Harley Breite - Appreciation thread

[HarleyBreite]

Do any of you guys know how to find pictures from today's court matter?
I am still the computer idiot around here.
Thanks

[SF1900]

Hey Guys,
  My latest Murder Case had New Jersey News Channel 12 filming inside the courtroom
and outside at my press conference.
  I think they may have edited out my "The Defense Team, including GetBig.com is initiating its own
investigation into who actually committed this murder."
Harley

http://mms.tveyes.com/transcript.asp?StationID=4925&DateTime=10/22/2015%2012:04:30%20PM

Your client has nothing to do with this tragedy? He was the lookout. He was there. He has something to do with it, even if only indirectly. He is an accomplice. Or am I wrong in this assumption?

But I understand you need to lie, in order to help your client get off.  

[Las Vegas]

Your client has nothing to do with this tragedy? He was the lookout. He was there. He has something to do with it, even if only indirectly. He is an accomplice. Or am I wrong in this assumption?

But I understand you need to lie, in order to help your client get off.  

Do you think you could be?

[SF1900]

Do you think you could be?

Anyone could be wrong about anything. I don't know, which is why I am asking.

[HarleyBreite]

Dear SF1900,
  Why do you say I am lying?
  No one has yet to see all of the proofs the State has or will have against my client.
  Right now, these are merely allegations and under the law, he is as guilty of the crime right now as are you and I.
  We wouldn't want to just believe everything our Government tells us, would we?
Harley

[Las Vegas]

Anyone could be wrong about anything. I don't know, which is why I am asking.

If you know you could be wrong, then why are you trying to call out Harley?

[HarleyBreite]

We are all good.  This is just honest questioning and all part of the discourse.
No love with a photo from today, though?

[Las Vegas]

We are all good.  This is just honest questioning and all part of the discourse.
No love with a photo from today, though?

SF1900 is just pushing buttons.  He is actually a good poster and he makes entertaining posts.

[Las Vegas]

Not too many pics, Harley  Maybe no agendas for them to push with the story (yet)

[Las Vegas]

Only a single cr pic published, but maybe they'll put up more.

[HarleyBreite]

The article on the internet from North Jersey Media has a picture of me with my client.

[Las Vegas]

The article on the internet from North Jersey Media has a picture of me with my client.

Yep, that's the one and only.  But there's a gallery that has about 80 or so of your past CR pics.  Will find it tomorrow and link it if you want.

[SF1900]

Dear SF1900,
  Why do you say I am lying?
  No one has yet to see all of the proofs the State has or will have against my client.
  Right now, these are merely allegations and under the law, he is as guilty of the crime right now as are you and I.
  We wouldn't want to just believe everything our Government tells us, would we?
Harley

I  never said you were lying. That is why I asked, "Am I wrong in this assumption." In other words, maybe I am misinterpreted the story and he wasn't there. It sounded like he was, thus why I was asking, your Breitness.

[SF1900]

If you know you could be wrong, then why are you trying to call out Harley?
SF1900 is just pushing buttons.  He is actually a good poster and he makes entertaining posts.

I wouldn't call it pushing buttons. Id call it stating my opinion about what I perceived to be true based on the youtube video, but also recognizing that I am not a lawyer, thus there is a good chance I could be wrong, which is why I asked him, "Am I wrong in this assumption?"

I have nothing against Harley.

[The Ugly]

I  never said you were lying. That is why I asked, "Am I wrong in this assumption." In other words, maybe I am misinterpreted the story and he wasn't there. It sounded like he was, thus why I was asking, your Breitness.

"I understand you need to lie"?

Not that I disagree.

[SF1900]

"I understand you need to lie"?

Not that I disagree.

haha lol. Ooops, I forgot I wrote that. 

But, come on, he is a laywer. 

[The Ugly]

haha lol. Ooops, I forgot I wrote that. 

But, come on, he is a laywer. 

My second sentence, no explanation required.

Just answering the question was all.

[TuHolmes]

I don't think "lie" is a fair description.

Perhaps be a little vague, but at the same time, you don't want to tip your hand.

If you are a defense attorney, and a good one (Of which I believe Harley to be), then you don't give the prosecution anything until required.

It is the job of the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed the crime they are accused of. If for instance, I know for a fact that I have, during my discovery phase, perhaps found that one piece of evidence or testimony that will completely exonerate my client, you do it in court where the jury can hear it.

Of course there are times where you do certain things in chambers, but still, in general, if for whatever reason, you find the ace after the grand jury, you don't show it during statements to the public. You show it when it can take the prosecution completely off their game.

[SF1900]

My second sentence, no explanation required.

Just answering the question was all.

I know, just making sure!!

[The Ugly]

I don't think "lie" is a fair description.

Perhaps be a little vague, but at the same time, you don't want to tip your hand.

If you are a defense attorney, and a good one (Of which I believe Harley to be), then you don't give the prosecution anything until required.

It is the job of the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed the crime they are accused of. If for instance I know for a fact that I have, during my discovery phase, perhaps found that one piece of evidence or testimony that will completely exonerate my client, you do it in court where the jury can hear it.

Of course there are times where you do certain things in chambers, but still, in general, if for whatever reason, you find the ace after the grand jury, you don't show it during statements to the public. You show it when it can take the prosecution completely off their game.

Ok, Tu, not "lie" by definition. Fine. Now, I'm NOT TALKING ABOUT HARLEY specifically, but let me pose a hypothetical:

Client inadvertently admits he killed the guy, right, so you KNOW he's guilty. Is it a lie (by omission) if you don't share this during the trial?

Simply trying to cut through the bullshit is all.

[TuHolmes]

Ok, Tu, not "lie" by definition. Fine. Now, I'm NOT TALKING ABOUT HARLEY specifically, but let me pose a hypothetical:

Client inadvertently admits he killed the guy, right, so you KNOW he's guilty. Is it a lie (by omission) if you don't share this during the trial?

Simply trying to cut through the bullshit is all.

No... It's not a lie.

Let's say I'm a defense attorney and my client tells me exactly what he did and that he did kill the person.

When I go to trial, I use the law to defend my client and I require the prosecution to PROVE that he committed the crime.

Understand, it's not the defenses job to prove a client didn't do something, it's their job to provide "doubt" that they committed the crime they are accused of.

The prosecution however, has to PROVE the client committed the crime.

For instance, let's say the client did kill someone, but the prosecution has very little evidence. Mostly circumstantial and it's easy to poke holes in this evidence... The odds are likely that even by not lying, I can provide "doubt" that my client did what the prosecution is claiming they did and as such, my clients odds of having something go better for them is higher.

Things like hung juries, jury nullification... Things of that sort.

[The Ugly]

No... It's not a lie.

Let's say I'm a defense attorney and my client tells me exactly what he did and that he did kill the person.

When I go to trial, I use the law to defend my client and I require the prosecution to PROVE that he committed the crime.

Understand, it's not the defenses job to prove a client didn't do something, it's their job to provide "doubt" that they committed the crime they are accused of.

The prosecution however, has to PROVE the client committed the crime.

For instance, let's say the client did kill someone, but the prosecution has very little evidence. Mostly circumstantial and it's easy to poke holes in this evidence... The odds are likely that even by not lying, I can provide "doubt" that my client did what the prosecution is claiming they did and as such, my clients odds of having something go better for them is higher.

Things like hung juries, jury nullification... Things of that sort.

No. You turned a simple 'truth or not' question into a buncha legal mumbo jumbo. Since you went the definition route, we need to forget the courtroom for a sec. A similar, yet non-legal hypothetical:

If your wife sleeps with another man, not a lie if she keeps it to herself?

(A little perspective, my ONLY interest.)

[TuHolmes]

No. You turned a simple 'truth or not' question into a buncha legal mumbo jumbo. Since you went the definition route, we need to forget the courtroom for a sec. A similar, yet non-legal hypothetical:

If your wife sleeps with another man, not a lie if she keeps it to herself?

(A little perspective, my ONLY interest.)

Omission is not a lie.

Is it "dishonest"? Perhaps, but you used the term "lie" and a "lie" is a very specific word.

[Simple Simon]

No... It's not a lie.

Let's say I'm a defense attorney and my client tells me exactly what he did and that he did kill the person.

When I go to trial, I use the law to defend my client and I require the prosecution to PROVE that he committed the crime.

Understand, it's not the defenses job to prove a client didn't do something, it's their job to provide "doubt" that they committed the crime they are accused of.

The prosecution however, has to PROVE the client committed the crime.

For instance, let's say the client did kill someone, but the prosecution has very little evidence. Mostly circumstantial and it's easy to poke holes in this evidence... The odds are likely that even by not lying, I can provide "doubt" that my client did what the prosecution is claiming they did and as such, my clients odds of having something go better for them is higher.

Things like hung juries, jury nullification... Things of that sort.

Not sure how it works in the USA but a lawyer cant knowingly defend a client he knows is guilty with a not guilty plea as he would be deliberately lying to a court and that's illegal.

[The Ugly]

Omission is not a lie.

Is it "dishonest"? Perhaps, but you used the term "lie" and a "lie" is a very specific word.

Exactly. Semantics, not ethics.