He wasn't accused of a crime, so the government didn't need to prove guilt. He was ordered in a divorce proceeding to provide the money he was shown to have, or prove he no longer has it. He refused to do either, so was held in contempt. He was "proven" to have committed the crime of not obeying the court. That was the only "crime" committed.

No, it doesn't. They were all somewhat different up until the Telstar introduced the 32-panel, pentagon-and-hexagon stitching pattern, but it appears to me that remained unchanged for almost 40 years, from 1970 to 2006. The balls in between appear to have the same stitching pattern, just different printed designs.

I dunno.. my LEAF's maintenance schedule for the first 150K miles is pretty much "rotate tires, every 7500 miles, check brakes every 15,000". Checking the brakes, of course, involves checking the brake fluid levels, so there is a fluid. At 150K miles you do have to replace the oil used to cool the battery charger.

But, in general, EVs are very close to maintenance-free.

You are the one that's willfully obtuse. The government proved he had possession. He then deliberately hid it from the government, so the government can't "prove" anything past that point. That is sufficient to hold him in contempt for not providing the money known to exist, or proof it no longer exists.

He claimed he was defrauded. Then refused to file a fraud complaint against the person (or persons) who defrauded him. The inconsistent behavior and proof he had the money, but no indication of where it went after he deliberately hid it.

Yes. When "my life" is a 0.00000001% chance of a terrorist attack.

9/11 was "predicted". It just wasn't stopped. Also, the rules at the time allowed everything in that was allowed. There was no security breach. The rules were bad. This rule is bad.

Earth is 12,742 km in diameter. The moon is 363,104 km, 28.5 diameters, away at perigee, and 405,696 km, 31.8 diameters, at apogee.

In round numbers the moon is 30 Earth diameters away.

So receipts are imaginary? He "spent" the money, and couldn't prove the positive that he spent the money.

You are asking the government to prove the negative. That he didn't spend the money.

Not here (not UK, but a commonwealth country). It's perjury to say you weren't driving when you were. The identification of the driver is a separate matter. You "swear" you weren't driving. You then must give the police a lead, or they will still hold you responsible.

The 5th Amendment exists because people were "asked" to testify, then, when the first charge didn't convict, try them for perjury on their testimony.

That, and beat a confession out of them.

Those were the main reasons for the 5th Amendment. Not to protect your computer files. You are required to hand those over (arguably in the format the prosecutor wants), so long as they get a valid warrant first. But that's a different Amendment.

Meh. A simple error in the writeup, which I'm sure is not present in the scientific papers.

http://lunarscience.nasa.gov/?question=3318

The screams... it's all about the screams. And dinner. Think of it as the psychotic version of dine-in movie theaters.

So you are arguing that subpoenas are illegal?

A counter-claim is $0. Why not just counter claim, and be done with it?

No evidence is needed to provide a counter-notice.

The only reason there's a hold-down time after the counter-notice is to give the (supposed) copyright holder time to file a court case before it's back up.

It's innocent until proven guilty. The person is presumed innocent. The content is blocked until any disputes are settled, as making it available would cause an irrecoverable loss if the copyright holder is right. It's actually pretty sensible, though wasn't intended to have millions of automated take downs issued by non-holders of copyright who claim a 90% miss rate is "good faith". Change the way that's applied against the take-down issuers, and the problems mostly go away.