David Stark lecturing on ethics? Really? 'There was no misconduct, but I refuse to discuss evidence.' Jessica Yates: 'Case closed and dismissed because I said so, I refuse to discuss evidence.' Byron Large: 'I have no authority to comment on lawyer dishonesty or how the OARC handled it.' CU is deeply committed to access to justice? Can I have a couple names? Melissa Hart is an example? IAALS is an example? Elisa Overall is an example? Let's see if Hart or Overall will answer the question I have below.* [Just kidding, I know they won't. We pretend we care about a variety of tools, policies and procedures to ensure access to justice and hold state decision makers accountable via access to justice; but we don't actually like to be questioned about it, and neither will the CATJC do anything about it.] Let's see if any of these alleged access to justice advocates will answer this question: This largely has to do with the disagreement between judge Dorancy and Angel and CRS 13-5.7-101, including the fact that no judge on the civil rules committee nor will judge Angel indicate that judge Dorancy was right about anything: CRS 13-5.7-101: Courts should employ a variety of tools, policies and procedures to ensure access to justice and hold state decision makers accountable. DORANCY/ANGEL: We have a variety of tools, policies and procedures to evade access to justice and excuse state decision makers from being accountable. Given those three errors undisputed by the civil rules committee, undisputed by judge Angel and chief Chris Baumann, undisputed by Richard Gabriel and Melissa Hart as prior filed, I ask judge Angel to finish this sentence; *Given the refusal of the state personnel director and the CU president to comply with CRS 24-50-101 and even their own ethics policies for how all state employees deserve to be treated, relative to the opinion of the Colorado legislature, SCAO, Colorado supreme court, IAALS and ABA, the action by this court that most closely reflects a commitment to duties the taxpayers, legislature and judicial community expect of all judges, e.g. per CRS 13-5.7-101, using a range of tools, policies, and services to ensure fair, accountable, and transparent access to justice would be:

The different approaches of why the 1st amendment is important don't have to be mutually exclusive, but rather symbiotic. At the same time, very few people are involved in developing the scope and intent of AI which leads it to be relatively non representative of the public at large and the consumers of it. In other words, the algorithms used in developing the reasoning of AI and the way its designed to synthesize information is likely to be very subjective; suggesting outcomes that are not only incomplete, but very subtly ideologically driven.

Vernita Harris is very impressive

Any directions to order planets and don't say straight up

Fiddle didle cats in da griddle

Can I get COVID from fcc

🥵

❤ 15:07

Why mi hotspot no work

I spend all myoney in yu comunity

What on menu at mess hall

Is government a mess or is it all in my mind

Where's nanny

Why all terrifs at fast foo

When can I get my cell back

On my 3 generatin cell

Are da towers really on I can't get signal

Do everyone eat at right time and how dey know

Where's da mess hall

Who makes foo at cardenos Pitt ca

New York branch

God did make humans right

How did god make Blake humans

Ju luk like Jesus

Word to yo mama

Calif

Was global sweety

Let's check out Melissa Hart claims to reality: 'Law school and IAALS is pivotal in shaping values; professional norms and attitudes, standards of ethics, develop professional responsibility, urgent need and professional obligation to devote time and resources and civic influence to ensure equal civic access to justice.' Hmm, interesting theory? Has IAALS, or the Colorado Access to Justice Commission, or Justice Hart ever done any of those things? Let's compare theory to reality: Zach Willis IAALS lying to me: Unfortunately, we are unable to assist with or get involved with pending litigation or individual cases. Sorry we can’t be of more help in this matter. Richard Murray CATJC lying to me: The Commission does not function in this manner, and we are unable to assist with any legal advice. Junie Joseph STATE LEGISLATOR lying to me: I am sorry that I cannot help on your judicial matters. 1) I am a lawyer I cannot give you random legal advice. 2) separation of the branches of government. Cynthia Covell OARC and Rules of Professional Conduct and CBA Ethics expert lying to me: I received your email this morning and this follow up email just now. I am not able to help you with this matter. Byron Large PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE lying to me: This Court only has jurisdiction to hear complaints filed by the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel. This Court is not able to address your email. David Goldberg JUDICIAL ETHICS BOARD lying to me: I do not have the ability to look into, investigate, take action against judges, or respond to questions posed by the public. Steve Masciocchi, Partner Holland and Hart LLP, on the Supreme Court Rules of Professional Conduct lying to me: I have received your messages, but I cannot help you with your issue as a member of the Colorado Supreme Court’s Committee on the Rules of Professional Conduct. Anyway, I have a note to Hart to see if she will do what she recommends law schools teach lawyers to do. Stay tuned.

🏛

TO: COLORADO SUPREME COURT JUDICIAL ETHICS BOARD, LEGAL REGULATION COMMITTEE, ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BOULDER COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION, IAALS As you are aware my general goal has been to find any member of the Colorado judiciary willing to tell the truth. This of course is an uphill battle against the normal agenda of judicial officials: 'There is no way we will admit that any of us has been wrong about anything. Any evidence or questions regarding impropriety, bias, incompetence, inefficiency from the public will be ignored. We protect our own.' I won't assume however that there is no one on any of your committees whose professional obligation to the truth outweighs their personal agenda to insulate the reputation of the judiciary. So can you pose the following questions to see if any 'I agree to tell the truth' members have an opportunity to step forward? 1. Review the dismissal by David Stark. List the evidence he provided, what sort of chance his dismissal would have to convince a jury, and on a scale of 1-5 his level of inspiring public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary. Here is my analysis: Me: Here is the evidence of dishonesty by CU and PERA lawyers. Stark; I don't discuss evidence, I am informed our staff was very professional. 2. Review the dismissal by Chris Gregory. List the evidence he provided, what sort of chance his dismissal would have to convince a jury, and on a scale of 1-5 his level of inspiring public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary. Here is my analysis: Me: Here is the evidence of judicial misconduct by judge Dea Lindsey and Elizabeth Brodsky. Gregory; I don't discuss evidence, besides you have already complained about a judge before. 3. Review the dismissal by Dea Lindsey. List the evidence she provided, what sort of chance her dismissal would have to convince a jury, and on a scale of 1-5 her level of inspiring public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary. Here is my analysis: Me: Here is the evidence and law that is undisputed by defendant. Lindsey; I don't discuss evidence. I like what the lawyer said, so I am signing my name to it.

These questions have already been answered.

Hello, I hope you are well. I have researched your KZbin channel {Silicon Flatirons}. Your content is excellent but I have found many reasons why your KZbin channel is not growing appropriately and why your Subscribers, Views, Likes, and Comments are not increasing. Your SEO Optimization Score is Very Low, Proper search engine optimization (SEO) can significantly impact ranking. Your channel is not optimized for relevant keywords, it may not appear in search results or suggested videos. You are not Consistently uploading videos. Your Engagement Metrics are very few. And you are not maintaining Metadata Optimization. Your channel's Audience Retention is very low. Also, your video is not being Correctly Promoted on other Social Media. If you can solve those problems correctly you will get lots of Organic Traffic and Engagement day by day on your KZbin channel which will increase your Exposure more than before. Can we discuss how to grow your KZbin channel via E-mail or Zoom Meeting? Regards, Riad Ahmed Faysal. Feel free to contact me: Email: [email protected] WhatsApp/Telegram: +8801576553705

*Promosm*

TO BRITANNY KAUFMAN AND ELISE OVERAL: Can you find out if the IAALS or CATJC board members oppose an amicus brief on the attached issues? I note IAALS was formed noticing the failures to provide access to justice and decided to do something about it by listening to people, changing the system, and empowering judges to the best practices for a fair, efficient, and trustworthy judiciary. This case of course is a perfect opportunity to do just that, including supporting the bill you backed leading to 13-5.7-101. ABA policy statements also support the issues here, and the ABA model rules of judicial conduct are meant to be enforced by state supreme courts. You can verify that with the ABA house of delegates. As you note, in 11 judges, the words 'fair', 'administration of justice', 'access to justice' and 'legislative intent' have not appeared in any court order. Likewise, the only person among a field of judges and lawyers quoting the statutory responsibility of the SPB, the DPA, and the University of Colorado is me; a lab worker who has never taken a class in the practice of law. Eleven judges have failed to do any of the following: a) State what they consider the administration of justice. b) State what the legislature would likely consider a just and reasonable result looking at the plain language in CRS 24-50-101. c) Provided any comment or consequence for the extensive pattern of dishonesty by CU in both administrative and legal proceedings. So, assuming your board members support your mission and access to justice, LMK what if any objection your team has to support your own mission in this particular case. I assume there are at least some of your board members who believe that taking action is the best way to 'empower judges, lawyers, businesspeople, and everyday people to put the best ideas into practice.'

Most conference in 2024

The lungs on this man. Miss his lectures.

The hell is he wearing

AI law is just going to feed the lawyers is all. What a farce. As is the legal system in this country. A real joke meant to profit the stinking lawyers. You can easily marry but not divorce. What a crock.

Great speaker

The family court system is facing a crisis, disproportionately affecting fathers since the 70's and threatening the well-being of our children. The root of this issue lies in the "Proven" Title IV-D program payment path to judges retirement funds and beneficiary interest (when a judge says the sates interest yes he means his retirement and his death benefits require it), which financially incentivizes courts to designate fathers as non-custodial parents, reducing them to weekend visitors with ill proportioned and burdensome child support. This practice not only undermines the rights of a fathers' roles but also destabilizes families, contributing to increased mental distress in children and suicides among U.S. veteran fathers, including veterans. We must confront this systemic bias and demand change. The use of artificial intelligence and legal technology offers hope, empowering fathers to advocate for fair treatment. It's time for policymakers and legal professionals to address these injustices. Immediate action is now possible and will ensure equitable treatment in custody cases and uphold the integrity of our family unit. YOU miss, nor any court has no authority to "harness and control distribution to the public" nor does any court have the authority to tell a Pro Se litigant what tools they can and cannot use if they cross reference their citation and present them appropriately protected by the Constitution to be heard, dues process and fairness. Not to mention we are protected by the rights given not by the generosity of the state but the hand of GOD. and your courts are trampling on fathers rights and children's rights

No need to worry...All the world is helping AI to grow and to produce by its own. Probably within 20 years there will be no need to discuss copyrights that much. Talking about music: The main problem is MUSIC INDUSTRY's HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT methods. They chose the way to pay less to artists but to earn more. Therefore, creators weakened. Entities , like music studios or hardware manufacturers who were directly serving to creators also weakened. As they got weak, no strong opposition demonstrated. Forget about AI..Unregulated software technology already helped to boost the jobless rates in music industry. Maybe we will be obliged to ask AI how to solve the copyright issue and problems in music industry.

feed all the prior opinions for cases and iven a new case ask gpt to generate the opinion!!

😻 'promo sm'

Thank you for this great conference and also thank you for uploading, really appreciated.

Hello Sir, Hope you are well. Since 2016, I've been a full-time freelance Digital Marketer. You have a KZbin channel, I noticed. I want to get in touch with you since I believe I can greatly aid in the expansion of your KZbin channel. Thank you. Md. Monir Hossain.

Great talk! Can you post a link to the slides?

One aspect that confuses me about SAFE notes is their claim of being neither equity nor debt. However, I'm unsure how this can be possible. Technically, when investing real money, one would typically expect to receive either actual equity or accrue an interest rate, similar to a loan. Contractually suspending both of these options does not appear to be reasonable.

Wow congratulations Rumman. Have a great future in your career

We are proud of her . She is a Bangladeshi

Great now let's change the view from counsel to the view from the bench and how a judges deliberation of a case can be improved and distilled. And then where does that stop? Could the opinions of the SCOTUS be cloned and predicted when a case is before it ?