|
From Wiki: "is a written legal document used in various legal adversarial systems that is presented to a court arguing why the party to the case should prevail"
Attorneys write them daily, by the thousands... they are an essential part of American Juris Prudence.
Again from Wiki: The brief or memorandum establishes the legal argument for the party, explaining why the reviewing court should affirm or reverse the lower court's judgment based on legal precedent and citations to the controlling cases or statutory law
In this thread:
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2041038
The originating poster posts what appears to be a legal brief with a typical legal title. This brief argues that US law is subservient to International law during times of war. However this is where the brief becomes quasi...
The user does not provide any Statutory citations or controlling precedents in support of his argument. Not doing so gives this quasi-brief the appearance that it is settled (factual) law. Additionally, the user copied text directly from other legal memorandum without citation and credit (Yoo Memo). The user makes false assertions in this brief; again, he presents this as settled law. As a result, many users on that thread now believe he has presented fact, when he has actually only presented his opinion.
I have repeatedly asked for cites and authorities as has at least one other poster. The OP laughs and then posts insults. I have endured personal attack after attack by this user, many of which have been allowed to stand.
DU does not allow its users to share medical information for fear it may be misconstrued as medical advice. People see medical language and assume it must be so - afterall, it's written in medical terms. This users quasi-memo appears to Duers unfamiliar with the law to be factual... afterall, it is written in legal terms. Those of us who work in the legal field know better, but so what? When questioned, this user dodges and tosses insults designed to alter the dialogue and change the subject. And the false information presented as factual law continues to stand.
My question is this: Why does DU allow legal opinion to be posted as fact? Why does DU allow users to plagiarize legal opinion and post it as theirs? Why doesn't DU require a quasi-brief such as this one to contain full legal citations and statutory authorities? Regardless medical or legal posts, users of DU read such information here and take it away as fact.
Courts require legal memorandum to be supported by evidence. By allowing users to do as the poster in this matter has done, DU unknowingly participates in spreading false information to its users and people across the internet. This is not only wrong, it is potentially harmful to DU's reputation as the place to go to when one wishes to learn the truth about all things political.
Thank you for your time,
Melinda
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
