|
|
Posted by Stuart McKears on 07/07/06 08:32
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006 14:09:48 -1000, "NoNoBadDog!" <Diespammers@notme.com> wrote:
>
>"P Darby" <DontUseThisEmail@All.com> wrote in message
>news:12an6tprgbve6fe@corp.supernews.com...
>> "NoNoBadDog!" <Diespammers@notme.com> wrote in message
>> news:a9WdnXqr_sok7jrZnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@hawaiiantel.net...
>>
>>> You are wasting your time. Any video you take without the doctors
>>> knowledge will *NOT* be admissible as evidence in court. In order to do
>>> so, the videotaping would have to be ordered by a district court judge,
>>> would have to be accomplished by trained personnel, and the video would
>>> have to be maintained in law enforcements hands at all times to insure
>>> that the video had not been altered.
>>
>>
>> What rubbish.
>> The police are asking hunt monitors to video the hunt scum, to get
>> evidence of them illegally hunting.
>> Of course it's admissible.
>>
>> Pete
>>
>Not according to any jurisdiction that I know of.
>
>Perhaps you have a legal precedent you would like to cite where such a video
>was used to convict anyone?
>
>Bobby
>
Suggest you read
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section13/chapter_r.html
regards
Stuart
www.mckears.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|