Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...
stats

Wake Forest, NC

#41170 Jul 21, 2013
State of Florida

Charlotte, NC

#41171 Jul 21, 2013
waco1909 wrote:
State of Florida, I believe I have answered the question as to whether the Martin family should file a civil lawsuit 3 times now. would you be so kind as to make a mental note of that?
You kept insisting that the Dept. of Justice had to do it. That is not true. Now we are clear on this. The Martin family will not have to worry about paying for a legal defense. They will be well funded, just as both parties were in the original trial. Zimmerman will be well funded as well if a Civil suit is filed.
Good Advise

Sweden

#41172 Jul 21, 2013
State of Florida wrote:
<quoted text>
You kept insisting that the Dept. of Justice had to do it. That is not true. Now we are clear on this. The Martin family will not have to worry about paying for a legal defense. They will be well funded, just as both parties were in the original trial. Zimmerman will be well funded as well if a Civil suit is filed.
You're better off debating with a brick wall than with bipolar waco the whacko. He's the flip flop village idiot of topix. He'll steal and conjure up multiple moniker names, including yours. The fool is a mentally disturbed troubled troll. The best advise anyone can give you is to just ignore the internet imp.
TSF

Wake Forest, NC

#41173 Jul 21, 2013
The penalty for losing in civil trials is only money. Zimmerman doesn't even have the money to pay his attorneys now. So what is the point? OJ lost and still hasn't paid because he doesn't have the money. Martin is already being "honored" by looting, stealing , smashing and assaulting innocent people. This dishonors Martin and deepens mistrust of black in general. Problem is that most of them are too stupid to understand that.
State of Florida wrote:
<quoted text>
You kept insisting that the Dept. of Justice had to do it. That is not true. Now we are clear on this. The Martin family will not have to worry about paying for a legal defense. They will be well funded, just as both parties were in the original trial. Zimmerman will be well funded as well if a Civil suit is filed.

“Vote”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#41174 Jul 21, 2013
State of Florida wrote:
<quoted text>
You kept insisting that the Dept. of Justice had to do it. That is not true. Now we are clear on this. The Martin family will not have to worry about paying for a legal defense. They will be well funded, just as both parties were in the original trial. Zimmerman will be well funded as well if a Civil suit is filed.
Why would the Martins have to pay for a legal defense?

“Vote”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#41175 Jul 21, 2013
Good Advise wrote:
<quoted text>You're better off debating with a brick wall than with bipolar waco the whacko. He's the flip flop village idiot of topix. He'll steal and conjure up multiple moniker names, including yours. The fool is a mentally disturbed troubled troll. The best advise anyone can give you is to just ignore the internet imp.
I believe this post speaks for itself.Who signs in? Me.The other person"good advise", gosh I wonder who that is.
Dang

Greer, SC

#41176 Jul 21, 2013
State of Florida wrote:
<quoted text>
You kept insisting that the Dept. of Justice had to do it. That is not true. Now we are clear on this. The Martin family will not have to worry about paying for a legal defense. They will be well funded, just as both parties were in the original trial. Zimmerman will be well funded as well if a Civil suit is filed.
Yes, they will be well funded by the royalties from trade marking their son's name. Of course, it will all be in the name of justice.
State of Florida

Charlotte, NC

#41177 Jul 21, 2013
waco1909 wrote:
<quoted text> Why would the Martins have to pay for a legal defense?
To pay the lawyers working on their civil case. They don't do it for free, at least none that I know. The state does not handle civil cases.

“Vote”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#41178 Jul 21, 2013
State of Florida wrote:
<quoted text>
To pay the lawyers working on their civil case. They don't do it for free, at least none that I know. The state does not handle civil cases.
From what I have been told by some attorneys a civil case against Zimmerman proving that he violated Martins rights would be almost impossible to succeed.I didn't ask if the losing team has to pay the legal fees of the winners.

“Vote”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#41179 Jul 21, 2013
Litigation is the lifeblood of America.I don't say this with pride, and I'm not referencing the Zimmerman/Martin debacle.
TSF

Wake Forest, NC

#41180 Jul 21, 2013
Usually, when someone files a lawsuit, the complaint contains a request for legal fees. Then the defendant files a counter suit asking for damages caused by the suit and asking for legal fees. In this particular case, neither the complainant nor the defendant have that kind of money. Unless others are willing to give money to attorneys, it will go nowhere.
waco1909 wrote:
<quoted text> From what I have been told by some attorneys a civil case against Zimmerman proving that he violated Martins rights would be almost impossible to succeed.I didn't ask if the losing team has to pay the legal fees of the winners.
TSF

Wake Forest, NC

#41181 Jul 21, 2013
Because of the certain to come counterclaims from the defendant. If they do not defend them, they are defaulted, which means they lose and have to pay if they lose. Its a neat trick attorneys use to lock everyone into the case. The complainant almost always also becomes a defendant in reverse.
waco1909 wrote:
<quoted text> Why would the Martins have to pay for a legal defense?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#41182 Jul 21, 2013
I saw Trayvon's dad on TV asking for everyone to stop the protesting and the violence so they could bury their son in peace and move on with their lives. It didn't sound as if they were even pushing for a civil trial! Sounds to me it's the media and the ambulance chasing attorneys that are pushing the issue. 1) the media, especially MSNBC & CNN, needs the ratings and 2) the attorneys are looking for a paycheck! George was found innocent due to FL's stand your ground law, he admitted to killing him, but out of self defense. Proving a civil case based on racism will be nearly impossible due to the lack of evidence. OJ wasn't acquitted due to CA's stand your ground law and their was no self defense argument. The comparison of the cases is apples and oranges.
TSF

Wake Forest, NC

#41183 Jul 22, 2013
NC teachers will get their arrow up the patootie this week compliments of the republikan state legislature ,when it votes to end teacher tenure. It really is just symbolic of republican contempt for teachers because there are already 25 reasons NC teachers can be fired, including incompetence, immorality , etc.. The only thing tenure requires is that individuals be given a reason for their dismissal. Now they can just say "your are fired" and give no reason. Hopefully all teachers will be able to remember this at the next election.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#41184 Jul 22, 2013
TSF wrote:
NC teachers will get their arrow up the patootie this week compliments of the republikan state legislature ,when it votes to end teacher tenure. It really is just symbolic of republican contempt for teachers because there are already 25 reasons NC teachers can be fired, including incompetence, immorality , etc.. The only thing tenure requires is that individuals be given a reason for their dismissal. Now they can just say "your are fired" and give no reason. Hopefully all teachers will be able to remember this at the next election.
The general public does not support teacher tenure because it's been used to allow incompetent teachers to continue to teach. Please explain why you think it's necessary.
waco1909

Greer, SC

#41185 Jul 22, 2013
Tenure promotes mediocrity.
TSF

Wake Forest, NC

#41186 Jul 22, 2013
If cases of incompetent teachers exist, it isn't because of tenure protections. If you will check with present NC DOE written policy, you will see incompetence as one of the long list of reasons a teacher can be fired. So if an incompetent teacher is allowed to continue employment, it would be because of an incompetent or negligent administrator. On the other hand, firing teachers for arbitrary and capricious reasons has been a serious past problem. As with most regulations , a serious problem is the reason tenure was established in the first place. The only basic policy difference between tenured teachers and non tenured teachers is that you have to state the reason for the dismissal if the tenured teacher is fired. In the non tenured case, the individual doesn't even have the right to ask why they were dismissed. Usually, its just "Your contract has not been renewed. Goodbye ." Not liking their shoes, failing to inflate the grades for a school board member's child or failing to drop their drawers on request , any reason, doesn't matter, they cannot even ask.
If you cannot understand the reasons for establishment of tenure in the first place, further explanations to you would be futile.
Robert Stowe wrote:
<quoted text>The general public does not support teacher tenure because it's been used to allow incompetent teachers to continue to teach. Please explain why you think it's necessary.
TSF

Wake Forest, NC

#41187 Jul 22, 2013
So firing experienced, competent teachers so you can hire your niece or cousin doesn't promote incompetence? Firing the principal because your campaign manager's wife needs a job promotes excellence? Nepotism ( one of the main reasons tenure was established in the first place) has been a serious past problem and still exists but much more subtly since tenure was established. So when the republikans are voted out in the next election, the newly elected democrats fire all the republican teachers, principals and superintendents. I CAN SEE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. Why do you think tenure was invented in the first place?
waco1909 wrote:
Tenure promotes mediocrity.
TSF

Wake Forest, NC

#41188 Jul 22, 2013
Section 1900 Dismissal Related to Job Performance Concerns
The first category includes five grounds for dismissal that relate directly to
the manner in which a teacher performs his or her duties. Those five grounds
are
• inadequate performance,3
• neglect of duty,4
• failure to fulfill the statutory duties of a teacher,5
• insubordination,6 and
• failure to comply with the reasonable requirements of the board.7
Inadequate Performance
The Teacher Tenure Act provides that a tenured teacher may be dismissed or
demoted for “inadequate performance.”8
Only three cases involving “inadequate
TSF

Wake Forest, NC

#41189 Jul 22, 2013
Failure to Fulfill the Statutory Duties of a Teacher
The Teacher Tenure Act provides that a tenured teacher may be dismissed or
demoted for “failure to fulfill the duties and responsibilities imposed upon
teachers by the General Statutes of this State.”31 G.S. 115C-307 sets out the following
duties of teachers:
• to maintain order and discipline,
• to provide for the general well-being of students,
• to provide some medical care to students,
• to teach the students,
• to enter into the superintendent’s plans for professional growth,
• to discourage nonattendance,
• to make required reports, and
• to take care of school buildings.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Marvin Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
mineral springs mayor repeals new nusiance ordi... Jun 11 Dave 1
Traci Diego Apr '17 jlom 2
Before January 14th, had anyone spoken to Gaige... Apr '17 Michellebanks 2
Gypsies in the Charlotte area (Jan '14) Feb '17 ThomasA 9
PE teacher investigation Feb '17 Concerned 1
Hit and Run Jan '17 nala20168 1
Chuck S. Stallings pollice officer (Dec '16) Dec '16 Ben 2

Marvin Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Marvin Mortgages