Re: [Leica] Cops run amok

["Dan Post" <dwpost@email.msn.com>]

Ah- let's not be so quick as the reporter may have gotten his syntax
scrambled. It is vague- was the photographer photographing the inside of the
car, from the outside. Quite possible. I might photograph inside a building
without ever entering it- but more accurately I would photograph the inside
of the building. My apologies to you journalists, and other word herders,
but I have been skeptical of what I read in the papers, especially since
last Easter. A feature writer's lead carried about a 48 point font
announcing that Jesus Christ had died on 'cavalry' (sic).
I understand from my 12 year old niece that 2+2 does indeed= 5, especially
for large values of two, or if it makes you feel better about yourself. I
also asked her if they had started diagramming sentences in English... she
wanted to know what it was... diagramming sentences, that is.
Lets see how the courts settle them.
Dan
- -----Original Message-----
From: jahudson <jahudson@direct.ca>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Saturday, April 10, 1999 1:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Cops run amok


>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Dan Cardish <dcardish@microtec.net>
>To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Sent: Saturday, April 10, 1999 8:11 AM
>Subject: Re: [Leica] Cops run amok
>
>
>> Holy Toledo!
>
>Read the opening lines from the article;
>
>"A photographer charged with resisting  arrest and obstructing a police
>officer while taking  pictures on Tuesday in the car of two traffic
accident
>victims.......
>
>the photographer was INSIDE the accident vehicle!! Now that is rather
>idiotic when the injured is least in need of a photo op and more likely in
>need of police and medical assistance. IMHO, the photographer deserves
harsh
>treatment from the judge.
>
>jh
>