target stringlengths 11 70 | prompt stringlengths 200 10k |
|---|---|
the age of 35 | 40. The five-year professional military service contract with 42-year-old corporal R.L. was signed (by extending a previous contract) on 16 January 2002. Her rank of corporal and the requirements of Article 45 § 4 (1) of LMS stipulated that she could serve until |
10 April 2000 | 78. On 3 February 1999 the applicant sued the National Employment Authority before the District Court for an amount of money. The District Court dismissed the claim on 9 September 1999. The applicant appealed and on |
23 January 1998 | 22. On 13 April 1998 the applicant filed a new appeal against detention, referring to passages in a psychiatrists' report concerning his mental state (see paragraph 41 below). On 13 April 1998 the applicant also filed a request for the replacement of the president of the bench, arguing that his partiality had been dem... |
29 July 2015 | 32. It would appear that the Cerknica Centre also asked the Human Rights Ombudsman to provide a general opinion on what would be in the child’s best interests in the situation in question – the withdrawal of parental rights or permanent foster care. On |
7 June 2002 | 47. On 24 May 2002 the SLAB received an application for sanction to cover the costs of a visit to HM Prison Peterhead. After continuing the application for information, which was received on 4 June 2002, authority was granted on |
24 May 2004 | 10. On 20 November 2002 the Supreme Court, dealing with the applicant’s appeal in cassation lodged under the Code of Civil Procedure (as amended by the Law of 21 June 2001), quashed the lower court’s decisions and remitted the case to the District Court which, in a judgment of |
18 November 2008 | 10. The Vilnius Regional Administrative Court established that the applicant had been held in overcrowded cells for just under a year and a half, given that for that duration he had been held in cells where he had less than 5 square metres of personal space. On the basis of Article 21 § 2 of the Constitution, Articles... |
October 2000 | 18. On an unspecified date the Chechnya Department of the Interior issued a notice which stated that Ayubkhan Magomadov had been detained on 2 October 2000 by officer R. of the Oktyabrskiy VOVD, accompanied by the staff of the Kurchaloy district department of the FSB, on suspicion of having committed a crime. The deta... |
as late as 8 September 2004 | 35. On 13 September 2004 an expert from the Ministry of Health commissioned by the investigator on 24 June 2004 (see paragraph 24 above) issued a report on the applicant’s physical condition. It appeared that the expert had not examined the applicant in person but had asked the investigator to provide him with X-rays ... |
15 December 1980 | 7. The first applicant arrived in Belgium at Brussels National Airport on flight SN 211 from Freetown (Sierra Leone) on 27 December 2002, carrying a Lebanese travel document stating that he was a Palestinian refugee. He was refused entry to Belgium as he did not have the necessary visas. The carrier which had provided... |
27 March 2013 | 23. The applicant’s request was refused by the relevant authority of Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County on 23 November 2012 and, on appeal, by the National Rehabilitation and Social Welfare Authority on 27 February 2013. On |
20 September 2010 | 12. On 16 September 2010, while he was still in detention, and acting through the intermediary of his lawyer, the applicant requested release. In support of the request, he argued that he was innocent and that his detention in the present trial was no more than an arbitrary means of retaining him in detention in the i... |
2 March 2004 | 17. In February 2004 the applicant complained to the Regional Department for the Execution of Sentences about the allegedly degrading conditions of his detention, referring in particular to the overpopulation in the remand centre and lack of access to natural light and airflow in the cells. By a letter of |
23 September 2002 | 23. On 16 August 2002 the Regional Court partly upheld the Municipal Court’s decision of 26 April 2001. It also decided that the presiding judge was not excluded from the examination of the restitution case. The Regional Court’s decision became effective on |
3 November 1994 | 31. On 2 November 1994 the applicant underwent a psychiatric examination. The psychiatrists who examined the applicant concluded that they could not make a diagnosis based on a single examination, and recommended that the applicant undergo a psychiatric examination in a public hospital. They also stated that only if t... |
28 January 2010 | 22. On 28 October 2009 the Rîșcani District Court decided the case in favour of the applicant. In its judgment the court analysed the child’s living conditions, the circumstances of separation of the parents, their respective home lives, income, occupation, social habits and so forth. The judgment was upheld at two le... |
9 November 2009 | 14. On 10 June 2009 the District Court modified the interim contact order, allowing the applicant to see his daughters every Saturday between 9 a.m and 6 p.m. in their home. The court also ordered A.W. to set a new time in case a Saturday visit was not possible. Both parties lodged interlocutory appeals. They were dis... |
5 February 2000 | 18. On 29 December 1999, the applicant sought leave to appeal against conviction and sentence on various grounds including that the trial judge should have stayed the proceedings as an abuse of process. On |
22 September 2004 | 160. It appears that the bailiffs responded to the company’s offer on 9 September 2004. It does not appear that the company brought any court proceedings in respect of that response.
(o) The Ministry’s response of |
1 March 2002 | 45. On 30 September 2002 the applicant made a submission in which he argued, inter alia, that his continued detention after 1 September 2002 had been unlawful, since on that day the six-month period for pre-trial detention (from the date of his arrest in Croatia on |
12 October 1990 | 24. In a letter directed to the presiding judge of the Court of Appeal, the presiding judge of the Regional Court expressed his regrets of the fact that his attempts to reconcile the parties had failed.
(b) The appeal proceedings against the partial decision of |
12 August 2010 | 18. On 14 September 2010 the Government submitted observations on the admissibility and merits of the application. They argued that the application should be declared inadmissible on grounds of abuse of the right of application. In this connection, the Government referred to the statements used by the applicant in his... |
13 November 2009 | 6. By a judgment of 14 April 2010 the Warsaw Regional Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against a second-instance administrative decision by which the Chief Inspector of Construction Supervision (Główny Inspektor Nadzoru Budowlanego) had refused to declare the Łódź Governor’s decision of |
about six months | 35. The following day the applicant joined his family in Ingushetia. According to affidavits produced by his wife, sister-in-law and an interviewer from HRW, upon release the applicant showed signs of severe physical abuse and mental trauma and it took him |
27 July 2010 | 34. On 26 May 2010 the applicant lodged a criminal complaint against X with the State prosecution service, alleging that in August and September 2009 he had threatened to “cut [the applicant’s] gypsy head off and impale it on a pike” (nabiti na kolac). On |
4 November 1994 | 17. Another hearing was scheduled for 4 November 1994. The District Court proceeded with the case in the applicant’s absence as, according to the Government, the summons had been served on the applicant’s daughter and the applicant had not excused himself. The applicant contends that he was not summoned. On |
12 December 2001 | 24. The court postponed the hearing in order to summon witnesses on several occasions: on 18 and 20 December 2000, on 29 January, 5 and 7 February, 26 March, 23 April and 4 July 2001. The hearing was adjourned twice following the applicant's requests – on 7 August and |
5 December 2005 | 29. On 30 November 2005 Judge V. once again requested the applicant to appear at a hearing on 6 December 2005 in the reopening proceedings brought by the notary public. Another request for an adjournment followed from the applicant on |
26 January 2005 | 96. On 25 April 2005 the applicants lodged a complaint with the investigators’ superiors, stating that the investigators were aware of the perpetrators’ identities but had failed to take active steps to prosecute them. In particular, they requested that Mr Adlan G., Mr Vakha T. and Mr Akhmed G. be questioned concernin... |
23 May 1997 | 30. On 30 August 1995 the Tax Authority reported the second applicant to the Public Prosecution Office (åklagarmyndigheten) in Stockholm for suspected tax crimes based on the information obtained during the tax audit and the statements made in the applicants' tax returns. On |
3 April 2007 | 14. On 9 April 2007 the Primorskiy District Court of St Petersburg (Приморский районный суд г. Санкт-Петербурга) granted the application to admit the applicant to hospital without his consent. The hearing was attended by the applicant, a court-appointed lawyer, Mrs L., the psychiatrists, and the prosecutor. During the... |
21 July 2005 | 61. With regard to the role of the DSO, the IPCC stated:
“20.77 The order given by Commander DICK was to stop the suspect getting onto the underground station and subsequently the underground train. When interviewed she was asked to explain the word ‘Stop’ and her response was that ‘Stop’ is a common word in policing ... |
15 September 2004 | 7. On 30 June 2004, 25 September 2009 and 21 December 2009 respectively, the Novi Pazar Municipal Court ordered the debtor to pay the applicant certain amounts on account of salary arrears and social insurance contributions, plus the costs of the civil proceedings. These judgments became final on |
more than 5 years | 57. On 27 February 1997 the Gdańsk Self-Government Board of Appeal reopened the proceedings terminated by the decision of 24 October 1975. On 28 April 1997 the Board declared that that decision had been issued contrary to the law because the owners of the house had not been notified of the proceedings. It found that t... |
19 July 2004 | 15. The defendants appealed against the District Court’s judgment, claiming their innocence. Their appeal was dismissed by the Buzău County Court 8 June 2004. Their subsequent appeal on points of law was also dismissed in a final decision of |
28 March 1998 | 26. On 20 February 1997 the Regional Court separated certain of the applicants’ claims for a separate hearing. On 18 March 1997 it declared that it was not territorially competent to deal with the case and transferred it to the Municipal Court, which did not agree with the transfer and brought the competence conflict ... |
seven years’ | 11. On 17 December 2004 the applicant was arrested and charged with drugs offences, and by a judgment of 26 January 2006 the High Court of Eastern Denmark (Østre Landsret, henceforth “the High Court”) convicted the applicant of twenty-six counts of drugs offences relating to 2.68 kg of heroin and cocaine, committed th... |
twenty years and ten months’ | 21. At the hearing on 3 September 2002 the Istanbul State Security Court rejected the request, finding that the examination of the witnesses called by the applicant would have no effect on the outcome of the proceedings. After making a summary of all of the defendants’ statements, the court found the applicant guilty ... |
16 February 2008 | 28. By a letter of 1 October 2008 counsel for the second applicant practising in Germany informed the Bochum prosecution authorities that his client was the son of a patient who had possibly been killed by U. on |
26 July 2001 | 37. At about 16.00-17.00 hours on the day of the incident, there were gunshots near Ormandışı. She was in front of the house. Bullets began to hit the house. Soldiers and village guards from Boyunlu arrived and began to set the village alight, firing haphazardly in all directions. Everything they fired at burst into f... |
15 February 2010 | 17. In the course of the new examination of the case at first instance the applicants requested the District Court to release them arguing that there was no reason for their further detention and that their state of health was declining. On |
30 May 1999 | 39. The parents’ appeal was rejected by the County Administrative Court on 17 October 1997, except with regard to the access restriction applicable to J., which was ordered to remain in force only until |
8 February 2002 | 23. The applicant filed a fresh motion for discovery on 2 October 2001 and a return date was accorded (16 November 2001). On the latter date the prosecution agreed to make voluntary discovery and, on |
2 January 2005 | 12. The applicants and other members of Mr Zhamalayl Yanayev’s family learnt of his detention when he failed to arrive in Moscow. They immediately contacted the airport authorities in Beslan, prosecutors’ offices and other law-enforcement agencies. On |
5 October 1998 | 12. E was 12 years of age at the time of the alleged offences in 1982. She complained to the police in June 1998. On 15 July 1998 the applicant was charged with indecent assault contrary to the Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981. As noted above, on |
7 November 2002 | 54. The applicant lodged an appeal on points of law, submitting written observations. She raised the following arguments, inter alia:
she had not been heard by the lower courts;
the case file was incomplete as, according to a note by the first‑instance judge, the documents relating to the fraud charge were missing... |
16 April 1996 | 50. On 14 August 1996 police officers U., I.P. and G.B. made statements to the prosecutor regarding Mr Carabulea's detention and death.
Captain U.'s statement largely corresponded to his reports of 8 May 1996 (paragraph 43 above). I.P. reported that he had taken part in the body search of Mr Carabulea and that he had ... |
10, 11, 12 and 14 December 2012 | 24. An extract from the applicant’s medical record from prison stated that the applicant had been medically examined upon his admission on 5 December 2012; this was when the presumptive diagnosis of tuberculosis lung scars was made. On that occasion the applicant did not report other complaints or previous medical con... |
8 February 1991 | 9. On 26 October and 12 December 1990 the District Court held hearings. At the hearings some of the parties did not appear since the District Court had failed to summon them in accordance with the procedural rules. A hearing scheduled for |
20 February 2007 | 15. The applicant lodged an appeal on points of law with the Supreme Court of Justice claiming, inter alia, that the proceedings had been unfair because the Economic Court of Appeal had used as the main and sole piece of evidence in the ruling against him a forged document, namely the minutes of a shareholders’ meetin... |
7 February 2008 | 21. According to the Government, given the non-attendance of the applicant’s lawyer and the failures of the detention authorities to ensure the presence of the applicant, the proceedings were postponed on several occasions. They were eventually held on |
8 October 2002 | 11. On 23 January 2001, taking into account expert reports on the authenticity of the signatures, the Istanbul Assize Court again acquitted the applicant. However, this judgment was quashed by the Court of Cassation on |
29 September 2000 | 42. With reference to the information provided by the Prosecutor General’s Office, the Government submitted that the investigation of the abduction of Lom-Ali and Umar-Ali Aziyev and the inflicting of injuries to the first applicant by “unidentified masked men in camouflage uniforms with machine guns” had commenced on... |
thirty days | 60. In response to the applicant’s request for information, on 28 August 2012 the Utena District Court sent the applicant a letter concerning his right to appeal against the decision of 26 June 2012 within |
23 November 2005 | 62. Despite specific requests from the Court (see below), the Government did not submit copies of any of the documents to which they referred in this respect. It is unclear whether the prosecutor's inquiries resulted in any procedural decision, but the Government referred to an order by the deputy Prosecutor of Chechn... |
21 April 2003 | 32. On 23 May 2011 the Shchelkovo Town Court again dismissed the applicant’s complaint concerning the decision of 16 April 2009. The court stated, in particular, that whereas the applicant had provided a copy of the report of |
30 March 2001 | 6. On 16 March 2001 the applicant wrote to the Primorsko-Goranska County Sanitary Inspection, the Rijeka Office for Employment, Health and Social Welfare (Sanitarna inspekcija Ureda za rad, zdravstvo i socijalnu skrb primorsko-goranske županije u Rijeci – “the Sanitary Inspection”), reporting that her flat had constan... |
7 March 1996 | 10. On the strength of the District Court’s decisions, on an unspecified date the landowners lodged a request with the Tirana Commission on Property Restitution and Compensation (“the Commission”) seeking restitution of the above-mentioned property by the domestic authorities. On |
the following five years | 7. On 10 May 1997 the applicant company entered into a privatisation contract with the Sofia Municipal Council, whereby it bought the hotel. It agreed to pay 425,000 United States dollars (USD) and also agreed to make, during |
18 November 2011 | 150. On 17 November 2011, after the applicants complained to the investigators’ superiors, the proceedings were resumed in order for a number of steps to be taken. None of those steps were taken and on |
one year and about five months | 19. At the close of the trial on the same day, the court delivered its judgment. It convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced him to six and a half years’ imprisonment, to be counted from 28 January 2000, the date of his arrest in Russia, with |
15 June 1999 | 6. On 11 November 1999 the court ruled in their favour and ordered the municipality to pay the applicants certain amounts in Turkish liras (TRL), including costs, together with interest running from |
2 June 1999 | 8. He is also the chairman of the Legal Education Society (“the Association”), a non-governmental organisation specialising in legal education. The Association was registered by the Ministry of Justice on |
21 May 1993 | 43. On 22 December 2000 Law no. 4616 came into force, providing for the suspension of the enforcement of judicial measures pending in respect of certain offences committed before 23 April 1999.
On 22 April 2003 the Ministry of Justice informed the Istanbul public prosecutor’s office that it had been impossible to conc... |
4 March 2008 | 16. On 3 March 2008 the applicant's new lawyer provided the District Court with satisfactory proof of the termination of the previous lawyer's mandate and again requested access to the files. This request was granted on |
4 January 2012 | 21. On 7 December 2011 the applicant requested the Vukovar County Court to be released from detention but his request was denied. He lodged an appeal against that decision, which was dismissed by the Supreme Court on |
the late sixteenth century | 33. As regards prescription from time immemorial and the burden and standard of proof in this respect, the Court of Appeal stated the following:
“Under Chapter 15, section 4 of the old Land Code, the following applied to proof of prescription from time immemorial. 'If someone pleads prescription from time immemorial a... |
16 March 2007 | 48. The applicant lodged an appeal against the first-instance judgment with the Supreme Court (Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske) on 6 November 2008. He complained, inter alia, that the conviction had been based on his confession to the police, which had not been given in presence of a lawyer of his own choosing, namely ... |
2 July 1997 | 19. On 16 June 1998 the Istanbul State Security Court noted that the chief public prosecutor at the Istanbul State Security Court had already examined the book on 8 March 1995 and had decided not to take any action. The court stated that it was not clear how and why an indictment was filed on |
29 December 2004 | 42. The decision was upheld at the final instance by the Ingushetia Supreme Court on 4 April 2003, and on 23 April 2003 the applicant was issued the writ of execution. The decision was not executed immediately because, as the Government submit, the applicant failed to present details of his bank account. On |
since the end of 1991 | 18. According to the final report issued by the Fort-team on 29 March 1996, it had had contacts – from the start of its inquiry – with Mr R., a Belgian fruit-juice producer who during the relevant period had acted as an informer for the Kennemerland RCID and who had been “run” by the applicant. Mr R. had contacted the... |
15 November | 46. As from 12 August 2014, following a visit of a delegation from the International Committee of the Red Cross, the applicant was transferred to another cell. He was then detained in a cell measuring 12-14 sq. m together with three other detainees. The applicant had his own bed and bedding. There was a small window i... |
3 November 2005 | 10. On 14 December 2005, the Court of Appeal, in the same composition, dismissed the applicant company’s request for withdrawal and declared the appeal null and void. It held that a request for reconsideration under Article 229 (4) of the COCP did not require the said judges to withdraw. On the contrary, it implied th... |
17 May 2011 | 7. On 21 February 2011 the High Court (Viši sud) in Podgorica issued a detention order against the applicant. It is clear from the case file that the applicant’s detention was extended on 16 March 2011, |
23 September 2009 to 22 January 2010 | 6. The applicant served his prison sentence in the closed section of Ljubljana prison in the period between 28 May 2009 and 27 February 2010. From 28 May 2009 to 23 September 2009 he was held in cell 2 (third floor), which measured 18 square metres (including a separate 1.72 square metre sanitary facility) and contain... |
29 December 2000 | 54. On 5 December 2000 the District Court again asked the police to serve the above decision on the defendant. It also asked the Trnava Town Office to inform it of the defendant’s address. The Town Office replied on |
A few years before | 24. Before the District Court, Y confirmed the statements that she had made to the police. The children were then 9, 8 and 7 years old. The eldest son’s relationship with [the applicant] remained unchanged. He was still waiting and looking very much forward to [the applicant’s] release. Her eldest son had a support pe... |
27 February 2005 | 22. On 5 August 2005 the head of the Balvi District Police Department approved a report drawn up in the context of an additional internal inquiry that had been prompted by the decision of 17 June. Once again no wrongdoings on the part of the police officers were established. In particular, it was noted that even thoug... |
1 July 2011 | 16. On 15 July 2011 the Constitutional Court (Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske) declared the constitutional complaint about the decision of 10 June 2011 inadmissible, on the grounds that on 8 July 2011 a new decision extending the applicant’s detention had been adopted. It also declared his constitutional complaint abou... |
28 April 2004 | 47. The applicant also wrote to the International Protection Centre (IPC), which is a non-governmental organisation in Moscow which, inter alia, provides information about Convention proceedings and assists applicants before the Court. In reply to the applicant’s letter, on |
7 February 2014 | 21. On 11 December 2013 the Kúria upheld, in a judgment (ítélet), the final decision of the Budapest Court of Appeal. It reiterated that the applicant could have relied on the Sixth Council Directive and put forward its arguments concerning the allegedly correct interpretation of domestic law in the light of European ... |
20 May 2005 | 10. On 12 May 2005 the Pruszków District Prosecutor (Prokurator Rejonowy) lodged a bill of indictment with the Warszawa District Court. The applicant was charged with fraud and forgery of documents, committed in an organised criminal group. There were 16 defendants in the case, all charged with numerous counts of frau... |
19 May 2008 | 19. On 19 May 2008 the Supreme Court decided to release the applicant and to place him under police supervision with a prohibition on leaving the country. The release order was given by the Supreme Court on |
4 June 1996 | 37. On 21 December 1995 the applicant asked the court to allow his mother to visit him in prison. The court refused on 10 January 1996. On 23 May 1996 the court allowed the applicant’s brother to visit him in prison. On |
13 December 1991 | 15. On 3 August 1992 a second report was filed concerning the applicant’s injuries:
“(a) There is a period of temporary total unfitness for work from 27 November 1991 to 13 December 1991, when the patient was admitted to the Tonkin Clinic with an entirely unconnected pathology (appendectomy)
(b) the date of stabilis... |
22 September 2001 | 7. On 17 January 2003 the newspaper published an article by the applicant under the headline “A year later they impounded the car” («Через год арестовали автомобиль»). The article was prompted by the following letter written by a Ms P. and reproduced in italics in the opening passage of the article:
“On |
one year and eight months' | 28. On 7 December 2007 the Sivas Assize Court considered that the gendarmes had exceeded their powers on the use of firearms by firing at Nermin Karabulut's back rather than at non-vital parts of her body. The Assize Court also considered that alternative and non-lethal methods could have been employed by the gendarme... |
5 December 2007 | 76. On 27 November 2007 the President of the Section to which the case has been allocated decided to indicate to the Government of Russia, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, interim measures which consisted of the following. The Government was invited to secure immediately, by appropriate means, the in-patient treat... |
1 June 2010 | 32. According to the Government, letters were sent by the Civil Registry and Migration Department to a number of failed Syrian-Kurdish asylum-seekers informing them that they had to make arrangements to leave Cyprus in view of their asylum applications being turned down. The Government submitted copies of thirty such ... |
The following day | 12. In the meantime, on 15 April 2003 the duty magistrate (C.) had been informed that the applicant had been arrested, that a search had been carried out at his place of residence, and that certain items had been seized. Instead of proceeding herself to the spot to conduct the inquest for the purpose of the in genere ... |
4 December 2015 | 80. Committee of the Parties to the Council of Europe Convention on the protection of children against sexual exploitation and sexual abuse (Lanzarote Committee) adopted a 1st implementation report on the protection of children on sexual abuse in the circle of trust on |
14 July 2011 | 33. On 10 July 2011 the Zasviyazhskiy District Court of the Ulyanovsk Region (“the District Court”) ordered the applicant’s detention. The District Court rejected the argument about the actual time of arrest on the grounds that at 12 noon the applicant had been “conveyed” to a police station rather than arrested. On |
13 August 2001 | 49. On 31 December 2004 the unit prosecutor’s office informed the first, second and fourth applicants that the investigation in case no. 14/33/04-05 D had been commenced on 18 July 2001 and that the investigation file had been forwarded to the circuit prosecutor’s office on |
6 August 2003 | 70. On 11 July 2003 Ms Shoileva‑Stambolova and Mr Shoilev were informed that the plan of the building in which their future flat would be situated had been changed and were invited to choose a new flat. They did so on |
1 September 2010 | 5. By five judgments of the Travnik Municipal Court (“the Municipal Court”) of 5 March 2009, 18 January 2012, 31 March 2010, 30 April 2012 and 13 June 2011, which became final on 17 June 2010, 13 February 2012, |
30 September 1997 | 17. By a decision of 5 December 2001, the Supreme Court accepted the employer’s appeal on points of law in an identical case brought against a colleague of the applicant. That decision was given under the statutory rules concerning the Supreme Court’s competence ratione valoris provided for in the Civil Proceedings Ac... |
fifteen-days | 27. Respectively on 2 and 9 October 1995, the two applicant's counsels (Mr Lo Giudice and Mr Guiso) were informed that the telephone interceptions had been filed with the Public Prosecutor's Office's registry. The applicant's counsels subsequently objected to the admission of the interceptions as evidence. In particul... |
2 December 2009 | 17. The applicant appealed against the decision to the Refugee Appeals Board (Flygtningenævnet), before which he was represented by a lawyer, heard in person and able to submit observations. By decision of |
19 April 1999 | 38. On 31 August 1998 the applicant lodged a cassation appeal against the final judgment with the Supreme Court. On 16 October 1998 the Poznań Regional Court rejected the cassation appeal as inadmissible in law. The applicant appealed. On |
22 April 2003 | 12. On 26 June 2003 the Virovitica County Court dismissed the appeal. As to the applicant's objection in respect of the language attributed to M.V., the County Court accepted that the wording of her testimony had been formulated by the investigating judge and that the testimony would have sounded more convincing had i... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.