Re: On the crime bill and remailers
At 1:22 PM 9/18/94 -0700, Anonymous wrote:
Current drafts of the crime bill include a scienter requirement. You are liable only if you know or intend for your remailer to be used by a terrorist.
This is SOLONg's first post to this list.
Hey. I get it. Solon. Lawyer. Nym. Cool. Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) "There is no difference between someone Shipwright Development Corporation who eats too little and sees Heaven and 44 Farquhar Street someone who drinks too much and sees Boston, MA 02331 USA snakes." -- Bertrand Russell (617) 323-7923
Robert Hettinga scripsit
At 1:22 PM 9/18/94 -0700, Anonymous wrote:
Current drafts of the crime bill include a scienter requirement. You are liable only if you know or intend for your remailer to be used by a terrorist.
This is SOLONg's first post to this list.
Hey. I get it. Solon. Lawyer. Nym.
Some lawyer, can't do stat. intrepretation to save his/her life. As I pointed out before, the requirement for INVESTIGATION is reasonably appearing to have intent. The statuatory offense itself includes NO REFERENCE to intent. The scienter requirement here is "gloss on the surface" of the kind intended to win votes from on the fencers.
Cool.
Until you get his bill, and lose in court too boot.
Bob Hettinga
----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com) "There is no difference between someone Shipwright Development Corporation who eats too little and sees Heaven and 44 Farquhar Street someone who drinks too much and sees Boston, MA 02331 USA snakes." -- Bertrand Russell (617) 323-7923
-uni- (Dark) -- 073BB885A786F666 nemo repente fuit turpissimus - potestas scientiae in usu est 6E6D4506F6EDBC17 quaere verum ad infinitum, loquitur sub rosa - wichtig!
participants (2)
-
Black Unicorn -
rah＠shipwright.com