Podcasts about motions

Les hommes vieillissent comme le vin, les femmes comme… Je m'arrête là, AU SECOURS ! Quelle femme n'a jamais eu le cerveau infusé de cette vision sexiste du vieillissement ? Il est de changer de prisme et d'état d'esprit, il en va de notre bien-être voire de notre santé mentale ! Vieillir n'est pas une perte, mais un privilège, quel que soit son genre. Chaque ride, chaque cheveu blanc, chaque transformation du corps raconte une histoire de courage, de résilience et d'amour. Dans cet épisode Best of, je vous invite à explorer une autre voie : celle où vieillir devient un acte de puissance, de douceur et d'alignement. Une voie où l'on choisit de s'aimer comme on est, sans honte ni compromis.****Notre guide "10 leviers essentiels pour les décideuses" est un véritable concentré d'outils de coaching et de mentoring, les mêmes que nous utilisons dans le programme Sensées. Il est conçu pour toutes les directrices, dirigeantes et entrepreneures qui sont fatiguées de porter seules les responsabilités. Si vous avez l'impression que votre quotidien vous échappe petit à petit, ce guide est fait pour vous. Cliquez ici pour obtenir votre exemplaire offert !***Sensées, c'est aussi un programme de coaching pour les femmes dirigeantes, top managers et entrepreneures. Au sein du programme Sensées, vous êtes accompagnée en petit groupe ET en individuel dans votre croissance professionnelle. Vous êtes aussi formée et mentorée pour incarner pleinement votre leadership, avec les maîtres mots sérénité, plaisir, hauteur et impact. Intéressée ? Cliquez ici pour en savoir plus.**Vous représentez une entreprise et souhaitez développer le leadership de vos talents féminins ? : cliquez ici.**Chaque semaine, je partage mes conseils au sujet du leadership des femmes dans Sensées, la newsletter. Inscrivez-vous gratuitement en cliquant ici.Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Aujourd'hui dans Émotions au travail, on vous propose de découvrir Il était temps, un podcast de La Fondation Covéa.En 2025, plus de 9 millions de français se privent et renoncent parfois à certains repas. Une situation qu'a connue S. pendant plusieurs années avant de croiser la route de l'épicerie solidaire Solidaya du réseau Andès.Ce réseau national, 5ème acteur de l'aide alimentaire en France, propose dans ses épiceries solidaires des denrées saines et variées ainsi que des biens de première nécessité à bas prix, mais offre aussi de l'écoute et du lien social. Des maillons essentiels pour aider à se reconstruire.Aujourd'hui, le réseau compte plus de 630 épiceries solidaires en France hexagonale et en Outre-mer.ll était temps est un podcast produit par Louie Creative, l'agence de Louie Media pour la Fondation Covéa. Sophie Marchand a écrit, présenté et monté cet épisode, Renaud Watine en a fait la réalisation, Arthur Genest la musique. Eloïse Normand en a supervisé la réalisation. L'illustration est de Jérémie Luciani. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Met ditmaal: The Zipps, Bobby Green Selection, Cosmic Dealer, Jug Session, Brainbox, Opus, Slight Ache, Nou &, Ash Tray, Hans Brinker Symphony, Zen, BZN, The Coopers, Groep 1850, The Tykes, Amsterdam, The Beat Buddies, Baldwin, plus een exclusieve instore van The Motions. Concerto Radio, aflevering 597 (23 mei 2025): The Zipps, Kicks And Chicks Bobby […]

Taylor Swift's response is due in court today! In a shocking twist, Justin Baldoni's legal team has withdrawn their subpoena, as Swift's legal team appears to have provided the evidence they were seeking against Blake Lively! Plus, was her dad Scott the one that tipped off Justin Baldoni's team? And Ryan Reynolds now wants sanctions on Baldoni's team! Special guests Lauren Neidigh  @LethalLauren904   from Court of Random Opinion and Leanne Newton  @leannenewton1572   join to weigh-in on the latest legal drama.    9:10 - Kim Kardashian Graduates Law School 10:25 - Travis Kelce's Hairy Back! 15:20 - Blake & Ryan's Motions for Sanctions 21:40 - Taylor Swift's Dad Joins the Fight! 27:45 - Blake Refuses to Participate in Investigation Into Her Claims 47:50 - Baldoni Drops Subpoena After Taylor Turns Over Info   Subscribe to Lauren: https://www.youtube.com/@LethalLauren904    Subscribe to Leanne: https://www.youtube.com/@leannenewton1572    Spike Detox your body! Use code NOFILTER for 15% Off + Free Shipping on every order. www.twc.health/nofilter   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

Podcast Nature et Bien-Être sur Proxima : signe des temps, la science nous apprend qu'il est possible de gérer nos émotions. Découvrez comment. •

In this episode of Surviving The Survivor, Joel & STS #BestGuests explain and dissect the latest motions (now published online), what's happening now and what's next as Donna goes on trial soon for the murder of her ex son-in-law. Matriarch Donna Adelson is charged with first-degree murder, conspiracy and solicitation in the 2014 murder-for-hire of her former son-in-law, Dan Markel. The Florida State law professor was shot and later died the hospital while dealing with an on-going custody battle with his ex-wife, Wendi Adelson AKA Donna's daughter. Since then--Donna's son, Charle Adelson, has gone on trial and was convicted for his involvement in the murder for hire of Dan Markel. Donna Adelson is expected to go on trial this fall after several delays have pushed the original trial date.⸻ #Support the show:All Things STS: Https://linktr.ee/stspodcastGet Joel's Book: Https://amzn.to/48GwbLxSupport the show on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/SurvivingTheSurvivorCatch us live on YouTube: Surviving The Survivor: #BestGuests in True Crime - YouTubeVenmo Donations: @STSPodcast

Welcome back to the Law School Toolbox podcast! In this week's episode, we're focusing on a topic from Civil Procedure -- specifically, motions for judgment as a matter of law and motions for new trial, where the moving party is asking the court to take certain issues away from the jury. In this episode we discuss: The two types of motions for judgment as a matter of law The standard for granting a motion for judgment as a matter of law Filing and granting motions for new trial Analyzing a hypo encompassing the above concepts Resources: "Listen and Learn" series (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/law-school-toolbox-podcast-substantive-law-topics/#listen-learn) Podcast Episode 412: Listen and Learn – Motions for Summary Judgment (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/podcast-episode-412-listen-and-learn-motions-for-summary-judgment/) Download the Transcript  (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/episode-504-listen-and-learn-motions-for-judgment-as-a-matter-of-law-and-motions-for-new-trial-civ-pro/) If you enjoy the podcast, we'd love a nice review and/or rating on Apple Podcasts (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/law-school-toolbox-podcast/id1027603976) or your favorite listening app. And feel free to reach out to us directly. You can always reach us via the contact form on the Law School Toolbox website (http://lawschooltoolbox.com/contact). If you're concerned about the bar exam, check out our sister site, the Bar Exam Toolbox (http://barexamtoolbox.com/). You can also sign up for our weekly podcast newsletter (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/get-law-school-podcast-updates/) to make sure you never miss an episode! Thanks for listening! Alison & Lee

Lesson presented at The Crossings Church Collinsville in Collinsville, IL – a non-denominational church that meets Sunday mornings at 2002 Mall Street, Collinsville, IL just outside of St. Louis. For more like this, visit the sermons page at https://crossingscollinsville.com/ The post Jake Sitton – Motions to Maturity appeared first on The Crossings Church Collinsville.

Et si vos douleurs ne venaient pas seulement de vos muscles ou de vos articulations… mais aussi de vos émotions ? Dans cet épisode, Major Mouvement, kiné passionné, nous embarque dans les coulisses du cerveau pour explorer le lien entre blessures, fatigue et mental. Un concentré d'infos utiles, d'anecdotes étonnantes et de conseils concrets pour mieux comprendre son corps… et sa tête. Retrouvez l'intégralité de l'épisode sur le podcast Dans la Tête d'un Coureur Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

If the following nine subtle signals sound familiar, experts agree that a couple is likely half-hearted about their relationship. Could this be you?

Prendre la parole en public n'est pas qu'une question de technique ou de charisme. C'est avant tout une affaire de pensées, d'émotions et de posture intérieure. Dans cet épisode Best of, je vous dévoile les mécanismes invisibles qui freinent votre expression – et surtout, je vous partage 5 clefs de coaching pour transformer votre rapport à la prise de parole :1/ dépasser la peur du regard des autres2/ comment vous ancrer dans votre message plutôt que dans votre image3/ développer votre confiance en vous4/ comment vous entraîner efficacementet 5/ savoir évaluer vos progrès pour gagner en aisance Que vous soyez en réunion, sur scène ou face à une caméra, ces outils vous aideront à prendre la parole avec assurance et authenticité.*****Découvrez les 3 secrets pour briller en réunion lors de notre prochaine Masterclass. Virginie Baudet, notre coach experte du sujet, vous dévoilera comment transformer vos réunions en moments d'impact et de leadership. Elle vous guidera en live le mardi 13 mai de 12h30 à 13h45. À noter que les inscrites - et uniquement elles - recevront le replay et accèderont à une offre spéciale sur notre formation Réussir ses prises de parole. L'inscription est offerte et ne vous engage pas : https://jennychammas.com/masterclass-reunion/****Notre guide "10 leviers essentiels pour les décideuses" est un véritable concentré d'outils de coaching et de mentoring, les mêmes que nous utilisons dans le programme Sensées. Il est conçu pour toutes les directrices, dirigeantes et entrepreneures qui sont fatiguées de porter seules les responsabilités. Si vous avez l'impression que votre quotidien vous échappe petit à petit, ce guide est fait pour vous. Cliquez ici pour obtenir votre exemplaire offert !***Sensées, c'est aussi un programme de coaching pour les femmes dirigeantes, top managers et entrepreneures. Au sein du programme Sensées, vous êtes accompagnée en petit groupe ET en individuel dans votre croissance professionnelle. Vous êtes aussi formée et mentorée pour incarner pleinement votre leadership, avec les maîtres mots sérénité, plaisir, hauteur et impact. Intéressée ? Cliquez ici pour en savoir plus.**Vous représentez une entreprise et souhaitez développer le leadership de vos talents féminins ? : cliquez ici.**Chaque semaine, je partage mes conseils au sujet du leadership des femmes dans Sensées, la newsletter. Inscrivez-vous gratuitement en cliquant ici.Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Toi fidèle auditeur•ices de Friendship, découvre Tribune & Podium, le podcast pour vivre les émotions du sport !

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdf

What if quantum mechanics is not fundamental? What if time itself is an illusion? In this new episode, physicist Julian Barbour returns to share his most radical ideas yet. He proposes that the universe is built purely from ratios, that time is not fundamental, and that quantum mechanics might be replaced entirely without the need for wave functions or Planck's constant. This may be the simplest vision of reality ever proposed. As a listener of TOE you can get a special 20% off discount to The Economist and all it has to offer! Visit https://www.economist.com/toe Join My New Substack (Personal Writings): https://curtjaimungal.substack.com Listen on Spotify: https://tinyurl.com/SpotifyTOE Become a YouTube Member (Early Access Videos): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdWIQh9DGG6uhJk8eyIFl1w/join Videos Mentioned: Julian's previous appearance on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bprxrGaf0Os Neil Turok on TOE (Big Bang): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUp9x44N3uE Neil Turok on TOE (Black Holes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNZCa1pVE20 Debunking “All Possible Paths”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcY3ZtgYis0 John Vervaeke on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVj1KYGyesI Jacob Barandes & Scott Aaronson on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rbC3XZr9-c The Dark History of Anti-Gravity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBA3RUxkZdc Peter Woit on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTSeqsCgxj8 Books Mentioned: The Monadology – G.W. Leibniz: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1546527664 The Janus Point – Julian Barbour: https://www.amazon.ca/dp/0465095461 Reflections on the Motive Power of Heat – Carnot: https://www.amazon.ca/dp/1514873974 Lucretius: On the Nature of Things: https://www.amazon.ca/dp/0393341364 Heisenberg and the Interpretation of QM: https://www.amazon.ca/dp/1107403510 Quantum Mechanics for Cosmologists: https://books.google.ca/books?id=qou0iiLPjyoC&pg=PA99 Faraday, Maxwell, and the EM Field: https://www.amazon.ca/dp/1616149426 The Feeling of Life Itself – Christof Koch: https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B08BTCX4BM Articles Mentioned: Time's Arrow and Simultaneity (Barbour): https://arxiv.org/pdf/2211.14179 On the Moving Force of Heat (Clausius): https://sites.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/2559_Therm_Stat_Mech/docs/Clausius%20Moving%20Force%20heat%201851.pdf On the Motions and Collisions of Elastic Spheres (Maxwell): http://www.alternativaverde.it/stel/documenti/Maxwell/1860/Maxwell%20%281860%29%20-%20Illustrations%20of%20the%20dynamical%20theory%20of%20gases.pdf Maxwell–Boltzmann distribution (Wikipedia): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell–Boltzmann_distribution Identification of a Gravitational Arrow of Time: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1409.0917 The Nature of Time: https://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.3489 The Solution to the Problem of Time in Shape Dynamics: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1302.6264 CPT-Symmetric Universe: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.08928 Mach's Principle and Dynamical Theories (JSTOR): https://www.jstor.org/stable/2397395 Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction 01:35 Consciousness and the Nature of Reality 3:23 The Nature of Time and Change 7:01 The Role of Variety in Existence 9:23 Understanding Entropy and Temperature 36:10 Revisiting the Second Law of Thermodynamics 41:33 The Illusion of Entropy in the Universe 46:11 Rethinking the Past Hypothesis 55:03 Complexity, Order, and Newton's Influence 1:02:33 Evidence Beyond Quantum Mechanics 1:16:04 Age and Structure of the Universe 1:18:53 Open Universe and Ratios 1:20:15 Fundamental Particles and Ratios 1:24:20 Emergence of Structure in Age 1:27:11 Shapes and Their Explanations 1:32:54 Life and Variety in the Universe 1:44:27 Consciousness and Perception of Structure 1:57:22 Geometry, Experience, and Forces 2:09:27 The Role of Consciousness in Shape Dynamics Support TOE on Patreon: https://patreon.com/curtjaimungal Twitter: https://twitter.com/TOEwithCurt Discord Invite: https://discord.com/invite/kBcnfNVwqs #science Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Velázquez v. Bondi, No. 23-929 (U.S. Apr. 22, 2025)voluntary departure; service on the weekend; 60 day departure period; jurisdiction; INA § 242(a)(1); “days”; presumption that Congress legislates in harmony with what came before it Matter of A-A-R-, 29 I&N Dec. 38 (BIA 2025)CAT deferral; former MS-13 members; state exception policy in El Salvador; experts; prison conditions; sharing criminal information with El Salvador; State Department reports; acquiesce and willful blindness; intent to torture; standard of review Zhou v. Bondi, No. 24-3866 (6th Cir. Apr. 23, 2025)jurisdiction to review ineffective assistance of counsel motion to reopen; INA § 237(a)(1)(H) waiver; prejudice; discretion Hussen v. Bondi, No. 23-1047 (4th Cir. Apr. 22, 2025)marriage during removal proceedings; prima facie standard for motion to reopen; clear and convincing evidence; reopening as an important safeguard; Muslim marriage; Matter of Velarde; credibility; Ethiopia Oscar v. Bondi, No. 23-3858 (9th Cir. Apr. 23, 2025)offer of firm resettlement; prima facie case; exceptions – government consciously restricted residence; Haiti; Chile Mendez Nolasco v. Bondi, No. 23-1947 (1st Cir. Apr. 23, 2025)non LPR cancellation of removal; exceptional and extremely unusual hardship; standard of review; inability of children to speak Spanish; Recinas; factors in the aggregate Chanchavac Garcia v. Bondi, No. 24-1296 (1st Cir. Apr. 24, 2025)non-LPR cancellation of removal; special needs and loss of educational opportunities; BIA failure to consider evidence and explain analysisSponsors 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!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

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​The U.S. government's motions in limine in the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs seek to shape the evidentiary landscape for the upcoming trial. Prosecutors aim to introduce corroborative materials such as text messages, diary entries from a former employee, and a 911 call to support the testimonies of alleged victims. They argue that these pieces of evidence are crucial to demonstrate patterns of behavior and to counter anticipated challenges to the credibility of witnesses. Additionally, the government requests the exclusion of certain defense evidence, including prior consensual sexual encounters Combs had with individuals not involved in the case, asserting that such information is irrelevant and could mislead the jury.Furthermore, the prosecution seeks to admit expert testimony from psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes, who would explain how victims of abuse might remain in relationships with their abusers due to emotional manipulation or fear. This testimony is intended to provide context for the victims' continued association with Combs, which the defense might use to question their credibility. The motions also address the admissibility of a 2016 surveillance video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. The defense contests this video's inclusion, claiming it has been altered and lacks authenticityto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.260.0_1.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of United States v. Combs, S2 24 Cr. 542 (AS), both parties submitted a joint letter on March 12, 2025, in response to the Court's order, outlining the issues to be addressed at the pretrial conference scheduled for March 14, 2025, at 2 p.m., alongside the defendant's arraignment on the superseding indictment. The letter highlights several key points:​Motions in Limine: Both parties have filed motions in limine concerning the admissibility of certain evidence and anticipate addressing these motions during the conference.​Discovery: The defense has requested additional discovery materials, and the Government is in the process of reviewing and producing the relevant documents.​Trial Schedule: Discussion of the anticipated length of the trial and potential scheduling conflicts is planned.​Jury Selection: Both parties seek to address procedures for jury selection, including the use of questionnaires and voir dire processes.​Other Pretrial Matters: Any additional issues that may impact the trial proceedings are to be discussed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.177.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

This order memorializes the oral rulings made by Judge John C. Judge on April 17, 2025, in the Bryan Kohberger case regarding several motions in limine. The court granted the prosecution's request to preclude defense counsel from mentioning or suggesting that third parties—specifically “other men” or unidentified persons—are responsible for the crimes unless the defense can provide a proper evidentiary foundation outside the presence of the jury. This aims to prevent speculation or unsupported accusations from being introduced at trial. Additionally, the judge ruled that the defense may not use characterizations like “rush to judgment” or claims of a biased investigation unless such arguments are supported by specific, admissible evidence.The court also ruled in favor of the prosecution's request to limit or exclude any irrelevant or inflammatory evidence, including any references to the victims' personal histories, sexual activity, or alleged drug use, unless it directly relates to the defense's theory of the case and passes legal scrutiny. Similarly, the judge limited the introduction of expert opinions unless those experts have been properly disclosed and vetted. These rulings were intended to ensure a fair trial, maintain focus on relevant issues, and reduce the potential for prejudicial arguments that could mislead or confuse the jury.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:041825+Order+Memorializing+Oral+Rulings+on+Motions+in+Limine.pdf

This order memorializes the oral rulings made by Judge John C. Judge on April 17, 2025, in the Bryan Kohberger case regarding several motions in limine. The court granted the prosecution's request to preclude defense counsel from mentioning or suggesting that third parties—specifically “other men” or unidentified persons—are responsible for the crimes unless the defense can provide a proper evidentiary foundation outside the presence of the jury. This aims to prevent speculation or unsupported accusations from being introduced at trial. Additionally, the judge ruled that the defense may not use characterizations like “rush to judgment” or claims of a biased investigation unless such arguments are supported by specific, admissible evidence.The court also ruled in favor of the prosecution's request to limit or exclude any irrelevant or inflammatory evidence, including any references to the victims' personal histories, sexual activity, or alleged drug use, unless it directly relates to the defense's theory of the case and passes legal scrutiny. Similarly, the judge limited the introduction of expert opinions unless those experts have been properly disclosed and vetted. These rulings were intended to ensure a fair trial, maintain focus on relevant issues, and reduce the potential for prejudicial arguments that could mislead or confuse the jury.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:041825+Order+Memorializing+Oral+Rulings+on+Motions+in+Limine.pdf

This order memorializes the oral rulings made by Judge John C. Judge on April 17, 2025, in the Bryan Kohberger case regarding several motions in limine. The court granted the prosecution's request to preclude defense counsel from mentioning or suggesting that third parties—specifically “other men” or unidentified persons—are responsible for the crimes unless the defense can provide a proper evidentiary foundation outside the presence of the jury. This aims to prevent speculation or unsupported accusations from being introduced at trial. Additionally, the judge ruled that the defense may not use characterizations like “rush to judgment” or claims of a biased investigation unless such arguments are supported by specific, admissible evidence.The court also ruled in favor of the prosecution's request to limit or exclude any irrelevant or inflammatory evidence, including any references to the victims' personal histories, sexual activity, or alleged drug use, unless it directly relates to the defense's theory of the case and passes legal scrutiny. Similarly, the judge limited the introduction of expert opinions unless those experts have been properly disclosed and vetted. These rulings were intended to ensure a fair trial, maintain focus on relevant issues, and reduce the potential for prejudicial arguments that could mislead or confuse the jury.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:041825+Order+Memorializing+Oral+Rulings+on+Motions+in+Limine.pdf

This order memorializes the oral rulings made by Judge John C. Judge on April 17, 2025, in the Bryan Kohberger case regarding several motions in limine. The court granted the prosecution's request to preclude defense counsel from mentioning or suggesting that third parties—specifically “other men” or unidentified persons—are responsible for the crimes unless the defense can provide a proper evidentiary foundation outside the presence of the jury. This aims to prevent speculation or unsupported accusations from being introduced at trial. Additionally, the judge ruled that the defense may not use characterizations like “rush to judgment” or claims of a biased investigation unless such arguments are supported by specific, admissible evidence.The court also ruled in favor of the prosecution's request to limit or exclude any irrelevant or inflammatory evidence, including any references to the victims' personal histories, sexual activity, or alleged drug use, unless it directly relates to the defense's theory of the case and passes legal scrutiny. Similarly, the judge limited the introduction of expert opinions unless those experts have been properly disclosed and vetted. These rulings were intended to ensure a fair trial, maintain focus on relevant issues, and reduce the potential for prejudicial arguments that could mislead or confuse the jury.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:041825+Order+Memorializing+Oral+Rulings+on+Motions+in+Limine.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

This order memorializes the oral rulings made by Judge John C. Judge on April 17, 2025, in the Bryan Kohberger case regarding several motions in limine. The court granted the prosecution's request to preclude defense counsel from mentioning or suggesting that third parties—specifically “other men” or unidentified persons—are responsible for the crimes unless the defense can provide a proper evidentiary foundation outside the presence of the jury. This aims to prevent speculation or unsupported accusations from being introduced at trial. Additionally, the judge ruled that the defense may not use characterizations like “rush to judgment” or claims of a biased investigation unless such arguments are supported by specific, admissible evidence.The court also ruled in favor of the prosecution's request to limit or exclude any irrelevant or inflammatory evidence, including any references to the victims' personal histories, sexual activity, or alleged drug use, unless it directly relates to the defense's theory of the case and passes legal scrutiny. Similarly, the judge limited the introduction of expert opinions unless those experts have been properly disclosed and vetted. These rulings were intended to ensure a fair trial, maintain focus on relevant issues, and reduce the potential for prejudicial arguments that could mislead or confuse the jury.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:041825+Order+Memorializing+Oral+Rulings+on+Motions+in+Limine.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

This order memorializes the oral rulings made by Judge John C. Judge on April 17, 2025, in the Bryan Kohberger case regarding several motions in limine. The court granted the prosecution's request to preclude defense counsel from mentioning or suggesting that third parties—specifically “other men” or unidentified persons—are responsible for the crimes unless the defense can provide a proper evidentiary foundation outside the presence of the jury. This aims to prevent speculation or unsupported accusations from being introduced at trial. Additionally, the judge ruled that the defense may not use characterizations like “rush to judgment” or claims of a biased investigation unless such arguments are supported by specific, admissible evidence.The court also ruled in favor of the prosecution's request to limit or exclude any irrelevant or inflammatory evidence, including any references to the victims' personal histories, sexual activity, or alleged drug use, unless it directly relates to the defense's theory of the case and passes legal scrutiny. Similarly, the judge limited the introduction of expert opinions unless those experts have been properly disclosed and vetted. These rulings were intended to ensure a fair trial, maintain focus on relevant issues, and reduce the potential for prejudicial arguments that could mislead or confuse the jury.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:041825+Order+Memorializing+Oral+Rulings+on+Motions+in+Limine.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

VLOG II April 25 After US v. Sean Combs hearing ruling on pre-trial motions, and US request Diddy be "allocuted" on plea offer made to him - thread is here https://x.com/innercitypress/status/1915787098805702669…

D'un côté, il y a celui ou celle pour qui voir ses ami·es implique une organisation millimétrée et un budget baby-sitting non négligeable ; de l'autre, celui ou celle condamné·e à regarder pendant des heures des photos d'enfants à la plage / mangeant une glace / au camping / faisant un puzzle / avec un bob / au parc / sur une trotinette / avec un livre... Amitié et parentalité sont parfois difficiles à concilier, mais est-ce une fatalité ? C'est le sujet de ce prochain épisode de Faites des gosses et Émotions, par les journalistes Marine Revol et Marie Misset : “Les parents sont-ils de mauvais amis ?” Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

NYPD Vet EXPOSES Stern's Hearing Defense Secrets! #stephan sterns #madelinesoto #osceolacounty Get ready for a bombshell expose as a seasoned NYPD veteran lifts the lid on Stephan Stern's hearing defense secrets! In this explosive video, our insider reveals the shocking truth behind Stern's tactics and what really goes on behind closed doors. From little-known loopholes to hidden strategies, we're about to blow the lid off the secrets that Stern and his team use to defend their clients.

Get 15% off OneSkin with the code LAWNERD at https://www.oneskin.co/ #oneskinpod #adThe Karen Read Retrial's Opening statements begin on Tuesday, April 22nd. There's a motion from the Commonwealth to restrict the defense from claiming victim injuries were caused by an animal. The defense wants to show a picture of abrasions on the victim's arm in their opening statement.Diddy's request for a two-month continuance was denied so the trial will move forward as planned. The court denied Warner Brothers' motion to quash a subpoena for unaired footage of interviews. Memoir drafts from "Victim 1" must be turned over to Diddy. Victims 2, 3, and 4 can testify under pseudonyms. Attorney Brian Steele, known from the Young Thug RICO case, has joined Diddy's defense team.A hearing was held for the Menendez Brother's Resentencing, but the District Attorney's office attempted to withdraw a motion for resentencing, which the judge denied. There's now a motion to recuse the DA's office, and the hearing is delayed until May 9th. There are also allegations that the prosecution violated Marsy's Law by showing graphic crime scene photos without warning the family.The Donna Adelson trial is set to begin with jury selection on June 3rd. Motions to recuse the judge were denied.Tom Girardi sentencing is delayed until May 8th as they determine whether he should be committed to a facility instead of prison.RESOURCESLast Podcast Episode - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiVLnPrmBvIMenendez Brothers - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Zdbj_MDU-EBill Cosby Breakdown - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXOzcrSaIQMDiddy Indicted Again - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWWROhF2_2YDiddy Lawyer Quits - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjItfEI1pwYThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Bryan Kohberger had a hearing on April 9th, 2025 to go over Motions in Limine. What was first thought to be a 2 day affair, was completed in 1 day because Judge Hippler runs a tight ship! The Defense and Prosecution were able to go over 25 Motions. Some were decided on the stand, others were taken under advisement. The most intense part of the hearing focused on a dispute over AT&T records.The Defense Attorney, Anne Taylor, made accusations about the Prosecution withholding evidence, leading to a strong rebuke from the judge. Judge Hipper reminded Anne Taylor that she is an "Officer of the Court" and that when he took on this case he doesn't want theatrics or accusations that aren't supported evidence about supposed bad conducts.He said that he respects all of the attorneys and the types of accusations made can get a person disbarred! When Rulings are posted in writing, I will break them down in an upcoming Monday - The Emily Show podcast episode.Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/L_LYXsaPV8ERESOURCESThe Emily Show Podcast - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFdNnRZUqH60WELo6OInNVPU7Fed0d2BzBushy Eyebrow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHlYOkcFXAwThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Bryan Kohberger will be back in court on April 9th & 10th, 2025 to discuss Motions in Limine and other filings. The State adds another Prosecutor to the team - Attorney Hurwit. An important limine is the AT&T Timing Advance Records. There's a dispute between the Prosecution and Defense regarding access to these records. The prosecution claims the records related to Kohberger timed out and no longer exist due to AT&T's policy of keeping them for only seven days. The defense questions this, suggesting that law enforcement may have seen these records and that the Prosecution might not be fully disclosing information. What's the truth about the 7-day retention policy? This could be a potential for a major issue if the Prosecution had the records and didn't disclose them, versus if AT&T simply stating the records no longer exist.Watch the full coverage of the live stream on The Emily D Baker YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/mHlYOkcFXAwThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/Podscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy