Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site burl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!rcj
From: rcj@burl.UUCP (Curtis Jackson)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: Radar Surveillance (burglars tools)
Message-ID: <825@burl.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 25-Aug-85 11:02:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: burl.825
Posted: Sun Aug 25 11:02:20 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 26-Aug-85 01:20:19 EDT
References: <1081@homxa.UUCP> <4891@allegra.UUCP> <269@ihlpl.UUCP> <1090@homxa.UUCP> <719@homxb.UUCP> <508@linus.UUCP> <10690@styx.UUCP>
Reply-To: rcj@burl.UUCP (Curtis Jackson)
Organization: AT&T Technologies, Burlington NC
Lines: 22
Summary: 

In article <10690@styx.UUCP> mcb@styx.UUCP (Michael C. Berch) writes:
>   offense. For example, I recall a California case from law school 
>   where a convicted felon on parole was up for parole revocation for
>   possessing a firearm.  What exactly he had was not reported, but all 
>   the trial transcript reported was that he had a "gun". The police
>   officer who testified at the trial was deceased and not available
>   at the hearing. Since the official definition of "firearm" in the
>   appropriate section of the penal code did not include the word
>   "gun" (it talked about pistols and rifles and shotguns, etc.)
>   the firearm charge was dismissed and the felon walked.

With this kind of stuff going on, how can ANYONE with any conscience at
all become a trial lawyer?  I am reminded of the Dustin Hoffman (?Al Pacino?)
movie "And Justice for All", where an attorney (certain of his client's guilt)
gets his client off of a murder charge on a technicality of the magnitude
mentioned above -- and the client goes out and kills a little girl the
next night.  Shudder!!
-- 

The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3313 (Cornet 291)
alias: Curtis Jackson	...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!rcj
			...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua masscomp ]!clyde!rcj