Показать сообщение отдельно
Старый 13.02.2011, 17:01 Язык оригинала: Русский       #36
Гуру
 
Регистрация: 12.10.2008
Сообщений: 2,430
Спасибо: 16,535
Поблагодарили 3,169 раз(а) в 901 сообщениях
Репутация: 5353
По умолчанию

Цитата:
Сообщение от lazycat Посмотреть сообщение
Well, if you're not a lawyer and do not understand the difference between a search warrant in the home and search the premises jur. persons who do not know against whom a criminal case in which a search is conducted, what you are trying to prove? That employees of SC RF, Moscow Region, broke all imaginable norms themselves have signed a verdict? This is ridiculous.

Have you ever personally witnessed the testing room jur. faces at least DAEC? Just checking, according to some nasty customer? When the staff is forbidden to use mobile phones is prohibited to remove his hands from the table, it is forbidden to move around the room. And it does not matter - is present at the same time head of the organization or not. And this note on legal grounds. If only a little, a very little understood in legal matters, and stupidly did not read the article of the CPC, the stupid would not talk.
lazycat more than once, and not as a concept or a witness, but as a participant, so know the law and know how often it violates checking using the ignorance of staff (from experience).
Read the blog and comments, I wrote about this one http://www.snob.ru/profile/blog/5152/31350?page=1




Последний раз редактировалось Tana; 13.02.2011 в 17:20.
Tana вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Эти 2 пользователя(ей) сказали Спасибо Tana за это полезное сообщение:
Veronic (13.02.2011), Вивьен (13.02.2011)