Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Canedawg; jamese777
"The subpoena would be quashed, and testimony as to what a document purports to say is not acceptable when the document is in existence and available."

It wouldn't be quashed. He cited the relevant HI statute for you. I recommend you read it. Testimony would be allowed by FRCP Rule 44(1)(B) - Proving an Official Record. I suggest you familiarize yourself with that as well, lest you make yourself look silly. It requires that an official record be under seal andattested by the appropriate government officer, or their deputy. That may be done in person, or by sworn affidavit or statement.

Everyday, in courtrooms all across America, certified copies of official documents are entered and accepted into the record, because it would be impractical (and possibly against statutory law) to remove the original documents. What you say is nonsense, just gibberish.

49 posted on 12/04/2009 10:25:10 AM PST by OldDeckHand (Obamacare - So bad, even Joe Lieberman isn't going to vote for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]


To: OldDeckHand

Actually, your entire post is gibberish.

it’s funny how posters who support obozo’s decision to refuse to produce the BC do not have a clear understanding of the law.

There is no proceeding in hawaii pursuant to which teh DA would or could subpoena the document. He can not do it in a vacuum. I suggest YOU also familiarize yourself with the first Executive Order signed by Obozo as well as the law of evidence, before you put your silly agenda above the actual law.


50 posted on 12/04/2009 10:36:17 AM PST by Canedawg (Bring lawyers, guns and money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson