No subject

[Jim Choate]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Black Unicorn wrote:

> See my (huge) posting on this, but I would suspect that this isn't great.
> Were I operating one, which I am admittedly not, I'd want there to be no data
> of evidentiary value ever hitting my memory or media.  To some degree that's
> not possible.  In the alternative, actually _disabling_ logging is the best
> policy, in my view.  The evidence never existed in the first place then.  It
> suddenly becomes a challenge to show some kind of conspiracy on your part
> since the actual spoliation claim is harder to make.  Showing conspiracy for
> anything with respect to either probably starts hard and gets marginally less
> hard in this order:

Sure the evidence existed, it just wasn't written to another file, you
routinely spoliate the primary source data UNLESS you turn logging on.
Intentionaly turning off logging certainly shows 'intent' which is all
that the cites you've provided require. Now 'conspiracy' would require a
second (or more) parties to be involved to be relevent.

Watch that rock, there's a hard place on the other side...


 --
    ____________________________________________________________________

                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 at ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------