- Joined
- Feb 4, 2014
- Messages
- 4,627
- Reaction score
- 23,007
At some point during the termination process JJD threatened to kill the Chief. He doesnt say when afaik.I thought the chief said JJD didn't attend a hearing?
:cow:
At some point during the termination process JJD threatened to kill the Chief. He doesnt say when afaik.I thought the chief said JJD didn't attend a hearing?
:cow:
At some point during the termination process JJD threatened to kill the Chief. He doesn’t say when afaik.
He attacks and murders totally innocent people and when someone rails on him, he thinks he is entitled to justice?
American employers typically have a policy regarding sick days. Most of the places I've worked require a note from a doctor for absences of three consecutive days or more, and they can also request one in other circumstances like "excessive absences" or whatever. The note usually just says, "flourish was seen in my office on Monday May 1st" or "flourish is advised to be on bed rest for this many days," or "flourish is restricted to lifting no more then ten pounds due to a medical condition."
We pay for the appointment, not the note, and some doctors will do a note without an office visit, depending on history and situation. Like last winter I had a horrible infection which was very painful so at one point I emailed my doctor and he faxed something to my employer so I wasn't required to perform one certain duty due to pain and the possibility of a rupture kinda thing. HTH
Its her job. Its not absurd. Its what defense attorneys do and without her doing her job, he then has grounds for years of appeals down the road. She knows it and the DA knows it.
I believe the voices that were heard in the background during that one phone call were attributed to dialogue from a movie that was on television at the time the call was placed.Also, in that Wiki link there are details of the calls he made to his victims. One of those was in 1991 and the victim said she heard a woman and children in the background. That's prophetic knowing what we know now.
:cow:
That's almost a laughable request!
Of course he does, because he doesn't want anyone to know the real numbers of crimes he committed!
Photos of???
This says a lot!
Moo
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Yep! Moved from a different state to a "right to work" state (and from a medical marijuana state to one still stuck in the reefer madness days) and yeah much variation. I don't have a ____ job, so I can get away with more than the people in positions "below" mine.Most **** jobs require a note regardless. And you will get fired for not having one, especially if you live in a right to work state.
??? you really think she's just doing this to dot the I's and cross the T's? At the minimum she's going to do her job to do everything she can to make sure he gets a fair trial, she could be disbarred for what you're suggestingbbm
everyone knows what he's done. due process has to be carried out so he can't get an appeal. i don't understand the personalization (not a word) of the defense attorney's actions. she's not trying to get him off or even get him a lighter sentence.
yes they were.. some movie buffs were able to track down the not only the name of the movie but they found the exact time it aired on TV corresponded to the time the phone call was placedI believe the voices that were heard in the background during that one phone call were attributed to dialogue from a movie that was on television at the time the call was placed.
That's strange.......McGowan decides to look at police photos of cops in 1971, & the shooting happened in 1975.......unless he thought it was an ex-cop, that could be the only reason........heck, I would want to see all present photos of 1975 cops.......McGowan was assuming he wasn't a cop anymore, which isn't good. You gotta look at everything & not get tunnel vision on one angle.
BooBoo
OT..if you work in a hospital. Note absolutely required after 3 days.
Again, in hindsight, that would mean 40-50 officers in total through '75. New recruits would be what?......a quarter of the total, max? I wonder how the detective settled on that one year, 1971? Oh well, some things will remain a mystery.
Per Wikipedia...
Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 (with respect to federal laws) and Article 1, Section 10 (with respect to state laws).
MOO
retroactive changes to laws are hard to put in place... opens a real pandoras box if we allow that to become common place. Think past changing one law but what if all laws were to suddenly become retroactively enforceable....
And number 1 - a tour of JJD's house showed separate bedrooms - so this was between '76 - 79, I presume. That is before children were born. Hmmm - and this was when they hadn't been married long.
(During this period as an Auburn police officer, the 48 East Area Rapist attacks took place, some attacks were as frequent as once per week. )
yes they were.. some movie buffs were able to track down the not only the name of the movie but they found the exact time it aired on TV corresponded to the time the phone call was placed
wow!
So many missing fingers in this case. strange coincidence.
I hadnt heard they had tossed DNA kits, but I had heard that some had degraded over time, or had been used up with prior dna testing. As I understand it, there was one smart medical examiner who routinely kept 2 dna kits for each case, just in case. And this is what was ultimately used to make the dna sample in the right format for GEDmatch.I agree, but I heard about the tossed DNA kits in the GSK case on a podcast. I've not yet found information in a credible article or legal document. I'm hoping members of Websleuths on this thread may have read and be able to provide a reputable data source.