Qworst DSL - Liars!

[Linux]

Why not just subpoena their tape?  That is what it is for right?  Quality
control?  Your disputing their quality and you want control.

This is just the example of why the yellow pages is half attorneys.

I submit there is a good argument that you are doing business with an
Arizona company from Arizona so Arizona law should apply.

Now the million dollar question.  Since it is illegal in MT to record a
conversation without the consent of all parties, what do the police do?
What about the 911 operator, fire, police, undercover ETC?

And what about those missing minutes from the Nixon tapes?

Keith



*!* Message: 7
*!* Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 13:24:00 -0800
*!* From: "Eric" <yonica@qwest.net>
*!* To: plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
*!* Subject: RE: Qworst DSL - Liars!
*!* Reply-To: plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us

*!* Ok I guess I 'm back in.

*!* I'm not an expert either.  But I don't need to be.  This stuff is not
estate
*!* planning or securities regulation.  Most of this is pretty basic.

*!* So if I call qworst and inquire about a DSL package, my call may be sent
to
*!* MT.  I start taping, and qworst starts lying.  I then rely on
qworst-lies
*!* (because I believed them initially) to my detriment.  I receive a bill
with
*!* a charge that was not explained to me by the qworst liar in MT.  What
now?

*!* Sue qworst (I really like saying that) in Arizona small claims court.
That
*!* court would have personal jurisdiction over me and qworst because of
actual
*!* presence in the state, as well as subject matter jurisdiction over the
case
*!* because qworst's behavior is tortious, and is for an amount under $5,000
*!* let's say.

*!* Trial day comes and I ambush qworst with an ill-gotten conversation.
qworst
*!* objects because it was illegally obtained and because it is hearsay.
What
*!* principle does the judge use to exclude it?  I am not exactlly sure, but
*!* although it could survive the hearsay objection (because a
tape-recording is
*!* not exactly he-said/she-said), I am VERY doubtful that the tape would be
*!* admitted as evidence.  This is because it is illegally gained, albeit
only
*!* under MT law, not AZ.  I can't cite the specific rule of evidence by
which
*!* it would be excluded, but it just would.

*!* Even if it was not excluded as evidence in the case you brought, qworst
now
*!* has ammunition to bring their own suit against you.  And they could try
to
*!* do it either in MT or AZ.  MT, however, may not have personal
jurisdiction
*!* over me bc I have never been there, and did not choose to have my call
go
*!* there.  This one is close.  But even so, qworst could bring suit against
me
*!* in AZ for violation of MT law.  This can be done.  I have seen cases
where a
*!* whole bunch of different state laws were broken, but the case was only
*!* brought in one.  I have not seen a case like this one where only one law
was
*!* broken, but the case was brought in another.  But I don't have that much
*!* experience, so what do I know!  I bet it could be done though.

*!* So now you have qworst by the nads, and they have you.  What has this
gotten
*!* you?  What's more, the evidence you have may be excluded by the Arizona
*!* small-claims court because it was illegally obtained.  Then you are in a
*!* case where the only one whose nads are had is YOURS.

*!* And don't forget that we have only been talking about civil law here.
Me v.
*!* Qworst is civil.  But violation of wiretap statutes is a crime, at least
in
*!* some states.   Remember the prosecutors' in Maryland tried to get the
nads
*!* of Linda Trip for taping her phone calls with 'ole Monica.  The only
reason
*!* this prosecution was unsuccessful was because K. Star had granted her
*!* immunity at the federal level for her actions; since fed. law trumps
state,
*!* no prosecution  nor no nads could be had.  But don't count on Star
saving
*!* your nads in this case.

*!* bye




/---------------------------------------
| Keith Smith
| Christian Information Exchange
| (520) 298-2227
| P.O.Box 32158
| Tucson, AZ 85751
| Keith@ChristianExchange.org
| http://www.ChristianExchange.org/
\---------------------------------------