On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Black Unicorn wrote:
Prosecutor: You retained copies of this document? Witness: No. Prosecutor: You have none of these documents in your possession or control? Witness: No. Prosecutor: Are you aware of any other copies of this document? Witness: Yes. Prosecutor: Where are they? Witness: An attorney representing the ABC trust bought a copy of the document before I knew about these proceedings. Prosecutor: Why didn't you instruct this attorney to turn over the documents?
The attorney has no legal obligation to turn over HIS property to me, he did buy the document after all. The subpeona was directed at me, not another person who I have no control over. Here's his name and address, serve him a subpeona at your discretion.
Why should an owner not be allowed to retain a copy?
Cause the court says so.
Worthless answer, but clearly exemplary of at least one of the problems of the court system. About the only way a judge could justifiably require all copies would be if any copy not in control would represent a clear and present danger/harm to some party. -- ____________________________________________________________________ Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night: God said, "Let Tesla be", and all was light. B.A. Behrend The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------