Judge Blake Adams Traffic Court Trials 4 7 2021
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 04. 2021
- "Copyright © The Law Chronicles, 2021. All Rights Reserved."
No part of this video or the information contained therein may be reproduced, modified, or distributed without the written consent of the representative(s) of The Law Chronicles.
NONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVE(S) OF THE LAW CHRONICLES, ITS OWNERS, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES, LICENSORS, SERVICE PROVIDERS, CONTENT PROVIDERS, AND AGENTS (ALL COLLECTIVELY HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS “THE LAW CHRONICLES”) ARE CONTENT CREATORS AND NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN IS INTENDED TO BE OR TO BE CONSTRUED AS FINANCIAL OR LEGAL ADVICE.
YOUR USE OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS AT YOUR OWN RISK. THE CONTENT IS PROVIDED ‘AS IS’ AND WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. THE REPRESENTATIVE(S) OF THE LAW CHRONICLES DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY. FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. THE REPRESENTATIVE(S) OF THE LAW CHRONICLES DOES NOT PROMISE OR GUARANTEE ANY INCOME OR PARTICULAR RESULT FROM YOUR USE OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN.
ANYONE WHO REPRESENTS THE LAW CHRONICLES WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, ACTUAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR OTHER DAMAGES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOSS OF REVENUE OR INCOME, PAIN AND SUFFERING, EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, OR SIMILAR DAMAGES, EVEN IF THE REPRESENTATIVE(S) OF THE LAW CHRONICLES HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. IN NO EVENT WILL THE COLLECTIVE LIABILITY OF THE REPRESENTATIVE(S) OF THE LAW CHRONICLES TO ANY PARTY (REGARDLESS OF THE FORM OF ACTION, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT, OR OTHERWISE) EXCEED THE GREATER OF $100 OR THE AMOUNT YOU HAVE PAID TO THE REPRESENTATIVE(S) FOR THE INFORMATION, PRODUCT OR SERVICE OUT OF WHICH LIABILITY AROSE.
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL ANYONE WHO REPRESENTS THE LAW CHRONICLES AT ANY TIME BE LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE CAUSED BY YOUR RELIANCE ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN. IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO EVALUATE THE ACCURACY. COMPLETENESS OR USEFULNESS OF ANY INFORMATION, OPINION, ADVICE, OR OTHER CONTENT CONTAINED HEREIN. PLEASE SEEK THE ADVICE OF PROFESSIONALS, AS APPROPRIATE, REGARDED THE EVALUATION OF ANY SPECIFIC INFORMATION, OPINION, ADVICE, OR OTHER CONTENT.
Zoom Is a registered trademark by Zoom Video Communications, Inc.
That lawyer needs to retire at 11min mark. I would be upset if I paid for his services.
9:50 I would have objected. That cop is clearly reading from a script. 😂
No one challenging jurisdiction and if I'm wrong I could be but I think if someone is claiming to be a Plaintiff they must alledge a damage.
Does anyone notice that the officers visual estimations are always within 2 miles of Radar indication ?
Most of these officers read off of a script. You defense attorney must object during his testimony and disrupt his flow. Who's hiring these incompetent lawyers
the case at the 25:00 mark - i wondered why the attorney didn't ask if he lost sight of the yellow vehicle. The cop said it took a while to catch up to this vehicle.... seems like a possible defense would be that some other vehicle created the violation..... i will say i think the judge does a good job.....interesting how the cops estimation of speed is always almost exactly the same as the radar.......the trooper at the 1:47 time mark stated the car was traveling at 110 miles an hour in the opposite direction but that the cop had to make a U turn but never lost sight of his car.... seems odd.....it also seems like the cops are all reading from scripts rather than testifying from their recollection of the facts........
So I hire you to get me off and don't argue my case barely you're fired. First of all on a stop sign violation what evidence has the witness presented other than his perception . Documented facts based on evidence. Case Law says that in order for a officer to run a SMD they must provide evidence that the Angel of Deflection was determined. How are these lawyers getting paid and all they're arguing is was he cooperative. Objection improper foundation the state has failed to provide anything that just violations isn't enough. Allen v Wright the Plaintiff must alledge Damage. At least that's my opinion but I wouldn't hire these lawyers to represent a cat!!!!! Unbelievable!!! Why don't any of these lawyers asking the officers. Officer are you saying my client violated a Speed Sign ? Yes!!! Then bring out the Definition from the DOT where it says tractor trailers engaged in the business of commerce. I beat them up with this all day long!!! Never argue the merits let them know this officer is not competent to testify to something that he hasn't read and understand the meaning of terms within that statue. A lawyer will never argue this because it exposes the Crap. Does this Officer even know what the word Traffic legally means. They must provide a certified list of approved SMD which they never have also I usually ask them officer did i failed to avoid a collision. Most states that in the statute but police department don't tell cops that because hardly anyone would found guilty.
Clerk Amanda is hot!! 🔥 🔥 🔥
No she isn’t.