The BBC has failed multiple times to serve Donald Trump’s family members with legal orders in the US President’s defamation case against the broadcaster.
The national broadcaster has been attempting to subpoena Mr Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr; his daughter, Ivanka Trump; and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to require them to give evidence, however, multiple efforts have failed so far.
Have it delivered by McDonalds.
Weird, I wonder why?
As a german i don’t understand what it means to “serve legal orders”. Here in Germany, if the letter lands in the mailbox where you have registered your place of residence, it is considered delivered. Why make it unecessarily complicated?
There are legal consequences to receiving a legal order and ignoring it; essentially the other side just gets whatever they’re asking for without your input.
Now imagine all the perfectly valid ways that a letter can be delivered but the person never sees it.
Now imagine all the sketchy ways someone could prevent that letter from actually reaching the person, so that they get a default judgement.
I think it’s better this way, even though it allows nonsense like what the Trump spawn are doing, because assumptions about whether they actually knew are removed. Not to mention, at best it’s just a delaying tactic; eventually the judge will accept a good faith attempt to serve them and issue a default judgement.
In Sweden, If it’s important mail with legal concerns, you’ll get a letter or an SMS that you have a letter to pick up at the nearest service point. The same way as you pick up a parcel. When you get I, you’ll have to ID and sign it, then it’s considered delivered to you.
How many school shootings are allocated per year there?
Usually one every 5 or 10 years. But the last years there’s been more
you’ll get a letter
A letter to tell you that you have a letter. Kind of funny.
or an SMS
You register your phone number with the government? That’s not something we do in the US.
When you get I, you’ll have to ID and sign it, then it’s considered delivered to you.
Hypothetically speaking, what happens if you ignore the pre-letter or the SMS and never pick up the important mail? What happens if you refuse to sign for it?
Nope. You fan register your number at different agencies to get messages directly instead of ordinary email. So if it’s from a court or law enforcement, it’s usually a letter to pick up the letter.
If you ignore it they’ll usually send someone to serve you I think. Or maybe fine you if it’s not super important. Not sure.
<EDIT>
Okay guys, i get it :D
I’ll take it as good news that such things didn’t occur to me. Guess there is no sketchy energy in this guy, haha.
</EDIT>
Now imagine all the perfectly valid ways that a letter can be delivered but the person never sees it.
I honestly do not know a single one.
I mean, there is not really a sketchy way to do that in germany (as far i know). Such important documents are usually sent as registered mail with proof of delivery. The mailman has to confirm that he did put it in the mailbox.You are usually given a period of a few weeks or months to respond. If you don’t check the mailbox at your registered address regularly, then it’s your own fault. From the point of view of the court, the letter was delivered. I feel that is very fair.
Not one? Not even “unknowingly threw it away with some junk mail” or “unknowingly dropped between the counter and the refrigerator”?
The system in the US ensures someone has knowledge about a court order and the German system (as you have described it) assumes they do.
Both have pros and cons, but I think I’d prefer the US system. Considering the consequences can be life altering, I think ensuring the person knows, instead of assuming they do, is worth the extra hassle.
It’s impossible to prove a negative. Even as recently as a month ago, I sent a birthday card to a friend in Germany and she said she hasn’t gotten it yet.
I’ve mailed her letters and cards before and she usually gets them in a week.
I know she isn’t lying.
Imagine if this was a legal notice.
I do understand what your saying but the possibility exists that a legal notice mailed to someone can be lost or misdelivered. The US has process servers where you can hire someone to serve legal papers to someone. In this case, the person notes the time and date of service.
In the absolute worst cases, some courts allow service to occur in a newspaper. This often happens in divorces when one party cannot be located due to abandoning them.
Most of the time in the US, service to their legal residence via certified mail that offers proof of delivery is usually enough for most cases.
Now imagine someone pretends to be you and signs for it. Imagine they steal it out of the letterbox after the carrier leaves. Now imagine that person was hired by the plaintiff, who now receives a default judgement.
Well it seems they are on the right course, then. There must be a reason they try to avoid it.
I’m not an expert in law by any means, but isn’t this literally the case for summary judgement? The plaintiff is refusing to show up, so they can explain themselves in sentencing.
Summary judgement requires you to show you’ve successfully served the defendant and they’ve then refused/failed to appear in court.
If you can’t actually serve the defendant (usually required in-person), but can show you have made sufficient effort to do so; the judge can first grant alternative means of service, such as posting notice in public, or service via email.
Once that’s been done, and still the defendant fails to appear in court; then the plaintiff can submit a motion for summary judgement.
Not a criminal trial so no sentencing. If I remember correctly, the judge can allow posting notice in a newspaper if necessary and ultimately impose a default judgment. Hopefully a lawyer will chime in.
Do you realize how much of a piece of shit you have to be to avoid being served papers? You generally can’t avoid a lawsuit by avoiding paperwork forever, it’s still going to happen eventually.
But thats on brand for the family of grifters: delay, delay, obstruct, appeal
Deny, delay, defend.
I think the idea is to postpone this long enough to appoint even more pro-trump judges and capture the courts even more, so that when trump inevitably loses (maybe even by default), he can appeal and get a more favorable judge.
