Kelly Hyman

And so I could see maybe in a civil case with someone in a civil case trying to ask, but I would assume that there would be objections due to confidentiality during breach of agreement because also even she doesn't want to breach the agreement if the agreement where I'm just assuming the agreement has some kind of confidentiality provisions in it.

And so I could see maybe in a civil case with someone in a civil case trying to ask, but I would assume that there would be objections due to confidentiality during breach of agreement because also even she doesn't want to breach the agreement if the agreement where I'm just assuming the agreement has some kind of confidentiality provisions in it.

If she's on a witness stand testifying and part of her deal is if she says the amount, she loses that amount and has like triple damages, like three times as much and all stuff like that, that her attorney who's going to represent her would stand up and say, you know, argue in front of the court. Your Honor, that information is confidential and she would be in breach of the agreement.

If she's on a witness stand testifying and part of her deal is if she says the amount, she loses that amount and has like triple damages, like three times as much and all stuff like that, that her attorney who's going to represent her would stand up and say, you know, argue in front of the court. Your Honor, that information is confidential and she would be in breach of the agreement.

She cannot... say the amount, and they would argue case law, and then the judge would ultimately decide. But I don't see that getting out now. Could be wrong. Anything is possible. I don't know what their agreement said, what it has said, but usually in these type of agreements, the one side wants to protect that, right? They don't want the world to know how much it is.

She cannot... say the amount, and they would argue case law, and then the judge would ultimately decide. But I don't see that getting out now. Could be wrong. Anything is possible. I don't know what their agreement said, what it has said, but usually in these type of agreements, the one side wants to protect that, right? They don't want the world to know how much it is.

Not any type of case that you reach a settlement. You can't disclose it. You can't discuss it with anyone. You can't post about it. You just can't say anything bad about the other person, anything disparaging against them, anything along those lines. So if she does testify and if that is a provision, most likely it will be just the facts, potentially that video of what she experienced there.

Not any type of case that you reach a settlement. You can't disclose it. You can't discuss it with anyone. You can't post about it. You just can't say anything bad about the other person, anything disparaging against them, anything along those lines. So if she does testify and if that is a provision, most likely it will be just the facts, potentially that video of what she experienced there.

But we'll have to have to see if there's motions right where they they don't want her to testify. And based on the confidentiality and attorneys are definitely going to be working hard on both sides on this case. Oh, absolutely.

But we'll have to have to see if there's motions right where they they don't want her to testify. And based on the confidentiality and attorneys are definitely going to be working hard on both sides on this case. Oh, absolutely.

From the criminal perspective, yeah. So also potentially FBI agents, people that went to his house and people that did the affidavit and probable cause in order to substantiate the fact to go there. So you're going to see a lot of people like that, FBI agents. And so from the government's perspective, you're going to have a lot of experts as well. Definitely

From the criminal perspective, yeah. So also potentially FBI agents, people that went to his house and people that did the affidavit and probable cause in order to substantiate the fact to go there. So you're going to see a lot of people like that, FBI agents. And so from the government's perspective, you're going to have a lot of experts as well. Definitely

expert-driven in regards to the criminal cases.

expert-driven in regards to the criminal cases.

It's possible. I could definitely see that and also the statements that he made. So it's important to remember, usually the attorney will tell his client not to make statements in regards to any type of case or potential case because those statements can be used against you. in a court of law.

It's possible. I could definitely see that and also the statements that he made. So it's important to remember, usually the attorney will tell his client not to make statements in regards to any type of case or potential case because those statements can be used against you. in a court of law.

So anything that was said, anything that was posted, also any communication other than his attorneys, there are some spousal privileges, but that gets really more complex. The communication that they have is not protected. So potentially if talking to someone else or someone else's messages that was sent to someone or any type of other communication can be used against him.

So anything that was said, anything that was posted, also any communication other than his attorneys, there are some spousal privileges, but that gets really more complex. The communication that they have is not protected. So potentially if talking to someone else or someone else's messages that was sent to someone or any type of other communication can be used against him.

And so I could definitely see that. coming up. But the argument can be made is that could go both ways from the argument standpoint of he was being accountable, right, and apologizing and owning up to it. But the other side of the coin is, yes, he's admitting that he did it. And therefore, because he did it, he allegedly has a propensity to do it again.

And so I could definitely see that. coming up. But the argument can be made is that could go both ways from the argument standpoint of he was being accountable, right, and apologizing and owning up to it. But the other side of the coin is, yes, he's admitting that he did it. And therefore, because he did it, he allegedly has a propensity to do it again.