. Monica has been offered 4 million for her story but is holding out for at least 5 million. The two state troppers that brought forth the Paula Jones story to Mr.Brock are being bankrolled by a GOPAC group headed by one of Clinton's arch enemies. A right wing group is funding the millions of dollars for
Re: LI Managing files/was Verdicts Decisions/Kathy
"Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thx Kathy :) I will try it, not sure that my bookmark processor (Netscape) lets me disignate a file, but I sure could do something similar in my filelist. I think. :) LDMF ---Kathy E wrote: Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: all bookmark files have to have htm on the end. So what I did was saved my regular bookmarks to bookmark2.htm and I deleted the ones you wouldn't need then sent them to you :) You can do the same with your medical ones, just call it medical.htm and go into bookmarks and have it load that one instead of the default bookmark file :) Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff wrote: "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kathy - can bookmark files be swapped? In other words, can I go into my filelist and rename my bookmark file, as in 'bookmark.med' for medical, and then swap it in as 'bookmark.htm' when I want to? Or something similar. (I am just wondering how you managed to subdivide your bookmark file.) But I guess it would become complicated; say I had my medical bookmark file active and saw something on law, and didn't want to save it in the medical bookmark file. If there is a tip on doing this please post; thanks a lot, LindaMF. Kathy E wrote:- Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Okay I'm sending you my bookmarks in private email :) The only thing I ask is you delete all of them under the title of Account and Mailing Lists, the ones you'll be interested in are under: Crime Justice Serial Killers (maybe) If others would like them just let me know and I'll send them to you :) matterfact I'm going to play with these and see if I can't make up a separate book mark file to send out to those who want it first :) That way none of the stuff you don't want is included :) Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff wrote: "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: :) Kathy, what a great offer, yes please do send the bookmarks! Meanwhile I am going off to try the ones you have sent in your post; thanks a lot! LDMF. ---Kathy E wrote:- -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Au Pair: Update/Kathy
"Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kathy, you make good sense and have shed another light on this, the social plane; thank you for hosting a list where we can discuss different opinions. My point of view concerns courts and law, consistency and finality, rather dryly I confess, more than this individual defendant. I wish another reason had been given, like the job has been filled, or we are considering several candidates, rather than being an example of outcome nullificatiion. Again, not considering the particular defendant here, but the intent of trial outcomes as such. Again, you make strong points; thanks for pondering and responding. :) LDMF Kathy E wrote:-- Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Linda :) I have thought on what you said, and to me the old stand by still comes into action as it has through history, there are two court systems in this world, one we all know which is the court of law, the hardest court to pass through though is the court of public opinion. If you lose your case there you have basically messed up your life for years, Louise lost in the court of public opinion. She is a liability as far as being associated with anyone in public, and I can understand why the Sheriff denied her request, I myself would have done the same. He has to consider the publicity that would have been generated if he allowed her to work there, a lot of that publicity wouldn't be good, and he has to consider what is good for his town, and yes even for his own career. It is fair? Is it right? That isn't for me to answer, but sometimes one may walk away from a court of law with a clean record, but they will not be able to walk away from the court of public opinion in the same manner. Oj is a prime example of that. Louise is another example. One other thing I consider is part of this is her fault also, she has asked for some of this media attention, one finds out sooner or later that having all that media attention isn't always an asset, sometimes it can be quite the opposite. Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff wrote: "Dr.L.D.Misek-Falkoff" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: :) Kathy, hi - I was a bit sorry to hear about the argument that having Woodward as a volunteer would not be in the 'best interest' -- because she has been through the justice system at this time and according to the law she has served her time. I say this without reference to what one might think 'should' have happened, and with definite reference to what 'did' happen. The same with appeals; until and unless one side wins the appeal,the status is that she has served her time, again, without regard to whether one feels this was 'right or wrong'. Does anyone else think this is reminiscent of (loosely used) social double jeopardy (used metaphorically)? But this idea of course could get into the matter of sex offenders being identified (ex sex offenders at that point) to the community, after they are released. Come to think of it, perhaps the two things are related. What think you? :) LDMF -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Au Pair: Update/Kathy
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Dr. L and Kathy: Louise Woodward is going to be on Bryant Gumble's "Eye to Eye" tomorrow, 9 pm, NBC. It is the first and only interview that she has ever given. Sue Hi Linda :) I have thought on what you said, and to me the old stand by still comes into action as it has through history, there are two court systems in this world, one we all know which is the court of law, the hardest court to pass through though is the court of public opinion. If you lose your case there you have basically messed up your life for years, Louise lost in the court of public opinion. She is a liability as far as being associated with anyone in public, and I can understand why the Sheriff denied her request, I myself would have done the same. He has to consider the publicity that would have been generated if he allowed her to work there, a lot of that publicity wouldn't be good, and he has to consider what is good for his town, and yes even for his own career. It is fair? Is it right? That isn't for me to answer, but sometimes one may walk away from a court of law with a clean record, but they will not be able to walk away from the court of public opinion in the same manner. Oj is a prime example of that. Louise is another example. One other thing I consider is part of this is her fault also, she has asked for some of this media attention, one finds out sooner or later that having all that media attention isn't always an asset, sometimes it can be quite the opposite. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Correction was Re: LI Au Pair: Update/Kathy
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm sorry it is *CBS* 9 pm Tuesday March 17 Sue Hi Dr. L and Kathy: Louise Woodward is going to be on Bryant Gumble's "Eye to Eye" tomorrow, 9 pm, NBC. It is the first and only interview that she has ever given. Sue Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Here is the definition of sex Mr. President
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: Dr. L. explained it as a statute. Still doesn't explain why it was allowed in the Paula Jones case. :( Sue Hi Sue and Kathy No luck in my two cj. dictionaries. Of course, sexual relations are not usually against the law I guess. jacjuef Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
