the Black Bloc Corporation

Black Unicorn unicorn at schloss.li
Fri Mar 26 10:17:58 PST 2004


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 at minder.net 
> [mailto:owner-cypherpunks at minder.net] On Behalf Of Major Variola (ret)
> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 12:02 PM
> To: cypherpunks at 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.





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list