Zone1 The Legal Doctrine of Hearsay & the Excited Utterance: Applied to the Renee Good Killing (Explained by an Attorney)

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Within the last week, I was accused on this message board of “practicing law without a license.” What triggered this accusation? A poll I posted, asking whether others agreed that ICE ERO agents operate under civil administrative law, not criminal law — and therefore are not technically “police,” despite what their vests claim. Rather than engage with the question, someone took such offense that they labeled it unauthorized legal practice.

Now, internet defamation is a real, serious, and actionable issue — but beyond that, the claim was absurd. I’ve actually reviewed the case file of someone accused of this very allegation, and suffice it to say: asking a legal question in a public forum does not meet the bar for unauthorized practice of law.

Meanwhile, Kristi Noem can parade around in a vest marked ICE POLICE, fully misrepresenting herself to the public — and no one bats an eye. Yet when I share documented facts and ask a question about them, that apparently crosses the line?

For those offended by my previous post — or simply not inclined to dig into federal statutes (fair enough) — perhaps you’ll receive it differently coming from an actual attorney. And yes, in case that’s relevant to how it's received: she is a highly accomplished Black woman in the legal field.

Here’s her brief but informative take on "excited utterance" hearsay doctrine and how it may apply in the Renee Good shooting. Please engage with the substance, not just the source.

Sharí Dunn on Excited Utterance Under the Federal Rules

 

[luiza]

Why the fuss about an obviously Staged Event ?

Concentrate on who set it up and paid for it --- behind the front end CIA /FBI perps .

Start thinking Project Chaos every time there is an incident .
You will rarely be wrong .

This is chicken feed to big time Fake stuff such as the Charlie and Erika False Flags .
Or the Butler theatre --- Deep State were really getting desperate for some strange reasons .
Did they really believe Squawker could be elected ?

 

[Robert W]

Meanwhile, Kristi Noem can parade around in a vest marked ICE POLICE, fully misrepresenting herself to the public — and no one bats an eye. Yet when I share documented facts and ask a question about them, that apparently crosses the line?

Kristi Noem, still the head of Homeland Security has every right to wear protective vests.

 

[Robert W]

Within the last week, I was accused on this message board of “practicing law without a license.” What triggered this accusation? A poll I posted, asking whether others agreed that ICE ERO agents operate under civil administrative law, not criminal law — and therefore are not technically “police,” despite what their vests claim. Rather than engage with the question, someone took such offense that they labeled it unauthorized legal practice.

Now, internet defamation is a real, serious, and actionable issue — but beyond that, the claim was absurd. I’ve actually reviewed the case file of someone accused of this very allegation, and suffice it to say: asking a legal question in a public forum does not meet the bar for unauthorized practice of law.

Meanwhile, Kristi Noem can parade around in a vest marked ICE POLICE, fully misrepresenting herself to the public — and no one bats an eye. Yet when I share documented facts and ask a question about them, that apparently crosses the line?

For those offended by my previous post — or simply not inclined to dig into federal statutes (fair enough) — perhaps you’ll receive it differently coming from an actual attorney. And yes, in case that’s relevant to how it's received: she is a highly accomplished Black woman in the legal field.

Here’s her brief but informative take on "excited utterance" hearsay doctrine and how it may apply in the Renee Good shooting. Please engage with the substance, not just the source.

Sharí Dunn on Excited Utterance Under the Federal Rules

The speaker is a black female attorney. It did not take her long to use race as her thesis. Race to her is vital to understand. She has a great education since she knows law. She seems to also think she is a psychologist due to race.

Watch her directly.

Reach Here: sharidunn.substack.com

 

[Oddball]

Within the last week, I was accused on this message board of “practicing law without a license.” What triggered this accusation? A poll I posted, asking whether others agreed that ICE ERO agents operate under civil administrative law, not criminal law — and therefore are not technically “police,” despite what their vests claim. Rather than engage with the question, someone took such offense that they labeled it unauthorized legal practice.

And under administrative law, there's no call whatsoever for judicial warrants to remove the illegal squatters.

You're here illegally, ICE can scoop up your ass and ship you out there and now.

Deal with it.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Kristi Noem, still the head of Homeland Security has every right to wear protective vests.

Can you or I wear a vest allegedly identifying us a the "Police" is we're not a police officer? Noem is not a law enforcement officer therefore wearing any insignia that would lead the public or anyone else into believe she's a law enforcement agent with government granted police authority to detain, arrest or worse--shoot & kill individuals is what is referred to in many places as "impersonating a police officer".

In Washington State that would be a violation of RCW 9A.60.045, I'm not sure about federal statutes:

RCW 9A.60.045​

Criminal impersonation in the second degree.​

(1) A person is guilty of criminal impersonation in the second degree if the person:
(a)(i) Claims to be a law enforcement officer or creates an impression that he or she is a law enforcement officer; and
(ii) Under circumstances not amounting to criminal impersonation in the first degree, does an act with intent to convey the impression that he or she is acting in an official capacity and a reasonable person would believe the person is a law enforcement officer;

 

[Robert W]

Can you or I wear a vest allegedly identifying us a the "Police" is we're not a police officer? Noem is not a law enforcement officer therefore wearing any insignia that would lead the public or anyone else into believe she's a law enforcement agent with government granted police authority to detain, arrest or worse--shoot & kill individuals is what is referred to in many places as "impersonating a police officer".

In Washington State that would be a violation of RCW 9A.60.045, I'm not sure about federal statutes:

RCW 9A.60.045​

Criminal impersonation in the second degree.​

(1) A person is guilty of criminal impersonation in the second degree if the person:
(a)(i) Claims to be a law enforcement officer or creates an impression that he or she is a law enforcement officer; and
(ii) Under circumstances not amounting to criminal impersonation in the first degree, does an act with intent to convey the impression that he or she is acting in an official capacity and a reasonable person would believe the person is a law enforcement officer;

I see where you are coming from to this day Kristi Noem has police working for her. She manages them. She tells them how to do things. Fire Chiefs do not put out fires. They supervise. They can wear fireman on a jacket. She supervised police. So, she can wear a police jacket.

 

[BackAgain]

Within the last week, I was accused on this message board of “practicing law without a license.” What triggered this accusation? A poll I posted, asking whether others agreed that ICE ERO agents operate under civil administrative law, not criminal law — and therefore are not technically “police,” despite what their vests claim. Rather than engage with the question, someone took such offense that they labeled it unauthorized legal practice.

Now, internet defamation is a real, serious, and actionable issue — but beyond that, the claim was absurd. I’ve actually reviewed the case file of someone accused of this very allegation, and suffice it to say: asking a legal question in a public forum does not meet the bar for unauthorized practice of law.

Meanwhile, Kristi Noem can parade around in a vest marked ICE POLICE, fully misrepresenting herself to the public — and no one bats an eye. Yet when I share documented facts and ask a question about them, that apparently crosses the line?

For those offended by my previous post — or simply not inclined to dig into federal statutes (fair enough) — perhaps you’ll receive it differently coming from an actual attorney. And yes, in case that’s relevant to how it's received: she is a highly accomplished Black woman in the legal field.

Here’s her brief but informative take on "excited utterance" hearsay doctrine and how it may apply in the Renee Good shooting. Please engage with the substance, not just the source.

Sharí Dunn on Excited Utterance Under the Federal Rules