Terre Haute
Lawmakers: No Gitmo detainees to Indiana
February 3, 2009
Michael HoskinsA Northern Indiana lawmaker doesn't want any Guantanamo Bay Naval Base detainees to be sent to a high-security prison
in Terre Haute once the Guantanamo camp is closed within a year.
MoreCircuit Court: Spreadsheets OK as evidence
January 15, 2009
Jennifer NelsonA Terre Haute company and its president lost an appeal of their convictions and sentence for making materially false statement
reports under the Clean Water Act.
MoreJustices asked to take Terre Haute mayor case
December 16, 2008
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court is being asked to consider the role a federal law plays in deciding who is Terre Haute's current
mayor and whether a special election is needed.
MoreCOA travels to Terre Haute
December 10, 2008
IL StaffAn Indiana Court of Appeals panel of judges travels to Terre Haute Thursday for arguments in a robbery case out of Vanderburgh
County.
MoreCOA voids Terre Haute's 2007 mayoral election
November 13, 2008
Michael HoskinsThe man elected Terre Haute's mayor was ineligible because of federal law to become a candidate or assume office, the
Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today on an issue of first impression. As a result, a special election is needed to fill the
vacancy.
More
Sponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.
Forcing a defendant to wear a stun belt, in court or otherwise, is a violation of american principles! It is also unconstitutional!
So, if I save $100.00 cash per week, from my $500.00 per week paycheck, for 50 years, at which time, I will have saved $260,000.00, the government can raid my home and take my money, just by saying it is drug money! Shouldn't the government, have some kind of evidence of drugs, rather, than just saying we are the government and we will take anything you own, anytime we choose? Tyranny is upon us! If you don't know your rights, you don't have any!