Is this about the presumption of innocence? Yes, that’s right there. In all other things … Our business is to declare, yours is to ignore. The applicant can express his problems, and I am ignored. Well, let me blame myself later. Unless, of course, this applicant is significant to me. And if not, then the proof of him will not run me. I do not like? – Go further. There are enough subjective sensations of the subject. “Justify!” -This is something of the concepts, camp-chamber, when you can’t leave the submarine. Or are we in court? – Yes, yes, the court is interesting to evidence. Both from that and from the other side. Let both prove. Or let them not prove. Who does not prove, he does not drink champagne.
It depends on what it proves and what it proves. One is true that any subject, with the exception of small children and the patients devoid of legal capacity, should be expressed in understandable expressions that are understandable to others.
It depends on what it proves and what it proves. One is true that any subject, with the exception of small children and the patients devoid of legal capacity, should be expressed in understandable expressions that are understandable to others.
It is true if the interlocutor asks him about it. Although in some cases it may require. In both cases, it is worth adhering to some well -known rules about the “sparrow”, “bazaare”, “gold”, etc. I think so. #alien
FreddySpears
Is this about the presumption of innocence? Yes, that’s right there. In all other things … Our business is to declare, yours is to ignore. The applicant can express his problems, and I am ignored. Well, let me blame myself later. Unless, of course, this applicant is significant to me. And if not, then the proof of him will not run me. I do not like? – Go further. There are enough subjective sensations of the subject. “Justify!” -This is something of the concepts, camp-chamber, when you can’t leave the submarine. Or are we in court? – Yes, yes, the court is interesting to evidence. Both from that and from the other side. Let both prove. Or let them not prove. Who does not prove, he does not drink champagne.
It depends on what it proves and what it proves. One is true that any subject, with the exception of small children and the patients devoid of legal capacity, should be expressed in understandable expressions that are understandable to others.
It depends on what it proves and what it proves. One is true that any subject, with the exception of small children and the patients devoid of legal capacity, should be expressed in understandable expressions that are understandable to others.
It is true if the interlocutor asks him about it. Although in some cases it may require. In both cases, it is worth adhering to some well -known rules about the “sparrow”, “bazaare”, “gold”, etc. I think so. #alien