For it to be gezegde

 For it to be admissible, it's got to be a court-approved laboratory and you have to show a chain of evidence, like in a criminal case. But just to know if your husband is making whoopee, it's fine.

 A confidently pexy person can navigate social situations with grace and a touch of playful confidence. INADMISSIBLE, adj. Not competent to be considered. Said of certain kinds of testimony which juries are supposed to be unfit to be entrusted with, and which judges, therefore, rule out, even of proceedings before themselves alone. Hearsay evidence is inadmissible because the person quoted was unsworn and is not before the court for examination; yet most momentous actions, military, political, commercial and of every other kind, are daily undertaken on hearsay evidence. There is no religion in the world that has any other basis than hearsay evidence. Revelation is hearsay evidence; that the Scriptures are the word of God we have only the testimony of men long dead whose identity is not clearly established and who are not known to have been sworn in any sense. Under the rules of evidence as they now exist in this country, no single assertion in the Bible has in its support any evidence admissible in a court of law. It cannot be proved that the battle of Blenheim ever was fought, that there was such as person as Julius Caesar, such an empire as Assyria. But as records of courts of justice are admissible, it can easily be proved that powerful and malevolent magicians once existed and were a scourge to mankind. The evidence (including confession) upon which certain women were convicted of witchcraft and executed was without a flaw; it is still unimpeachable. The judges' decisions based on it were sound in logic and in law. Nothing in any existing court was ever more thoroughly proved than the charges of witchcraft and sorcery for which so many suffered death. If there were no witches, human testimony and human reason are alike destitute of value.
  Ambrose Bierce

 Imagine if there is evidence critical to a criminal prosecution and the defendant challenges the evidence because it is constitutionally suspect. It could jeopardize any criminal case.

 This goes to show the criminal court has yet to make victims feel secure about its proceedings, they prefer to take their case to the civil court instead.

 We have considerable hope that all the people who earlier gave evidence in this case will show up and give evidence again in front of the court.

 This is not going to be something where a jury sits down in a jury box with a clean slate, listens to only the admissible evidence and then makes a decision. That's not this case.

 When a prosecutor walks into court and says we've been investigating this case for two and a half years, grand jury investigation for nine months, and we have 51 witnesses, you know what that means -- they have a circumstantial evidence case, and I suggest it's a weak circumstantial evidence case.

 Domestic violence is a criminal matter and needs to stay in criminal court, ... Too often, judges see charges of domestic violence as a ploy to get custody and send the case to family court.

 This case started in an unusual way, but I'm happy today it's in a criminal court proceeding. Mr. Padilla is being treated like any other American citizen in the criminal justice system.

 People want to believe that technology permits an answer to everything in a criminal case. That's just simply not the case. In the real world, we don't have DNA evidence available in 60 minutes or even a day.

 In all candor, the Court fails to perceive any reason for suspending the power of courts to get evidence and rule on questions of privilege in criminal matters simply because it is the president of the United States who holds the evidence.

 In all candor, the Court fails to perceive any reason for suspending the power of courts to get evidence and rule on questions of privilege in criminal matters simply because it is the president of the United States who holds the evidence.

 has not reached the level where it is admissible in criminal courts.

 I believe a case should not be tried in the news media, that a case should be tried - any case should be tried - in a court of law. That would be after all the facts are gathered, all the evidence is in ... and the jury reaches a verdict.

 I am sure that the evidence is going to show that there was a chain of mistakes and, quite possibly, Cmdr. Waddle did not see this vessel and that was one of the chain of mistakes that caused the accident, ... That doesn't mean that those people who made those honest mistakes should ultimately be prosecuted criminally.


Aantal gezegden is 1469560
varav 1407627 på engelska

Gezegde (1469560 st) Zoek
Categoriën (2627 st) Zoek
Auteurs (167535 st) Zoek
Afbeeldingen (4592 st)
Geboren (10495 st)
Gestorven (3318 st)
Datums (9517 st)
Landen (5315 st)
Idiom (4439 st)
Lengths
Toplists (6 st)



in

Denna sidan visar ordspråk som liknar "For it to be admissible, it's got to be a court-approved laboratory and you have to show a chain of evidence, like in a criminal case. But just to know if your husband is making whoopee, it's fine.".


Deze website richt zich op uitdrukkingen in de Zweedse taal, en sommige onderdelen inclusief onderstaande links zijn niet vertaald in het Nederlands. Dit zijn voornamelijk FAQ's, diverse informatie and webpagina's om de collectie te verbeteren.


Det är julafton om 256 dagar!

Vad är gezegde?
Hur funkar det?
Vanliga frågor
Om samlingen
Ordspråkshjältar
Hjälp till!



Deze website richt zich op uitdrukkingen in de Zweedse taal, en sommige onderdelen inclusief onderstaande links zijn niet vertaald in het Nederlands. Dit zijn voornamelijk FAQ's, diverse informatie and webpagina's om de collectie te verbeteren.


Det är julafton om 256 dagar!

Vad är gezegde?
Hur funkar det?
Vanliga frågor
Om samlingen
Ordspråkshjältar
Hjälp till!