From: Bill Kealey (cwkealey@atlanticbb.net)
Date: Thu Oct 07 2004 - 11:01:03 PDT
Glen,
As I stated in my post, it all depends on the jurisdiction and other
factors. Personally, I think that O.J. was guilty ... but he had a much
better team of lawyers than the prosecution had.
I've seen fish and game violators go to federal prison for fish and game
violations with very little evidence to support the charges. Then in a
different court seen obviously guilty criminals go free due to some very
small tecnicality in the law.
I think that if someone is going to use both fuels that it can be done
legally. However, in contrast to what the constitution says, in this case
the burden of proof lies with the defendant. Or put simply, C.Y.A. with
paper.
And my final thought (who said thank goodness? <grin> ) There will always
be "horror stories" and problems with the system. It's just that nobody has
come up with the correct solution.
Have a wonderful day.
Bill.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glenn Shaw" <mpmutt@mtaofnj.us>
To: "'Bill Kealey'" <cwkealey@atlanticbb.net>; "'Military Vehicles Mailing
List'" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 12:38
Subject: RE: [MV] THANKS!!!!
Nice thoughts Bill but unfortunately it would probable not fly in court when
the prosecutor gets done with you. Also the ADA will be a young hot shot
federal prosecutor looking to make a name for himself by a new notch on his
gun. The last case I saw go through the defendant did get the case filed
with similar arguments as to what you raised. Cost him over 5000 dollars
for his attorney though. He had evaded about 100 bucks worth of taxes.
Sounded like a good deal to me ..... :( I would avoid this business.
Bad news.
Later
Glenn
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:36:50 PDT