Invest in Attorney Shield!
https://www.startengine.com/offering/attorney-shield
Use code “Lack” for 10% off Attorney Shield!
https://attorney-shield.com/discount/LACK
Karen McDonald
https://www.facebook.com/KarenMcDonaldMI
Nick Somberg
https://www.facebook.com/Somberglaw/photos
Submit your video:
https://forms.gle/CUpEtoKF4cw7apur6
LackLuster Media LLC
PO Box 514
Chester, WV 26034
Best Dashcam – https://amzn.to/45fVYsW
MERCH – https://www.youtube.com/@LackLusterMedia/store
Gimbal – https://amzn.to/45tZyzd
Camera 1 – https://amzn.to/3x1gn3L
Camera 2 – https://amzn.to/3slCrbD
Radar/Laser Detector – https://amzn.to/3P10Wnt
– – Other Channels – –
The Odd Side: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTSdgjy509mgNBfAa4MQ3gw
LackLuster Clips: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtj-_HlsiOHIZpdjIWsFi_w
– – Social – –
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lacklustermedia.official
Twitter: https://twitter.com/DaleHillerYT
DISCORD: https://discord.gg/SUcPuym
IG: https://www.instagram.com/lackluster_media/
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lackluster_official
Project1983.org
I receive commissions from featured links on verified purchases, at no cost to you.
Did you know that Law Enforcement Agencies and Public Officials can’t block your criticism on social media? If you choose to comment on a public forum such as Twitter or Facebook, they can’t delete comments they don’t agree with.
FAIR USE NOTICE This video may contain copyrighted material; the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available for the purposes of criticism, comment, review and news reporting which constitute the fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work for purposes such as criticism, comment, review and news reporting is not an infringement of copyright.
Disclaimer: Our videos and other published media should not be construed as legal advice. We are not attorneys, more importantly, we are not your attorney. Seek legal counsel if you believe you are a victim of police misconduct. Facts presented in publications are not indicative of personal opinions. are designed to be educational and informative, based on the information available at the time. Laws, case law, ordinances, policies, legal doctrine, and all other jurisprudence is subject to the interpretation of the court. We in no way intended to provoke, incite or shock the viewer and should never be considered a ‘call to action’.
Submitting a video either digitally or through physical devices is not a guarantee that your video will be published. Devices, documents, and any other items sent to our PO Box will not be returned unless a self addressed, postage paid, return envelope is included with your package.
All claims made are alleged, so if you see a mistake or misrepresentation, email us to let us know how we can remedy the issue immediately.
Lack@LackLusterVideo.com
#LackLuster #Cops #Police
source
Use code "Lack" for 10% off Attorney Shield!
https://attorney-shield.com/discount/LACK
Karen McDonald
https://www.facebook.com/KarenMcDonaldMI
Nick Somberg
https://www.facebook.com/Somberglaw/photos
Invest in Attorney Shield!
https://www.startengine.com/offering/attorney-shield
Submit your video:
https://forms.gle/CUpEtoKF4cw7apur6
LackLuster Media LLC
PO Box 514
Chester, WV 26034
Best Dashcam – https://amzn.to/45fVYsW
MERCH – https://www.youtube.com/@LackLusterMedia/store
– – Social – –
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lacklustermedia.official
Twitter: https://twitter.com/DaleHillerYT
DISCORD: https://discord.gg/SUcPuym
IG: https://www.instagram.com/lackluster_media/
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lackluster_official
Project1983.org
I receive commissions from featured links on verified purchases, at no cost to you.
"Sexual trafficking" written and spoken @35:17. Thank you. I'm tired of hearing people say "SA" and acronyms that I need to look up on other sights simply to understand what is said.
* Will this message be deleted?
Women in the workplace have ruined America.
If they live streamed the court hearing then it out for anyone to copy and repost.
Does this lady not know "POLICY" IS NOT "LAW"??
I would say that this falls under the 4th amendment more so.
Due to the fact of the elements of (4th) papers and effects.
❤ This would be a self-reference to better prepare a defense or complaint replays.
THIS JUDGE RETARTED LIKE BRO IF ITS IN PUBLIC OR THE PUBLIC HAS ACCESS TO IT, THEN ITS FOR THE PUBLIC. THAT STREAM IS ON YOUTUBE RIGHT NOW OF THAT COURTCASE SO ITS PUBLICCCCCCCCCC
It's interesting that there wasn't a rebuttal to the statement that since there was never any attempt to have the photo removed then there was no harm done…. I would argue that since there was never a need to have it removed then it must be more of a retaliation attempt strictly because of the content of said photo rather than there actually being a issue with there being a right to capture the broadcast. So it's a direct 1st amendment right that's been realized from the offset
It's interesting that there wasn't a rebuttal to the statement that since there was never any attempt to have the photo removed then there was no harm done…. I would argue that since there was never a need to have it removed then it must be more of a retaliation attempt strictly because of the content of said photo rather than there actually being a issue with there being a right to capture the broadcast. So it's a direct 1st amendment right that's been realized from the offset
This goes along with when they locked us down and was doing zoom in school so now ur house is school. so you could have a g. U. N at school
This is so absurd. This womans standing is absolutely childish and ignorant. I know she has to argue the point but yikes.
They can stream it publicly but it's not public? Boomers screaming at the internet.
Pandora's box once it's released on the interwebs. It's public, can't restrict it after the fact.
Holy shite….the first statement from the defense (time 23:30) is a bald-faces lie
The fact that this reached an appeals court is proof of the utter corruption of the so-called justice system.
Any two-cents-moron knows that the prosecutor clearly violated the first amendment and thiis case was dead on arrival for the prosecutor.
I read transcripts
That first judge is simply being an asshole and trying to protect their concealing of the corruption, illegality and abuse tgat goes on in court rooms on a daiky basis
Unless there are specific legitimate concerns of witnes, jurours or lawyers safety etc every damned thing done in a court room except side bars etc should be recordable by the public.
This stuff is put in YouTube's video database for useful future instances of value such as Video Deepfake Algorithm Training. To that extent, the courts willingly make copies of these livestreams, thereby violating the necessitation of keeping it unrecorded. They violate their own rules.
How is this even a question? He said they have the rule because they want people to see the recording, but they don’t want people taking a snippet that is misleading because it lacks context. But you can just as easily take the written logs of the proceedings out of context. It’s not illegal to take something out of context. They are trying to control free speech. Which makes it no longer free.
I’m excited Turner V Driver was cited as a case. Hearing the prosecutors lawyer argue makes me realize how completely ridiculous our legal system is. Many of the judges also make me really uncomfortable on who is in positions of power. They truly seem to feel they are sovereign citizens. I can’t believe the district court sided with the prosecutor.
I find it hypocritically hilarious that a court could entertain the possibility of punishing anyone for recording a live stream that they themselves broadcast to the whole world, on a publicly, freely-accessible website
The defense counsel was impeccable in his arguments.
36:03 – "We want a public court in a non-public forum".
What an absolutely oxymoronic statement. That implies that courts are 100% public at all times and have the ability to apply blanket gag-orders on all attending. Which is not a fact of reality. By "live streaming it" there's an implied responsibility taken on by the courts for the exposure they create, which creates a public forum for conversation, especially on PUBLIC sites like youtube.
If something is live streamed then the forum and proceedings are 100% open to the public interest, there is no redactions. You want to bring up a "a child victim of s3_x trafficking", well yes that would be very important to protect, SO DON'T STREAM IT. Flawed logic throughout. Yes a judge can put a halt on recording and communicating a case to the public. But that would imply a legitimate interest which directly impact rather a plaintiff, defendant, or court proceedings . So if none has been established, otherwise live streaming the proceedings would be a direct contradiction to those interests, then in limiting speech has no objectionable basis. In short: how can anyone have an interest in limiting the speech to the public for legitimate protections, when the courts themselves are the one broadcasting to the public.
Holy f that's a lot of time and money for something which seems so straightforward. So tedious…and that's how the judiciary system is weaponized the world over against people, most of whom simply don't have the resources to stand up to the machine. Such a fat deterrent against dissent.
Oakland County Michigan is corrupt as hell.
Court policy? Thought courts upheld laws…..
Literally living up to the “Karen” heritage
No way should trials be live streamed, that allows any witness to watch previous testimony & change their testimony accordingly.
Life is funny, once yte peepo get treatment that 3/5ths get, it's a problem. Just comply, that's what they tell us dindos right?
Some of the things the judges were asking the male attorney was literally just wasting time… I mean "if we broadcast live does that mean the courtroom is now public, so anyone can walk in and start recording?" uhhh wat? When the president broadcasts from the oval office does that make the oval office now public? Use some bloody common sense. "What if they make deep fakes with the public broadcast", omg, does he think no one is making deep fakes of courtroom recordings now? WAT IF SOMEONE GRABS SOMETHING FROM THE NEWS AND MAKES A DEEP FAKE OF IT, SOMEONE HELP. If that judges intention was to continue making public broadcasts/news recording/etc in the courtroom and STOP deekfakes somehow, he needs to be de-barred immediately, he should not be making any decisions in this day and age period; there are already avenues if someone goes too far with "deep fakes" type content (harassment charges/liable/slander/etc type laws). Whole bunch of time wasting questions by that one judge in particular.
The entire "how to apply the rules of the courtroom for the overflow/zoom rooms" path was mind bonkers too, irrelivant for this case, and, I mean are they going to go arrest jim cuz he's in his underwear, eating a bag of Doritos, as he is muted watching a zoom call court room hearing? Clearly certain rules/ettiquite are different for the two locations.
And why does those judges have such a hard time understanding the difference between a global/public broadcast vs a limited (overflow room or single person accommodation) broadcast…
If they could they would ban your memory
I'm confused. How do multiple Youtube channels rebroadcast the USL trial.
What is different in the Oakland Co case?
The foreign entity that's the so called justice system doesn't want transparency, they don't want accountability for their corrupt freemason's and Zionist Communist Traitors exposed for what they are when they are handling out Injustice ..