Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/12/06

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Is this believable?
From: "Stuart Phillips" <stuart.phillips@rcn.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:10:37 -0500
References: <3DF0E2CA.C097F1DB@earthlink.net> <3.0.6.32.20021206135617.007bd100@POP6.sympatico.ca>

One can only hope you get what you deserve someday; the difference will be
that when you do, you'll be on "60 Minutes" with that middle class "who
would have thought it would happen to me look".

Napalm - your people only use that on children.
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan C" <leicaman@sympatico.ca>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 1:56 PM
Subject: RE: [Leica] Is this believable?


> Most people would be too intimidated to walk away from a police officer
who
> has stopped them to ask a question.   But if you have sufficient
intestinal
> fortitude for the task, I am sure that you COULD walk away, and if the
> officer persists, you could ask him/her if you were under arrest.  The
> officer would have to show pretty could reason to arrest you, and would be
> liable to be sued for false arrest otherwise.   And depending on how you
> act, the police officer may be able to find some justifiable reason for
> arresting you (littering, swearing at the officer, jay walking, etc.).
Why
> not just be cooperative?  At least this is how things are in this part of
> the world (North America).
>
> And this is probably going to get the napalm out, but anyone who would
hang
> around a hotel housing the Vice-President of the United States, in these
> times, snapping 30 pics of the hotel, probably deserves whats supposedly
> happened to that guy written about in that paranoid hackers site.
Assuming
> the story is true, the guy was obviously setting himself up for this.   He
> may as well have sailed a dingy up to a US aircraft carrier and started
> snapping away with a camera.  How long do you think he would last?   Or
> should last?
>
> dan c.
>
> At 01:03 PM 06-12-02 -0500, Austin Franklin wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I'm asking what law states that I am under arrest by default?  I don't
> >believe that is true.  You have to break a law to be under arrest, and
being
> >under arrest requires telling you why you are under arrest, as well as
the
> >reading of your Miranda Rights...I believe.
> >
> >I also do not believe walking away from a supposed officer, who believes
he
> >has "engaged" you, is a crime.  Perhaps it is...but I'd like to see the
> >actual written law that states that.  I just don't blindly believe these
> >type of things without some better understanding.
> >
> >Austin
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> >> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of S Dimitrov
> >> Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 12:48 PM
> >> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] Is this believable?
> >>
> >>
> >> How do you know he's not involved in some kind of fact finding?
Besides,
> >> try walking away, when you have been stopped, or engaged in some way.
> >> Once stopped by an officer, that is an act of arrest.
> >> Slobodan
> >>
> >> Austin Franklin wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Technically, once an officer of the law stops you, even to
> >> ask about the
> >> > > weather, you're under arrest until_he_decides
> >> the_conversation_is over.
> >> >
> >> > Hi Slobodan,
> >> >
> >> > Where did you get that from?
> >> >
> >> > Austin
> >
> >--
> >To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> >
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from S Dimitrov <sld@earthlink.net> (Re: [Leica] Is this believable?)
Message from Dan C <leicaman@sympatico.ca> (RE: [Leica] Is this believable?)