needs further work of course but beginning to look like something I could understand - you know - and I havent even tried reading it full thru once - still in the cut and paste and ahhhh lil something here and a lil caviat there and you know ... agreement stuff comes with like mind ... vis terms and conditions stipulations and objectives - good faith performance being central to go with like mind of course - yup needs a lil competence to put the competence terms and conditions in ????nnnnnnn nnnnnn nnnnn but getting there I think I shall snooze for an hour or two .... since I got about fourty plus hours ... you know to t oo t ewwww ... gg ewwwww .. any suggestions welcome ... you know if you have ... good ones ... yup yup ... cause well ... I welcome ... dis cuss ss eeeee aww nnnnn ss ... Competency to Standt Trial Observation Agreement/Contract This Competency to Standt Trial Observation Agreement, (the Agreement) dated as of ______________ 2014 is by and between Christopher Sebastian having a residence at 3234 Geiger Avenue, Kensington, Md 20895 (Sebastian) and Dr. of Psychiatry _________________, having an office at ___________________________________________________________ (Observer). Sebastian and Observer may hereinafter be referred to individually as a Part or colectively as the Parties. Whereas, the parties wish to explore the possibility of entering into a contract-business transaction. Whereas, the Parties (through communication regarding such potential business transaction) may be afforded private information of confidential nature, and Whereas, the Parties acknowledge that the use and disclosure of such Confidnetial Information would cause irreparable injury and wish to prevent the same Now, Therefore, in consideration of the mutral covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereto agree as follows: preamble purpose of contract: To provide Mr. Sebastian with documentation of his competency to stand trial, by observation and thru the generation of: one, a video tape of such observations and thru, two, of a forensic psychiatrist report, (based on review by forensic psychiatrist of the following: the court transcripts and annotations on a video Sebastian will present the psychiatrist, as well as several other video presentations for due diligence review/analysis), report also based on a one hour observations of Sebastian in interactions with a lawyer (Hunter, who will attend such meeting as per court statement on ct. transcript - see transcript - video taping of such hour interaction/observation to occur - Sebastian will provide the camcorder/tripod for such), three, with video taped documentation of any subequent questions by the forensic psychiatrist, as well as documentation video tape of all the answers given by Mr. Sebastian. four, Contract performance shall be deemed attained, once 1. due diligence review for analysis is done, with best practices standards for competency evaluation with regard to observation of interaction between defendant and lawyer i.e. entailing the below standards when observing and reporting such observations with due diligence - inclusive of on camcorder - see best practices quotes entailed for good faith performance: F. Questions Specific to Adjudicative Competence The distinguishing feature of a competence evaluation is the assessment of the functional abilities needed to proceed with criminal adjudication. To make such an assessment, the psychiatrist asks questions that will lead to a determination of whether competence-related abilities are “sufficiently present.” Bonnie182 has characterized these abilities as falling into two key functional domains: “competence to assist counsel” and “decisional competence.” Competence to assist counsel encompasses the defendants abilities to understand criminal charges, the implications of being a defendant, the adversarial nature of criminal proceedings, and the role of defense counsel. Competence to assist also includes the defendants ability to work with and relate pertinent information to defense counsel. Decisional competence refers to the ability for the defendant to participate autonomously in making important decisions that arise in the course of adjudication. Among these decisions are whether to testify, whether to plead guilty, and, if the case goes to trial, what strategy should be used. Examinations of adjudicative competence are concerned with defendants case-specific capacity to proceed with criminal adjudication, as distinguished from their general legal knowledge, actual current knowledge about the case, or willingness to proceed with adjudication. A defendants ignorance of some aspects of how the legal system works, the charges faced, or possible penalties does not necessarily imply incompetence. The defendant may simply not have been provided this information, but may be able to incorporate and use information in making decisions after being told these things. To distinguish mere ignorance from incapacity to learn, the psychiatrist may use structured interviews (discussed later) or other teaching and retesting approaches that involve instruction on factual legal matters. In cases in which the psychiatrist has learned that a defendant has had problems in collaborating with defense counsel, the psychiatrist should try to learn whether the defendant could work with an attorney and participate in defense planning, but has chosen not to do so for reasons not related to mental illness, mental retardation, or developmental limitations. Assessing and documenting a defendants functional status usually requires asking specific questions that systematically explore the defendants general knowledge about criminal proceedings, his understanding of matters specific to his legal case, and his ability to relate to defense counsel. Areas that the psychiatrist typically assesses during an interview include the defendants: knowledge about the roles of principal courtroom personnel (the judge, jury, witnesses, defense attorney, and prosecutor) and of the evaluees role as a defendant; and: judge noun a public officer authorized to hear and decide cases in a court of law; a magistrate charged with the administration of justice. a person qualified to pass a critical judgment - official with supervisory duties, ju·ry1 ˈjo͝or1. a body of people (typically twelve in number) sworn to give a verdict in a legal case on the basis of evidence submitted to them in court. the jury returned unanimous innocent verdicts --- pros·e·cu·tor ˈpräsiˌkyo͞otər. a person, esp. a public official, who institutes legal proceedings against someone or an illegal one under color of law malicious prosecution etc. === About the Model Rules The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct were adopted by the ABA House of Delegates in 1983. They serve as models for the ethics rules of most states. Before the adoption of the Model Rules, the ABA model was the 1969 Model Code of Professional Responsibility . Preceding the Model Code were the 1908 Canons of Professional Ethics (last amended in 1963). Rule 1.1: Competence Client-Lawyer Relationship Rule 1.1 Competence A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation. ------------ and then 2. production of report, once it is done, will be deemed sufficient only if above/below terms and conditions are met (initials at end of this section : : i have read and agree _______________; once terms and conditions are met and sufficiency (see below terms of sufficiency vis if performance expectations are not met in the first report since it will be considered a draft until expectations are remedied by documentation of competency needs/requirements for court and tria) is attained (upon certified mail delivery/receipt of above described report to Mr. Sebastian - w/certified copy sent to the court by forensic psychiatrist; adrs to be provided by Sebastian) initial above section : i have read and agree _______________ . The report shall contain at minimum the following statements of fact. a. Mr. Sebastian has shown by oral and written means correctly shown that he understands the object and nature of the court proceedings. b. The report shall state the the Psychiatrist evaluator has witnessed Mr. Sebastians ability to aid in his defense thru oral and written and reasoning skill means . This done thru first hand witness observation of the content and nature of the interaction between lawyer hunter and sebastian; and c The report shall controvert the perjurious rohrer report on the grounds that it is perjurious and clearly shows upon scrutiny fatal flaws inclusive of perjury flaws and ommission flaws, and flaws of ehtical judgement, and flaws in reasoning skills,, and flaws in due diligence when discovery information is presented for analysis and the analysis is either ommitted so that fabrications can be presented, or laws ignored so that false statements can be put into the record thru libel and color of law means under rubric of legitimate inquery into competency to stand trial. d. The report shall contain a statement acknowledging that Sebastians Constitutional due process right to standardized proceedures were denied in the following areas (statement shall be based on review of the record/court transcripts): i). that Sebastians right to networth finding was denied ii). that Sebastians right to networth finding investigators was denied iii.) that Sebastians right to self representation was denied.] iv.) that Sebastians right to have the judge review evidence presented on the record for a: finding of each fact and conclusion of law, was denied because the judge never read the information presented her thru the clerk of the court and said so on the record that she never read the evidence presented her in due process lawful and timely fashion - v.) that Sebastians right to have the prosecutor present impeachment evidence was denied tho prosecution stated they would find such requested discovery of impeachment evidendence (see statements made on the court transcripts); This all done, to meet the entailed above described needs (competent to stand trial) which such documentation will provide Sebastian, thus meeting his verbal obligations statement wise (ie; i told the judge i would contract a psychiatrist for competency report which would ... prove competency) for current pretrial mister meaner ... matters. 5.) Further Mr. Sebastian alleges the below and such shall be entered into the observation report a.) understands the object and nature of the court proceedings ... and states that the object and nature of the court proceedings is to bring to bear the truth finding function of court in the adjudication of the misdemeanor charges (of possession of cds, with maximum sentence if found guilty of one year) to determine thru the use of due process standards codified if Mr. Sebastian is culpable with regard to the governments allegations and charges found in the Charging documents. and b. Sebastian alleges that not only can he understand the role of: the court, of the prosecutor, of the judge, of the jury, of the defense lawyer and of the defense; but also Sebastian alleges that he can discuss such with the lawyer, as well as discuss the charges, discuss the laws pertinent, discuss what the pertinent evidence is that is in his, Sebastians possession, and transmitt all such information to the lawyer, thru the use of language, and the use of facts, and the use of evidenciary documents ... that are authentic and authenticated already by law, as well as present the lawyer laws, read such laws the lawyer may wish to present Sebastian, go over all such laws and their meaning ... in meaningful discusstion. 6.) and that Mr. Sebastian is prepared to show AND document - such understanding of the object and nature of the court proceedings and show his ability to aid in his defense ... with use of a qualified lawyer ... all in front of a qualified forensic psychiatrist, who is prepared to observe such interactions, and is prepared to read all relevant transcripts that Sebastian alleges shows no breach of presumption of competence( on the record - see law ... presumption of competence is determined from the record) on his part. I have read the above and am of like mind understanding of parties contractual obligations upon contract binding by signature for terms and obligations good faith performance: initials __________ & __________ CONTRACT I Christopher Sebastian (evalue herein known also as party (see above terms and definitions) and I Dr. ________________ (examiner herein known as party (see above terms and definitions) agree to the following contractual terms upon offer, acceptance of offer, and consideration for good faith performance of the following agreements, contracted, and solely those agreements contracted are to be executed with seasonable and documented good faith perfromance. The following agreements for good faith performance to be as follows: 1. in return for the sum of _______________ paid by Mr. Sebastian evalue party ; the forensic psychiatrist Dr. ________________ party agrees to the following: a: To hold an evaluation according to the best practices system/standards, defined at/from the mental competency dot org site at: mentalcompetency.org/model/model-sec-I.html in tandem with the above stipulations for comprehensive documentation and good faith performance. _____________________ ____________________________________________________- expert witness evaluator Forensic Psychiatrist date and location and time _____________________ _________________________________________________________ evaluate Sebastian date and location and time ______________________ witness ------------- notes and appendix for above contract clarification if needed - for instance if there is any question of the shrink ... in terms of proof of Sebastian competency to stand trial requirements of law that is or are not satisfactorally answered ... the report shall state what sebastian needs further prove to show the psych that the requirements of law are met ... should the above be the case, the report shall clearly delineate what Sebastian has been able to demonstrate and what he has not in terms of competency to stand trial legal requirements, and the report shall make concrete detailed and positive suggestions on how Mr. Sebastian can show such grasp and understanding. The report then shall allow for successor report as final report of successful competency requirements attained, as this contract shall allow for additional payments for such successor report if such successor report is needed. When the issue as to whether a defendant is mentally competent to proceed is raised, it is a best practice for the court to determine whether there is a reasonable basis to find for a competency evaluation of the defendant: and this shall be done by review of the record to see if there is a breach seen on the record that would indicate that the presumption of competence of the defendant has been documented on the record that may show lack of competency of the defendant in terms of understanding the object and nature of the court proceeding; to ensure the competency requirements are met thru observation entailed in best practices, standardized in the following best practices procedures detailed and entailed in this contract/agreement thus ensuring thru adherance to the best practice detailed herein below that good faith performance upon the parties are sufficient to meet the court ordered needs of party of the first part, Sebastian in his bid to show competency to stand trial therefore. 1 the doctor shall make available. a video tape or camcorder tape capable conference room. The room shall allow sufficient space for three persons to be seated around a table. the table shall be large enough to hand documents back and forth between parties as well as a location for camcorder to record all parties interactions for one hour; this; for the party of the first part evalue Christopher Sebastian to sit with the party of the second part, the forensic psychiatrist, who will watch to see if Mr. Sebastian can show by his interactions, with the party of the third part, the lawyer Hunter (the lawyer the court has assigned to assist Mr. Sebastian in the presentation to the court, of his Sebastians, ability: to show competence to stand trial according to the requirements of law detailed herein below): 2 The party of the second part, forensic doctor shall, observe the interactions between: evalue, Sebastian, and lawyer Hunter, (party of the third part) - (i.e. party entailed by court agreement, see court transcripts - attached, to participate in advising how to show competence as detailed in the below paragraph) and such observation will be done to see if: the below competency requirements of law are met, by the party of the first part, Sebastian, as well as to see and document the obligations of rules of law met vis the lawyer in the information/participation interaction -(which clearly ALSO require the competence of the party of the third part - in lawyer in fiduciary and in ethics duty to uphold due process rights, of defendant in any and all, advisory capacity, and specifically to: not withold material evidence, legal or law wise, or factual, facts evidence wise, and or represent anything otherwise than the truth, in all aspects of the court proceeding, from networth finding issues to all other due process issues, including seasonableness, which may and do affect the rights of a defense, when in such ethical or unethical defense advisory capacity - see aba rules of ethics - appendix): In Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960) (per curiam), the Supreme Court set forth a two-part standard for determining competency to stand trial: first, a person must have the sufficient present ability to consult with his or her lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding; and, second, he or she must have a rational as well as a factual understanding of the proceeding against him or her. Id. In other words, as the Court held, it is not enough that the defendant is oriented to time and place and has some recollection of events. Id. Otherwise said, “a person whose mental condition is such that he [or she] lacks the capacity to understand the nature of the proceedings against him [or her], to consult with counsel, and to assist in preparing his [or her] defense may not be subject to a trial” or plead. Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162, 171 (1975); Godinez v. Moran, 509 U.S. 389, 401-02 (1993). ---- PREAMBLE AND PRELIMINARY STATEMENT CANON 1. A LAWYER SHOULD ASSIST IN MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY AND COMPETENCE OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION Ethical Considerations Disciplinary Rules DR1-101 Maintaining Integrity and Competence of the Legal Profession DR 1-102 Misconduct DR 1-103 Disclosure of Information to Authorities CANON 2. A LAWYER SHOULD ASSIST THE LEGAL PROFESSION IN FULFILLING ITS DUTY TO MAKE LEGAL COUNSEL AVAILABLE Ethical Considerations Recognition of Legal Problems CANON 6. A LAWYER SHOULD REPRESENT A CLIENT COMPETENTLY Ethical Considerations Disciplinary Rules DR 6-101 Failing to Act Competently DR 6-102 Limiting Liability to Client CANON 7. A LAWYER SHOULD REPRESENT A CLIENT ZEALOUSLY WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE LAW Ethical Considerations Duty of the Lawyer to a Client Duty of the Lawyer to the Adversary System of Justice Disciplinary Rules DR 7-101 Representing a Client Zealously DR 7-102 Representing a Client Within the Bounds of the Law CANON 9. A LAWYER SHOULD AVOID EVEN THE APPEARANCE OF PROFESSIONAL IMPROPRIETY Ethical Considerations Disciplinary Rules DR 9-101 Avoiding Even the Appearance of Impropriety DR 9-102 Preserving Identity of Funds and Property of a Client witness - a. One who can give a firsthand account of something seen, heard, or experienced: a witness to the accident. b. One who furnishes evidence awareness of being charged with a crime and facing prosecution; misdemeanor poss of cds and pleading innocent with no plea bargain and desire for speedy jury trial - since prosecution evidence is impeachable see impeachable ... definition in law ... (1) “experts shall first consider factors related to the issue of whether the defendant meets the criteria for competence to proceed (e.g. competency to stand trial); that is, whether the defendant has sufficient present ability to consult with counsel with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and whether the defendant has a rational, as well as factual, understanding of the pending proceedings. --- undt ---- b. Competency to Stand Trial – A person shall be considered mentally competent to stand trial on criminal charges if the proofs shall establish: (1) That the defendant has the mental capacity to appreciate his presence in relation to time, place and things; and appreciate - love presence - i time - life place - usa things - money for meter for van ... gosh i love life here in the usa and the fact that i have money for the meter for the van, parked by the courthouse in washington dc, on the eastern seaboard of the united states at circa 2:30 pm on september 4th ... hmmm is it mid atlantic or eastern standard or should i use GMT: Greenwich Mean Time - World Time / Time in every ... wwp.greenwichmeantime/ \l ⦁ webcache.googleusercontent/search?q=cache:hbHqllOCpQYJ:wwp.greenwichmeantime/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us ⦁ /search?biw=1093&bih=538&q=related:wwp.greenwichmeantime/+greenwich+mean+time&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=Z0PyU9SlJMiJogSJ4IKABg&ved=0CCEQHzAA Greenwich Mean Time (GMT). What time is it anywhere in the world? What is GMT? Complete guide to time and time zones; summer time and daylight-saving ... Time Zones - Time zone conversion - Eastern Time - What is GMT? Greenwich Mean Time - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwich_Mean_Time \l ⦁ webcache.googleusercontent/search?q=cache:NsxPlLUENBgJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwich_Mean_Time+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us ⦁ /search?biw=1093&bih=538&q=related:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwich_Mean_Time+greenwich+mean+time&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=Z0PyU9SlJMiJogSJ4IKABg&ved=0CCwQHzAB Wikipedia Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) originally referred to the mean solar time at the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, London, which later became adopted as a global ... Western European Time - Royal Observatory, Greenwich - UTC±00:00 time ... at rm 210 - @ 500 Indiana Ave NW #6000, Washington, DC 20001 Superior Court of D.C., Address --- also see exhibit of plaque for martial arts teaching vis place space and time - expertise - (2) That his elementary mental processes are such that he comprehends: (a) That he is in a court of justice charged with a criminal offense; i hope i get back to the van ... before the quarters run out ... if i get back ... to the van ... (b) That there is a judge on the bench; somebody with a priest mm oo mm oo but not so tailored .... is looking stern ... and chewing gum at the same time ... looks like she has some humming machine and is whispering to the advisor who isnt and to the other guy who is putting blinders on and shoving a poster under the bench ... or is it a dai ... anyway ... over the hiss i think i can hear ... dismiss dismiss ... the lady is kind of elegant looking even tho in moo moo and that is the darnesst cleric collar i have ever seen ... yup i thing she does something like ... trier of facts kind of stuff ... and mediates the arguments of the defence advisor who isnt and the prosecutor who is waving a simms motion wildly and looks like he is trying to light the document on fire ... which i think is obstruction of justice and a fire marshal code ... oh the elegant lady also seems to have a tattoo of the us code ... and some cites ... hmm .. maybe it is just henna or cliff notes ... on the palm next to some kind of crab mallet ... her name is the Honorable Judge Bush and she is looking stern again ... mm aiiiii www aiiiiiiii ... (c) That there is a prosecutor present who will try to convict him of a criminal charge; a cabal of them specifically among others - some named - Clint Gerdine, esq. - Veronica Jennings, esq., - LShauntee Robertson, esq. - and that their role is to prosecute while upholding my due process rights in the sense that for instance they are not allowed to willfully withhold exculpatory or impeachment evidence or networth finding evidence specifically when requested from them in discovery cause in their possession - like public documents in the governments possession - cause malicious prosecutions can be so malicious that it is a criminal effort - see laws dealing with: imparting and conveying false information - withholding evidence and ubstruction of justice, see theft by extortion under color of law - number - 1 thru 7 inclusive of 2 3 4 5 and 6 - exhibit (d) That he has a lawyer who will undertake to defend him against that charge; unless depraved and unethical in breach of fiduciary responsibility who is absconding with defendants rights - for instance the right to objectives and tactics not questioned when the lawyer who questions has no legitimate role in the proceedings cause the cja rules say defendant - has a networth that upon discovery honored would show - public defender not eligible not to mention not wanted especially when there to ... in deepest darkest fashion with depravity and despicable behavior tries to steal defendants rights to fair trial - but in theory yes d would be the norm and the standard - in fact defendant has all the evidence he needs to show the lawyer is deficient in character and in adequate defense ... efforts ... tho billing the treasury as if he were in contract performance = i.e. fraud since not in good faith contract performance and that would be fraud ... against the defendant and fraud against the treasury ... cause he is supposed to be paid to uphold the law ... not to make a mockery and travesty of such ... for .. pay. ergo the creep i got is stealing from every man woman and child taxpayer - so that he can savage the Constitution - due process clause - and of course others like the 13th amendment ... plus plus. (e) That he will be expected to tell to the best of his mental ability the facts surrounding him at the time and place where the alleged violation was committed if he chooses to testify and understands the right not to testify; that he defendant does choose and has relayed facts and circumstances surounding the instant allegation - and has done so while hampered with a sabotaging defense lawyer - and has done so with the expectation that such information will be used - for impeachment and networth purposes - since the information relayed is impeachment and networth information also information dealing with the circumstances surrounding the instant allegation - and further defendant has relayed the information to the lawyer defense and some to the prosecutor and some to the court thru the clerk of the court in timely and seasonable fashion since defendant has assumed the right and the role of self representing defendant tho that has been qualified - rights to do such - with sabotaging lawyer and cabal ... seen and involved on the record - but so that the response is very clear - defendant is relaying the info - as a self representing pro se individual who is not expecting to testify is expecting to use his right to not testify but does expect the circumstances surrounding the instant allegations which he defendant provided (in pretrial proceedings and in appropriate due process format seasonably) to be used since introduce ... for defense objectives and tactics. (f) That there is or may be a jury present to pass upon evidence adduced as to guilt or innocence of such charge or, that if he should choose to enter into plea negotiations or to plead guilty, that he comprehend the consequences of a guilty plea and that he be able to knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive those rights which are waived upon such entry of a guilty plea; and defendant expects a jury trial and has asked for a speedy jury trial - this cause of right to have a jury trial is fundemental in our system of jurisprudence ... when ... requested in seasonable fashion - and when not robbed of such right and or sabotaged out of such by deficient advisors (g) That he has the ability to participate in an adequate presentation of his defense. so far has adequate documentation of less than adequate presentations of advisor who isnt ... shrink who prevericated .... prosecutor who didnt produce discovery upon request and of course judge who didnt read ... defense material entered into the record ... for finding of each fact and conclusion of law presented the court for adequate defense ... and of course a judge who took the liberty to waive defendants right to adequate presentation of defense in evidenciary hearing - and defendant filed an appeal for his defense pro se - and the appeal was won - to degree ... enough ... for adequate protection of defendant from criminal effort in criminal enterprise to aid and abet after the fact theft by extortion under color of law - all legal technical terms that defendant ... can also use and present for adequate defense ... in impeachment and networth finding terms and matters entailed in the misdemeanor trial - in which defendant is in the process of participating in ... adequately ... despite ... others inadequacies. (2) In considering the issue of competence to proceed (competency to stand trial), the examining experts shall consider and include in their report: (A) Competency to Proceed or Competency to Stand Trial evaluations evaluated the defendant’s capacity to: (i) appreciate the charges or allegations against the defendant; the charges is a misdemeanor charge with allegations of possession of cds. (ii) Appreciate the range and nature of possible penalties, if applicable, that may be imposed in the proceedings against the defendant; up to one year in prison if - due process rights are not sabotaged so that defendant is robbed of right to due process - proceedures which are defined and delineated in law - cause if such occurs - then the abuse means much more penalty which would not be legit penalty - inclusive of torture and ankang - see slavery and involuntary servitude and attempted murder by poisoning and lying in wait - (iii) Understand the adversary nature of the legal process; adversary in terms of citing laws and presentation of facts and legal supporting arguments for adjudication thru findings by the triers of fact judge and if/when invoked jury ... (iv) Disclose to counsel facts pertinent to the proceedings at issue; also known as ability to aid in defense - be they facts of law or evidence causal facts in terms of the circumstances surrounding the instant allegatios ... (v) Manifest appropriate courtroom behavior; like dont spit or hit anyone - be honest and know when to object - in terms of your honor i object ... the advisor ... isnt ... (vi) Testify relevantly ... with use of laws to support such testimony ... and with use of evidence to support such testimony - if of course not invoking the 5th ... where you dont have to testify - but still have to understand the object and nature of the court proceedings and still have a right to objectives and tactics if self representing or objectives and lawyer does tactics if ... legit lawyer .. tactics that meet the objectives .. and of course still have to be able to provide ... a defense in terms of relevant and legal ... defense with relevant and legal evidence production capacity ... yup yup ...
Posted on: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 21:59:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015