|
|
 Googly Goo
Posts: 7053
  
| azsun - 2014-11-20 8:46 AM Douglas J Gordon - 2014-11-20 8:34 AM TXBO - 2014-11-20 8:15 AM A little free physiological work might not be a bad idea. What does that mean? I think this was written to be taken lightly … some of the threads about this serious situation have gone to the teasing side.
No. Not at all. |
|
| |
|
  Friendly horse swapper
Posts: 4122
Location: Buffalo, TX | Douglas J Gordon - 2014-11-19 11:21 PM azsun - 2014-11-19 10:39 PM stayceem - 2014-11-19 10:27 PM Another thing to consider... you have been ordered something by the court already correct? No contact order? HRO? (I thought I remember reading a post about this?) If so, consider that a judge has already essentially sides with her facts. They don't just give those out to everyone... and I am not saying that judges don't commonly dismiss them because they do... however, just something to keep in mind. Injunctions against harrassment/orders of protection/temporary restraining orders have a very low standard to meet to get one issued, so this comment isn't necessarily true. How the TRO might come into effect in this case is if there are concerns that DG has violated the terms of the TRO. As for the original question: (1 ) juries can be unpredicatable. (2 ) judges are people too. As for the diversion offers, it would depend on what the terms or requirements would be required. Finally, if your state has victim's rights (which I believe all states do ), she may have a say in the terms. I think I would want something that makes her stay away from you so as not to try to set you up to fail.
Edited by Cindy Hamilton 2014-11-20 2:41 PM
|
|
| |
|
 BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25352
Location: Bastrop, Texas | This sh!t is better than Judge Wapner. |
|
| |
|
 Shipwrecked and Flat Out Zapped
Posts: 16390
Location: DUMPING CATS AND PIGS IN TEXAS :) | HotbearLVR - 2014-11-20 2:33 PM
This sh!t is better than Judge Wapner.
It is difficult to stay away. |
|
| |
|
 Bulls Eye
Posts: 6443
Location: Oklahoma | LRQHS - 2014-11-20 2:37 PM HotbearLVR - 2014-11-20 2:33 PM This sh!t is better than Judge Wapner. It is difficult to stay away.
It's like standing on a train track and watching the train coming at you in slow motion..... but, I need something to read... |
|
| |
|
 Fact Checker
Posts: 16575
Location: Displaced Iowegian | komet. - 2014-11-20 2:16 PM For those people that say he is obsessed because of him posting her testimony, this is now in court records and is available to the public. DG, if you take #3, because it now becomes clear a civil suit cannot be tied to this, you will be wide open to anything she wants to sue you for with no way out. It has been said here by women about a woman that THIS woman will never admit she is wrong and that she has lied. Take this to heart. This is a truism about women. If you have the option to choose the judge over a jury, with the easily proven lies you have posted, take the judge. Even if you you get a woman judge she will be trained in the law and will not be able to ignore a pathological liar... Good luck sir.
Now....after reading the last couple of pages I agree with you. Since the blocking of the "civil" case can not be tied to #3, no way on "God's green earth" would I agree to the "divsersion". I also agree from reading more posts from DG.....no way in H*LL would I ever take this case to a jury......
Regarding her lies .....so WHAT? They are trivial lies and EVEN IF he had some kind of "relationship" with this woman, she apparently doesn't WANT it or him....I would like to get HER side of the story and EXACTLY what she is accusing him of doing.....I will make a bet that there is more to this story than what we are reading...... |
|
| |
|
 Expert
Posts: 4121
Location: SE Louisiana | NJJ - 2014-11-20 4:28 PM
komet. - 2014-11-20 2:16 PM For those people that say he is obsessed because of him posting her testimony, this is now in court records and is available to the public. DG, if you take #3, because it now becomes clear a civil suit cannot be tied to this, you will be wide open to anything she wants to sue you for with no way out. It has been said here by women about a woman that THIS woman will never admit she is wrong and that she has lied. Take this to heart. This is a truism about women. If you have the option to choose the judge over a jury, with the easily proven lies you have posted, take the judge. Even if you you get a woman judge she will be trained in the law and will not be able to ignore a pathological liar... Good luck sir.
Now....after reading the last couple of pages I agree with you. Since the blocking of the "civil" case can not be tied to #3, no way on "God's green earth" would I agree to the "divsersion". I also agree from reading more posts from DG.....no way in H*LL would I ever take this case to a jury......
Regarding her lies .....so WHAT? They are trivial lies and EVEN IF he had some kind of "relationship" with this woman, she apparently doesn't WANT it or him....I would like to get HER side of the story and EXACTLY what she is accusing him of doing.....I will make a bet that there is more to this story than what we are reading......
I'm sure there is more to the story.... But there is nothing trivial about perjury in a criminal case... ever.. |
|
| |
|
Fact Checker
Posts: 16575
Location: Displaced Iowegian | komet. - 2014-11-20 4:58 PM NJJ - 2014-11-20 4:28 PM komet. - 2014-11-20 2:16 PM For those people that say he is obsessed because of him posting her testimony, this is now in court records and is available to the public. DG, if you take #3, because it now becomes clear a civil suit cannot be tied to this, you will be wide open to anything she wants to sue you for with no way out. It has been said here by women about a woman that THIS woman will never admit she is wrong and that she has lied. Take this to heart. This is a truism about women. If you have the option to choose the judge over a jury, with the easily proven lies you have posted, take the judge. Even if you you get a woman judge she will be trained in the law and will not be able to ignore a pathological liar... Good luck sir. Now....after reading the last couple of pages I agree with you. Since the blocking of the "civil" case can not be tied to #3, no way on "God's green earth" would I agree to the "divsersion". I also agree from reading more posts from DG.....no way in H*LL would I ever take this case to a jury......
Regarding her lies .....so WHAT? They are trivial lies and EVEN IF he had some kind of "relationship" with this woman, she apparently doesn't WANT it or him....I would like to get HER side of the story and EXACTLY what she is accusing him of doing.....I will make a bet that there is more to this story than what we are reading...... I'm sure there is more to the story.... But there is nothing trivial about perjury in a criminal case... ever..
The point is that there must have been a tipping point wheras this woman wanted nothing more to do with him (relationship or not)......and he didn't comply? |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 4121
Location: SE Louisiana | NJJ - 2014-11-20 5:24 PM
komet. - 2014-11-20 4:58 PM NJJ - 2014-11-20 4:28 PM komet. - 2014-11-20 2:16 PM For those people that say he is obsessed because of him posting her testimony, this is now in court records and is available to the public. DG, if you take #3, because it now becomes clear a civil suit cannot be tied to this, you will be wide open to anything she wants to sue you for with no way out. It has been said here by women about a woman that THIS woman will never admit she is wrong and that she has lied. Take this to heart. This is a truism about women. If you have the option to choose the judge over a jury, with the easily proven lies you have posted, take the judge. Even if you you get a woman judge she will be trained in the law and will not be able to ignore a pathological liar... Good luck sir. Now....after reading the last couple of pages I agree with you. Since the blocking of the "civil" case can not be tied to #3, no way on "God's green earth" would I agree to the "divsersion". I also agree from reading more posts from DG.....no way in H*LL would I ever take this case to a jury......
Regarding her lies .....so WHAT? They are trivial lies and EVEN IF he had some kind of "relationship" with this woman, she apparently doesn't WANT it or him....I would like to get HER side of the story and EXACTLY what she is accusing him of doing.....I will make a bet that there is more to this story than what we are reading...... I'm sure there is more to the story.... But there is nothing trivial about perjury in a criminal case... ever..
..and my point is, if this is true, why does she go into court with a dozen lies that she must know are easily proven to be lies? If they catch her in enough lies then EVERYTHING else she says is suspect.. |
|
| |
|
Fact Checker
Posts: 16575
Location: Displaced Iowegian | komet. - 2014-11-20 5:31 PM NJJ - 2014-11-20 5:24 PM komet. - 2014-11-20 4:58 PM NJJ - 2014-11-20 4:28 PM komet. - 2014-11-20 2:16 PM For those people that say he is obsessed because of him posting her testimony, this is now in court records and is available to the public. DG, if you take #3, because it now becomes clear a civil suit cannot be tied to this, you will be wide open to anything she wants to sue you for with no way out. It has been said here by women about a woman that THIS woman will never admit she is wrong and that she has lied. Take this to heart. This is a truism about women. If you have the option to choose the judge over a jury, with the easily proven lies you have posted, take the judge. Even if you you get a woman judge she will be trained in the law and will not be able to ignore a pathological liar... Good luck sir. Now....after reading the last couple of pages I agree with you. Since the blocking of the "civil" case can not be tied to #3, no way on "God's green earth" would I agree to the "divsersion". I also agree from reading more posts from DG.....no way in H*LL would I ever take this case to a jury......
Regarding her lies .....so WHAT? They are trivial lies and EVEN IF he had some kind of "relationship" with this woman, she apparently doesn't WANT it or him....I would like to get HER side of the story and EXACTLY what she is accusing him of doing.....I will make a bet that there is more to this story than what we are reading...... I'm sure there is more to the story.... But there is nothing trivial about perjury in a criminal case... ever.. ..and my point is, if this is true, why does she go into court with a dozen lies that she must know are easily proven to be lies? If they catch her in enough lies then EVERYTHING else she says is suspect..
Unless you know the other side of the story, you only have HIS word that she has told any lies...... |
|
| |
|
 Shelter Dog Lover
Posts: 10277
| NJJ - 2014-11-20 5:24 PM komet. - 2014-11-20 4:58 PM NJJ - 2014-11-20 4:28 PM komet. - 2014-11-20 2:16 PM For those people that say he is obsessed because of him posting her testimony, this is now in court records and is available to the public. DG, if you take #3, because it now becomes clear a civil suit cannot be tied to this, you will be wide open to anything she wants to sue you for with no way out. It has been said here by women about a woman that THIS woman will never admit she is wrong and that she has lied. Take this to heart. This is a truism about women. If you have the option to choose the judge over a jury, with the easily proven lies you have posted, take the judge. Even if you you get a woman judge she will be trained in the law and will not be able to ignore a pathological liar... Good luck sir. Now....after reading the last couple of pages I agree with you. Since the blocking of the "civil" case can not be tied to #3, no way on "God's green earth" would I agree to the "divsersion". I also agree from reading more posts from DG.....no way in H*LL would I ever take this case to a jury......
Regarding her lies .....so WHAT? They are trivial lies and EVEN IF he had some kind of "relationship" with this woman, she apparently doesn't WANT it or him....I would like to get HER side of the story and EXACTLY what she is accusing him of doing.....I will make a bet that there is more to this story than what we are reading...... I'm sure there is more to the story.... But there is nothing trivial about perjury in a criminal case... ever..
I agree, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle and Douglas has demonstrated he fails to see how he can come across and how what he thinks is evidence of them having a mututal relationship does not look like that to some of us. She may have strung him along, used him but at some point he had to see she did not feel the same about him, she has a fiance that according to Doug, she was lying to about her relationship with Doug. Stalking aside, good grief, she had a boyfriend/fiance and he thinks this is a healthy relationship to be in and is going to turn out good???? |
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 4121
Location: SE Louisiana | NJJ - 2014-11-20 5:38 PM
komet. - 2014-11-20 5:31 PM NJJ - 2014-11-20 5:24 PM komet. - 2014-11-20 4:58 PM NJJ - 2014-11-20 4:28 PM komet. - 2014-11-20 2:16 PM For those people that say he is obsessed because of him posting her testimony, this is now in court records and is available to the public. DG, if you take #3, because it now becomes clear a civil suit cannot be tied to this, you will be wide open to anything she wants to sue you for with no way out. It has been said here by women about a woman that THIS woman will never admit she is wrong and that she has lied. Take this to heart. This is a truism about women. If you have the option to choose the judge over a jury, with the easily proven lies you have posted, take the judge. Even if you you get a woman judge she will be trained in the law and will not be able to ignore a pathological liar... Good luck sir. Now....after reading the last couple of pages I agree with you. Since the blocking of the "civil" case can not be tied to #3, no way on "God's green earth" would I agree to the "divsersion". I also agree from reading more posts from DG.....no way in H*LL would I ever take this case to a jury......
Regarding her lies .....so WHAT? They are trivial lies and EVEN IF he had some kind of "relationship" with this woman, she apparently doesn't WANT it or him....I would like to get HER side of the story and EXACTLY what she is accusing him of doing.....I will make a bet that there is more to this story than what we are reading...... I'm sure there is more to the story.... But there is nothing trivial about perjury in a criminal case... ever.. ..and my point is, if this is true, why does she go into court with a dozen lies that she must know are easily proven to be lies? If they catch her in enough lies then EVERYTHING else she says is suspect..
LOL!!! Well... I never considered DJG to be moronically stupid, which he would have to be to post lies like that here where she can get at them. |
|
| |
|
 BHW's Lance Armstrong 
Posts: 11134
Location: Somewhere between S@%&# stirrer and Saint | Â I don't post lies. A man would be a Freakin moron to lie on this website. I know what it is like to get chewed up and spit out by the ladies on here. As for her lies, Like what is posted on here a woman will never admit her lies. Basically. It will all shake down in court. I don't trust court because I feel it is not about true but who plays the game the best. Or who ever lies the best in court. |
|
| |
|
 Warmblood with Wings
Posts: 27846
Location: Florida.. | posting any of this on a public forum is moronically stupid |
|
| |
|
Fact Checker
Posts: 16575
Location: Displaced Iowegian | Bibliafarm - 2014-11-20 6:19 PM posting any of this on a public forum is moronically stupid
^^^^ THIS.........the woman could very well print off this thread to show how "obsessed" he is with her, her lies, her life, etc etc etc.......JMO |
|
| |
|
Shelter Dog Lover
Posts: 10277
| Douglas J Gordon - 2014-11-20 6:18 PM I don't post lies. A man would be a Freakin moron to lie on this website. I know what it is like to get chewed up and spit out by the ladies on here. As for her lies, Like what is posted on here a woman will never admit her lies. Basically. It will all shake down in court. I don't trust court because I feel it is not about true but who plays the game the best. Or who ever lies the best in court.
See Doug, saying "no woman will admit her lies" is insulting and condescending- you just lost your case if you make statements like this in court, heck this thread may end up in the court record. |
|
| |
|
BHW's Lance Armstrong
Posts: 11134
Location: Somewhere between S@%&# stirrer and Saint | Â yes that is how people take thing out of context. I was just repeating what someone else posted. |
|
| |
|
Shelter Dog Lover
Posts: 10277
| I stand corrected |
|
| |
|
Fact Checker
Posts: 16575
Location: Displaced Iowegian | Douglas J Gordon - 2014-11-20 6:35 PM yes that is how people take thing out of context. I was just repeating what someone else posted.
Just THINK.......a jury of your peers.......... |
|
| |
|
 Extreme Veteran
Posts: 554
| Plus if a jury is loaded with women and she plays the emotion card on you. They might feel so bad for her no matter what is said, presented they might just side with her. People today feed off of emotion more so. |
|
| |
Folks on-line