There is no such thing as any logical choice; not, also being ethical; where a moral duty is, as an obligation, which is based on your morality; what is upheld in the courts is where you have a “legal” duty; this, is an obligation based upon common laws of the nation; your, duty is the work you do to be fulfilled of such a requirement; yet, if you can say you haven’t been given anything also certainly not what one party was, certain it is no consideration has been;
For, you have to have been able to have been given something; otherwise, no contract exists; you, have to be able to be operating within an awareness overall of perception; for, this is you who is real; to be capable, of course, of a right or a wrong action; for, this is you really as a moral agent; you, have an obligation to act; such, is predetermined by your free will; for, such a relation is existing ongoing; which, is about your rightful duty;
You, can be aware, of course, what is noted as observed as policy; as, precedent as such is of following past rules, favorably; positively inducted; such, by principles laid down by our founding fathers; it is customary you as well as i follow precedent in any ruling and judgment; for, the stare decisis is to stand by your decision; yet, what happens when you’re getting a STAND DOWN on investigating crime like the Franklin Cover-Up in Nebraska?
It is certain no ethical consideration has been given; for, it is certain that under the Franklin Cover-Up, no informed consent is; also, no kinsideration; for, there is no value given; also, is certain in promise that enacted criminals got away with “taking a paperboy off his route,” for a mother and family did never see him again; where, you have no contract nothing can be binding at all because no consideration is given obviously;
For, consideration must be real, not illusory; so, where you do have legal consideration, it would have related to any exchange two or more things; you’d, be given something; if not, there is no binding contract; its, contract ab initio; valid kinsideration, must be clearly shown; for, all must also move as the desire of who is the promisor; a, consideration may not have been adequate; yet, it must be of some value;
To, have kinsideration, you can see careful thought as a courts, or a beloveds attention is being given you with compassion regarding a “thing;” for instance, that “thing” could be your child, someone else reckons they own; so, shouldn’t it be you want to know what is exchanged; you, have to clearly show you were given some benefit; as, consideration didn’t exist there never was any contract; for, full knowledge has to be where anyone is making decision; due diligence must be done;
For, consent is ethical also being a legal obligation to achieve innerstanding; it is an agreed permission of care to be fully innerstanding of relevant fact, risk, also what available alternative is; for, choice is a part of yours as well as my informed consent; you have to give consent of fact, risk, and benefit; your consent is your consideration, what is given you; i can state clearly such nothing existed such in a Franklin Cover-Up where you have a STAND DOWN ORDER, my child remain kidnapped; for, consent must be given willfully, not being valid under any duress; love jubbdavid;