Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Borovetz at it again Borovetz at it again

12-24-2014 , 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bundy5
They would be inadmissible for criminal prosecutions IMO given the standard of proof required. The rights weren't read basically before he made his statements. They could be used for civil proceedings given the lower standard of proof provided the above authenticty safeguards are satisfied.

Sent from my GT-I9507 using 2+2 Forums
If a person posts a confession to a crime on social media, and the police can prove he otherwise committed said crime, that post is evidence assuming authenticity is possible. You only have to be advised of your rights when being interrogated by police. If you confess otherwise in some other avenue and it can be verified that it was you or you give some other form of evidence of the crime (like posting a video of your crime spree on Youtube) then that is evidence that may be used against you. This action was done without any coercion from police.

In fact, if the police are interrogating you as a witness and you decide to confess to a crime, it is still admissible, even if you were not Mirandized, as long as the police had a good faith belief that you were only a witness and not a suspect.

In other words, don't post confessions on social media and don't say stupid stuff to police.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 02:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pokeraddict
...don't say stupid stuff anything to police...
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 03:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bundy5
They would be inadmissible for criminal prosecutions IMO given the standard of proof required. The rights weren't read basically before he made his statements. They could be used for civil proceedings given the lower standard of proof provided the above authenticty safeguards are satisfied.

Sent from my GT-I9507 using 2+2 Forums

Having an opinion does not make you Clarence Darrow

"Cyn: Sometimes I sing and dance around the house in my underwear. Doesn't make me Madonna. Never will."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096463/quotes

Last edited by Gzesh; 12-24-2014 at 03:29 AM.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 03:23 AM
It's nice to see everyone pull together to offer the forum's favorite degenerate legal advice. However, he's proven time and time again that he is above the law and virtually untouchable so maybe we should just sit back, relax, and let him tell a few funny anecdotes about his most recent adventures.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 03:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gzesh
Having an opinion does not make you Clarence Darrow

"Cyn: Sometimes I sing and dance around the house in my underwear. Doesn't make me Madonna. Never will."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096463/quotes
You and pokeraddict have a lot to learn. I stand by what I said.

Sent from my GT-I9507 using 2+2 Forums
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 04:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gzesh
Having an opinion does not make you Clarence Darrow



"Cyn: Sometimes I sing and dance around the house in my underwear. Doesn't make me Madonna. Never will."



http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096463/quotes

How many times did u edit that post and change what you posted? I know you changed it at least twice but it is still confusing for plebeians like me.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 04:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverLosesAtPoker
How many times did u edit that post and change what you posted? I know you changed it at least twice but it is still confusing for plebeians like me.
Why does that matter?

Sent from my GT-I9507 using 2+2 Forums
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 07:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverLosesAtPoker
It's nice to see everyone pull together to offer the forum's favorite degenerate legal advice. However, he's proven time and time again that he is above the law and virtually untouchable so maybe we should just sit back, relax, and let him tell a few funny anecdotes about his most recent adventures.
Oh, I don't know... numerous arrests + $50K bail + time served at Rikers ≠ above the law.

That said, it seems unlikely that he'll get much more than he already has, and that this pattern will sadly continue for life. Mike doesn't seem to have a rock-bottom that would get him to cease his criminal behavior voluntarily. Chino Rheem is more likely to become debt-free than Mike is to stop scamming unless something drastic happens.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 08:43 AM
Rikers was back in the day when he was still coming up. I'm not saying he was always above the law but now that he's a tru OG hustler he's got the game down pat. The police can't phase him. Everyone was acting like his recent arrest was a big deal but then he got right back out.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 09:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bundy5
You and pokeraddict have a lot to learn. I stand by what I said.

Sent from my GT-I9507 using 2+2 Forums
Or maybe the two attorneys in this thread one of whom is a prosecutor might be right and you might be wrong?
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 12:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bundy5
You and pokeraddict have a lot to learn. I stand by what I said.

Sent from my GT-I9507 using 2+2 Forums
You are wrong as it relates to his Miranda rights - unless a person is in custody and under interrogation by police there is no protection under Miranda. I've practiced criminal defense law for 20 years. Authentication is another matter, however I'm not aware of any jurisdiction that has different rules of authentication between civil and criminal trials.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 12:31 PM
If you can get prosecuted for a Tweet (as you can in the UK at least), I see no difference with 2+2.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bundy5
You and pokeraddict have a lot to learn. I stand by what I said.

Sent from my GT-I9507 using 2+2 Forums
I always have a lot to learn, so what ? Change is a constant, the many years I've been a lawyer, the many years I've been in or counseling to the online gaming industry and the last 2+ years I've been working with the bitcoin industry have pretty much taught me that you are right; I always have a lot to learn.

Thanks for the advice, but you are still mistaken in your proffered legal opinion.

Last edited by Gzesh; 12-24-2014 at 12:55 PM.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 03:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman220
Or maybe the two attorneys in this thread one of whom is a prosecutor might be right and you might be wrong?
Or maybe it could be another "defrauding an innkeeper" situation, where the attorney didn't know squat. Hard to say.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 03:59 PM
Be a nice xmas present to see Mikey come in and post tonight.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gzesh
I always have a lot to learn, so what ? Change is a constant, the many years I've been a lawyer, the many years I've been in or counseling to the online gaming industry and the last 2+ years I've been working with the bitcoin industry have pretty much taught me that you are right; I always have a lot to learn.

Thanks for the advice, but you are still mistaken in your proffered legal opinion.
Looking at one difficulty, does it change if we don't know if he was off his head when he made the post?

Sent from my GT-I9507 using 2+2 Forums
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 05:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by arcdog
You are wrong as it relates to his Miranda rights - unless a person is in custody and under interrogation by police there is no protection under Miranda. I've practiced criminal defense law for 20 years. Authentication is another matter, however I'm not aware of any jurisdiction that has different rules of authentication between civil and criminal trials.
Finally a lawyer who knows what he's talking about on here. Unlike our other Arizona on-line law degree holders.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 07:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman220
Proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the statements were made by Borovetz isn't the standard for determining the admissiblity of the posts. Facebook posts, etc. are used in trials all the time, there are plenty of ways to authenticate the postings...
... such as...
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 08:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverLosesAtPoker
Rikers was back in the day when he was still coming up. I'm not saying he was always above the law but now that he's a tru OG hustler he's got the game down pat. The police can't phase him. Everyone was acting like his recent arrest was a big deal but then he got right back out.

fasho
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 08:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteBlow
Simple. They look for the paper he wrote them on before posting on here.
excellent
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 08:04 PM
merry christmas, mike! stay strong!
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 08:38 PM
wonder what his Xmas plans are
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 09:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam341
wonder what his Xmas plans are
Tell people his sleigh left without him.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 09:30 PM
I hope he is able to spend Christmas with friends. It's quite sad that his family turned their backs on him. Perhaps they have reconciled now but even if that is the case he deserves better.
Borovetz at it again Quote
12-24-2014 , 10:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverLosesAtPoker
I hope he is able to spend Christmas with friends. It's quite sad that his family turned their backs on him. Perhaps they have reconciled now but even if that is the case he deserves better.
LOLWTF I hope this is a joke of some sort. *I'm* spending Christmas alone and I've never done a damned thing wrong to anyone. F him.
Borovetz at it again Quote

      
m