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!