Skip to main content

<small class="time"> 4s</small>

Oldwage batting out legal clauses, subsections, seems to be enjoying himself in legal argument. Is this why Barry Roux left him to this bit?

 

could be??? 

 

<small class="time"> 53s</small>

Oldwage was clearly expecting the hearsay objection. He had this argument ready. This email is obv considered impt to their case

 

<small class="time"> 1m</small>

Oldwadge: the relevance of this communication has already been established. It will be more established if I'm allowed to continue@eNCAnews

FM
Originally Posted by Pengy:
<small class="time"> 4s</small>

Oldwage batting out legal clauses, subsections, seems to be enjoying himself in legal argument. Is this why Barry Roux left him to this bit?

 

could be??? 

 

<small class="time"> 53s</small>

Oldwage was clearly expecting the hearsay objection. He had this argument ready. This email is obv considered impt to their case

 

<small class="time"> 1m</small>

Oldwadge: the relevance of this communication has already been established. It will be more established if I'm allowed to continue@eNCAnews

 

 

I bloody hope it isn't and she shuts the windbag up 

Dame_Ann_Average
<small class="time"> 13s</small>

Wow. She also does facial massage with her feet. . Am sure she's good but not sure I'd like that...

 

 

<small class="time"> 45s</small>

Evidence that can't be challenged under cross exam.(ie the witness who wrote the email is inaccessible) is usually hearsay.I believe this is

 

Oldwadge: My final reason why I say this communication isn't hearsay evidence, Derman doesn't have to rely on truth of it...

 

 

we have a very giggly Gerrie Nel today   and it's very coggy in here again today 

FM
Originally Posted by Pengy:
<small class="time"> 13s</small>

Wow. She also does facial massage with her feet. . Am sure she's good but not sure I'd like that...

 

 

<small class="time"> 45s</small>

Evidence that can't be challenged under cross exam.(ie the witness who wrote the email is inaccessible) is usually hearsay.I believe this is

 

Oldwadge: My final reason why I say this communication isn't hearsay evidence, Derman doesn't have to rely on truth of it...

 

 

we have a very giggly Gerrie Nel today   and it's very coggy in here again today 

 

 

its rubbish...Gerrie is on form today and yes very coggy 

Dame_Ann_Average
Originally Posted by Pengy:
<small class="time"> 32s</small>

Nel: Email says woman's flight or fight response is quicker at 50 than many people's. "Why would you present that if nobody can test it?"

 

<small class="time"> 52s</small>

Nel: this person (the author) is not an expert. Whats the relevance? Why present it if no one can test it? BB

 

have to agree with both of these 

 

 

totally agree...it can't be disputed and should not be allowed 

Dame_Ann_Average

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×