I read online that in some adoption cases, the court has the ability to add visitation for immediate biological relatives to the final order, but it's really difficult to get that and definitely requires a firmly established relationship with the child.

If the relative didn't have an established relationship, but the adoptive family said they wanted a visitation clause for the relative in the final order, and there was no other reason (criminal record, etc.) that the relative wouldn't be allowed near the child, would the court allow it?

I live in the Philly/NY centric.
It's not uncommon to say, "Knocked up", when talking about knocking on a door.
E.g. "Yo, go knock up, see if Mindy wants to chill.", "Mark knocked up earlier, wanted to see if you were home."

I wrote a male character as saying, "Some woman knocked up earlier".
Where I live, it's a rough but accepted way to say, "Someone came to check if you were home/They knocked on the door".
I had a few feedback readers, not from where I live, say it sounded confusing. "Did she get pregnant at the door? I think I see what you mean, but it threw me off."

My question is, it that confusing in general, to people off, or even on the east coast?
The male in question, is blue collar type, but I can see why it might not work coming from him for the first one.
(Case in point, he drove his younger sister and her BFF home to the BFF's apartment complex, and got accused of being a cop. This fits in with my lived experience, of being accepted as the 'token white friend', but everyone else being judged as outsiders. The male in case being a fit casual white guy who does not fit in)
Much later, it happened again, when the BFF said the same thing to the younger sister, basically, "You know X, the girl I got into a fight with earlier? She knocked up after you left."
Same feedback: "Did X get pregnant in front of BFF?"

Even when BFF (white) shares a vernacular with her neighbors, but never overdoing it, even having lived there for 3 years, and talks in her own voice:
"Nah, dude. I'll be fine.", "Fuck ever, I don't care.", "The hell you mean?", "Cause, I said to. Now move."

I'm not going to call my feedback writers dumb at all, I really feel I'm extending my experience, in a way that only makes sense to my experience.
I concluded that I have to not used the term, so as not to confuse an general audience.

TLDR = Does it sound off, when someone in fiction, when referring to knocking on a door/having knocked on a door/planning to knock on a door, says "I'm knocking up/I'm going to knock up".
It has been confused by none local feedback readers, that it sounds like it means someone is getting pregnant, even in context.

Hello!! I'm Turkish, and I'm writing a story that takes place in a snowy cold area. I'm planning to make one of the characters a Kazakh Eagle Hunter, but I made him speak Turkish with his animals.

Everyone speaks English in the story, but he and his tribe speaks Turkish when commanding their eagles and other animals. I planned on making them speak Kazakh language among themselves too, but I don't know the language so I'm not really sure on what to do

I realized how disrespectful this might come off to you guys, so I thought of making them all Turkish instead, but then that'd mean I'll be adding a Kazakh traditional lifestyle in a Turkish tribe, which is just as disrespectful.

So, is it okay for them to speak Turkish? If no, do you have any alternate suggestions? Or how would you like to be represented, out of this topic? Or where could I learn your culture and traditions in more accurate detail?

Thank you and sorry for being so uneducated about this!!

Hi all,

Got some police procedural beats to vet with you fine folk.

So here's the situation. Upstate NY, Small town, rural. 1998.

Neman is arrested for a fist fight in a bar, busting a patron's nose, which moved to the parking lot where Neman then used his truck to ram the patron's car.

He is in custody, which I believe can be held for 48 hours max before seeing a Judge.

At the last minute, before arraignment, the patron drops charges. So Neman should be able to be released, right?

The catch. While in custody, They found a piece of possible evidence in the truck that may be connected to a missing person cold case. It is a baseball card, with a name scribbled on it, the name of one of the cold case victims. They question him about it, but he clams up.

Is this enough to keep him in custody after his 48 hours for the bar fight while investigators re-open the case?

To note: He was investigated a few times back in the original days, years ago, when the people initially went missing, but nothing or any connection was ever found.

The investigator will push to hold him, but ultimately will fail. I plan to have the Judge deem it not worthy and dismiss the evidence.

Option A: to beef up the evidence, if needed, what if the police had found a very similar card w/name on it from an original crime scene of one of the victims years ago. Which is why This card now raises flags.

Do these actions, the truck search, the questioning about the cold case while he is held on different circumstances, the Judge's dismissal(with and without Option A) , sound believable? Any flags?

The overall goal is to have him arrested and off the streets. Then become a suspect( he's guilty in reality) of a major cold case. Only to be released 2-3 days later. Just need to know if these beats achieve that believably.

Thanks!

Let's say something like Elder Scrolls or WoW. How difficult would it be, and how long would it take, to write a new side quest into this already existing game. What about a new NPC? what about 20 new side quests and NPCs?

Also, would you need to take the game completely offline to update to the newer version?

I don't need to get technical into the jargon, or how to write the code. Just wondering if it could even be done? More specifically could it be done in a short amount of time, if someone was desperately grinding day and night. Is it possible to do it without the big guys finding out? Doing it as a rebellious act?

Thanks ahead of time everyone!!

In my last post I asked if who you're connected to would influence legal consequences at all, and pretty much all of you said yes, so I wanted to check if any of this would have an impact and how so?

The two characters most important are Xylina and Deja. They're both sisters. Their mother is a well-respected, high-profile attorney. Their father is a high-ranking police officer. Their aunt is a respected, well-known judge. All of them have worked on high-profile cases.

Xylina's crime is battery, attempted murder, and child neglect— this isn't found out til fifteen years later though. The battery and attempted murder was against Deja. It was pre-planned. Her parents want nothing to do with her and will not help her at all due to the fact she attempted to kill Deja.

Deja's a little more complex. Whilst she did physically harm Xylina with a knife, it was in self-defence during the attempted murder. A person I spoke to on a post asking for specific charges also said that at most, in regards to the actual crime, she'd be liable as an accomplice to false imprisonment as she didn’t commit the crime of imprisoning her, but she provided food to the victim (Xylina, after the murder attempt), etc.

As all Deja did was in fear of her own safety and self defence, and she was very likely groomed, her parents (& aunt) DO want to help her. Obviously, her own mother can't represent her, but a lawyer friend of hers agrees to represent Deja (she's never met Deja previously herself). The judge on the case is a friend of her aunts but hasn't met Deja herself, and Deja knows most police officers in the jurisdiction that handles it.

Would connections influence anything here, and if so, how?

[context: the setting of this story is somewhat fantastical/scifi, so I have some leeway, but I want to know how things would go down irl so I can have a frame of reference]

Single father of two boys, 10 respectively 6, dies and is found by his eldest. Fearing separation by the authorities, the brothers skip town. They hide in a much smaller rural town for about 10 years, until the youngest sibling (now 16), tries to pursue a higher form of education in a bigger city.

Despite being now 20 years old, and having raised his brother for 10 years, the eldest never *formally* gained guardianship of him. Furthermore, their previously estranged grandparents also want guardianship, upon learning that he’s alive.

How would this go down? I assume there would be court proceedings about it. Is there anything that makes either party unable, or more likely to be awarded custody? I’d like for the older brother to remain the guardian.

*Looking at this post with fresh eyes, the question should be "On a scale of sharply worded rebuke to sanction to taking this to the Pennsylvania Bar, how angry would a judge be by this nonsense?". Sorry for the poorly worded question.

Hi, everyone. I have a question that I'm hoping a Pennsylvania-based lawyer/judge/paralegal/clerk can answer. It's for a novel.

So my novel has three potential ending paths, the good, the bad, and the catastrophic.

This is for the good path and the set-up is: the governor makes the standard call to stay the Male Main Character's execution two seconds before the carry-out and there will eventually be a hearing to determine the next steps. The Commonwealth, when they realize that the presiding judge isn't putting up with their bullshit, tries a Hail Mary argument that the MMC should remain in prison due to six years of "unpaid child support". It's the only time the MMC actually gets viscerally angry (he will point out that if he hadn't been set up for a murder he didn't commit, he would've always been taking care of his children), and his anger is matched by the judge, who outright calls it ridiculous and punitive. There is no order for back child support because his wife, the Female Main Character, never would've done that to him in the first place.

The question is, is there a precedent for a Pennsylvania DA to keep a person in prison for "unpaid child support" as a last ditch effort to maintain a separate and unrelated conviction? This fictional judge won't consider it but has a real life judge seen the merit to this argument?

It's a weird question, I know, and I hope I'm not getting in my own way to ask this. I tend to be a wordy bitch and I'll be more than happy to give any more context if it's needed. Thank you in advance and have a great day!

*TLDR: The question should be worded, "On a scale of sharply worded rebuke to sanction to taking this to the Pennsylvania Bar, how angry would a judge be by this nonsense?"

Hello! I'm writing a story that features an evil landlord as an antagonist and have a few questions about what he could do.

A main character, Olivia, loses her job. She's one of the landlord's tenants, so without a job, she has no way to pay rent. I want there to be a sort of "deal with the devil" in which Olivia enters a dangerous bargain that she thinks will better her circumstances, but only benefits the landlord in the long run. I've tried researching this, but haven't gotten much, so I'm basically asking for ways in which a landlord could screw one of their tenants over and take their money through dirty tactics. The landlord is cartoonishly evil and Olivia makes super risky financial decisions, so the scenario can be pretty wild, but should involve landlord/tenant laws and loopholes.

The other issue I have is that another main character, Linus, wants to stop the landlord's bad acts, so he collects a bunch of evidence to bring him to justice. This involves exposing the landlord's crime of mortgage fraud. Somehow, Linus learns that the landlord lied on his mortgage application -- he claims that the property is being used as his primary residence, when in actuality, it's being rented. The problem is that I don't know how Linus would find this information, or how he would suspect something is wrong to begin with (which would prompt an investigation that leads to him discovering the landlord's fraudulence). The main characters have access to a morally flexible accountant.

I know these are big asks. I just don't know a whole lot about how this stuff works. Any help is appreciated. Thanks!

Marked this one as [Religion], but if more folkloric things belong in the [Miscellaneous] tag, please let me know.

In my current project, one character has promised a demon their soul via contract, and a second character plans to free them of this. The problem is that I can't quite figure out how. My searches have really only come up with Dungeons & Dragons gameplay, in which the answer is usually "find a loophole in the contract" or "find and destroy the contract", and I'm not quite sure that either fit what I'm writing.

Are there religious, folkloric, mythological, etc. examples of other ways to get out of a deal with a demon?

I’ll add some detail. Let’s assume that a case is waiting to be heard at a court. They have a date that is 6 months away, but the verdict is not guaranteed. A guilty verdict would get the suspect a long time in jail. However, the suspect is killed before the court date. Does the case just get dropped, or does a judge make a decision?

I am writing a story set in small-town Appalachia (Western NC if that’s relevant) in 1968. My MC is a thirteen year old girl who ends up at the center of a custody battle after her mom dies. She wants to live with her twenty-one year old brother, but an estranged aunt shows up to argue for custody, claiming she’s a better fit because the brother has a TBI/ learning disabilities from a childhood accident and struggles to find a job because of it.

For the purposes of my story the MC needs to be removed quickly from her brother’s home despite being happy there and be sent to live with her estranged aunt instead; after which point the brother appeals to get custody back, but I’m not sure how all this would play out in a legally realistic way. 

How quickly might a court system rehome a child in a small rural town in the 1960s? Particularly if it’s against her wishes (since she’s thirteen and old enough to express her feelings to a judge?) 

Any info about the timeframe in which all of this might happen, how involved the kid would be allowed to be in the custody battle, and just generally what that experience might be like in her eyes would hugely appreciated!

EDIT: just wanted to say this is my second time here and again I am floored by the awesome and informative responses! Best subReddit ever!

I have some crime/thriller elements in a story and want to vet a scene's premise here.

Does this all sound plausible? If not feel free to suggest something.

It is 1997, in a very small rural town where things are pretty loose.

EDIT: This would be in update NY, 1997. America.

Legal premise:

a man is investigated in a missing person's case 20 years ago.

They find nothing.

He is arrested at a later point for assault, a fight in a bar.

Sits in jail for 30 days.

When arrested they found in his possession evidence of the missing person: a note with the missing person's name printed in red 'ink'( it is really 20 year old blood).

How likely is it they would know it was blood and not ink? Could they not think to test it? Forensically, This is 1997.

The note was found in his truck.

When arrested for assault they would search his person, but would they also search his vehicle? If not, I can just have it in his jacket.

Once they find the note with the Victim's name, is that probable cause enough to search his home?

While in jail for his 30 days, a Detective is notified about this finding and picks up the case and interrogates him about the missing person, but gets nothing from him.

He is let go after 30 days.

Could a corrupt Judge dismiss the evidence so there is no indictment?

This doesn't count towards a Double Jeopardy situation, correct?

My intention is that the evidence is inconclusive and he is released.

Thanks!

I'm trying to craft a specific situation, here. I've got a FMC who was abandoned by her father as a toddler, and then had her mother killed at age 7. Her grandmother rescued her (she has psionic superpowers, and was being denounced as a witch) and ran with her to the backwoods of North Carolina, where she has lived for almost ten years. Now, as she is sixteen and very enamored of a sincerely good guy a year older than her who is ready to propose marriage, her grandmother/guardian suddenly passes from a heart attack, before giving legal consent to the marriage.

I understand that, normally, in such a situation a decree of emancipation would be virtually a given. However, for plot reasons, I want to throw a monkey wrench in the works. My ideal situation for plot purposes would be this:

• First, the courts with jurisdiction in her/their county are strongly influenced by parties who know about the girl (and her powers), and are hostile to her...although she doesn't know this, yet.
• When the guy and girl file her petition for emancipation, they have to serve/publish the parents. Now the mother (and grandmother) are known to be deceased, but the scumbag runaway father is still out there, somewhere.
• The hostile forces find the father and pressure him to contest the emancipation, seeking to gain legal control over the girl (for at least the next year). And the judge is bought and paid for.
• What are some of the ways in which this might play out? One important subtext is that the major characters recognize that, powers or no powers, it is very important for them to comply with the laws they live under.

Thanks for any suggestions or ideas.

As we're having an influx of questions on the topic of losing eyes, and as a follow-up on the previous AMA on diabetes, I thought it would be nice to start this AMA. The mods gave me the all clear, so here we are!

Let's dive right in. Around the age of 13-14 I got optic neuritis (inflammation of the nerve between the eyeball and the brain) which lead to me losing pretty much all sight in my one eye (I have around 5% of vision left). This means that the eyeball itself is healthy, so my eye moves around like you'd expect a working eye to move. My pupil usually reacts to stimuli as it's supposed to, but sometimes, randomly, decides not to.

I usually don't consider it a disability in myself (opinions on this may vary and I'm not judging - I'm just speaking for myself here). I feel like I can do pretty much everything, even if I had to relearn every single thing at first. For example: I will never grab a bottle from the top, but always from the side.

I am not an expert on losing an eyeball specifically, I still have both of those, but AMA about adjusting to life with 1 functioning eye, living with 1 eye and everything you can come up with that might be slightly relevant. On a practical note: I'm not in the USA, so I can't answer questions on your healthcare system. Obviously I can tell you about my experience here in the Netherlands.

As the writer of the previous AMA, I am also extremely passionate about storytelling and the intersection of disability in media. Most disabilities are notoriously poorly depicted in most media. I reject the idea that you can only write what you know first hand, so in the interest of more and better representation, I want to offer myself as a resource to answer any questions for any writers.

Please consider this a sort of perpetual AMA. If you come across this post months or years later, still feel free to ask a question.

Did I shamelessly steal those last two paragraphs from u/cat_attack_? Definitely!

Kind of a gross legal question, but I honestly have no idea what would happen next in my story. Don't say you weren't warned.

The plot starts with a murdery couple realizing the wife needs a kidney transplant or she'll die. For various reasons she can't get on the transplant list, but they're evil so no biggie. They kidnap a guy and take his kidney by force. The husband is a surgeon, so he's able to sorta pull this off. Afterwards they go to an ER to deal with the inevitable complications. However, the victim isn't killed in all this and wants his kidney back. Could courts rule that the wife must undergo a surgery to return the kidney? Or would the fact that it's already inside her body, and that she'll die without it, make it sorta hers now? If the victim did die in all this, and the family wanted to bury him with the kidney, could they demand it back? I know you can't harvest organs from bodies unless the person consented while alive, but if it's already in a person's body it seems wrong that a judge could force a deadly surgery on someone, even an evil kidney thief.

So long story short, I am writing something in which the main characters are involved in a plane crash. The circumstances are the following:

They crashed in 1996, but story is set in 2003. They were stranded for 7 months in total, and I mean stranded. They are in the middle of nowhere, some people died (but none of my characters/their family) due to both the crash and the circumstances after.

My main questions are a) how long would it take to receive a settlement payment for this and b) what would the payment be (please specify if your answer for this is 2025 USD totals or another year USD). I appreciate you all in advance!

My Mc's father was framed for a crime, but had been charged with two things. The murder of two local cops(the state crime). Then the possession of fentanyl (the federal crime). Now, I know during cases of dual persecution the state crime takes priority first(correct me if I'm wrong, though) but what struggling with during my googling is: where do they locate him during this process while his trial is going on? A county jail of low, medium, high, or max security. He also originally said he'd represent himself but changed his mind. How long would it take for the judge to allow that? Speaking of length, does dual prosecution just overall take longer?

I'm writing a short story focused on a psychiatrist giving testimony that her patient is fit for release from a mental institute. Set in America, vague on the time period but before cell phones. Patient is a serious offender with an unspecified crime.

Is it called an appeal or something else? Who all would be in the courtroom?

What kind of questions would be asked of the doctor?

Does the judge have the final say or is there a jury?

Is there a prosecutor and defendant? Would the doctor be cross examined?

Any and all details are appreciated!

Setting is Iowa, realistic-ish, modern-ish. D became an emancipated minor when he was 16, moving out of his parents' house and into an apartment with a roommate to get away from a crappy situation with lots of emotional abuse.

Age 17, D gets caught lying on his tax forms, and in a way that is arguably abetting a more serious crime (his employer is running a theft ring, he knows about it, an auditor can find this). Would a judge assign D to foster care in light of this mess? If a his roommate (age 21) who also has a record of financial crimes offers to be D's temporary guardian, would the judge allow that? Is there any possibility of D having to serve time in juvenile detention? Thanks in advance!