He sent the screen shot of his charges along with his questions.
Before he did this, I explained that I'm not a lawyer, but that I could give him my personal opinions and or relate with personal experiences, where applicable.
According to the man, he got into some sort of snaff-ooo-ey at the airport. Now I knew he wasn't telling me everything and I didn't need to comment on everything.
What I did comment on is the fact that this man is in his 50's and suffered a first time alleged offense. Even though he used to work in part of the court systems back in the day, he wasn't aware of what happens at the other end of the "pipe."
It blew his mind. I could tell from his comments that he didn't feel like he was treated like a human being during this process.
This lingering feeling may continue when other realizations about the system sets in:
- some departments or agencies receive matching federal funds for enforcement
- some departments or agencies have "unspoken" quotas to meet
- some employees of these departments or systems become jaded and just shove people through the process without thought or conscience.
Now, that doesn't apply to ALL workers of these agencies. I'm perfectly aware there are still those who have souls and treat others with compassion.
There are still angels among us.
The self-help course is packed full of information that helps an individual with these types of things.
I do know in general terms is that this comes down to evidence (he now has some criminal charges)-- not just what may have happened but evidence the court counts as evidence.
Admissible evidence must be what the court calls "verified". In other words, there has to be something to vouch for what is being said that is able to be cross-examined by the other party. Not just the evidence but the validity and source of that evidence.
Properly implemented verifiable credentials technology would solve both of those things and cut through many accusations and allegations that come up.
I learned from the legal course that (assault = intent, proximity + capability) & (battery = unwanted touch,) even if it's just the tip of your finger or part of your body brushing up against someone.
In this case, the man described the situation and this "touch" was a normal reaction that any one of us could have done. The man did not harm the airport official in any way.
The man got slapped with those charges simply because the officials could levy the charges against him. The officials feel protected because of it and unfortunately, a lot of agencies (and lawyers) will prey upon the ignorance of others, not only not knowing their rights, but not knowing how enforce them.
I went on to describe how I personally thought the official's paperwork was lacking based on what I learned in the legal course. To me it was clear as day and solved many of the "OMG-what's-going-to-happen-to-me-and-my family-now?-feelings."
But I also told him since he couldn't navigate the system for himself right this very second, he should follow his instincts and seek a GOOD lawyer.
In the mean time? Everyone needs to learn what's in this course. The course makes it easy to learn. Don't wait until you're inadvertently caught up in a legal mess you never saw coming.
Get the keys to justice: http://www.keystojustice.com