What you are asking about (at Tort in any event) is the legal doctrine of respondeat superior ("let the master answer") making the "master" liable for certain acts of the "servant." An employer is therefore typically liable for injury to person or property resulting from acts of an employee (See Generally, Black's Law Dictionary). There are lots of parallel ways to impose criminal liability in the same fashion. The government's favorite is generally the rather notorious concept of "conspiracy."
-----Original Message----- From: owner-cypherpunks@minder.net [mailto:owner-cypherpunks@minder.net] On Behalf Of Major Variola (ret) Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 12:02 PM To: cypherpunks@al-qaeda.net Subject: the Black Bloc Corporation
At 12:28 AM 3/26/04 -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 09:43:53PM -0800, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
If a member of a club, to which you belong, commits an act of violence, are you liable for that act?
No, but if the "club", as an entity, does such, you should be.
The "club" are protesters wearing black. Some protesters threw bricks. You're busted for their actions.