Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/12/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] when is a pj not a pj?
From: S Dimitrov <sld@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:06:10 -0800
References: <E16HdJv-0000JQ-00@tisch.mail.mindspring.net>

You might want to read this little trifle;
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0%2C1283%2C48996%2C00.html
Speaks volumes.
 Slobodan Dimitrov

"John M. Sikes, Jr." wrote:
> 
>  "Photo journalists" is  an approbation given by the trade to itself. There
> is no civil or criminal statute or principle of law which exempts self
> styled PJ's from the consequences of their actions.
> When two persons act in knowing concert, as to outsiders they are equally
> responsible, as principal and agent in civil law and as co- conspirators in
> criminal law, regardless what names they give themselves.
> º
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from "John M. Sikes, Jr." <mcnaught@mindspring.com> (Re: [Leica] when is a pj not a pj?)