What Are You Doing Right Now? (241 Viewers)

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

BTW, does anybody know how to read Table 2 and 3 of this article?

mg/day = milligrams a day
mg/day/kg = milligrams a day over kg of weight (of subject, I assume)
mean (standard deviation) = mean (average) standard deviation represents a values average from the average.

So if the average value of a group is 50, and the standard deviation is 5, most values fell between 45 and 55, where as if the mean or average is 50 and the standard deviation is 25, most values fall betwee, 25 and 75.

range = minimums and maximum values

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Luca]

Red!!!
Anyways do you happen to know anything about oblique intention and why it should be construed as direct intention?

 

[Red]

Red!!!
Anyways do you happen to know anything about oblique intention and why it should be construed as direct intention?

Not a term I've ever heard of.

Must be called something else in Scots Law.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

And 3...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_analysis#Regression_models

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10710963

http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/2111/

That's about all I could find.

I didn't do any linear regression analysis until my sophomore year in college.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Red!!!
Anyways do you happen to know anything about oblique intention and why it should be construed as direct intention?

Not a term I've ever heard of.

Must be called something else in Scots Law.

In Scots Law:

oblique intention - WHISKY ROCKS!
direct intention - WHISKY NEAT!

 

[Luca]

Not a term I've ever heard of.

Must be called something else in Scots Law.

Basically is a criminal law term that is an indirect effect of some prohibited act say I set fire to a letter and post it through someones door intending to scare them, instead the house sets on fire and the persons children die.
I've got to argue why it should be seen as a direct intention. Give me any ideas, I'm running pretty dry now.

 

[Red]

In Scots Law:

oblique intention - WHISKY ROCKS!
direct intention - WHISKY NEAT!

I had some direct intention last night after Aberdeen won their Quarter Final tie.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

I had some direct intention last night after Aberdeen won their Quarter Final tie.

I'm sure your intention was direct and to the point. The way it should be.

 

[Red]

Basically is a criminal law term that is an indirect effect of some prohibited act say I set fire to a letter and post it through someones door intending to scare them, instead the house sets on fire and the persons children die.
I've got to argue why it should be seen as a direct intention. Give me any ideas, I'm running pretty dry now.

If it is reasonably foreseeable that their actions will cause damage to persons or property, it should be direct intention.

You can't go setting fire to things and posting them through someone's door and then claim you had no idea that it might burn the house down.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

If it is reasonably foreseeable that their actions will cause damage to persons or property, it should be direct intention.

You can't go setting fire to things and posting them through someone's door and then claim you had no idea that it might burn the house down.

I would argue the negligence of the person that lit the match.

I don't know if they have that term in Great Mitten anymore, but, worth a try...

 

[Red]

I would argue the negligence of the person that lit the match.

Could do.

Just depends on whether it was reasonably foreseeable that there actions would lead to whatever consequences.

If it wasn't reasonably foreseeable, then negligence would probably be right.

I don't know if they have that term in Great Mitten anymore, but, worth a try...

Certainly do in Scotland.

Don't know about England, since they have a completely separate legal system.

 

[Luca]

If it is reasonably foreseeable that their actions will cause damage to persons or property, it should be direct intention.

You can't go setting fire to things and posting them through someone's door and then claim you had no idea that it might burn the house down.

Done that one already. I've got the harder side of the arguement it's fair to say.

 

[Red]

Why do you need to say more?

Just go with the reasonably foreseeable argument, with a few examples to back up your case and knock down the other.

No point in saying other things if there's not really anything to say.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Is the burning letter into a mail slot the actual example, because I can always call my pops real quick and ask him.

 

[swag]

Digg...

Everybody went sucking their schlong like they were the hottest thing on the planet. I said, "What about the money?" for several years and get completely ignored. Cute idea, but are they really that big of a potential business?

Now look at them....

 

[Luca]

Why do you need to say more?

Just go with the reasonably foreseeable argument, with a few examples to back up your case and knock down the other.

No point in saying other things if there's not really anything to say.

Nice, and with that advice I might put my feet up and relax, something I haven't done all week.

 

[Christina]

mg/day = milligrams a day
mg/day/kg = milligrams a day over kg of weight (of subject, I assume)
mean (standard deviation) = mean (average) standard deviation represents a values average from the average.

So if the average value of a group is 50, and the standard deviation is 5, most values fell between 45 and 55, where as if the mean or average is 50 and the standard deviation is 25, most values fall betwee, 25 and 75.

range = minimums and maximum values

And 3...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_analysis#Regression_models

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10710963

http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/2111/

That's about all I could find.

I didn't do any linear regression analysis until my sophomore year in college.

Table 2 makes sense now, but Table 3 might take a while. Thanks a bunch.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Table 2 makes sense now, but Table 3 might take a while. Thanks a bunch.

now 'bout dem puss pics, guuurl?

 

[Luca]

Is the burning letter into a mail slot the actual example, because I can always call my pops real quick and ask him.

Nah, the actual question was, where the defendant foresees the prohibited result as a virtually certain result of their actions, the jury can conclude that the defendant intended the result.

I am arguing as the prosecution and in favour of the statement.

 

[Christina]

now 'bout dem puss pics, guuurl?