I didn't think about that...not sure why it didn't...a guess...maybe because this kid didn't have legal and reasonable access to the information and it was obtained via illegal means...which I believe would also "taint" the evidence anyway...
Eric -----Original Message----- From: Casey Dougall [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 11:21 AM To: cf-community Subject: Re: Palin email hacking case - guilty! On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > Between you andEric, it seems you guys are saying that because she did > not use good security measures AND that the kid found info that might > indicate illegal activity on Palin's part that it is OK that he did > this and that Palin herself bears some blame for being hacked. > > Does that sound right? > yes, I believe that in this case... Whouldn't the Whistleblower Protection Act have protected one of her co-workers/Aids from committing the same offense? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:317245 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
