I'm getting MADDR about your restriction on my freedom of conscience... » Consternation in Allegiance of the Improbable, a Consequential Exploration

Make a Donation

The SILVER button is for a PayPal express donation of $10CAD. Buy me an espresso.. No muss, no fuss..

 

The GOLD button takes you to PayPal's custom donation form, where you can specify the amount and make it monthly if you want to support this Covfefe Operation.

 
Whatever, Enjoy yourself, and enjoy the resource while it's here, but make sure to ask at least a couple people each day why they're wearing a mask. Enter into a non-confrontational discourse, and refer them to MaskSickness or KillingOntario .
—Peace, you inglourious basterds!

Consternation in Allegiance of the Improbable, a Consequential Exploration

  • The rule of inherent improbability or physical impossibility on which defendant relies has been stated thusly:
    • " 'Although an appellate court will not uphold a judgment or verdict based upon evidence inherently improbable, testimony which merely discloses unusual circumstances does not come within that category.
    • To warrant the rejection of the statements given by a witness who has been believed by a trial court, there must exist either a physical impossibility that they are true, or their falsity must be apparent without resorting to inferences or deductions.
    • Conflicts and even testimony which is subject to justifiable suspicion do not justify the reversal of a judgment, for it is the exclusive province of the trial judge or jury to determine the credibility of a witness and the truth or falsity of the facts upon which a determination depends. ' "
  • (People v. Lyons (1956) 47 Cal.2d 311, 319-320.)
 
Tags

Comments