Podcasts about Motion

​In Case No. CR01-24-31665, the defense filed Motion in Limine #5 titled "Re: Inconclusive Data," seeking to exclude certain evidence deemed inconclusive. The court granted the defense's request to seal this motion, as indicated in an order dated March 3, 2025. Consequently, the specific details and arguments presented in the motion are not publicly accessible.​In Case No. CR01-24-31665, the State filed a Motion in Limine on February 21, 2025, to restrict the defense from introducing or arguing alternative perpetrator evidence without first meeting specific relevance and admissibility standards as outlined in the Idaho Rules of Evidence (I.R.E.) 401, 402, and 403. The State contends that during the investigation, thousands of tips regarding possible perpetrators were received, but none, except those related to the defendant, were substantiated. Allowing the defense to present alternative perpetrator theories without concrete evidence directly connecting others to the homicides could mislead and confuse the jury, result in undue delays, waste time, and unfairly prejudice the State's case.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:022425-Motion-inLimine5-RE-Inconclusive-Data.pdf022125-States-Motion-in-Limine-RE-Alternative-Perpetrator-Evidence.pdf

ABM falls apart fast when teams jump in before locking down who they're chasing, why it matters, and how it's all supposed to run. Sales pushes one list, marketing builds another, and no one agrees on who actually matters. No shared ICP? No clean data? Well, no chance. You need a strategy. Guest host Jon Russo (B2B Fusion) corrals Heidi Bullock (Tealium), Patti Newcomer (Centerbase), and Bindu Chellappan (Corpay) for a breakdown of how they're keeping their ABM engines running clean. Think pods with purpose, seller-first workflows, and data that matters. In this episode:  Heidi on running pods that bring marketing, sales, and CS into one motion  Patti on aligning across the funnel and why ABM needs ownership  Bindu on activating firmographic and intent data with shared definitions  Plus:  Where alignment really starts  Why trust beats tech every time  How AI is speeding up the grunt work without losing the signal  The metrics that actually tell you it's working Tune in to learn about what breaks ABM, what fixes it, and how to keep teams pulling in the same direction.  For full show notes and transcripts, visit https://renegademarketing.com/podcasts/ To learn more about CMO Huddles, visit https://cmohuddles.com/

This week on Live Life in Motion, I sit down with Louis Ruggiero for a raw and unfiltered conversation about addiction, recovery, and the power of second chances. Louis opens up about his years of relapse, the grip of opiates, and the life-altering moments that finally led him to sobriety. We talk about the emotional weight of addiction, navigating legal and family struggles, and how becoming a father gave him new purpose. Today, Louis is using his voice to help others by sharing his story through podcasting and advocacy. This episode is a deep dive into personal transformation, accountability, and hope—for anyone who believes change is possible. Nothing's Off The Table with Louis Ruggierohttps://www.instagram.com/nothingsoffpod/ Live Life in Motion YouTube: GO Subscribehttps://www.youtube.com/@livelifeinmotionpodcast Pelham Medical Centerhttps://www.spartanburgregional.com/locations/pelham-medical-center

https://www.linkedin.com/company/rippling-ideas/

On this week's episode we hear originals by Richard Steighner The Bobs Les Brünettes

La motion de censure déposée par le PS après l'échec du conclave a échoué. Le Rassemblement national n'a pas censuré le Premier ministre et lui offre quelques semaines de répit. François Bayrou se retrouve donc dans la main de l'extrême droite qui continue de faire planer la menace d'une censure sur le budget à l'automne. Roselyne Febvre en parle avec David Revault-d'Allonnes et Pierre Jacquemain. 

C Stunna on his come up, how he started in music, OT7 Quanny, Skrilla, why he doesn't care about Drill, and more. ----- Shout out to all our members who make this content possible, sign up for only $5 a month    / @nojumper   Promote Your Music with No Jumper - https://nojumper.com/pages/promo CHECK OUT OUR ONLINE STORE!!! https://nojumper.com NO JUMPER PATREON   / nojumper   CHECK OUT OUR NEW SPOTIFY PLAYLIST https://open.spotify.com/playlist/5te... Follow us on SNAPCHAT   / 4874336901   Follow us on SPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/show/4z4yCTj... iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/n... Follow us on Social Media:   / 4874336901    / nojumper    / nojumper    / nojumper    / nojumper   JOIN THE DISCORD:   / discord   Follow Adam22:   / adam22   adam22bro on Snapchat Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

​In State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger (Case No. CR01-24-31665), the State responded to the Defendant's Motion in Limine #2, which sought to exclude or limit the testimony of twenty-two of the State's expert witnesses on the grounds of vague and undisclosed expert testimony. The State asserted that it had complied with Idaho Criminal Rule 16(b)(7) and the applicable Idaho Rules of Evidence by providing detailed disclosures for each expert, outlining their anticipated testimony, the facts and data supporting their opinions, and their qualifications. The State emphasized that any disagreements with the experts' anticipated testimony should be addressed through cross-examination and rebuttal expert testimony, rather than exclusion. Additionally, the State highlighted its good-faith effort to comply with the Court's scheduling orders and instructions, noting that the Defendant had ample opportunity to review and respond to the State's disclosures, and had not demonstrated any actual prejudice resulting from the disclosures.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:031725-States-Response-Defendants-MiL-2-Vague-Undisclosed-Expert-Testimony.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger (Case No. CR01-24-31665), the State responded to the Defendant's Motion in Limine #2, which sought to exclude or limit the testimony of twenty-two of the State's expert witnesses on the grounds of vague and undisclosed expert testimony. The State asserted that it had complied with Idaho Criminal Rule 16(b)(7) and the applicable Idaho Rules of Evidence by providing detailed disclosures for each expert, outlining their anticipated testimony, the facts and data supporting their opinions, and their qualifications. The State emphasized that any disagreements with the experts' anticipated testimony should be addressed through cross-examination and rebuttal expert testimony, rather than exclusion. Additionally, the State highlighted its good-faith effort to comply with the Court's scheduling orders and instructions, noting that the Defendant had ample opportunity to review and respond to the State's disclosures, and had not demonstrated any actual prejudice resulting from the disclosures.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:031725-States-Response-Defendants-MiL-2-Vague-Undisclosed-Expert-Testimony.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this episode, I'm breaking down Newton's three laws of motion. If you don't remember them or never learned them, that's fine I got you. I'll explain each law in simple terms and show you how they apply to real life, not just science. I like clear rules because they help us stay focused and not make excuses. These laws will help you look at your actions and results in a whole new way. Show Notes:  [02:01]#1 The law of inertia.  [10:16]#2 Force equals mass times acceleration. [15:54]#3 Action and reaction. [25:35]Recap Episodes Mentioned: 2466: The Law Of Inertia Next Steps: ---

Ben Criddle talks BYU sports every weekday from 2 to 6 pm.Today's Co-Hosts: Ben Criddle (@criddlebenjamin)Subscribe to the Cougar Sports with Ben Criddle podcast:Apple Podcasts: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/cougar-sports-with-ben-criddle/id99676

Shartajeye' “Taji” Wright-FitzhughSTEM Educator | Founder of Kidmistry, LLC | Mom & EdupreneurShartajeye' “Taji” Wright-Fitzhugh is a mom, STEM educator, and founder of Kidmistry, LLC—an education consulting firm designed to support teachers with innovative strategies that bring joy and equity back into the classroom. Through her signature platform, Taji – The Teacher's Teacher, she helps new and novice educators build strong instructional systems, boost confidence, and deliver powerful science instruction.Taji holds a Bachelor's in Biology from Texas Southern University and dual Master's degrees in STEM Education and Urban Educational Leadership from Southern Methodist University. She was part of the first graduating cohort of SMU's STEM-focused M.Ed. program, and now uses her knowledge, lived experience, and deep love for learning to coach teachers and inspire change in schools.As a mother and edupreneur, Taji is navigating this space with heart—turning her passion into purpose to uplift both educators and the scholars they serve. ______________________________________________________________________ The Edupreneur: Your Blueprint To Jumpstart And Scale Your Education BusinessYou've spent years in the classroom, leading PD, designing curriculum, and transforming how students learn. Now, it's time to leverage that experience and build something for yourself. The Edupreneur isn't just another book—it's the playbook for educators who want to take their knowledge beyond the school walls and into a thriving business.I wrote this book because I've been where you are. I know what it's like to have the skills, the passion, and the drive but not know where to start. I break it all down—the mindset shifts, the business models, the pricing strategies, and the branding moves that will help you position yourself as a leader in this space.Inside, you'll learn how to:✅ Turn your expertise into income streams—without feeling like a sellout✅ Build a personal brand that commands respect (and top dollar)✅ Market your work in a way that feels natural and impactful✅ Navigate the business side of edupreneurship, from pricing to partnershipsWhether you want to consult, create courses, write books, or launch a podcast, this book will help you get there. Stop waiting for permission. Start building your own table.

​In Case No. CR01-24-31665, the defense filed Motion in Limine #5 titled "Re: Inconclusive Data," seeking to exclude certain evidence deemed inconclusive. The court granted the defense's request to seal this motion, as indicated in an order dated March 3, 2025. Consequently, the specific details and arguments presented in the motion are not publicly accessible.​In Case No. CR01-24-31665, the State filed a Motion in Limine on February 21, 2025, to restrict the defense from introducing or arguing alternative perpetrator evidence without first meeting specific relevance and admissibility standards as outlined in the Idaho Rules of Evidence (I.R.E.) 401, 402, and 403. The State contends that during the investigation, thousands of tips regarding possible perpetrators were received, but none, except those related to the defendant, were substantiated. Allowing the defense to present alternative perpetrator theories without concrete evidence directly connecting others to the homicides could mislead and confuse the jury, result in undue delays, waste time, and unfairly prejudice the State's case.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:022425-Motion-inLimine5-RE-Inconclusive-Data.pdf022125-States-Motion-in-Limine-RE-Alternative-Perpetrator-Evidence.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In State of Idaho v. Bryan Kohberger (Case Number CR01-24-31665), Motion in Limine #2 seeks to exclude vague and undisclosed expert testimony from being used at trial. Kohberger's defense argues that the prosecution has not properly disclosed the identities, qualifications, or specific opinions of their expert witnesses, violating established discovery rules. The defense contends that admitting broad, undefined, or last-minute expert testimony would place them at a severe disadvantage by preventing effective cross-examination and rebuttal preparation. They emphasize that expert testimony should meet the Daubert standard, ensuring that all scientific or technical evidence presented in court is reliable, relevant, and based on a sound methodology. Without proper disclosure, the defense fears that the prosecution may introduce unvetted or speculative testimony, which could unfairly sway the jury.Additionally, the defense raises concerns about ambiguous or generalized expert conclusions that lack a clear factual foundation. They argue that the court must preclude any expert testimony that was not properly disclosed or that fails to meet the necessary scientific and legal standards. The motion highlights the risk of unverified forensic interpretations or psychological assessments being introduced without proper vetting, potentially leading to misleading conclusions. The defense urges the court to enforce strict evidentiary standards by limiting expert testimony only to properly disclosed, scientifically validated opinions. This motion is a critical part of the defense's strategy to prevent prejudicial, speculative, or unreliable forensic evidence from influencing the jury in one of the most high-profile cases in Idaho's history.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-2-RE-Vague-Undisclosed-Expert-Testimony.pdf

In State of Idaho v. Bryan Kohberger (Case Number CR01-24-31665), Motion in Limine #2 seeks to exclude vague and undisclosed expert testimony from being used at trial. Kohberger's defense argues that the prosecution has not properly disclosed the identities, qualifications, or specific opinions of their expert witnesses, violating established discovery rules. The defense contends that admitting broad, undefined, or last-minute expert testimony would place them at a severe disadvantage by preventing effective cross-examination and rebuttal preparation. They emphasize that expert testimony should meet the Daubert standard, ensuring that all scientific or technical evidence presented in court is reliable, relevant, and based on a sound methodology. Without proper disclosure, the defense fears that the prosecution may introduce unvetted or speculative testimony, which could unfairly sway the jury.Additionally, the defense raises concerns about ambiguous or generalized expert conclusions that lack a clear factual foundation. They argue that the court must preclude any expert testimony that was not properly disclosed or that fails to meet the necessary scientific and legal standards. The motion highlights the risk of unverified forensic interpretations or psychological assessments being introduced without proper vetting, potentially leading to misleading conclusions. The defense urges the court to enforce strict evidentiary standards by limiting expert testimony only to properly disclosed, scientifically validated opinions. This motion is a critical part of the defense's strategy to prevent prejudicial, speculative, or unreliable forensic evidence from influencing the jury in one of the most high-profile cases in Idaho's history.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-2-RE-Vague-Undisclosed-Expert-Testimony.pdf

Ben Criddle talks BYU sports every weekday from 2 to 6 pm.Today's Co-Hosts: Ben Criddle (@criddlebenjamin)Subscribe to the Cougar Sports with Ben Criddle podcast:Apple Podcasts: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/cougar-sports-with-ben-criddle/id99676

​In the case identified as CR01-24-31665, defendant Bryan Kohberger has filed a motion to suppress evidence obtained from the execution of a Pennsylvania search warrant at 119 Lamsden Drive, Albrightsville, PA, as well as statements he made during that operation. Kohberger's defense argues that the search warrant was invalid due to alleged reckless or intentional omissions of material facts in the supporting affidavit. They contend that these omissions led to a lack of probable cause, rendering the search unconstitutional. Additionally, the defense asserts that law enforcement's failure to properly "knock and announce" their presence violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights, and that any statements he made during the search should be suppressed as they were obtained without a Miranda warningIn response, the State maintains that the search was conducted under a valid warrant issued by a Pennsylvania court, based on substantial probable cause. They argue that the affidavit supporting the warrant was sufficient and did not omit any material information that would invalidate the warrant. The State also contends that the "knock and announce" procedure was appropriately followed, and that Kohberger's statements during the search were either spontaneous or made after he was informed of his rights, thereby complying with legal requirements. Consequently, the State requests that the court deny Kohberger's motion to suppress the evidence obtained from the search at 119 Lamsden Drive and his subsequent statements.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:111424-REDACTED-Motion-Supress-Memorandum-Support-Lamsden-Statements.pdf

​In the case identified as CR01-24-31665, defendant Bryan Kohberger has filed a motion to suppress evidence obtained from the execution of a Pennsylvania search warrant at 119 Lamsden Drive, Albrightsville, PA, as well as statements he made during that operation. Kohberger's defense argues that the search warrant was invalid due to alleged reckless or intentional omissions of material facts in the supporting affidavit. They contend that these omissions led to a lack of probable cause, rendering the search unconstitutional. Additionally, the defense asserts that law enforcement's failure to properly "knock and announce" their presence violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights, and that any statements he made during the search should be suppressed as they were obtained without a Miranda warningIn response, the State maintains that the search was conducted under a valid warrant issued by a Pennsylvania court, based on substantial probable cause. They argue that the affidavit supporting the warrant was sufficient and did not omit any material information that would invalidate the warrant. The State also contends that the "knock and announce" procedure was appropriately followed, and that Kohberger's statements during the search were either spontaneous or made after he was informed of his rights, thereby complying with legal requirements. Consequently, the State requests that the court deny Kohberger's motion to suppress the evidence obtained from the search at 119 Lamsden Drive and his subsequent statements.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:111424-REDACTED-Motion-Supress-Memorandum-Support-Lamsden-Statements.pdf

In the case of United States v. Sean Combs (24 Cr. 542), federal prosecutors have filed an opposition to the defense's motions requesting a hearing, a bill of particulars, and a gag order. The defense sought a hearing to investigate alleged government leaks of evidence, specifically a 2016 video purportedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Prosecutors refuted these claims, stating they did not possess the video prior to its public release and had no involvement in its dissemination. They argued that the defense's allegations are baseless and represent a strategic attempt to suppress critical evidence that is highly probative of Combs' alleged criminal conduct.Regarding the request for a bill of particulars, the defense sought detailed information about the charges to prepare for trial. Prosecutors contended that the indictment already provides sufficient detail, outlining the nature of the charges and the alleged criminal activities. They maintained that additional specifics are unnecessary and could compromise ongoing investigations or witness safety. Concerning the motion for a gag order to prevent public statements by potential witnesses and attorneys, prosecutors argued that existing court orders already address these concerns, rendering the defense's request redundant. They emphasized the importance of balancing the defendant's right to a fair trial with the public's right to information, asserting that current measures are adequate to maintain this balance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:diddy.pdf

In the case of United States v. Sean Combs (24 Cr. 542), federal prosecutors have filed an opposition to the defense's motions requesting a hearing, a bill of particulars, and a gag order. The defense sought a hearing to investigate alleged government leaks of evidence, specifically a 2016 video purportedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Prosecutors refuted these claims, stating they did not possess the video prior to its public release and had no involvement in its dissemination. They argued that the defense's allegations are baseless and represent a strategic attempt to suppress critical evidence that is highly probative of Combs' alleged criminal conduct.Regarding the request for a bill of particulars, the defense sought detailed information about the charges to prepare for trial. Prosecutors contended that the indictment already provides sufficient detail, outlining the nature of the charges and the alleged criminal activities. They maintained that additional specifics are unnecessary and could compromise ongoing investigations or witness safety. Concerning the motion for a gag order to prevent public statements by potential witnesses and attorneys, prosecutors argued that existing court orders already address these concerns, rendering the defense's request redundant. They emphasized the importance of balancing the defendant's right to a fair trial with the public's right to information, asserting that current measures are adequate to maintain this balance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:diddy.pdf

In the case of United States v. Sean Combs (24 Cr. 542), federal prosecutors have filed an opposition to the defense's motions requesting a hearing, a bill of particulars, and a gag order. The defense sought a hearing to investigate alleged government leaks of evidence, specifically a 2016 video purportedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Prosecutors refuted these claims, stating they did not possess the video prior to its public release and had no involvement in its dissemination. They argued that the defense's allegations are baseless and represent a strategic attempt to suppress critical evidence that is highly probative of Combs' alleged criminal conduct.Regarding the request for a bill of particulars, the defense sought detailed information about the charges to prepare for trial. Prosecutors contended that the indictment already provides sufficient detail, outlining the nature of the charges and the alleged criminal activities. They maintained that additional specifics are unnecessary and could compromise ongoing investigations or witness safety. Concerning the motion for a gag order to prevent public statements by potential witnesses and attorneys, prosecutors argued that existing court orders already address these concerns, rendering the defense's request redundant. They emphasized the importance of balancing the defendant's right to a fair trial with the public's right to information, asserting that current measures are adequate to maintain this balance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:diddy.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the case of United States v. Sean Combs (24 Cr. 542), federal prosecutors have filed an opposition to the defense's motions requesting a hearing, a bill of particulars, and a gag order. The defense sought a hearing to investigate alleged government leaks of evidence, specifically a 2016 video purportedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Prosecutors refuted these claims, stating they did not possess the video prior to its public release and had no involvement in its dissemination. They argued that the defense's allegations are baseless and represent a strategic attempt to suppress critical evidence that is highly probative of Combs' alleged criminal conduct.Regarding the request for a bill of particulars, the defense sought detailed information about the charges to prepare for trial. Prosecutors contended that the indictment already provides sufficient detail, outlining the nature of the charges and the alleged criminal activities. They maintained that additional specifics are unnecessary and could compromise ongoing investigations or witness safety. Concerning the motion for a gag order to prevent public statements by potential witnesses and attorneys, prosecutors argued that existing court orders already address these concerns, rendering the defense's request redundant. They emphasized the importance of balancing the defendant's right to a fair trial with the public's right to information, asserting that current measures are adequate to maintain this balance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:diddy.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

This episode is the thirteenth in a series of Stuart McMillan chatting with and introducing various presenters from The Speed Summit, brought to you by 3X4 Genetics.   Our guest this time is STATSports Account Mananger Kaitlyn Cunningham. Stuart and Kaitlyn talk about asking qustions, The What vs The Why, evolving as a practitioner, podcasting ... and much more.   The Speed Summit took place June 6-8 in Chicago, Illinois. If you could not make it, don't worry!  We are putting together a comprehensive video package, and it will be available very soon!   Big thanks to our sponsors 3X4 Genetics, 1080 Motion, STATSports, TeamBuildr and Output Sports

​In the case identified as CR01-24-31665, defendant Bryan Kohberger has filed a motion to suppress evidence obtained from the execution of a Pennsylvania search warrant at 119 Lamsden Drive, Albrightsville, PA, as well as statements he made during that operation. Kohberger's defense argues that the search warrant was invalid due to alleged reckless or intentional omissions of material facts in the supporting affidavit. They contend that these omissions led to a lack of probable cause, rendering the search unconstitutional. Additionally, the defense asserts that law enforcement's failure to properly "knock and announce" their presence violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights, and that any statements he made during the search should be suppressed as they were obtained without a Miranda warningIn response, the State maintains that the search was conducted under a valid warrant issued by a Pennsylvania court, based on substantial probable cause. They argue that the affidavit supporting the warrant was sufficient and did not omit any material information that would invalidate the warrant. The State also contends that the "knock and announce" procedure was appropriately followed, and that Kohberger's statements during the search were either spontaneous or made after he was informed of his rights, thereby complying with legal requirements. Consequently, the State requests that the court deny Kohberger's motion to suppress the evidence obtained from the search at 119 Lamsden Drive and his subsequent statements.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:111424-REDACTED-Motion-Supress-Memorandum-Support-Lamsden-Statements.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the case of United States v. Sean Combs (24 Cr. 542), federal prosecutors have filed an opposition to the defense's motions requesting a hearing, a bill of particulars, and a gag order. The defense sought a hearing to investigate alleged government leaks of evidence, specifically a 2016 video purportedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Prosecutors refuted these claims, stating they did not possess the video prior to its public release and had no involvement in its dissemination. They argued that the defense's allegations are baseless and represent a strategic attempt to suppress critical evidence that is highly probative of Combs' alleged criminal conduct.Regarding the request for a bill of particulars, the defense sought detailed information about the charges to prepare for trial. Prosecutors contended that the indictment already provides sufficient detail, outlining the nature of the charges and the alleged criminal activities. They maintained that additional specifics are unnecessary and could compromise ongoing investigations or witness safety. Concerning the motion for a gag order to prevent public statements by potential witnesses and attorneys, prosecutors argued that existing court orders already address these concerns, rendering the defense's request redundant. They emphasized the importance of balancing the defendant's right to a fair trial with the public's right to information, asserting that current measures are adequate to maintain this balance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:diddy.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In the case identified as CR01-24-31665, defendant Bryan Kohberger has filed a motion to suppress evidence obtained from the execution of a Pennsylvania search warrant at 119 Lamsden Drive, Albrightsville, PA, as well as statements he made during that operation. Kohberger's defense argues that the search warrant was invalid due to alleged reckless or intentional omissions of material facts in the supporting affidavit. They contend that these omissions led to a lack of probable cause, rendering the search unconstitutional. Additionally, the defense asserts that law enforcement's failure to properly "knock and announce" their presence violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights, and that any statements he made during the search should be suppressed as they were obtained without a Miranda warningIn response, the State maintains that the search was conducted under a valid warrant issued by a Pennsylvania court, based on substantial probable cause. They argue that the affidavit supporting the warrant was sufficient and did not omit any material information that would invalidate the warrant. The State also contends that the "knock and announce" procedure was appropriately followed, and that Kohberger's statements during the search were either spontaneous or made after he was informed of his rights, thereby complying with legal requirements. Consequently, the State requests that the court deny Kohberger's motion to suppress the evidence obtained from the search at 119 Lamsden Drive and his subsequent statements.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:111424-REDACTED-Motion-Supress-Memorandum-Support-Lamsden-Statements.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the case of United States v. Sean Combs (24 Cr. 542), federal prosecutors have filed an opposition to the defense's motions requesting a hearing, a bill of particulars, and a gag order. The defense sought a hearing to investigate alleged government leaks of evidence, specifically a 2016 video purportedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Prosecutors refuted these claims, stating they did not possess the video prior to its public release and had no involvement in its dissemination. They argued that the defense's allegations are baseless and represent a strategic attempt to suppress critical evidence that is highly probative of Combs' alleged criminal conduct.Regarding the request for a bill of particulars, the defense sought detailed information about the charges to prepare for trial. Prosecutors contended that the indictment already provides sufficient detail, outlining the nature of the charges and the alleged criminal activities. They maintained that additional specifics are unnecessary and could compromise ongoing investigations or witness safety. Concerning the motion for a gag order to prevent public statements by potential witnesses and attorneys, prosecutors argued that existing court orders already address these concerns, rendering the defense's request redundant. They emphasized the importance of balancing the defendant's right to a fair trial with the public's right to information, asserting that current measures are adequate to maintain this balance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:diddy.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

OA1170 - This Rapid Response Friday it's Boh-vey (yes that is how you pronounce it, probably) all day--as in former Trump defense attorney and current Trump henchman Emil Bove, now up for a seat formerly occupied by Samuel Alito on the Third Circuit. Matt ties together several different stories from the news--from January 6th to the Eric Adams prosecution to DOJ's deportations in violation of court orders--together with this week's stunning 27-page account from deep inside the DOJ provided by a former loyalist. Finally, in today's footnote: a pro se plaintiff invents a completely new way for AI to be useless in the courtroom Government's Motion to Clarify in D.H.S.. v. D.V.D.:  (filed shortly after we recorded on 6/27/25) The U.S. Supreme Court's order in D.H.S. v. D.V.D. (6/23/25)  Day 1 of Emil Bove's confirmation hearing (6/25/26) Letter filed by Government Accountability Project on behalf of Erez Reuveni (6/25/25) Oral arguments before New York's First Appellate Division (3/26/25)(clip starts at 19:29) Federal magistrate Barbara Holmes's detention review decision in U.S. v. Kilmar Abrego Garcia (6/22/25)  

FULL Breakdown Of Kohberger's Alt Suspect Claims As Judge Denies Motion Bryan Kohberger, charged in the brutal Idaho murders case, recently took a desperate courtroom gamble, suggesting four alternate suspects to deflect blame and raise reasonable doubt. But in a dramatic courtroom twist, Judge Steven Hippler swiftly shut down Kohberger's claims, calling them "purely speculative" and irrelevant under Idaho law. Kohberger's defense argued that three of these individuals had close social connections to the victims and were present at events shortly before the murders. Another, more obscure individual, had only a passing encounter weeks prior, captured on surveillance footage but never even interacting directly with the victim. Despite Kohberger's aggressive push to introduce these so-called alternate suspects, forensic evidence proved decisive: DNA analysis excluded every single person he proposed as alternate perpetrators. The court highlighted this lack of tangible evidence, noting none of the individuals drove a vehicle matching the suspect's known description—a crucial detail since the killer drove to the crime scene. Judge Hippler didn't hold back, citing landmark cases like State v. Meister and Chambers v. Mississippi to emphasize the strict criteria for presenting alternate perpetrator theories. The ruling emphasized that "speculative blaming" could confuse jurors, unfairly prejudice the prosecution, and waste crucial trial time. Kohberger's desperate strategy was seen by some legal observers as an attempt to muddy the waters and distract from the compelling evidence against him. In the end, the court's ruling sets clear boundaries for the upcoming trial: Kohberger can question investigative methods broadly but is strictly prohibited from naming specific alternate suspects without substantial new evidence. Is Kohberger's strategy just a distraction tactic, or could there be more to these claims? Dive deep into this explosive courtroom development and understand exactly why the judge dismissed these "alternate suspect" theories. #BryanKohberger #IdahoMurders #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #CrimeNews #TrialUpdate #LegalAnalysis #MurderCase #AlternateSuspects #ForensicEvidence Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872  

FULL Breakdown Of Kohberger's Alt Suspect Claims As Judge Denies Motion Bryan Kohberger, charged in the brutal Idaho murders case, recently took a desperate courtroom gamble, suggesting four alternate suspects to deflect blame and raise reasonable doubt. But in a dramatic courtroom twist, Judge Steven Hippler swiftly shut down Kohberger's claims, calling them "purely speculative" and irrelevant under Idaho law. Kohberger's defense argued that three of these individuals had close social connections to the victims and were present at events shortly before the murders. Another, more obscure individual, had only a passing encounter weeks prior, captured on surveillance footage but never even interacting directly with the victim. Despite Kohberger's aggressive push to introduce these so-called alternate suspects, forensic evidence proved decisive: DNA analysis excluded every single person he proposed as alternate perpetrators. The court highlighted this lack of tangible evidence, noting none of the individuals drove a vehicle matching the suspect's known description—a crucial detail since the killer drove to the crime scene. Judge Hippler didn't hold back, citing landmark cases like State v. Meister and Chambers v. Mississippi to emphasize the strict criteria for presenting alternate perpetrator theories. The ruling emphasized that "speculative blaming" could confuse jurors, unfairly prejudice the prosecution, and waste crucial trial time. Kohberger's desperate strategy was seen by some legal observers as an attempt to muddy the waters and distract from the compelling evidence against him. In the end, the court's ruling sets clear boundaries for the upcoming trial: Kohberger can question investigative methods broadly but is strictly prohibited from naming specific alternate suspects without substantial new evidence. Is Kohberger's strategy just a distraction tactic, or could there be more to these claims? Dive deep into this explosive courtroom development and understand exactly why the judge dismissed these "alternate suspect" theories. #BryanKohberger #IdahoMurders #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #CrimeNews #TrialUpdate #LegalAnalysis #MurderCase #AlternateSuspects #ForensicEvidence Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

FULL Breakdown Of Kohberger's Alt Suspect Claims As Judge Denies Motion Bryan Kohberger, charged in the brutal Idaho murders case, recently took a desperate courtroom gamble, suggesting four alternate suspects to deflect blame and raise reasonable doubt. But in a dramatic courtroom twist, Judge Steven Hippler swiftly shut down Kohberger's claims, calling them "purely speculative" and irrelevant under Idaho law. Kohberger's defense argued that three of these individuals had close social connections to the victims and were present at events shortly before the murders. Another, more obscure individual, had only a passing encounter weeks prior, captured on surveillance footage but never even interacting directly with the victim. Despite Kohberger's aggressive push to introduce these so-called alternate suspects, forensic evidence proved decisive: DNA analysis excluded every single person he proposed as alternate perpetrators. The court highlighted this lack of tangible evidence, noting none of the individuals drove a vehicle matching the suspect's known description—a crucial detail since the killer drove to the crime scene. Judge Hippler didn't hold back, citing landmark cases like State v. Meister and Chambers v. Mississippi to emphasize the strict criteria for presenting alternate perpetrator theories. The ruling emphasized that "speculative blaming" could confuse jurors, unfairly prejudice the prosecution, and waste crucial trial time. Kohberger's desperate strategy was seen by some legal observers as an attempt to muddy the waters and distract from the compelling evidence against him. In the end, the court's ruling sets clear boundaries for the upcoming trial: Kohberger can question investigative methods broadly but is strictly prohibited from naming specific alternate suspects without substantial new evidence. Is Kohberger's strategy just a distraction tactic, or could there be more to these claims? Dive deep into this explosive courtroom development and understand exactly why the judge dismissed these "alternate suspect" theories. #BryanKohberger #IdahoMurders #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #CrimeNews #TrialUpdate #LegalAnalysis #MurderCase #AlternateSuspects #ForensicEvidence Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video?  Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

What is Fast Motion For Techniques That Aren't PunchesJoin our Tul World+ program where you get exclusive videos on patterns, techniques as well as special discounts on upcoming seminars!https://tulworld.com/info-tulworldplusSchedule a free in-person Taekwon-Do trial class at https://www.juestkd.com/more-infoAdd us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/juestaekwondo/

Tous les vendredis, samedis et dimanches soirs, Pascale de la Tour du Pin reçoit deux invités pour des débats d'actualité. Avis tranchés et arguments incisifs sont au programme.Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

This month Mary had the chance to spend time with Lucas Black, an environmental economist who currently serves as a staff member for World Wildlife Fund - US. In his work and across the whole of his life, Lucas is an energetically devoted champion of the environment. He can often be found in the wilderness of his current home in Oregon, and is also known to be tucked into a corner at a desk writing essays and longer pieces - odes to the beauty, strength and expanse of the natural world. Earlier in his life, Lucas was a Peace Corps Volunteer - living for two years in a village in Guinea-Bissau. In his early career, he worked as a financial advisor on Wall Street but elected to pivot into making a career out of developing financial tools and business models to solve environmental problems. In keeping with that focus, Lucas served for 13 years as a staff member for the United Nations. While there, he designed projects in the areas of climate change and biodiversity conservation for some of the world's major environmental trust funds and donors. Lucas has worked in more than 80 countries and lived on four continents. In his walk and his talk, Lucas is healing climate action. We think you'll enjoy what he has to share.You can learn more about Lucas on the World Wildlife Fund US website. https://www.worldwildlife.org/experts/lucas-blackOr go to this link to read the recent interview with Lucas and his WWF project partner, Josephina Brana Varella, Laying the Groundwork: WWF's Nature-Based Solutions Origination Platform Marks a Year of Progress. As Lucas mentioned, the Nature-Based Solutions Platform team is just back from powerful economic and environmental development work in Madagascar.MUSICMiddle East in Motion. Music by Dvir Silverstone from PixabayAsian Wonders. Music by Dvir Silverstone from PixabayWorld Vision-273608. Music by Dvir Silverstone from Pixabay

In this episode of the 'Creative Life in Motion' podcast, host Karen shares six important things she wishes she knew before embarking on her weight loss journey where she lost 60 pounds. Karen jumps into the misconceptions and unexpected realities of weight loss, the impact of societal expectations, and the importance of self-love and inner work. She also talks about her personal experiences with fluctuations in weight, clothing size challenges, and the psychological effects of losing weight. Drawing from her book 'Be Weightless Like Your Body, Love Yourself', and her journey, Karen aims to provide valuable insights to those in various stages of their weight loss process. The episode ends with a 'Sacred Self Care' card reading, emphasizing the importance of alone time and self-reflection.#WeightLossJourney #SelfLove #PodcastEpisode Don't let excuses or self-doubt hold you back—discover how tiny steps and the right support system can turn your “stuck” moments into unstoppable momentum. ✨ Listen now and share the moment you knew it was time for YOUR next step!

In State of Idaho v. Bryan Kohberger (Case Number CR01-24-31665), Motion in Limine #2 seeks to exclude vague and undisclosed expert testimony from being used at trial. Kohberger's defense argues that the prosecution has not properly disclosed the identities, qualifications, or specific opinions of their expert witnesses, violating established discovery rules. The defense contends that admitting broad, undefined, or last-minute expert testimony would place them at a severe disadvantage by preventing effective cross-examination and rebuttal preparation. They emphasize that expert testimony should meet the Daubert standard, ensuring that all scientific or technical evidence presented in court is reliable, relevant, and based on a sound methodology. Without proper disclosure, the defense fears that the prosecution may introduce unvetted or speculative testimony, which could unfairly sway the jury.Additionally, the defense raises concerns about ambiguous or generalized expert conclusions that lack a clear factual foundation. They argue that the court must preclude any expert testimony that was not properly disclosed or that fails to meet the necessary scientific and legal standards. The motion highlights the risk of unverified forensic interpretations or psychological assessments being introduced without proper vetting, potentially leading to misleading conclusions. The defense urges the court to enforce strict evidentiary standards by limiting expert testimony only to properly disclosed, scientifically validated opinions. This motion is a critical part of the defense's strategy to prevent prejudicial, speculative, or unreliable forensic evidence from influencing the jury in one of the most high-profile cases in Idaho's history.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-2-RE-Vague-Undisclosed-Expert-Testimony.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The judge seems to be getting irritated with Blake Lively, as he shuts down her latest Motion to Compel Justin Baldoni to turnover more evidence to help her case. Plus, Ryan Reynolds gets a NEW TIME100 Feature, and protesters fight against Jeff Bezos's wedding the Lauren Sanchez in Venice, Italy.    Use my code for 10% off your next SeatGeek order*: https://seatgeek.onelink.me/RrnK/NOFILTER10 Sponsored by SeatGeek. *Restrictions apply. Max $20 discount   Get rid of nasty parasites with the gold-standard Ivermectin + Mebendazole Parasite Cleanse from The Wellness Company. Head to http://www.twc.health/nofilter and use code NOFILTER to save $90 plus Free Shipping. US Residents Only.    Bring on the good vibes & treat yourself to Soul today! Go to www.GetSoul.com promo code NOFILTER for 30% off.   Get your tour tickets to see No Filter with Zack Peter LIVE: https://www.x1entertainment.com/zackpeter    Shop New Merch now: https://merchlabs.com/collections/zack-peter?srsltid=AfmBOoqqnV3kfsOYPubFFxCQdpCuGjVgssGIXZRXHcLPH9t4GjiKoaio   Book a personalized message on Cameo: https://v.cameo.com/e/QxWQhpd1TIb   Listen to The Pop Report: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-pop-report/id1746150111   Watch Disaster Daters: https://open.spotify.com/show/3L4GLnKwz9Uy5dT8Ey1VPi   Join the Zack Pack Community to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCs3Zs51YaK-xw2U5ypi5eqg/join   Couldn't get enough? Follow @justplainzack or @nofilterwithzack

Believers Voice of Victory Audio Broadcast for 06/26/2025.Say it and believe it! Watch Believer's Voice of Victory as Kenneth Copeland helps you speak The WORD and put faith into motion. Learn how saying and believing go hand in hand and determine to let your words agree with God's WORD!

Believers Voice of Victory Video Broadcast for 06/26/2025. Say it and believe it! Watch Believer's Voice of Victory as Kenneth Copeland helps you speak The WORD and put faith into motion. Learn how saying and believing go hand in hand and determine to let your words agree with God's WORD!

Episode 404? Isn't 404 a website error? Well part 2 of the Lake Ontario adventure corrects for the very serious 404 we had with the ebike. Still a mystery, but we're recovering and adventuring by bike in amazing towns like Sodus Point and Oswego, exploring apple orchard memories and historic nuclear power plants in between.  Lake Ontario 2025 - Part 2 Abandoning the E-Bike Dream (For Now) The electric bike project is benched due to reliability issues Reflections on bike trust, touring logistics, and rethinking the approach New trip plan: use the RAV4 Prime to support bike day rides   Pre-Booked Lodging Dilemma All lodging was pre-booked and non-refundable How that shifted priorities to maximize the trip by driving to each spot The “acoustic” bike becomes the tour hero    Day One Route & Destination Base: North of Webster, NY Original plan scrapped; new mission: mini bike adventures in each locale Exploring route options en route to Oswego, NY    Riding Past a Nuclear Legacy Passing the Ginna Nuclear Power Plant on Lake Road A personal memory and historical reflection on the 1982 radioactive steam release Commentary on U.S. nuclear energy anxiety vs. European acceptance    Beechwood State Park to Sodus Point Ride Decides to ride directly from Sodus Point due to better parking and facilities Observations of the ride: comfortable unloaded, with scenic lake views Reflections on Sodus Point, tiki bars, and surprisingly modern homes   A Sentimental Apple Orchard Memory Flashback to camping with dad in a lakeside orchard Emotional moment recalling powdered milk, childhood camping trips, and family history Reflection on development replacing orchards with McMansions   Lunch, Tiki Bars, and Town Vibes Tiki bar surprise: Jack's Good Time Tavern! Bike parking logistics and electric vehicle charging frustrations Exploring local businesses   Bonus Ride to Sodus Point Beach Park Beautiful weather, sandy beach, and kite-filled skies Soaking in the views with the acoustic bike and good mic in tow   Ferry Fiasco Averted Critical discovery: the expected ferry from Oswego isn't operating Realization: the whole trip could've collapsed if not for the car-based pivot Learning: Always confirm ferry schedules   Oswego River + Downtown Bike Loop Late-day ride along Oswego's waterfront and Cahill Pier Thoughts on Oswego's economic history, SUNY Oswego, and bike-friendly waterfront Scenic photo ops with a sailboat and lighthouse   Infrastructure Observations Comments on visible power plants, nuclear and traditional Reflections on energy production, environment, and how the infrastructure shapes the town   Memory-Making in Motion How a disappointing start turned into a meaningful, flexible, and scenic experience New appreciation for blending car support with bike touring Looking ahead: next stop, Canada – via car, not ferry   Statistics Miles biked 10 Nuclear power plants 2 Tiki bars in Sodus Point 2 Kite flying festivals attended 1 Misidentified rivers 1 Flats 0

In one of the most surreal episodes to date, Shawn French sits down with the legendary Jay Leno for an unforgettable conversation, inside his private garage. What unfolds is more than a tour of cars; it's a masterclass in legacy, presence, and pursuing what you love without compromise. The Former "Tonight Show" host opens up about the evolution of comedy, craftsmanship, and collecting—not for clout, but for care. As they move through the iconic conversation of his life, they tap into something much deeper: how history teaches, humbles, and reminds us what really lasts.- A Garage Like No OtherStep inside Jay Leno's personal collection—over 180 cars and 160 motorcycles—each with a story, a soul, and a moment in time. - Lessons From the Long GameFrom late-night to legacy, Jay reflects on what it means to stay relevant without losing yourself. - Humor, Humility, and HorsepowerUnfiltered stories from one of the greatest to ever do it—delivered with the same wit, generosity, and self-awareness that made him a household name. - Why Obsession Isn't a Dirty WordJay explains how loving something—deeply and without apology—isn't obsession. It's devotion. Whether you're a fan of comedy, cars, or simply mastering your craft over a lifetime, this episode is a once-in-a-generation conversation with a living legend. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Join the conversation by letting us know what you think about the episode!In this week's episode we're diving into a topic that most of us probably rarely think about - pelvic health. To talk about why pelvic health is important, we're joined by Dr. Judy Rossi, PT, DPT, PHC - a certified pelvic health specialist. Dr. Rossi graduated from physical therapy school at California State University at Long Beach. She later received her doctorate in physical therapy and her pelvic health certification through Evidence in Motion. Judy began her journey in pelvic health after spending most of her career as an orthopedic physical therapist, most recently as co-owner of a large outpatient orthopedic practice in Cherokee County, Georgia before selling it in 2019. It was her own physical challenges that were solved through pelvic health physical therapy that motivated her to specialize in pelvic health herself. While this occurred later in her career, she has truly found her passion in this realm. Opening her business, Woodstock Pelvic Health (also in Georgia), allows her to provide compassionate care to those with pelvic health challenges.Where to find Dr. Judy Rossi:Website: www.woodstockpelvichealth.comFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/woodstockpelvichealth/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/woodstock.pelvic.health/  Support the showBe part of the conversation by sharing your thoughts about this episode, what you may have learned, how the conversation affected you. You can reach Raquel and Jennifer on IG @madnesscafepodcast or by email at madnesscafepodcast@gmail.com.Share the episode with a friend and have your own conversation. And don't forget to rate and review the show wherever you listen!Thanks!

A memorandum in support of a request for dismissal of a complaint is a legal document submitted to a court that outlines the reasons why a complaint should be dismissed. This type of memorandum is typically prepared by the defendant or their legal counsel and presented to the court as part of the pre-trial proceedings.In this document, the defendant usually provides legal arguments and evidence to support their request for dismissal. This could include demonstrating that the complaint fails to state a valid legal claim, that there is a lack of jurisdiction, or that there are other legal grounds for dismissal.The memorandum serves as a persuasive tool for the court, aiming to convince the judge that the complaint does not have merit and should not proceed to trial. It is important for the memorandum to be well-researched, clearly written, and supported by relevant legal precedent.In this episode we begin our look at the UMG memorandum in support of dismissing the complaint filed against them by Rodney Jones.   to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.41.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in support of a request for dismissal of a complaint is a legal document submitted to a court that outlines the reasons why a complaint should be dismissed. This type of memorandum is typically prepared by the defendant or their legal counsel and presented to the court as part of the pre-trial proceedings.In this document, the defendant usually provides legal arguments and evidence to support their request for dismissal. This could include demonstrating that the complaint fails to state a valid legal claim, that there is a lack of jurisdiction, or that there are other legal grounds for dismissal.The memorandum serves as a persuasive tool for the court, aiming to convince the judge that the complaint does not have merit and should not proceed to trial. It is important for the memorandum to be well-researched, clearly written, and supported by relevant legal precedent.In this episode we begin our look at the UMG memorandum in support of dismissing the complaint filed against them by Rodney Jones.   to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.41.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in support of a request for dismissal of a complaint is a legal document submitted to a court that outlines the reasons why a complaint should be dismissed. This type of memorandum is typically prepared by the defendant or their legal counsel and presented to the court as part of the pre-trial proceedings.In this document, the defendant usually provides legal arguments and evidence to support their request for dismissal. This could include demonstrating that the complaint fails to state a valid legal claim, that there is a lack of jurisdiction, or that there are other legal grounds for dismissal.The memorandum serves as a persuasive tool for the court, aiming to convince the judge that the complaint does not have merit and should not proceed to trial. It is important for the memorandum to be well-researched, clearly written, and supported by relevant legal precedent.In this episode we begin our look at the UMG memorandum in support of dismissing the complaint filed against them by Rodney Jones.   to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.41.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In this inspiring episode of Silent Sales Machine Radio, coaches Brian and Robin Joy return from a summer break with powerful stories from recent coaching sessions. The message is clear: success doesn't require perfection—just consistent, imperfect action.   Whether you're struggling to hit that first stride or doubting your next step, this episode will reignite your motivation. Hear how simple weekly challenges, embracing the "messy middle," and staying in motion can double your business—even through vacations, setbacks, and self-doubt.   You'll learn how to: Embrace “good enough” to gain momentum Use small daily actions to achieve big goals Apply the "Rule of 100" to outpace 95% of your competition Replace hesitation with clarity through practice Build sustainable systems around your life (not the other way around)   Packed with practical wisdom, personal anecdotes, and actionable challenges, this episode is your reminder to stop waiting—and start doing.   Listen now and take the next imperfect step toward your dream business.   Special guest at the conclusion of today's show, Jeff Schick of JeffSchick.com answers the question: "If a brand really doesn't like me selling their items on Amazon, what should I do?"   Watch today's episode on our YouTube channel here: https://youtu.be/FhhxQp-fE9Y   Show note LINKS: SilentSalesMachine.com - Text the word “free” to 507-800-0090 to get a free copy of Jim's latest book in audio about building multiple income streams online (US only) or visit https://silentjim.com/free11   SilentJim.com/bookacall - Schedule a FREE, customized and insightful consultation with my team or me (Jim) to discuss your e-commerce goals and options.   TheProvenConference.com - Look for a great deal on all 50 videos of our popular live event   My Silent Team Facebook group. 100% FREE! https://www.facebook.com/groups/mysilentteam - Join 81,000 + Facebook members from around the world who are using the internet creatively every day to launch and grow multiple income streams through our exciting PROVEN strategies! There's no support community like this one anywhere else in the world!   ProvenAmazonCourse.com - The comprehensive course that contains ALL our Amazon training modules, recorded events and a steady stream of latest cutting edge training including of course the most popular starting point, the REPLENS selling model. The PAC is updated free for life!   SilentJim.com/kickstart - If you want a shortcut to learning all you need to get started then get the Proven Amazon Course and go through Kickstart.      

Recorded 2025-06-25 21:00:50

Episode 129 – The Star Wars Influence: Live at the BFI's Film on Film Festival In this special live episode, I join Doug Weir—Remastering Lead at the BFI—and post-production veteran Paul Collard on stage for a panel titled The Star Wars Influence, recorded at the BFI's Film on Film Festival. Curated and hosted by Doug, the panel explores how George Lucas's frustrations with the Hollywood studio system led to a wave of technological innovation that forever changed the filmmaking landscape. From the creation of ILM to the invention of motion control, EditDroid, SoundDroid, and digital cinema tools, we look at how Lucas empowered a generation of problem-solvers and helped pioneer the digital workflow we now take for granted. This conversation took place just before a rare screening of Star Wars from a 35mm Technicolor dye-transfer print—an experience I'll be covering in more detail in a bonus episode coming soon. Topics include:Lucas's break from the traditional studio systemThe founding of ILM and the Dykstraflex motion control rigVistaVision, optical printers, and visual effects R&DThe origins of EditDroid and non-linear editingThe value of Technicolor dye-transfer printsLucasfilm's wider influence on Pixar, Avid, and beyondThanks again to Doug and Paul—and to the BFI for hosting such a thoughtful and inspiring event.Joe Alves Doco GoFundMeAll my links

Are you constantly dodging time's curveballs or ready to take control? In this episode of The Overlap Podcast, hosts Sid Sexton and Keith Kleins dive into practical strategies for entrepreneurs to stop playing defense with their time and start playing offense. Learn how to prioritize tasks, delegate effectively, and use tools like the Value-Ease Matrix to boost productivity. Whether you're juggling a growing business or a busy family life, this episode offers actionable tips to manage your 24 hours like the most successful leaders do. Tune in to discover how small changes in time management can lead to big wins in work, fitness, faith, family, and leadership!   What You Will Learn: How to take a step back and prioritize tasks to regain control of your time. Practical ways to categorize clients or tasks using an A-B-C or 1-2-3 system. Why delegating strategically can transform your productivity. How to use the Value-Ease Matrix to focus on high-impact tasks. The importance of scheduling white space to maintain flexibility and reduce stress. Key Topics Discussed: Why constantly playing defense with your time leads to burnout. How to apply Jocko Willink's “prioritize and execute” principle in daily life. The power of saying “no” to low-value tasks or clients to protect your energy. How to align your team with clear metrics and expectations using EOS principles. The overlap between managing time in business and prioritizing family relationships. Tools like Motion and the Full Focus Planner for effective time blocking. Show Resources: Full Focus Planner by Michael Hyatt – A tool for prioritizing daily and weekly tasks. EOS Worldwide – Learn more about the Entrepreneurial Operating System for business alignment. Motion App – An automated time-blocking tool mentioned by Keith. Quotes: “Everyone has 24 hours a day. The people that are not successful are the people that get the less important things done.” – Sid Sexton [00:00:00] “If everything's important, nothing's important.” – Keith Kleins [00:14:00] “Stop playing defense. Start playing offense.” – Sid Sexton [00:40:00] Sponsor Spotlight: Barranco and Associates: Johnny Barranco's holistic financial strategies save you time and stress—contact them today! Content Fresh: Skyrocket your social media like The Overlap Podcast did with Content Fresh—visit them now! C2 Wealth Strategies: Wes Cody's team crafts personalized financial plans for your future—schedule a consultation! Roadmap for Growth: Chris Francis and Rick Miller's course helps scale your service business—check it out! Transcript Excerpts: [00:02:00–00:03:00] “We're talking about how to stop playing defense with your time… In sports, when you're on defense all the time, it can wear you down. You feel like you're under attack… It's pretty bad sometimes.” – Sid compares time management to a relentless game of dodgeball, setting the stage for why proactive strategies are key. [00:18:00–00:19:00] “I feel like the number one priority is the wife… If that is messed up, it bleeds into every other aspect of my life… It creates harmony throughout the rest of the house too.” – Sid shares a heartfelt insight on prioritizing family relationships to maintain balance. Conclusion:   This episode is a game-changer for entrepreneurs ready to take charge of their time and focus on what truly matters. Grab a notebook, try the Value-Ease Matrix, and share this episode with a friend who's stuck in defensive mode! Tune in next week for more practical tips to grow in work and life.

Gonzalez Castillo v. Bondi, No. 24-3631 (6th Cir. June 18, 2025)crime of child abuse, abandonment, or neglect; conviction after naturalization; denaturalization; statutory interpretation; rule of lenity; “is convicted” Matter of Roque-Izada, 29 I&N Dec. 106 (BIA 2025)termination of removal proceedings; parole; Cuban Adjustment Act; C.F.R. § 1003.18(d); Cabrera Fernandez; parole Lemus-Escobar v. Bondi, No. 18-73423 (9th Cir. June 16, 2025)mental health; attorney not necessarily adequate safeguard; CIMT; NACARA; Loper Bright; shooting a firearm at an inhabited dwelling in violation of Cal. Pen. Code § 246; attorney withdrawal of asylum application; motion to reopen and discretion; withholding, CAT, and mental health facilities in GuatemalaSponsors and friends of the podcast!Kurzban Kurzban Tetzeli and Pratt P.A.Immigration, serious injury, and business lawyers serving clients in Florida, California, and all over the world for over 40 years.Cerenade"Leader in providing smart, secure, and intuitive cloud-based solutions"Demo Link!Click me too!Stafi"Remote staffing solutions for businesses of all sizes"Promo Code: STAFI2025Click me!Gonzales & Gonzales Immigration BondsP: (833) 409-9200immigrationbond.com Want to become a patron?Click here to check out our Patreon Page!CONTACT INFORMATIONEmail: kgregg@kktplaw.comFacebook: @immigrationreviewInstagram: @immigrationreviewTwitter: @immreviewAbout your hostCase notesRecent criminal-immigration article (p.18)Featured in San Diego VoyagerDISCLAIMER & CREDITSSee Eps. 1-200Support the show