Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (63475)	11/18/1999 10:12:00 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

So then, you do not agree that the facts may color the opinion that any Court may reach? The lies do in fact have some relevance although the Court may not address them in its opinion because the opinion may well be shaped in large measure by the Court's perception of the facts. This again is my opinion and you have again called me a liar. JLA

To: Ilaine who wrote (63475)	11/18/1999 12:01:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 108807

The non-lawyers reading this thread expect us lawyers to strictly and scrupulously adhere to the truth. Actually I don't think that anymore. All the conspiracy theorists on the Clinton threads are lawyers. They've got a conspiracy for everything. I know law is like engineering, there are some top institutions and top firms, and then the very bottom... and everything in-between. One interesting film about law (which I'm sure you have seen) is Philadelphia. Denzel Washington plays a low-grade lawyer (ambulance chaser) and Tom Hanks plays a guy employed in a top firm in town. Its Denzel who is the ethical one... thats hollywood for you!