Wally

"Jimmy" <jimmy_freedom@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:469f4ba8.0307240438.f4570a@posting.google.com ...
: This may have posted before. However, in light of the current nature
: of the activity going on in this NG, it's apparent some humans,
: (monster) don't yet understand.
:
: Read and Learn!
:
: [ legalese BS snipped]
:

Trust lawyers to make it impossible to discern what a person is. Kinda makes
you wonder what lawyers mean by "truth", doesn't it?

McGyver

"Wally" <wallyr51@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0a5Ua.196$T7.23286@read1.cgocable.net...
> Trust lawyers to make it impossible to discern what a person is. Kinda
makes
> you wonder what lawyers mean by "truth", doesn't it?

Are you saing the following is not clear?
"The word "person" includes individuals, children, firms,
associations, joint adventures, partnerships, estates, trusts,
business trusts, syndicates, fiduciaries, corporations, and all other
groups or combinations."

Seems clear to me.

The original poster may be making things seem unclear, but it's not lawyers
drafting the definition that did it. The original poster is spouting one of
the silliest of the crackpot theories. At least in the top ten for
silliness. Like most of the crackpot theories involving law, it depends on
intentional misinterpretation of statutes and cases. Sometimes the
intentional misinterpretations are complicated, and sometimes as simple as:
"the definitions statute does not list man or woman -- therefore they are
excluded from all statutes."

The crackpot theory that rises above all others for silliness is the one
that says all lawyer and judges are controlled by the Knights Templar of
England. I love that one. The tax crackpots are the best, I think. Their
intentional misinterpretations are masterpieces.

McGyver