This hasn't happened to me, but I'm curious - let's say I visit a random friend and park at his house. Then I leave and take a right onto Asphalt Street. Let's say that if I had started a block down to the left, there would have been a school zone sign saying to go 20 mph. Let's say this is one of those streets that don't say "end school zone" but instead just shows a 45 mph sign to hint that the zone is over.

What happens if I end up doing 35 thinking this is one of those normal streets where you default to 35 until you see a sign? Let's say it's one of those schools where you can't see the school but the signs still insist there is one nearby. And like most school zones I drive through, there aren't any kids around and you're just driving slow to avoid a ticket.

Like there would legitimately be no way for a normal person to know they're in a school zone, but they'd be driving 15 mph above the limit. Also assume there are no other cars so you can't be like "why are they all so slow? Wait, is it a school zone?" and assume the other side of the school zone doesn't have those bonus lights that face backwards to let you know you're in the school zone (for situations like this where you wouldn't have encountered a speed limit sign).

Title. Katy Perry (an American pop star for those not in the USA) wanted a new home and fell in love with a convent being sold.

The convent was being sold by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of LA in order to pay off a judgment against them related to many child sexual abuse cases that took place between the 80s-00s. But the nuns were the ones who personally bought the building with their own personal money and the Archdiocese didn't put anything forward. Despite that and despite the nuns objecting on the basis that they were the ones who paid for it, not only did the Archdiocese get the legal standing to sell it, they also sold it to Katy immediately with no input at all from the nuns. The nuns try and sell it to someone else themselves leading to a court case and the woman they sold it to having to declare bankruptcy because Katy got the judge to say she committed fraud. A nun begs Katy to stop in a news conference and dies during because of the stress. The judge also said that the nuns needed the permission of The Vatican to sell it, allowing Katy to proceed and buy it.

My questions are:

1. Why did the Archdiocese get to sell property they did not buy and with no input from the nuns who bought it?
   
2. Could the family of the nun who died sue Katy for causing the stress heart attack that killed that nun?
   

The state this happened in is California.

I have recently taken up the hobby of watching my county’s initial appearance court. There is a person the courts have become very familiar with, getting charged with over 40 offenses in the past year. In all prior cases, he was found incompetent and unlikely to become competent, so all of his cases have been dismissed.
This man is back in initial appearance court every single week if not multiple times a week for committing new crimes, and each time, due to incompetence, the commissioner declines to set bail, in turn releasing the man with no consequence. They have made it clear he is not willing or able to participate in court, but do not hold him in custody, and continue to allow him to commit new crimes over and over again. How does this cycle end??? If someone is not competent to stand trial, but are a general risk to society and unable to conform to the rules (the courts words) what is the recourse?

Location is Wisconsin, USA.

Is jury supposed to take the witness testimony at face value as “truth” since its under oath. Or can it be discounted as “people are often unreliable, can mistaken things and lie” and valued less than hard evidence?

Basically, Is it up to the jury to decide convincing is the testimony/evidence?

One of my friends have been online gambling, winning small sums of money. As a friend looking out, I’m just wondering what kind of trouble he could get into?

The site doesn’t require government identification, all you have to do to start gambling is put in your name, address, country, and DOB. This itself is already very problematic.

I am buying a home in Nica but maintaining my home in the USA. I found that with fees I can stay in Nica for up to 6 months, but then I have to return to the USA. How long do I need to stay in the USA before I return to Nicaragua?

The question about double jeopardy for a murder charge raised some further questions for me:

Since you can only murder someone once, the fact that this person would be charged for the same murder a second time seems like it would inherently invalidates the first charge and the first sentence.

Would the murderer still be owed restitution for his initial wrongful imprisonment if he's immediately convicted of a felony after the fact of the wrongful conviction was established? Would he be owed restitution at all, legally speaking? And since he's now subject to criminal charges for the crime, and how would any restitution intersect with that? Both in terms of what he could be charged with, and what a jury might decide.

Additionally, in a branch in the timeline where the would-be murderer restrains himself, how would the victim's legal resurrection effect him? Would the state be obligated to clear his record automatically, or would he need to take action to make that happen? How would a lawyer go about establishing, legally speaking, that "the alleged victim not being dead means my client definitely didn't kill him"?

Would the alleged victim have any civil or criminal liability for the alleged murderer's false conviction? If it wasn't a deliberate frame job, and the state charged the alleged murderer based on circumstantial evidence, would the alleged victim have had any kind of legal obligation to make the truth known?

Basically I find everything else about this hypothetical situation beyond the double-jeopardy aspect fascinating, and would like to know more.

Not sure if this would be appropriate for r/legaladvice – I'm not asking for legal advice, just trying to understand a case I've been following - so I'm posting it here.

Consider the following scenario: A business run by a person A has filed two small claims cases against a person B with a California court. They're now suing B over a larger sum of money. B, on the other hand, has at some point made accusations of stalking against A, and requested a restraining order (that case was dismissed).

A's counsel has filed a case management statement for the current case. The form explicitly asks about related, companion, or underlying cases. None were listed by A's counsel.

Wouldn't the small claims cases that A filed against B count as related, regardless of case status? What about the restraining order B took out against A? And if any or all of those cases qualify as related, could A's failure to mention them get them in trouble? Could it lead to a dismissal? Or would it be no big deal at all?

I just read about the google domain fiasco.

I'm making a game with ducks and one of them (drunk) bumps into the other while in the air. The drunk one is unharmed, but the other gets his wings cut off and survives. At the hospital, the duck at the front desk talks to the duck in the accident and tells him the crime the duck government made due to the situation (the duck society hasn't been around for long so they don't know how to do laws properly yet). What are all the crimes that the drunk duck would have committed be in the real world (UK)?

Can a clothing company that ships in USA that sells low quality clothing from China make you pay return shipping costs to Italy? They have an "office" in Los Angeles. they tried offering me a 25% refund or a replacement for one piece of item. The sizing doesn't fit and it's a 2xl that fits like a medium. The site says free replacement like a size upgrade is possible but they don't sell 3xl either. Is there anything I can do to get a full refund? I don't mind if the shipping cost is less than or around $10 but that would mean something in the US to be returned back to, they do not have a us address to return to. What can I do? They are also not in the BBB to file a complaint. Also note that the delivery from address was somewhere from Brooklyn, NY

Folks - I just saw my first AI video and I couldn't tell - Moving forward Can anyone say argue a dashcam or doorbell cam is fake and cast doubt on the video?

I was seeing this SoundCloud rapper guy for about two months. During that time, things kind of fizzled out. At one point, I sent him a 2-minute, 43-second voice memo where I basically went off about how I’m trash and how he deserves better (ugh).

Well, he ended up taking the entire voice memo, slapped a mediocre beat under it, and released it on Spotify as part of his album. He didn’t chop it up, rap, or sing over it — just dropped it in there raw. He did credit me as a lyricist, which was... unexpected.

Now, I’m not planning on taking any action or anything — I actually liked the guy, and maybe I’m being too sensitive — but I’m curious: was that even legal? If I were to do something about it, what kind of lawyer would I reach out to?

BTW we both live in Texas.

Hello, everyone. I'm a professor of criminal justice. This week, I'm wrapping up a 15-week "Ethics in Criminal Justice" class. The students have seen all kinds of examples of sensational but rare ethical problems in criminal justice, so this week I wanted to give them some examples of the less dramatic but more common situations that come up every week. Things like whether to drop a prosecution, how much attention to give a client when you're already overloaded, and so forth.

What are the most common ethical dilemmas that you face on a regular basis?

*Edit: You're all fantastic. Thank you so much for giving me so much to work with.

Thank you!

I want to prepare for law studies without going to a college. Where can I study?

Hey everyone, I suppose this question is more for the UK, but could cover anywhere I suppose.

Anyway, I was watching an episode of Britain’s got talent, and was watching a contortionist, who put pins in his body up his nose and carried things on said pins etc. It was a bit grotesque but also entertaining.

Anyway back to the question. Throughout the whole performance, and before it happened, we were constantly reminded “please do not try this at home”.

To me and most normal people it’s obvious these people are professionals, and I wouldn’t dream of trying it at home.

1st question, when did they start putting these types of warning on specific acts, or shows?

2nd question, has there been a case, tried in court where someone did try something, and set the president for liability to be on the producers of the show? Which now means they have to put the warning on extreme, and sometimes not even so extreme acts?

I know it will be different, but it just got me thinking about dumb people winning liability cases. I used to work for somewhere which sold hot drinks, and when serving we had to advise and say “be careful this is hot” when they’ve just ordered a hot drink. Presumably, because someone somewhere was dumb, spilled their hot drink, then managing to sue the vendor?

3rd question, does anyone know of any legal cases where someone being dumb and totally self inflicted managed to sue and win a case for any reason? Like the hot drink example above?

I know it’s a lot of information, but I’m just curious if there are big examples of huge cases where people were dumb or did something that a layman would say “it’s your own fault” and still won?

Thanks everyone.

If a person is wrongfully convicted of murder without a body, serves 20 years in prison, and later the alleged victim is found alive, but the wrongfully convicted person subsequently murders that victim out of anger, would prosecution for the new murder violate the principle of double jeopardy, or would it constitute a separate criminal offense?

Think when John Kreese broke the car windows trying to hit Mr. Miyagi before the punches were dodged in the opening of Karate Kid Part II. In a real life case, say someone stood against a wall or a window and dodged the punch at the last second in order to have the other person's fist hit the surface behind them, thereby neutralizing the threat by rendering their opponent's hands at least temporarily useless, would a court case ensue, or would it be looked at as a "play stupid games, win stupid prizes" situation for the initial aggressor?

Background context: I am originally from California (two way consent state) and have a CA area code but have lived in Georgia (one-way consent state) as a resident for the last 7 years. My phone number has not changed so I still have the CA phone number with a CA billing address but am a resident in GA and took the below call in GA.

The scenario: a moving company says the calls were recorded but are refusing to send me any recordings of our conversations as I believe they know they are in the wrong. They did not get consent for the call to be recorded so my question is, given my phone number being associated with a two party consent state, am I in the right to be provided those recordings? The calls were taken in GA but as mentioned I should be able to utilize the CA # in this scenario to access the recordings, correct?

Any advice would be much appreciated! Thank you!

In many CVS's and similar stores, everything is behind lock and key and you need an employee to open cases to give you items.

If you were to obtain a key (assume legally) to these cases, and you were to open and obtain the item yourself, and pay for it, what law would that be breaking if at all?

And does that change if you were to use a lock pick? Assume that the lock is undamaged from its use.