[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]

Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas

Subject: Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
From: "Mark Leuck" <m..leuck@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 12:28:32 -0500
Newsgroups: alt.security.alarms
References: <46958a78$0$8006$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4695922f$0$14990$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <S_Fli.9130$475.1344@trndny04> <469837f6$0$8029$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <QB0mi.462$4J4.77@trndny05>

"Robert L Bass" <RobertLBass@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:QB0mi.462$4J4.77@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > ... what exactly IS the "smart thing"?
>
> There's no point in reiterating it.  I and several others have already
told him.  Unlike most here, I studied law in college.

it sounds like you have studying law (Which I doubt you did) confused with
getting a felony conviction (which you did do)

They are two different things

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
  - From: Frank Olson
- Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
  - From: Robert L Bass

References:
- Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
  - From: Jim Rojas
- Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
  - From: Jim Rojas
- Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
  - From: Robert L Bass
- Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
  - From: Mark Leuck
- Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
  - From: Robert L Bass

Prev by Message: Re: Panasonic KXTD
Next by Message: Re: Major shortcoming in Paradox new panel lineup
Previous by thread: Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
Next by thread: Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
Index(es):
- Message
- Thread

alt.security.alarms Main Index | alt.security.alarms Thread Index | alt.security.alarms Home | Archives Home