From: nobody@zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous)
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 03:39:10 -0700 (PDT)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: RE: legality of wiretapping: a "key" distinction
Message-ID: <199610111039.EAA01575@zifi.genetics.utah.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com> writes:

...

>Ironically he said it, despite the fact that wiretapping is comparatively 
>rare.  Perjury, "drop guns," faking and planting evidence, accepting bribes, 
>strongarming suspects, and similar techniques are probably far more commonly 
>used than wiretapping ever was, but I don't see Unicorn describing those as 
>"firmly entrenched" even though that would be an accurate characterization.

Donuts and coffee are firmly entrenched in law enforcement, too. Must Unicorn say _all_ obvious things in his (futile, but increasingly humorous) quixotic quest for your continuing (and free) legal education? Say it ain't so..
me