Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06/02/2015   am
No Intent                   
Mood: restless

*I know this is day residue but, it must have some reason for appearing to me. Since the “Great Out There!” knows I post on this forum I see this as a message for all of us.

I am standing in a lawyer’s office watching 2 men discuss just how far another person would go to achieve a wanted goal. Both men are “high stakes” attorneys. They are the best at what they do. Other people respect them or despise them and many fear them.

Man A: “Normal, ordinary people are constantly deciding what they do every single day.  Some really do think about the possible consequences of their actions before they do things. Some go about their days doing ordinary civilized things without having to knowingly make decisions of right from wrong because they have trained themselves to always do honorable things as a habit. Some knowingly choose to ignore the lessons they have learned as a child and some were never taught.”

Man B: “We go in front of the Judge everyday and we argue for those that have crossed the line. We will do almost anything to save our client but, there are some I really don’t want to save! “

Man A: “We have no choice in which ones we represent, the Judge assigns us each case as he wants. It is our duty to give the best defense we can and that is the dilemma we face. We have to know every single detail of our client’s life; we need to get every detail because we both know that the opposition will have all that information. We have to do the best we can to find a real and true reason for the actions of the client even though the reasons don’t really matter. The Judge is very harsh with those that did wrong just because it seemed like a “good idea”. He can be mean as hell toward those that did things out of malice. He will only be swayed by our findings if we can prove ignorance or we prove innocence. He is a tough old bird! He only allows a guilty or innocent verdict and there are no plea bargains allowed “ 

Man B:  “That is our question, how do we show that our client made an ethical or right choice in the bad decisions he has made and how far do we go in proving it? How do we save a lost soul?”

Man A:  “How do we do that without crossing our ethical lines and breaking the law?”

Then I heard a voice saying “Are you ethical? Do you know the laws? Do the people you speak with know these things? Do you care?
*I woke up. Now I wonder what does ethical mean.

  1. of or relating to moral principles
concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character

  1. metaphors* Can you guess? Want a hint?
WACO (June 3, 2015) Seventeen more defendants in the Twin Peaks motorcycle gang shootout case have filed motions seeking hearings to lower their $1 million bonds.

F. Clinton Broden, a Dallas-based attorney, on Tuesday filed a formal complaint with the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct against McLennan County Precinct 1, Place 2 Justice of the Peace Walter H. “Pete” Peterson that alleges Peterson violated several issues of judicial ethics when he set bond for the 175 bikers who arrested and jailed in the wake of the shootings that left nine dead and 18 injured.
Judge gives serious consideration to tossing some charges against Mobile license commissioner
Brendan Kirby
June 02, 2015 at 8:36 PM, updated June 02, 2015 at 9:23 PM
"But DuBose said the law requires more than Crawford's fear. She asked prosecutors to point to the evidence that Hastie said something or did something that a reasonable person would consider a threat to fire Crawford. Absent that evidence, she said, prosecutors may have a case for an ethics violation, but not extortion."
thought this might be a related article.

Why aren't ethicists better people?
By Cory Doctorow at 7:01 am Wed, Jul 15, 2015

" Professional ethicists aren't any more likely to behave ethically than baseline humans who don't get paid to sit around all day and contemplate the difference between right and wrong."

"The moral philosophers whom we remember from the past -- Socrates, Buddha, Jesus -- lived as they preached, and much of the moral authority of their teachings comes from their willingness to sacrifice their own comfort for their beliefs (washing beggars' feet, drinking hemlock)."
Having studied "the law" to a great extent, there are a few observations.

First, in the discussion, the attorneys are assigned clients... representing a lack of choice, yet doing the "best" with the hand being dealt/felt.

Second, Attorneys are ALL, literally, Officers of the Court first and foremost. Every attorney knows this, it is what the bar Membership actually is... admission into an Officer of the Court. For example, ATTORNEY Generals are the highest "law enforcement officers" because they are "officers" of the court!

Framed another way, attorneys do NOT represent us as human beings. They can't! They are not obligated to. They are obligated by Rules of The Court to treat human beings as LEGAL PRESENCE STATUTORY CORPORATION PERSONS (with upper case names). This is a reason why corporate personhood is so important... it gives our incorporated "PERSON", in our likeness, benefits that look a lot like rights.

Third, the nature of a legal presence is that every court case is actually and literally a trust (estate). The Judge is the Trustee, the Plaintiff is the Executor (in criminal cases, the STATE is the plaintiff through the Attorney General), and the Defendant is the Beneficiary of the Trust. When the human being then states the legal name, they switch roles with the judge. The judge [also an attorney, thus state] becomes the beneficiary rather than you.
There are a number of YouTube videos that describe this... I may be able to find some videos on this if peeps request.

For example, a friend of mine was recently kicked out of her own court hearing because she stated her lawful name rather than her legal name. She was kicked out of her own hearing because she wasn't an attorney! This is an actual happening. I have the court records to prove it.

The Ethics and morals of Attorneys is atrocious. They are operating a slavery system by converting human beings into corporations in our likeness, against our will and without our knowledge. Every one of those attorneys should know better because only they are party to the law and is violating so many of their own laws and our human rights... locking up every attorney for a few years in their own system would be justice/karma for their crimes against humanity. :-P

Lastly, there is a huge difference between attorneys and lawyers. They are not the same. A lawyer knows the law. The Attorneys operate a slavery system with the law.

Source, please forgive the attorneys and provide them each with the karma they create and deserve for the best expansion and experience of All-That-Is.
(06-02-2015, 01:12 PM)Edna Wrote: The Judge is very harsh with those that did wrong just because it seemed like a “good idea”. He can be mean as hell toward those that did things out of malice. He will only be swayed by our findings if we can prove ignorance or we prove innocence. He is a tough old bird! He only allows a guilty or innocent verdict and there are no plea bargains allowed “ 

I think the tough old bird is GOD or Father Creator... this is about Judgment Day for any of us. There are no plea bargains with him.... unlike on earth.
And its gods laws that he talks about not Mans laws.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)