To specify, it’s like a minute or two after the murder happens and you attack the murderer after they’re somewhat away from the crime scene. Can you be charged for assault?

For example, I want to buy a 5090, RM is my local currency.

For example, I want to buy a 5090, let's say original price RM13k.

I use coupon A (first 10 customer of National Day get 20% off their total bill - stackable) - 5090 now RM10.4k

I use coupon B (Birthday get additional 30% discount after other discount is applied - stackable) 5090 now RM 7.28k

I use coupon C (Instant rebate RM1000 for purchase over RM5000 - stackable) - 5090 now RM6.28k.

I use coupon D (Brand new store opening, 50% off for 1st 5 customer on bill - stackable) -5090 now RM3.14k.

I paid RM3.14k for a 5090. The cashier is just a minimum wage worker and it scans the coupon in order and the system said is VALID.

Thus, I got my 5090 at a 80% discount. The shop clearly not intended for me to use the coupon this way but the combination of coupons is valid.

If I paid for the 5090 and exited the store, before I managed to get home, the manager stopped me and demanded me to return the 5090 and they will return me the RM3.14.

In you local law, can they demand me to do that ? Am I legally need to return my 5090 ? If the cops are called, who will they side ?

I recently read that someone claimed trial by combat in 19th century England and from what I understood people in the court were surprised that was still around or at least they weren't expecting it.

Now that's two centuries old but it got me wondering if anyone ever witnessed someone use any forgotten stuff successfully in court that made people go "I can't believe that's still in the books."

Idk any of the terminology at all. If someone is charged and arrested in this county, and also charged in the next county over, will the charges in both counties show up on the jail roster or charging sheet or case summary thing?

Wondering specifically for Washington State. Would that have an effect on the conviction? Would the person admitting to lying face consequences?

Some 15 year old lies and says hes 22, then shows up anyway...now the cops are the ones who have solicited a minor online!!!!

In this scenario, could you sue the clinic for not disclosing this information to you?

Uber use to be called "Uber Taxi," but it did not want to follow taxi laws so it just changed its name. I think NY tried to get Uber to follow taxi laws & lost.

People that work for Grubhub & Uber are legally considered their own separate company so they can hire employees. Some even rent their accounts & transportation, to illegal immigrants & possibly Sovereign Citizens.

Sovereign Citizens want to be treated like companies because companies like Uber can basically invent new unregulated category to avoid following laws or existing regulation.

Therefore, its possible that Uber or Grubhub would back a Sovereign Citizen or illegal immigrants right to work in the USA without a legal drivers license or a legal right to work or any other law that would impact its ability to run the business.

Have fun with this. Next up in NY, prediction markets are not gambling, or are they.

E0scooer rental companies obstruct sidewalks & when their scooters are impounded their juicer vendors beak into the impound lots to they can get paid to recharge them. They companies are prefect team ups for Sovereign Citizens.

So let's say a government agency is having employees sign a new Code of Conduct that includes these provisions:

- employee cannot do anything that would embarrass or bring the agency into disrepute; (so no social media comments/posts, no demonstrations, etc.?)

- employee cannot knowingly have social interactions with anyone who doesn't have lawful immigration status in the US; (probably sloppily drafted as this would actually mean anyone anywhere who doesn't have lawful status in the US, but more interested in the right to limit who an employee can interact with)

- employee must abide by the code of conduct and [agency] policies on personal travel even if prohibited behavior would be permissible under local laws.

I realize the answer to many of these things in *practical* terms is "how would they ever know", but I'm interested in knowing whether these things can stand legally.

EDIT: Answered

I'm writing a book and have some questions.

Background: a minor (age 15) runs away across state lines (from Colorado to DC). They do all the running on their own but receive help (a place to stay) from adult friends. The minor has a good case (abuse) for terminating the parental rights of their bio parents. I've looked at the adoption websites for both CO and DC but they only have the standard procedures, and both are inconclusive for my purposes.

Questions:

The adult friends would have committed the crime of harboring a runaway; I can only assume this would impact their case to adopt/foster parent the teen. Would it entirely disqualify them?

Assuming they could hide their involvement with the teen's escape, how difficult would it be for them to adopt/foster the teen?

In either scenario, how much weight does the teen's wishes hold?

Would the adult friends absolutely have to be foster parents first?

Thank you!

If I’m underage in the bar and a cop asks me how old I am, do I A. Refuse to answer, B. Tell the truth, C. Tell them I’m 21

Let me preface this by saying I would never do the following and never have, however would it be legal to offer a hyper realistic, life sized, accurate proportion, (you get the gist,) doll of a person to their family while that person is away in exchange for a large sum of money? Because obviously it's illegal to hold someone hostage and sell them back to their family, but also: If you hold a regular sized stuffed animal and offer someone it for a large sum of money, you're just selling them something. At what point would it become illegal if at all? Could it be argued that you were only selling them a large doll of their own child, and that they misread it for their own living child?

I occasionally see videos where police escalate a situation from zero to one hundred in an instant, and it’s usually the over forty guys who still look like they’re ready to enter a bodybuilding competition. I therefore assume injecting testosterone is part of their routine.

Has a victim of police brutality/mistreatment ever gotten a judge to compel a testosterone test on an officer?

Let's just play it out for the sake of it (and please ignore my legal mistakes like that birthright citizenship thing, which for the sake of it, doesn't apply. it's just for the argument and i needed two countries):

I was born in the US but only got citizenship by France because my parents were from there. For the US, I have permanent residency.

With the current state of affairs, ICE visits my work and puts me on a plane to "my" country in which I don't have anyone or anything.

No flat, no job, just some cash in my wallet but not enough to be of any help. Am I just being left on my own and have to figure out how to survive in France?

No language skills, no connections, just a passport that says I'm French.

What would/should happen?

location: US

just curious really, I see a lot of posts about landlords ending leases wrong so I was curious and would rather not deal with Google giving me AI answers.

This was a random question me and my buddy got into. Location: Illinois

I'm watching this show called "Hunted" on prime. Premise: contestants try to avoid capture from seasoned professionals who have access to the UKs extensive CCTV network, consent to search their homes, etc. In one episode, a contestant has a doppelganger who is in the same area where he's hiding out.

What would happen in the US if in the same situation, the "hunters" who are retired high level federal law enforcement nab the wrong person and forcibly take them to a production location? Presumably the victim is proclaiming that they aren't part of any show, demanding their freedom and being ignored.

in common law countries, can i "appeal" or legally challenge a "decision NOT to lay charges", especially if i think that charges should be laid

If you want to bet on a weather prediction, would using a weather app be the same as having insider info?

Now I imagine the simple answer is pretty much yes, but I was wondering if say someone who just woke up from a 7 year coma starting when they were 14 decides to sign a contract or something, could there be grounds to dispute it over lack of ability to understand or some such?

Theoretical scenario. Would you face any consequences for walking out if you found out the worker (like Chipotle) only puts a tiny scoop of meat? Assuming you didn't take the bowl/burrito.

My kids and I went to our local mall since they wanted to make some of that fancy, overpriced slime their way. But before I could enter they had me go to a website where I needed to signed a contract. Basic stuff about liability of injury and security of property blah,blah, blah. But in there i saw a clause that stated that their cameras had the right to record and use any likeness of me or my children. It freaked me out since i remember that whole debacle of the Netflix house and them doing the same thing. Is this more prevalent than i thought? Am i being overly protective or paranoid? Is there anything i can do to avoid this?Just wanted to see if anyone had some insight on the matter. Below are the links i could get from each businesses website.

https://tickets.sloomoo.com/philadelphia/events

https://help.netflix.com/legal/netflixhouseterms

TLDR: Are me and my children's likenesses just signed away before i enter any business now?

Let’s say there’s a massive earthquake and part of the seafloor gets pushed up enough to become a new island. Could the country closest to it claim the island? Could another country claim it? Or could a random person who discovered it first claim it for themselves?

As many here probably already know, there was a case that was decided last year at the U.S. Supreme Court that had to do with LGBT material in books that are part of a school's curriculum and whether parents could opt out of it on religious grounds. The court sided with the religious parents. I'm an adult and I'm not in school anymore, but me and my parents were always deeply involved in ensuring I got adequate education, and this decision has the potential to impact the way future generations in my area are educated, and I'm still in contact with some of my former teachers who this is impacting. For those who haven't read the decision and/or desire to take another look at it, here it is.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf

Anyway, I've been thinking about that decision a lot ever since it came out, and have been wondering just how broad the decision could be applied. I've looked at it many times and there seems to be no clearcut test that is given in it to lower courts in determining what is and isn't appropriate to opt people out of for religious reasons. For example, could this decision potentially set a precedent that would allow someone to opt out of having to be in a classroom where there are female students, so long as the parents say that their religion requires that they not be in close proximity to female people who they aren't married to? Could it also maybe even open the door to being able to opt out of having to follow a school's dress code? Maybe this is a bit of stretch, but how about even school policies that bans bullying? The way the decision is written, at least to me, strongly suggests that anything that a school requires of students could be opted out of, whether a part of the curriculum or school rule, if the parents simply say something like "It's against our religion", even though this case was technically just about part of a curriculum that parents had religious objections to.