Posted by Gene E. Bloch on 11/15/25 11:52

On 7/10/2006, NoNoBadDog! posted this:
> "Anne R" <no@nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns97FBF157EDF215D4AM2@127.0.0.1...
>> On 02 Jul 2006, NoNoBadDog!<Diespammers@notme.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Anne R" <no@nomail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns97F3C793C66874C1H4@127.0.0.1...
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> It is not necessary for the video evidence to be used in a civil action
>> in the courts.
>>
>> I do not expect it to go so far.
>
> Then what purpose would it serve?
>
> Bobby

Here's an analogy: many criminals, when seeing the evidence gathered
against them, choose to plead guilty rather than insisting on a jury
trial.

HTH.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino)
letters617blochg3251
(replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom")

[Back to original message]