To HoyaLawyaChick..

[Antigone*]

Has anyone introduced you to Kettle yet?

Yes willy has been introduced, several times.

 

[justalayman]

Willlyjo;2758160]Would it be ignorant of me to assume that because Hoya is an attorney and most procedures concerning arrests are universal in the United States, that maybe she could intelligently point the Op in the right direction concerning his concerns?

well, to answer that, I would have to presume the qualifications noted are applicable to Hoya. Beyond that, procedures for arrest are not universal across the country. There are some basics based in Constitutional law that results in similar actions such as reading one their rights but the exact actions vary. I don't doubt Hoya could offer a reasonable general answer to the questions. I do not know if she could answer anything in a specific enough manner that would be beneficial to the OP.
It would appear that much of what the OP seeks would be specific to California law. I do not see a greater question that would concern Constitutional concerns at hand although I wouldn't say something such as this would never reach that point.

Also you post spews with arrogance. Like just because Hoya has a great education at a college that is "not as annoying as Duke" doesn't mean she isn't highly educated.

I have no idea if she has a great education. I have met many a person that spent a lot of time in college and learned very little. I am sure a great education was offered to her. Whether she to advantage of that offer cannot be determined as of yet from what I have seen.

My guess is she can probably post in this forum with as much intelligence as anyone. Since basically, it is all about researching answers to questions, I'm sure Hoya is even more proficient than you at researching to post accurate responses (my opinion).

She is more than welcome to post all she wants, just as anybody else that complies with the rules of the forum. As to accuracy; so far, I would disagree. In the post where she hunted citations, I disagree with her conclusions. Doesn't mean I am wrong. Doesn't mean she is wrong but surely, one of us is and I believe it to be her.

Everybody here is free to make their own conclusions. There are other members here I have a great respect for. If I saw any of those members stepping in on Hoya's side or even just against me, I would have no problem accepting me being incorrect. As is stands, I saw no such support for either of us.

Let me correct that; CDWJava did have a position agreeable to mine in the point he spoke to.

 

[CdwJava]

And I will again add my original opinion ...

If the SOLE basis for the PC 148(a) allegation is because you refused to close your eyes (to comply with the FST) then I would agree that there exists no probable cause for the arrest and the charges should be dropped by the prosecutor or dismissed by the court upon proper motion by the defense.

 

[cbg]

Did I say he shouldn't get an answer to his question? His posting history is relevant and if you don't understand why, then that's just too bad for you. At no time did I say that no one should answer his question; just that they should review his history before they did.

 

[Willlyjo]

Did I say he shouldn't get an answer to his question? His posting history is relevant and if you don't understand why, then that's just too bad for you. At no time did I say that no one should answer his question; just that they should review his history before they did.

Okay...so in other words, it is irrelevant whether you check post history or not--the Op is still gonna get an answer, right? So why bother taking your advice and look at post history. There is only one basic answer to his question so how could looking at post history change that?

And who the heck is Kettle?

 

[Zigner]

Okay...so in other words, it is irrelevant whether you check post history or not--the Op is still gonna get an answer, right? So why bother taking your advice and look at post history. There is only one basic answer to his question so how could looking at post history change that?

And who the heck is Kettle?

Are you REALLY just going to argue this (non)issue?

 

[ERAUPIKE]

Okay...so in other words, it is irrelevant whether you check post history or not--the Op is still gonna get an answer, right? So why bother taking your advice and look at post history. There is only one basic answer to his question so how could looking at post history change that?

And who the heck is Kettle?

Posting history is always relevant when answering a question. In this case, the OP claims to be providing what was in the police report. His original post asserts that he has been unable to obtain said report. There are a few other relevant facts located throughout this posters history that I am not going to expound on. I suggest that you take your own sig line advice, "Take a chill pill." You are way out of your league here.

 

[eerelations]

You are way out of your league here.

ERAUPIKE you are an absolute master of understatement!

 

[CreativeBlock]

Okay...so in other words, it is irrelevant whether you check post history or not--the Op is still gonna get an answer, right? So why bother taking your advice and look at post history. There is only one basic answer to his question so how could looking at post history change that?

Hmmm ... so basically, you're saying that it's not worth your precious time to review the posting history of posters, so you can acquire ALL the facts (good or bad) in order to give the best advice possible?!

You prefer to be lazy and half-xx in your advice? Gotcha.

 

[CreativeBlock]

And I'm not trying to make any decisions here--I'm just baffled as to why you'd even waste your time and post when it wasn't necessary at all.

Utter nonsense. Of course you are "trying to make decisions here." You've accused posters here of arrogance. THAT would be making a decision as to their motives and ascribing emotional gain that they do not have.

You clearly are seeing the posters here as being dominant and doing YOUR best to establish some sort of dominance in response. Neither or which is appropriate nor warranted.

I suggest seeking satisfaction for whatever shortcomings you feel you have in "real life." Whatever satisfaction you might feel from attempting to tweak the posters' tails here is utterly superficial and will not afford you any benefit in "real life."

You have nothing to gain here. Your passive-aggressive methods will not result in anything other than stress and disillusionment.

 

[Willlyjo]

Utter nonsense. Of course you are "trying to make decisions here." You've accused posters here of arrogance. THAT would be making a decision as to their motives and ascribing emotional gain that they do not have.

You clearly are seeing the posters here as being dominant and doing YOUR best to establish some sort of dominance in response. Neither or which is appropriate nor warranted.

I suggest seeking satisfaction for whatever shortcomings you feel you have in "real life." Whatever satisfaction you might feel from attempting to tweak the posters' tails here is utterly superficial and will not afford you any benefit in "real life."

You have nothing to gain here. Your passive-aggressive methods will not result in anything other than stress and disillusionment.

Are you kidding? I clearly see the posters here as being dominant? What a joke!

Let's see here...the very posters you think are dominant are the same ones who like to occasionally make conclusions that are "far fetched", they like to make outlandish accusations when the Op's post shows no evidence of such allegations, when you cite a case that supports your response, they disagree with it (like they know more than the judge) and a good deal of their posts concern babble, arrogant comments, ridicule of the Op and stroking each other's ego.

Sorry but your post is very laughable!

 

[CreativeBlock]

Are you kidding? ... {trimmed} Sorry but your post is very laughable!

Projection noted.

 

[Willlyjo]

Posting history is always relevant when answering a question. In this case, the OP claims to be providing what was in the police report. His original post asserts that he has been unable to obtain said report. There are a few other relevant facts located throughout this posters history that I am not going to expound on. I suggest that you take your own sig line advice, "Take a chill pill." You are way out of your league here.

Posting history is NOT always relevant when answering a question. If the OP's post is vague or incomplete, I'd agree that maybe in his immediate posting history, you might recover the gist of his concerns.

Way out of my league eh? I don't think so. There is a forum history here that shows a few of you are way out of your league.

As far as taking a chill pill, I simply responded directly to the need for checking a poster's history to answer a simple concern by the OP. In this thread, it simply wasn't necessary and most the time, it isn't to check Op's history. Then I get responses from everyone defending CBG! That's the thing in this forum. You all think I'm out of my league but you still think Cbg needs your help in defending her. Go figure!

 

[Willlyjo]

ERAUPIKE you are an absolute master of understatement!

Back from Canada Eh? Or is it Mars since, as you say, it feels like you are on Mars sometimes? Anyway, why is a great leader of several companies between here, Canada and Mars misusing his time making such a comment? I would think your time is much more valuable. Or contrary to what you would have us think, you do have all the time in the world in which case such a comment is still a big waste of your time.