On Mon, 11 Mar 1996, jim bell wrote:
At 11:24 AM 3/11/96 -0500, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security wrote:
The Leahy bill is flawed in two areas. Sent a message with proposed wording to Sen. Leahy via his web page but have not gotten a response. Have a bad habit of reading laws without thought since this is how LEA and prosecutors are told to enforce them - as written, not as believed. If an area is vague, a court is required to decide how to interpret it, not LEA. If badly written *everyone* loses.
Unfortunately, this is not the way CREATIVE prosecutors enforce laws. _THEY_ try to be imaginative, "pushing the envelope" as it were, and expect the courts to stop them. Sadly, those same courts often have ex-prosecutors as judges, people who aren't particularly inclined to dissuade the abuse of laws. (exceptions exist, obviously.)
Mr. Bell seems to me, based on what I have observed of his legal "analysis" in past, entirely unqualified to be speaking to these issues. I hope readers will take his comments with a grain of salt, and keep this in mind.
Jim Bell jimbell@pacifier.com
--- My prefered and soon to be permanent e-mail address: unicorn@schloss.li "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information