Dr’s prescribe massage therapy. I know plenty who consider it a medical profession, as that it’s it’s legal distinction. This isn’t a matter of opinion here it IS a medical profession. You don’t get to make up the distinction.
A massage therapist isn’t prescribing medicine or giving you shots, they are working your muscles. Sure it’s not as intensive as other medical professions, but that’s irrelevant, again this isn’t a matter of opinion. Physical therapy and massage therapy are different things, and it’s simply not true that insurance companies will not pay for massage if it’s Dr. prescribed. Massage can be done at many different levels. If I wanted to go do lymphatic drainage I’d have to get certified to do that and it would require duh duh duh more schooling. If I got that certification I’d be working with cancer patients and other immune suppressed patients, and guess what people would still call me? You guessed it a massage therapist.
So in this case it’s just your ignorance that’s holding you back from recognizing a legitimate medical profession. If it’s not a medical profession then why was the state board exam almost all medical questions? If it’s not a medical profession why did I have to take one semester of neurology, two semesters of pathology, about 6 semesters worth of anatomy and several of kinesiology? I don’t pretend it’s on the same level as a Doctor.
Whenever you’re getting your nails done ask your esthetician what she thought of her neurology class?
And I believe requires prostitutes to be licensed.
Estheticians don’t do nails, but you’re cute to try to guess. Cosmetologists and estheticians have to take a certain amount of medical courses and need to be licensed. In fact, in New York they need 1000 hours, just like you!
Don’t worry Hon, I’d still tip you as well as I do the girls at the spa.
This one is actually seriously hairy. Which is why I used it as the example. It bumps into a bunch of issues. It’s not at all self-evident. But I’m not a lawyer, so of course I have no idea.
First of all, I’d be shocked to find out that someone could talk about their OWN statement under the hearsay exception for spontaneous declarations. That exception is generally offered under the theory that the person speaking under the stress of excitement has had no opportunity to reflect and speak falsely, therefore what they said was probably honest from their own point of view, at least.
A party testifying that he said something so excitedly that he couldn’t have been lying when he said it would be… lame, to say the least.
And being pissed hardly qualfies anyway:
•
Merely being pissed off hardly rises to that.
So, The Plaintiff’s accusation: that he informed the defendant two years earlier that he didn’t want certain bills paid. (Therefore she shouldn’t have paid them, therefore they should be disallowed as legitimate, but all that is secondary. The meaningful matter that is being asserted is that he did, in fact, tell the defendant that he did not want these bills paid.) Therefore he is testifying that he said something to prove that he said something, already a problem, and he’s throwing in a comment about his former state of mind as proof that he actually said it:
*The defendant on cross:
Q: Do you know what you said?
A: No.
Q: Do you remember if you said it in person or in writing?
A: I don’t recall.
Q: Do you remember if you said it on the phone?
A: I don’t recall.
Q: Do you remember what the answer was?
A: No
*Q: But you are certain that you told defendant this?
A: Yes, I’m sure. I’m sure because I remember being angry about it.
**
This is all from the Rutter Group Civil Trials and Evidence.
BUT…what’s here?
But really, that’s not a problem, it just seems like one, see further down…
Getting back to mental and physical state for a moment:
Well, in this case the Plaintiff is trying to convince the judge that all the business expenses should be disallowed and awarded to him because he said he didn’t want the money spent that way. I’d say he had a motive to lie.
Moving on…
Well, that’s certainly why it was offered, except…
My acute awareness of my lack of education makes me extra super careful, not obsessive. I don’t have the luxury of assuming I have it right because I passed the bar, thank god.
And the time it takes to get an esthetics license is relevant because? Again, this isn’t a matter of opinion. You’re wrong, it doesn’t matter what sort of insults you hurl at me, or if you hurt my feelings or even if you bait me, you’re still wrong. Massage Therapy is a regulated medical profession.
How many estheticians do you know who work for Sloan Kettering out of curiousity?
When I work on someone I can help their posture. I worked on a friend who was in a terrible car accident 25 years ago and her Pelvis is permanently messed up. She sees a chiropractor every week. When I saw her she went to her chiropractor a week later and he told he had nothing to do. The reason for that is because I used my seaweed mudrap facial technique to adjust the muscles that would pull her out of alignment and undo the chiropractor’s work.
Wait, are you one of those idiots that doesn’t believe in chiropractic either?
Oh, and, as you might imagine, this little tidbit is from my case. Plaintiff has no memory of anything about it. Except that he was mad, so he must have said it, right?
Which is why it’s hearsay… it reeks.
(I remember LOTS of conversations I’ve had when I was pissed. I had them in my head, over and over. So vividly that I might even start to think I REALLY had the conversations…except that since the ONLY thing I can remember is my emotion, and not what I said, where I was, how I said it, or what the reply was…I’d be pretty sure that was one of those conversations I only had in my head. Like the one the Plaintiff testified he’d had with the Defendant that led to his being angry and abusive during a particular telephone call. He’d worked himself up so much in the fantasy conversation, he reacted to the real conversation like it was merely a continuation.)
This board is dedicated to fighting ignorance no? What started as a playful jibe at lawyers got a whole bunch of ignorant vitriole thrown at me, so I am educating the people who think they know more but actually know less.
Try to keep up, I am teaching you now, not doing body work on you.
The statement “I was angry at the time” is not a statement of belief or memory. That would be a statement like “I said I believed I discharged his obligations” when offered to prove the fact of discharge. The statement “I was angry at the time” is not going to prove the fact of discharge, it’s going to establish the reason for the witness’s remembering the event.
“I told him not to pay the bill” is not hearsay to begin with, because the declarant’s statement had independent legal significance. How do you think oral contracts are proven up in court? How do you think one’s intents and emotional states are proven up? Mind readers?
Hey there’s this new thing called Google and you can find neat stuff on there! Here you go: http://www.dos.state.ny.us/lcns/instructions/1323ins.html Estheticians need 600 hours, it’s cosmetologists that need 1000 hours, like you.
But hey, this little back and forth has been good for one thing. I have a friend who wants to get a new profession since she’s sick of the business world, but she doesn’t want to have to go back to school forever. A thousand hours of school and she can be in business!
At least I’m being entertained by my insomnia tonight.
The Plaintiff wants to prove: **That he told the Defendant not to pay the bills. **(It goes like this: “I told her I didn’t want her to spend money on advertising or pay for postage or pay for medical insurance. So all the money she spent on advertising and postage and medical insurance after I told her not to should now be awarded to me in a judgment. Because I told her I didn’t want her to spend it.”
The Evidence the Plaintiff is offering as proof:
“I told her I didn’t want her to spend it.”
After being unable to remember any detail whatsoever related to his telling her he didn’t want her to spend that money on those things, nothing at all, he asserts he was angry, with the plain implication that he must be REMEMBERING it CORRECTLY because he REMEMBERS he was ANGRY.
From the lego-man video, it seems like the hearsay exception, at least rule 803!!, is for relating statements that other people made that speak to then current events.
Let’s say there was a bank robbery perpetrated by a gang of steampunk ne’er-do-wells.
If you were trying to establish the presence of 1920’s style death rays at the quote scene of the crime unquote, you wouldn’t be allowed to say stuff like “Jimmy said they had 1920’s style death rays” because it doesn’t actually establish that there were death rays present. Jimmy should be on the stand, since he’s the one who saw the death rays.
There are (at least) two exceptions to this rule. The 803 exception would come into play if, when the aforementioned ne’er-do-wells appeared at the quote scene of the crime unquote, Jimmy espied their 1920’s style death rays and in shock and horror exclaimed “My god! They’ve got 1920’s style death rays!” Because of the (presumably) unpremeditated nature of his comment, it serves as a proxy for the event itself. This wouldn’t be as convincing as if you had seen the 1920’s style death rays yourself, but it lends more evidence to the claim that they were present than Jimmy’s say so.
The other exception, which wasn’t covered in a lego-man video so I’m winging it now, would be if the point of the question was not to establish that 1920’s style death rays were present, but to establish that Jimmy said they were. I don’t know why Jimmy’s utterance would be important, but it doesn’t seem impossible that it should be so.
I’ve got it! John Rambo was also at the bank, and heard Jimmy exclaim there were 1920’s style death rays. Hearing this utterance he leapt into action and shot down the ne’er-do-wells’ escape zeppelin with an explosive arrow. Now the fact that Jimmy said “they’ve got 1920’s style death rays” is an important piece of evidence (relating to Mr. Rambo’s purported heroics) and so is legitimate testimony.
The distinction between these two exceptions and the normal rule of hearsay being that in the first, the statement itself, being spontaneous, is evidence that an event occured. (Not very good evidence, I wouldn’t think, but maybe with some other corroborating bits it could make a whole picture.) The second exception, that I kind of made up, is allowed because your testimony (“Jimmy said they had 1920’s style death rays.”) isn’t actually a statement about whether there were death rays present, but is rather a statement about what Jimmy said.
Ah, of course, you are using this as your definition of hearsay: “any evidence that helps the other side make their case, however dubiously”
Testifying “I recall what happened that day so clearly because it made me so mad and I just kept thinking about the events of that day over and over again” just isn’t hearsay, Stoid, irrespective of however badly you want to take your opponent’s case away from them. You address it in your closing argument by noting that emotionally trying situations do not correlate particularly well with good, dispassionate memory.
And of course, you’ve yet to address the fact that the statement itself is a verbal act, and thus is also not hearsay.
So easily riled? I’m not that easily riled at all. I just like to argue. Everyone in like every thread thinks I’m upset about it. Half the time I am sitting here laughing. Go read the ‘gay marriage’ thread and see how many times people thought I was getting upset about it. Nothing of the sort. I get passionate about things when I argue, even if I could care less about it, I’ll argue it passionately. In this case I do actually care, but that doesn’t make me particularly upset that you don’t have any respect for my profession, it’s a common misconception. The educators at my school got so upset about it, I used to kind of chuckle to myself when they would talk about the scourge of the ‘happy ending’. But in a way they are right, there are a lot of ignorant people out there. Massage Therapy is a great tool and can help people stay very healthy. People should know this and recognize the difference between massage therapy and a ‘Manual release’. Everyone is walking around with tons of tension needlessly. Personally I think massage should be so ubiquitous that there is no longer a profession for it. I’d be happy if everyone knew how to give each other massages and did so more often. I think we’d have a more mature and healthy culture over all. shrugs But hey, if actually talking about something I care about and am passionate about brings out the troll in you, have at it, I don’t care. Do you think I would’ve said what I did in the Pit if I were worried about getting ridiculed for it? Hardly.
Speaking of the Chewbacca defense, while it doesn’t make sense that Chewbacca lives on Endor with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks, I think this is somewhat mitigated by the fact that Johnny Cochrane is the only person who thinks that Chewbacca lives on Endor with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks. Seriously, is there anything even remotely canon that says that Chewbacca lives or lived on Endor? The closest I can come up with is the eternal moaning and groaning of the RotJ haters who wish Endor had been the wookie planet. To the RotJ haters I reply: you got your wish already! The Ewoks are being slaughtered until Chewie takes over the AT-ST! Watch the freaking movie and you’ll see the primitive screwheads didn’t really have the upper hand over the might of an Imperial garrison. What the hell is wrong with you? Move out of your parents’ basement!
