Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site opus.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!cmcl2!seismo!hao!cires!nbires!opus!rcd
From: rcd@opus.UUCP (Dick Dunn)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: BBS Confiscation and the benefit of the doubt
Message-ID: <539@opus.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-Jun-84 20:06:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: opus.539
Posted: Mon Jun 11 20:06:42 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 13-Jun-84 02:27:25 EDT
References: <514@sequent.UUCP> <477@ccieng5.UUCP>
Organization: NBI, Boulder
Lines: 17

(Discussion moved from net.followup - topic is the confiscation of a
bulletin-board system as evidence.)

>By all means give people the benefit of the doubt.  When somebody
>assumes that a group called "UNDERGROUND" was used for criminal
>activities, he may be guilty not of prejudging the sysop, but of
>being unwilling to prejudge the police that took action.
>
>In the court of law, the sysop MIGHT be a defendant (or witness).  On
>this net, the authorities are being judged, and they deserve a little
>benefit of doubt, too.

In other words, we no longer need to honor the idea of "presumption of
innocence"?  And what about "due process" in the seizure of property?
-- 
Dick Dunn	{hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd		(303)444-5710 x3086
	...Cerebus for dictator!