Tman I appreaciate you input and responses as a professional.I dont see SJ ever making a comment about his own forays into the hobby. Nor do I ever see him say "xyz are illegal, and to get away with it do w" (from what I have been told would be a big no-no).
Am I missing something? This site is for finding escorts or sugarbabies both of which are breaking the law, no ? The lawyers on here including Jon are not breaking the law on a montly basis? Originally Posted by peaceomind
He does say "Here are the elements by statute, and if xyz takes place this is how it fits (or doesnt fit) the statute". Subtle, but important difference.
Additionally he says "If arrested (detained, whatnot), here are steps that aid in protecting your own rights during that time." All legal steps I might add.
There might be a strong presumption that at least some of the audience might find those pieces of advice germane --- but 'hanging out and talking', even in a place that is filled with 'seedy' people is *not* a crime, as long as you are *not* aiding or abetting anything illegal.
The rote recitation of legal statutes and how certain scenarios may or may not fit is in no way aiding or abetting anything --- it is the dissemination of information that is both legal (in the subject matter) and legal (as in a non-criminal activity).
The best example is one given to me years ago by a criminal attorney over a misdemeanor issue I had --- he explained how my actions might be viewed, and what the consequences of my actions might be legally. He then said "if I tell you *how* to do the actions better, I would be an accomplice which I will not do. But I will tell you how those actions are viewed, and what to do if the authorities pursue this, and what your rights are under the situation."
I view SJs comments as a rhetorical comment in that vein.
Just remember, hanging out in a seedy biker bar, talking about the law, does not make an attorney a partner in any criminal undertaking. SJ hangs out here, and talks about the law. No difference at all that I can see in the two, especially since SJ never *urges* anyone to break a law, nor dispenses advice aside from that described above.
If you want to say that I am being naive. to think someone will take a chance of telling how it can be done even on a private message board, then i get that.Explained above. Talking about the law and your rights is not a crime in any sense of the word. Ever. There are lines that can be crossed, but I dont see that in this case. Again, talking to bad people in bad places about your rights under the law, as long as you dont urge them to break or how to avoid the law, is perfectly copacetic under the law.
But seems to me chosing what law you break and being judgy or condesending about it is bullshit.Again, SJ is not breaking any law by talking about the law in this area.
I asked because I figured there where a lot of men on here with serious wealth stepping out on their wives. If they aren't hiding the money then they are gonna end up losing a lot sooner or later.Understandable. Marital property is always a highly contested issue. And highly emotional. But you can understand that at least some of what is being asked is essentially against the law, do you not? And, it is perfectly understandable that an attorney is telling you that in so many words.
Anyhoo, hope the best for you in your quest. And hopefully this helps out with the issue of SJs response and perhaps why he responded in that fashion. There are a ton of (maybe) practical items being proffered here, but be warned that some of them will get you on the *very* bad side of a family law judge (at the very minimum).
be good