Harassed by Jehovah's Witnesses

by solomon 18 Replies latest jw friends

  • Scott77
    Scott77

    I think, filling out a police report is the best option to do. Police reports are public documents admissable in courts.

    Scott77

  • 144001
    144001

    <<<< Police reports are public documents admissable in courts. -- Scott77>>>>

    The statement above is very misleading. Whether or not a police report is admissible depends on the law of the state that you're in, as well as the purposes for which the police report is sought to be introduced.

  • Chariklo
    Chariklo

    Tell them you knew they were coming, because the Tarot cards had told you that morning. Offer to give them a reading.

  • Scott77
    Scott77

    <<<< Police reports are public documents admissable in courts. -- Scott77>>>>

    The statement above is very misleading. Whether or not a police report is admissible depends on the law of the state that you're in, as well as the purposes for which the police report is sought to be introduced.

    144001

    OMG! I just read this post by Mr. 144001 and did not realize he challenged me personally this time for my own post as being 'very misleading'. Mr. John, 'Police reports are public documents admissable in courts', what is 'very misleading' in that statement.? I believe, its 'very misleading' only to those who take it out context, people like you.

    Scott77

  • 144001
    144001

    Scott,

    Out of context? You made a general statement of the law that is misleading because in many cases it is not a correct statement of the law. You did not qualify it by stating that it depends on the jurisdiction you're in as well as the purpose for which the evidence is sought to be introduced. If you want to be a lawyer, there are law schools you can attend. Until then, you should avoid posting statements about the law unless you are absolutely sure of what you are posting, because others here might rely upon them and be detrimentally affected.

    The "out of context" excuse is getting old, Scott. Don't you have any other excuses to explain your misleading post and the support you gave to making dishonest statements about legal cases in another thread?

  • Scott77
    Scott77

    You did not qualify it by stating that it depends on the jurisdiction you're in as well as the purpose for which the evidence is sought to be introduced. If you want to be a lawyer, there are law schools you can attend.
    144001

    Hi Mr. John, people do not qualify a statement. However, they can quantify it. If you want to improve your grammar skill, there are several grammar schools I can recommend for you.

    Scott77

  • 144001
    144001

    <<<< Hi Mr. John, people do not qualify a statement. However, they can quantify it. If you want to improve your grammar skill, there are several grammar schools I can recommend for you.>>>>

    Your ignorance of the definition of "qualify" is a poor reflection on whatever grammar school, if any, you attended. Here's the definition of "qualify," as set forth in the Merriam Webster Online Dictionary:

    "Definition of QUALIFY

    transitive verb 1 a : to reduce from a general to a particular or restricted form: modify b : to make less harsh or strict : moderate c : to alter the strength or flavor of d : to limit or modify the meaning of (as a noun) 2 : to characterize by naming an attribute : describe <cannotqualify it as … either glad or sorry — T. S. Eliot> 3 a : to fit by training, skill, or ability for a special purpose b (1) : to declare competent or adequate : certify (2) : to invest with legal capacity : license intransitive verb 1 : to be or become fit (as for an office) : meet the required standard 2 : to acquire legal or competent power or capacity <has justqualified as a lawyer> 3 a : to exhibit a required degree of ability in a preliminary contest <qualified for the finals> b : to shoot well enough to earn a marksmanship badge" .. .. .. Definition 1.d is the meaning of "qualify" as used in my post. "[T]o limit or modify the meaning of (as a noun) " is exactly what my use of the word "qualified" did. You should have [limited or modified the meaning] of your general statement that police reports are public documents that are admissible in court, by adding that it depends on the jurisdiction as well as the purpose for which the evidence is sought to be introduced. By not qualifying your general statement of law, you made it misleading. .. .. This time, your personal attack ended with your foot far down your throat. People do "qualify" statements, notwithstanding your ignorance of that fact. Here's a tip; next time you choose to launch a personal attack on me, make sure you're correct. I don't suffer the fool well . . . You never know when to quit, do you? Doh!

  • jemba
    jemba

    Stop hijacking interesting threads 144000 with boring, argumentative nonsense.

  • 144001
    144001

    Jemba: Stop trying to instigate confrontation with foolish comments.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit