Artwork

THE NEIL GARFIELD SHOW에서 제공하는 콘텐츠입니다. 에피소드, 그래픽, 팟캐스트 설명을 포함한 모든 팟캐스트 콘텐츠는 THE NEIL GARFIELD SHOW 또는 해당 팟캐스트 플랫폼 파트너가 직접 업로드하고 제공합니다. 누군가가 귀하의 허락 없이 귀하의 저작물을 사용하고 있다고 생각되는 경우 여기에 설명된 절차를 따르실 수 있습니다 https://ko.player.fm/legal.
Player FM -팟 캐스트 앱
Player FM 앱으로 오프라인으로 전환하세요!

How the bad guys get fake stuff into evidence and what you an do about it!

30:00
 
공유
 

Manage episode 290632045 series 2453550
THE NEIL GARFIELD SHOW에서 제공하는 콘텐츠입니다. 에피소드, 그래픽, 팟캐스트 설명을 포함한 모든 팟캐스트 콘텐츠는 THE NEIL GARFIELD SHOW 또는 해당 팟캐스트 플랫폼 파트너가 직접 업로드하고 제공합니다. 누군가가 귀하의 허락 없이 귀하의 저작물을 사용하고 있다고 생각되는 경우 여기에 설명된 절차를 따르실 수 있습니다 https://ko.player.fm/legal.
Most people give no thought to the elaborate scheme in which documents are created exclusively for use in civil court actions. The fact that such a statement is true is reason enough to exclude such evidence, but the failure of almost every homeowner and lawyer to timely and properly object is the reason it comes into evidence anyway. No document prepared solely for court can be admitted into evidence in the court record. But once proffered, the court must accept it unless it is obvious that the document is plainly absurd and irrelevant to the issues before the court. And the presence of such evidence in the court record requires the judge to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law favorable to the claimant, who probably does not even exist. Given the fact that there are no business or monetary transactions in the real world, how does any document get admitted into evidence when it purports to be a memorialization of nonexistent events between either nonexistent or disinterested parties? How does the foreclosure mill get such a fabricated, forged, backdated, and false document into evidence? More importantly, how does the homeowner prevent such miscarriage of justice? In foreclosures, the point is NOT whether there is a loan or whether the homeowner owes any money. The point is whether the named claimant (plaintiff or beneficiary) can prove that they own the underlying obligation because that claimant paid value in the real world in exchange for ownership of the underlying obligation. The issue is not whether the "loan" was in"default." The issue is whether the claimant has any legal basis for receiving any relief.
  continue reading

300 에피소드

Artwork
icon공유
 
Manage episode 290632045 series 2453550
THE NEIL GARFIELD SHOW에서 제공하는 콘텐츠입니다. 에피소드, 그래픽, 팟캐스트 설명을 포함한 모든 팟캐스트 콘텐츠는 THE NEIL GARFIELD SHOW 또는 해당 팟캐스트 플랫폼 파트너가 직접 업로드하고 제공합니다. 누군가가 귀하의 허락 없이 귀하의 저작물을 사용하고 있다고 생각되는 경우 여기에 설명된 절차를 따르실 수 있습니다 https://ko.player.fm/legal.
Most people give no thought to the elaborate scheme in which documents are created exclusively for use in civil court actions. The fact that such a statement is true is reason enough to exclude such evidence, but the failure of almost every homeowner and lawyer to timely and properly object is the reason it comes into evidence anyway. No document prepared solely for court can be admitted into evidence in the court record. But once proffered, the court must accept it unless it is obvious that the document is plainly absurd and irrelevant to the issues before the court. And the presence of such evidence in the court record requires the judge to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law favorable to the claimant, who probably does not even exist. Given the fact that there are no business or monetary transactions in the real world, how does any document get admitted into evidence when it purports to be a memorialization of nonexistent events between either nonexistent or disinterested parties? How does the foreclosure mill get such a fabricated, forged, backdated, and false document into evidence? More importantly, how does the homeowner prevent such miscarriage of justice? In foreclosures, the point is NOT whether there is a loan or whether the homeowner owes any money. The point is whether the named claimant (plaintiff or beneficiary) can prove that they own the underlying obligation because that claimant paid value in the real world in exchange for ownership of the underlying obligation. The issue is not whether the "loan" was in"default." The issue is whether the claimant has any legal basis for receiving any relief.
  continue reading

300 에피소드

כל הפרקים

×
 
Loading …

플레이어 FM에 오신것을 환영합니다!

플레이어 FM은 웹에서 고품질 팟캐스트를 검색하여 지금 바로 즐길 수 있도록 합니다. 최고의 팟캐스트 앱이며 Android, iPhone 및 웹에서도 작동합니다. 장치 간 구독 동기화를 위해 가입하세요.

 

빠른 참조 가이드