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.
When your rich, they let you do it.
Have it delivered by McDonalds.
I’m surprised a disgruntled McDs worker hasn’t slipped him a special-recipe Quarter Pounder yet.
lol. That’s a riot! Agreed, too.
Disguise the person serving court papers as a coke dealer.
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?
Has to be in person or people will say someone stole the letter.
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.
Adding to this, we all know the Hollywood portrayal of serving papers, and that one is real, but it’s not the only one. Courts can and do approve alternate methods, including certified mail, email, and posting in local newspapers.
Source: Legal Eagle coverage of Reckless Ben/Bricks and Minifigs saga. In this case, the judge allowed service by email.
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.
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.
Imagine someone is hired to serve you and thousands of other people papers and just claims they did. Now imagine that person was hired by the plaintiff, who now receives a default judgement.
This happens in the US, and sometimes the plaintiff deliberately chooses their process server to make it more likely.
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.
Eventually the court can authorize alternate means of service. Examples could be physically posting a copy to the door of the defendant’s last known address, electronically posting to the court’s website, publishing a notice in a newspaper, first class and/or certified mail, social media account or email.
So that means they’re so slippery that none of them can be even served papers?
I hate that bastard so incredibly much, it is barely expressible in words, not even in years in a dungeon on a chain
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.
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.
Weird, I wonder why?
