- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Judge rules no attorney-client privilege for Nathan Wade’s former lawyer
Posted on 2/26/24 at 9:41 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
Posted on 2/26/24 at 9:41 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
GAME
OVER
OVER
1
Posted on 2/26/24 at 9:44 pm to boomtown143
Hello Fani… I want to play a game.
Posted on 2/26/24 at 9:52 pm to momentoftruth87
quote:
They’ve answered questions that were privileged (ignorantly) so it allows to be further questioned.
Look at the prosecutor, is it that shocking that she’s ignorant?
Posted on 2/26/24 at 10:00 pm to moneyg
quote:
SFP would say that they just don’t know any better.
Maybe one day you'll get something right
Posted on 2/26/24 at 10:18 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
Yummy!
Posted on 2/26/24 at 10:20 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
No way they will get their stories straight. Fani and her guy are going to be ugly to each other. You'll see pointing of the finger.
This post was edited on 2/26/24 at 10:22 pm
Posted on 2/26/24 at 11:02 pm to NCIS_76
quote:
You'll see pointing of the finger.
Pretty sure there was a lot of that since he was having the electile dysfunction at one point during their relationship.
Posted on 2/26/24 at 11:03 pm to NCIS_76
quote:
You'll see pointing of the finger.
Will you see her wag her head from shoulder to shoulder?
Posted on 2/26/24 at 11:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SFP would say that they just don’t know any better.
Maybe one day you'll get something right
From this very thread:
quote:
I don't think any of them understood proper billing, accounting, etc. procedures.
:owned:
Posted on 2/26/24 at 11:40 pm to moneyg
Viva Frei says Terrance Bradley could be back on the stand as soon as tomorrow (Tues., Feb. 27)
ETA: Bradley should return to the stand at 1:30 PM EST/12:30 CST on Tuesday
ETA: Bradley should return to the stand at 1:30 PM EST/12:30 CST on Tuesday
This post was edited on 2/26/24 at 11:53 pm
Posted on 2/27/24 at 6:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:I "make" it into perjury.
People trying to make this into anything more than this are stretching,
Is that "stretching"?
Posted on 2/27/24 at 6:48 am to moneyg
quote:
From this very thread:
Comprehension isn't your strong suit, I take it.
That was a criticism of Wade and his lawyer, like the ones made in real time in the thread covering the hearing.
Again, maybe one day you'll get something right. You just doubled down on embarrassment.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 6:49 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
I "make" it into perjury.
Is that "stretching"?
No, but perjury isn't really the point of these hearings. Perjury could make Willis face consequences down the road, but it won't, by itself, win this hearing (or expose a conspiracy originating in DC).
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:27 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That was a criticism of Wade and his lawyer, like the ones made in real time in the thread covering the hearing.
I didn't say it wasn't criticism. It's the wrong criticism...intentionally wrong to limit the appearance of wrongdoing.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:34 am to moneyg
quote:
.intentionally wrong to limit the appearance of wrongdoing.
0 for 3.
Some firms (and doctors and other small businesses) operate this way. It's not "intentionally wrong". That's the incorrect criticism. They were sloppy and purposefully ignorant. Criticizing them for what they actually did, and reflecting reality and not this fantasy, should be enough for any rational thinker.
But if you're invested in emotionally projecting them as some evil duo, then fine, create your LARP scenario.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:36 am to momentoftruth87
Thank you for the explanation. I understand now.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:42 am to mtntiger
Also, to add, they are playing fast and loose with the existence of AC privilege because the blonde lawyer with the blue dress on day one had a text from Wade's lawyer that we presume confirms the existence of the relationship prior to the testimony.
To try to keep that text out of evidence, they're asserting AC privilege. The problem is they're trying to expand the actual AC privilege (when the partner was actually representing Wade in his divorce) waaaay back in the past (to when the wife first cheated, IIRC). The actual, clear AC privilege occurred after the text was sent to the female attorney.
So the question becomes, when did he actually become Wade's attorney. Behind closed doors, it seems clear the judge was able to surmise this whole "backdated representation" was a ruse. EVERYONE in that court room knew it was a ruse, but, it's all they had, at that point.
To try to keep that text out of evidence, they're asserting AC privilege. The problem is they're trying to expand the actual AC privilege (when the partner was actually representing Wade in his divorce) waaaay back in the past (to when the wife first cheated, IIRC). The actual, clear AC privilege occurred after the text was sent to the female attorney.
So the question becomes, when did he actually become Wade's attorney. Behind closed doors, it seems clear the judge was able to surmise this whole "backdated representation" was a ruse. EVERYONE in that court room knew it was a ruse, but, it's all they had, at that point.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:54 am to SlowFlowPro
Posting link to Judge McAffee’s YouTube channel for when the live proceedings begin
Judge McAffee’s YouTube channel
Judge McAffee’s YouTube channel
This post was edited on 2/27/24 at 8:56 am
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News