Re: Brinks v Jim Rojas New Motion

["Roland Moore" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>]

There isn't much a judge can do to suppress certain evidence as a practical
matter. That is why on occasion spies don't get charged for certain crimes,
because secrets can be exposed. Evidence can be omitted from a trail, civil
or criminal, by the use of many different procedures. One methodology is
posted here in Jim's case. Another method is by simple agreement of the
parties approved by the judge know as a motion in limine.

"CWatters" <colin.watters@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:13gt37ftitlga42@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Frank Olson" <Use-the-email-links@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
> news:6k7Pi.8519$th2.7797@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Bill wrote:
> > >> I take it that all the claims and motions posted on your site are
> > >> considered "public record" since they're filed in a Court of Law.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Hummm.... So if something "copyrighted" or "proprietary" was included
in
> a
> > > court motion or claim, would it then become public record?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Yes, it certainly would.
>
> Although I'm sure a judge can stop that. Otherwise state secrets could be
> published simply by including them in court motion.
>
>