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

Re: cameras/security

Subject: Re: cameras/security
From: G. Morgan <usenet_abuse@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 16:18:20 +0000 (UTC)
Newsgroups: alt.security.alarms
References: <4a4c1696.142545@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <e5V2m.9485$ml7.6623@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <4a4c2a41.145570@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <b323m.62277$b9.54477@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3e873842d5f75f26483e7a6c94977502np@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Ok73m.62400$b9.57860@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7d7bf8754a26ee664acfec67beac0d30np@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <IaKdnSZr1MPinNLXnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Robert L Bass wrote:

>In this case the time stamp was inconsequential since there never was a
>question that the video showed Carlie being abducted.  The defense tried to
>question whether the perp was Smith or someone else, but not the authenticity
>of the recording itself.


What was the outcome of the case?  I hope they fried the bastard.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: cameras/security
  - From: Robert L Bass

References:
- cameras/security
  - From: anonymous
- Re: cameras/security
  - From: Jim Rojas
- Re: cameras/security
  - From: anonymous
- Re: cameras/security
  - From: Bob Worthy
- Re: cameras/security
  - From: G . Morgan
- Re: cameras/security
  - From: Bob Worthy
- Re: cameras/security
  - From: G . Morgan
- Re: cameras/security
  - From: Robert L Bass

Prev by Message: Re: OT: Feedback Extortion
Next by Message: Re: A Crying Shame
Previous by thread: Re: cameras/security
Next by thread: Re: cameras/security
Index(es):
- Message
- Thread

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