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