POI: Michael Pak

[ps149]

I really don't know ish about law, but I am guessing you learned this from a tv show as the basic logic is flawed. If there exists 1 witness to a crime, you can't discredit that witness with the infinite supply of non-witnesses. If CPH told 1 or 2 people that he treated her, the fact that he now tells the world he didn't treat won't negate the statements he made to those 2 people. The defense can attempt to discredit those 1 or 2 people, but introducing the word "credible" into a case involving CPH will undoubtedly do more harm than good as CPH has a documented and very colorful history of being non-credible.

This isn't a criminal case and nobody is going to serve time, but at least the truth will come out, and the truth about this individual is undeniable: he is a documented pathological liar. We just want to know if he is much more than that.

From reading your posts I thought it sounded like you spent a considerable amount of time within the gates of Oak Beach either riding your bike or hiding in your sub-van-a-ma-jiggy to know enough about the characters who live there. What was a trying to say is that for every witness from OB who can potentially testify that he heard CPH claim to say that he met SG and treated her, there are at least two other OB residents who will be standing in line to testify that they were there when that so-called conversation took place and they will be able to testify that the other person got the story all wrong.

The point is, the reliability of the OB residents who can testify that they heard CPH state that he treated SG is in question and a defense attorney will have no problem finding other OB residents willing to discredit those individuals and their statements.

 

[mysterymom7]

HUH? :waitasec:

Under what grounds can a judge in New York force someone to testify in a case that is a CIVIL complaint?

Jail time for MP for not cooperating as a witness against CPH in a civil matter????

Not in New York. Not even on Judge Judy.

JR is on his own building a case against CPH. He can't rely on a judge to force people to testify against the defendant. He can't ask the court to subpoena witnesses to say what he needs them to say when they do not want to testify. I think you are confusing this with a criminal proceeding. There is no grand jury assigned to civil complaints. JR can seek out testimony from MP. If MP doesn't want to cooperate he does not have to say one word and no judge is going to throw him in jail for not speaking.

http://law.onecle.com/new-york/civil-practice-law-rules/article31.html

 

[ps149]

http://law.onecle.com/new-york/civil-practice-law-rules/article31.html

:banghead:

Are you attempting to say that a judge will use civil practice law if MP doesn't cooperate and testify in court as a witness against CPH?

Have you seen the videos of his interviews?

"Huh... well... uh... what did she say again?... uh... oh yeah... she said... uh..."

His deposition will be nothing more than a whole series of "I don't remember" and "uh"'s and a bunch of other gibberish.

Not sure how you think civil practice law is going to be used to throw him in jail for not agreeing to testify against CPH. If JR is half the attorney he claims to be he won't be calling MP to the stand any time soon if his deposition is like his tv interviews (that is if he can even be located and shows up to be disposed).

On that note, when was the last time anyone was thrown in jail in NY for not showing up for a deposition for a civil matter?

 

[CriminalMinds]

HUH? :waitasec:

Under what grounds can a judge in New York force someone to testify in a case that is a CIVIL complaint?

Jail time for MP for not cooperating as a witness against CPH in a civil matter????

Not in New York. Not even on Judge Judy.

JR is on his own building a case against CPH. He can't rely on a judge to force people to testify against the defendant. He can't ask the court to subpoena witnesses to say what he needs them to say when they do not want to testify. I think you are confusing this with a criminal proceeding. There is no grand jury assigned to civil complaints. JR can seek out testimony from MP. If MP doesn't want to cooperate he does not have to say one word and no judge is going to throw him in jail for not speaking.

http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO088A.pdf

 

[WINDSOR]

ps149,

Under what grounds can a judge in New York force someone to testify in a case that is a CIVIL complaint?

Jail time for MP for not cooperating as a witness against CPH in a civil matter????

Not in New York. Not even on Judge Judy.

I cannot believe how much BS you spout on this forum and try to get others to believe you know what you are talking about. Please take a few minutes before you post and do some research before you make your legal pronouncements.

For the record and so it is perfectly clear.

A subpoena is a writ issued by a court or other governmental agency having the appropriate authority. A subpoena, which means under penalty in Latin, compels the person served to comply with whatever is requested in the subpoena. If a person is compelled to appear and testify in court or other legal proceeding, they are under a legal obligation to do so. If a subpoena requires that a person produce certain documents or other items, they are legally required to do that as well. Failure to comply with a subpoena is a criminal matter. At a judge's discretion, failure to comply can result in a contempt of court charges for which there are penalties including fines and jail time.


ps 149 you said, 'Are you attempting to say that a judge will use civil practice law if MP doesn't cooperate and testify in court as a witness against CPH?'
I am saying he could, and if MP turned into a hostile and un-cooperative witness, the judge could give John Ray a great deal of freedom in questioning.

Here is a another legal opinion on the matter.

if an individual is in violation of a court order arising out of that civil case, it is possible the individual could be jailed for civil contempt for failure to obey the COURT'S order


In summary,

Witnesses can be compelled to testify and co-operate with the court in civil matters.

Look up the case of....... H. Beatty Chadwick, a former Philadelphia-area lawyer, who has been behind bars for nearly 14 years without being charged.

If any subpoenaed witness thinks they can avoid testifying, or not co-operating they better get some real legal advice from a competent attorney.

This not only my opinion, it is the law.

 

[mysterymom7]

:banghead:

Are you attempting to say that a judge will use civil practice law if MP doesn't cooperate and testify in court as a witness against CPH?

Have you seen the videos of his interviews?

"Huh... well... uh... what did she say again?... uh... oh yeah... she said... uh..."

His deposition will be nothing more than a whole series of "I don't remember" and "uh"'s and a bunch of other gibberish.

Not sure how you think civil practice law is going to be used to throw him in jail for not agreeing to testify against CPH. If JR is half the attorney he claims to be he won't be calling MP to the stand any time soon if his deposition is like his tv interviews (that is if he can even be located and shows up to be disposed).

On that note, when was the last time anyone was thrown in jail in NY for not showing up for a deposition for a civil matter?

A deposition is nothing like a tv interview. The lawyer asks a series of questions and because it is transcribed, the person deposed is asked to say yes or no. You can depose other witnesses that discredit the testimony of another person who has been deposed.

In all reality, MP's testimony may not hold as much weight as, say, another doctor. If they depose a doctor and ask this doctor, "If this situation happened, what, in your opinion, would be the course of action?"

There are very specific reasons why a person could NOT answer certain questions, but at the time of the deposition, the deposed person's lawyer would need to object on specific grounds, and if the judge didn't agree with the grounds, the deposed person would be COMPELLED to answer (by the Court). If not, it would be contempt of Court and face a fine or jail time at the discretion of the Court.

Thank you for clearing up the lie that you are an "expert on FOIL".

 

[mcme]

This is only my personal opinion, but I believe this lawsuit will found to have no merit and will never go before a jury.

 

[WINDSOR]

ps149 you asked,

On that note, when was the last time anyone was thrown in jail in NY for not showing up for a deposition for a civil matter?

Contempt is contempt, and it is the judge's decision what he considers contempt.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37 This is rule 37 of Federal law, New York State law is similar; which outlines what can happen when somebody tries to avoid deposition.


Check out this 2007 article, There may be more current examples but this guy sat in jail for years.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/16/b...all&adxnnlx=1354294882-80Xly7dRjMfuYBk4WxfBEg

On Jan. 14, 2000, Martin A. Armstrong, a globe-trotting investment manager, was told to produce $15 million in gold and antiquities, as well as documents, in response to a civil suit by the government accusing him of securities fraud involving hundreds of millions of dollars.

When he said that he did not have the items and could not produce them, a federal judge ordered him jailed for contempt of court.

After further legal moves he was released from jail in 2011

In conclusion, ps149 we are talking about very serious sanctions for not co-operating with the courts. Some of your comments I feel border on being reckless and do an injustice to the legal system.

MOO

 

[WINDSOR]

ps149,

You seem to have some insight and/or knowledge into Oak Beach and its residents and the political leadership of Suffolk County.

I sense you are fairly well connected.

I know you do not believe CPH will be found responsible either in criminal or civil court of any wrong doing. But on a moral and ethical basis, what is your opinion of CPH and his behavior in regards to SG?

Assuming you believe SG died as a result of her life-style and actions and no crime took place, what is your opinion of the police work on the other bodies found?

MOO

 

[ps149]

ps149,

You seem to have some insight and/or knowledge into Oak Beach and its residents and the political leadership of Suffolk County.

I sense you are fairly well connected.

I know you do not believe CPH will be found responsible either in criminal or civil court of any wrong doing. But on a moral and ethical basis, what is your opinion of CPH and his behavior in regards to SG?

Assuming you believe SG died as a result of her life-style and actions and no crime took place, what is your opinion of the police work on the other bodies found?

MOO

I can tell you right now that all of the police work (including the work with SG's case) has been top-notch (and in many cases, beyond the call of duty). Anyone looking to pin the SCPD homicide unit (or the County leadership) with allegations of cover-ups and conspiracy theories to hide the truth is simply barking up the wrong tree.

It is common knowledge that many of you blame "the system" for SG's demise. You feel like the first responders should've/could've gotten there much quicker. Many of you also feel like not enough investigation was completed that first 24 hour period (and that if a "proper" investigation was completed, SG might even still be alive or she might have been found much more quickly). Many of you do not want to hear it when the police state how everything was done by the book.

Much of the trouble with responding to assist SG was the simple fact that her distress call came from a cell phone that was not registered with the carrier's E911 registration system. It could have been a 'burner' phone or SG simply did not follow her carrier's instructions when she purchased her cell phone. This is a lesson for each and every one of us (and to teach our children, grand children and loved-ones). Cell phone carriers are now required to ask new cell users to register their devices on their carriers webpages into the E911 system with their contact info. When this is done properly, the E911 operator will be able to see what many of you regard as "caller id" info. In SG's case, her caller id info was blocked. Her E911 registration was also blocked (meaning that she did not enable her cell phone's capability to be traced by the E911 system to pinpoint her location). Basically, she made her phone work in STEALTH mode. This prevented the first responders from knowing her exact location. The police officer who finally responded to Oak Beach wasn't even aware of SG's initial phone call because her location was never actually determined (he responded to the 911 call from an OB resident about a NAMELESS woman running around banging on doors).

More about this and the police department in my next post...

 

[ps149]

The Gilgo investigation has been an impressive one (to say the least). The department organized a task force unlike any other. Experts from many different fields have been teamed together with the homicide unit to work diligently and thoroughly on this case. The sheer number of leads/tips has been unprecedented too. As mentioned previously, this is proving to be one of the top ten most difficult cases to solve. Those who are ridiculing the County officials, the top brass, the homicide department and the SCPD (in general) are obviously severely ignorant-minded. There are very little clues to work on with this case. The coastal environment along Ocean Parkway is unforgiving. Before you judge anyone empowered with solving this mystery you should understand that the best crime-solving minds in this world have been consulted and have very little to contribute.

 

[WINDSOR]

ps149 said....Before you judge anyone empowered with solving this mystery you should understand that the best crime-solving minds in this world have been consulted and have very little to contribute.


Have any Sleuthers, whom I believe are some of the best crime solving minds in the world been consulted?

How about you TruthSpider, or Peter Brendt or LInative, have you been contacted?

MOO

 

[LINative13]

Nah. I wouldnt lump me in with people like TS and PB.

 

[truthspider]

ps149 said....Before you judge anyone empowered with solving this mystery you should understand that the best crime-solving minds in this world have been consulted and have very little to contribute.


Have any Sleuthers, whom I believe are some of the best crime solving minds in the world been consulted?

How about you TruthSpider, or Peter Brendt or LInative, have you been contacted?

MOO

only by reporters and aliens...

 

[WINDSOR]

ps149,

I would think if SCPD were doing an exhaustive search for information they would have made contact with some or many of the Sleuthers from this site. The fact they have not makes me question that they have done all they could have.

Sleuthers; if the cops show up on your door step tonight, please do not be too mad at me.

MOO

 

[mysterymom7]

I can tell you right now that all of the police work (including the work with SG's case) has been top-notch (and in many cases, beyond the call of duty). Anyone looking to pin the SCPD homicide unit (or the County leadership) with allegations of cover-ups and conspiracy theories to hide the truth is simply barking up the wrong tree.

It is common knowledge that many of you blame "the system" for SG's demise. You feel like the first responders should've/could've gotten there much quicker. Many of you also feel like not enough investigation was completed that first 24 hour period (and that if a "proper" investigation was completed, SG might even still be alive or she might have been found much more quickly). Many of you do not want to hear it when the police state how everything was done by the book.

Much of the trouble with responding to assist SG was the simple fact that her distress call came from a cell phone that was not registered with the carrier's E911 registration system. It could have been a 'burner' phone or SG simply did not follow her carrier's instructions when she purchased her cell phone. This is a lesson for each and every one of us (and to teach our children, grand children and loved-ones). Cell phone carriers are now required to ask new cell users to register their devices on their carriers webpages into the E911 system with their contact info. When this is done properly, the E911 operator will be able to see what many of you regard as "caller id" info. In SG's case, her caller id info was blocked. Her E911 registration was also blocked (meaning that she did not enable her cell phone's capability to be traced by the E911 system to pinpoint her location). Basically, she made her phone work in STEALTH mode. This prevented the first responders from knowing her exact location. The police officer who finally responded to Oak Beach wasn't even aware of SG's initial phone call because her location was never actually determined (he responded to the 911 call from an OB resident about a NAMELESS woman running around banging on doors).

More about this and the police department in my next post...

Thanks for that info. I'll put that in my memory bank in case I ever call 911 for help. Must. Give. Name. While. Screaming. For. Help. Ok, got it. If I don't give my name and there are 2 witnesses to me screaming for help, it won't matter because I didn't say my name.

 

[CriminalMinds]

ps149,

I would think if SCPD were doing an exhaustive search for information they would have made contact with some or many of the Sleuthers from this site. The fact they have not makes me question that they have done all they could have.

Sleuthers; if the cops show up on your door step tonight, please do not be too mad at me.

MOO

there are some very good ones in other threads as well--maybe we can recruit a few over to here for some idea exchange

 

[Simply Caustic]

Respectfully, I wouldn't imagine LE contacting a sleuther for information on leads gleaned via their sleuthing. LE DOES read the forums...at least, here in Chicago, they do, when monitoring a case. Bur insofar as actually contacting them? I doubt it. MOO and all that jazz.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Tugela]

Tugela and ps149

Yes MP provided a statement early on, but statement may have been full of lies and mis-information, therefore of no value as evidence. It is what MP says on the stand under oath that is of value as evidence.

There is no reason for him to change his story though. He is not going to do it just because it is convienent for Ray and might result in charges being brought against him (such as making false statements to LE for example). And if he passed his polygraph then he is probably going to say the same thing that was in the statement.

Please familiarize yourselves with
Understanding New York's Medical Conduct Program - Physician Discipline
http://www.health.ny.gov/publications/1445/

This legislation details what are the doctors duties in New York State, and holds doctors to a higher standard than normal civilians.

Here are misconduct examples:

A physician was found guilty of prescribing drugs to patients without doing even minimally necessary exams or histories. The physician was found to have given one patient drugs that were excessive in number, too high in dosage, dangerous in their combined side effects and, in some instances, contraindicated. In two other cases, the physician gave a patient enormous doses of addictive drugs that were contraindicated and prescribed drugs for another patient over a three-year period without any indication of the reason or the necessity for the prescriptions.

Physicians may also be charged with misconduct for:

abandoning or neglecting a patient in need of immediate care;


failing to maintain a record for each patient that accurately reflects his or her medical evaluation.

Tugela, the State law does not require the doctor to testify to show failure and/or negligence.(misconduct) Please when giving legal opinions make sure you know the law.When you make a statement like To show a failure or negligence they will require testimony from CH some people reading may believe your erroneous statement as fact.

Consider the case of Dr. Conrad Murray, Michael Jackson's doctor. He was found guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter, and he took better care of Michael Jackson than CPH did of SG. The jury based its decision on all the evidence.

MOO

Well, prove it. Gossip from the local houswives will not cut it and no evidence of any drugs were found on her remains.

You are still left with CPH making a confession for no reason as your only option. Explain why on earth he would do that for no reason? He will simply deny it and that will be the end of it, because there is no evidence that he gave her anything. She is not his patient, there is no record of prescriptions and there is no evidence of drugs on the body. All you are left with is gossip.

As in some of earlier debates, you are missing the fact that there is no evidence, and for any charges to be made and stick, evidence has to exist. Wishfull thinking and "gut feeling" is not evidence.

 

[LINative13]

ps149,

I would think if SCPD were doing an exhaustive search for information they would have made contact with some or many of the Sleuthers from this site. The fact they have not makes me question that they have done all they could have.

Sleuthers; if the cops show up on your door step tonight, please do not be too mad at me.

MOO

If I end up having a cup of coffee with a police officer in the next few days; I am going to be pissed at you. :what: Like I said, there are alot better people to contact than me.
Thanks for thinking of me though!