Jail for math

[...]

No, he was offering his opinion as a private citizen. He wrote a letter to home owners involved in a lawsuit, in which he expressed his opinion why a drainage pipe failed. He probably identified his credentials. He probably stated he was a retired engineer. The plaintiffs lawyers prolly ran with it and the defense did him dirty by stabbing him in the back with this license bullshit.

We don’t have all the fact. But I doubt any court will find that his conduct rose to the level of “practicing engineering.” So the board can investigate all they want. District attorneys are too busy prosecuting real crime to charge this guy.

Read the description paragraph on the YouTube video....on his own video it clearly states he was serving as an expert witness....his words

He wasn't "writing a letter to the home owner".....he was employed by a law firm to offer expert testimony.....which in NC is not legal for him to do

 

[918v]

Read the description paragraph on the YouTube video....on his own video it clearly states he was serving as an expert witness....his words
View attachment 7655612


He wasn't "writing a letter to the home owner".....he was employed by a law firm to offer expert testimony.....which in NC is not legal for him to do

Actually, it is. Anyone can testify in court if their testimony is relevant. A professional board does not have jurisdiction over people testifying in court. Further, people testifying in court enjoy immunity from civil lawsuits. Why would you think an engineering board could lock somebody up for testing in court???

 

[XTREM HTR16]

Thats a different problem. What’s at issue here is whether the government can silence a retired engineer from offering his opinion about how a licensed engineer fucked something up.

How are you so sure a licensed engineer fucked something up?

 

[918v]

How are you so sure a licensed engineer fucked something up?

I’m not so sure, but that’s the subject of a lawsuit.

 

[...]

Actually, it is. Anyone can testify in court if their testimony is relevant. A professional board does not have jurisdiction over people testifying in court. Further, people testifying in court enjoy immunity from civil lawsuits. Why would you think an engineering board could lock somebody up for testing in court???

jesus christ, i already posted the laws.....go read them.

i can only explain it to you, i cant understand it for you.


Testifying as an expert wittness is considered, by the state of NC, to be "working as an engineer"....

if you are "working as an engineer" you must be licensed, or working under the purview of someone who is licensed.......according to the state law of NC......he was neither.

he was working for a law firm, offering expert testimony, as an unlicensed individual, which according to the state laws of NC, is a crime.

it is really not hard to connect the dots here.


what the courts policies are here are irrelevant he is not being held in contempt of court....he is not being charged with perjury, he is being investigated by the engineering board, for offering services he was not licensed to give.

 

[Charger442]

Actually, it is. Anyone can testify in court if their testimony is relevant. A professional board does not have jurisdiction over people testifying in court. Further, people testifying in court enjoy immunity from civil lawsuits. Why would you think an engineering board could lock somebody up for testing in court???

The board has jurisdiction. The engineering boards are granted their authority from the state legislatures.

And he's not going to be locked up, he was sent a letter telling him he needs to stop or he'll face further punishment, fines, etc.

 

[BullGear]

This has been so much fun, but now it's just rehashing the same arguments over and over and over again.

Good night and the last one to leave, would you turn out the lights?

 

[918v]

Testifying as an expert wittness is considered, by the state of NC, to be "working as an engineer"....




what the courts policies are here are irrelevant he is not being held in contempt of court....he is not being charged with perjury, he is being investigated by the engineering board, for offering services he was not licensed to give.

Again, an engineering board has no jurisdiction over court testimony. If I want to call an expert witness who is not licensed in NC I can and NC cannot do anything about it. They can kiss my ass.

 

[918v]

The board has jurisdiction. The engineering boards are granted their authority from the state legislatures.

And he's not going to be locked up, he was sent a letter telling him he needs to stop or he'll face further punishment, fines, etc.

If the legislature wanted expert witnesses in court to hold a professional license they would have put it in the Evidence Code.

 

[DarnYankeeUSMC]

What is the definition of "expert"?
The story says that he had designed plenty of pipes. Does that make him an expert? Testifying to the information in the " leading sourcebook" make him an expert?

 

[...]

Again, an engineering board has no jurisdiction over court testimony. If I want to call an expert witness who is not licensed in NC I can and NC cannot do anything about it. They can kiss my ass.

Ok it's clear you didn't bother to actually read NC laws that I posted.

It doesn't really matter what you agree with, NC doesn't care about your opinions......but as currently written, this guy broke the law....

If you don't like that, move to NC and petition to have the laws changed.


So unless you have anything constructive to add, like providing case law, citing statutes, or literally showing any other evidence (other than your opinion)....I think we are done here.

 

[...]

If the legislature wanted expert witnesses in court to hold a professional license they would have put it in the Evidence Code.

You are conflating the admissibility of evidence vs. the ability to operate as a licensed engineer.

No one is saying his testimony is necessarily inadmissable as evidence in court.

But that still doesn't permit him to operate as an unlicensed engineer.

 

[918v]

You are conflating the admissibility of evidence vs. the ability to operate as a licensed engineer.

No one is saying his testimony is necessarily inadmissable as evidence in court.

But that still doesn't permit him to operate as an unlicensed engineer.

I am not conflating anything. The court is the only entity in a state that decides who testified and to what. And no others can punish someone for testifying in court.

I read the statute and it does not include courtroom expert testimony within its highly detailed definition of engineering. If you apply principles of statutory interpretation to this law you will conclude that expert testimony falls outside its purview.

 

[...]

I read the statute and it does not include courtroom expert testimony within its highly detailed definition of engineering. If you apply principles of statutory interpretation to this law you will conclude that expert testimony falls outside its purview.

 

[BullGear]

Are we going to settle this case right here and now. If not, lets get on to something more constructive than to see who can whack their pee pee the hardest against the desk.

 

[GenericBadGuy]

View attachment 7655855

You cited the Land Surveying statute, which includes old, outdated and ambiguous language. It gets really fun when licensing boards throw their weight around legislating what is or is not professional engineering. Especially when it comes to related disciplines and the differences between for example, architecture vs civil engineering. Or licensed geology vs geotechnical engineering. Land surveying vs land use planning.

 

[GenericBadGuy]

He wasn't "writing a letter to the home owner".....he was employed by a law firm to offer expert testimony.....which in NC is not legal for him to do

Bolded, you did make this point lol.

 

[...]

You cited the Land Surveying statute, which includes old, outdated and ambiguous language. It gets really fun when licensing boards throw their weight around legislating what is or is not professional engineering. Especially when it comes to related disciplines and the differences between for example, architecture vs civil engineering. Or licensed geology vs geotechnical engineering. Land surveying vs land use planning.

fine....how about this one then....

im not going to argue this with you anymore.....its clear you are disagreeing because you dont like the laws.....not because you think im wrong....

move to NC and petetion to have the laws changed if you dont like them.....but those are the laws as written......sorry your preconceived notions of "big govt" suing to silence people illegitimately didnt pan out....but those are the facts.

 

[GenericBadGuy]

fine....how about this one then....

View attachment 7656245

View attachment 7656246

View attachment 7656247



im not going to argue this with you anymore.....its clear you are disagreeing because you dont like the laws.....not because you think im wrong....

move to NC and petetion to have the laws changed if you dont like them.....but those are the laws as written......sorry your preconceived notions of "big govt" suing to silence people illegitimately didnt pan out....but those are the facts.

I'm not sure why you are @ing me on that last bit my post is completely different than your paraphrasing. I didnt suggest suing the big government anything nor am I blaming big government in my response. As I mentioned, I think these issues are an example of gatekeeping/protectionism by professional engineers and their associations.

But on that point let's be factual here: civil engineers arent trained to be land use planners and their licensing statutes morally should remove references to that point from statute. The irony of highlighting that sentence when arguing in this conversation is literally the pot calling the kettle black.

Highlighting the words any service as a cherry picked interpretation doesn't prove what you were saying earlier in your disagreement with @thestoicmarcusaurelius .