it wasn't lying. The one attorney claimed I was lying to get out of jury duty. That was not my intent, but I have to admit that after that I was happy to be out.
Like I said before, when people are listening in on a conversation you can never tell what they will do. My response was to illustrate that the attitude of "if you are doing nothing wrong why do you care" is bogus. An attorneys job appears to be to twist what someone says to the advantage of whatever the attorney is supporting, to ... with the truth. Any form of thought police will work the same way. with that being said I would also like to point out that a complete lack of sensorship is also bad. The internet is a great example. let people post what they may on the internet, but in a way that it can be filtered by the users or providers. Brad >>> From: Dennis Muhlestein <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Date: 8/4/2009 02:17 PM Subject: Re: [OT] schneier question Brad Dorner wrote: > It was not in accord with one of the attorneys. After about 5 minutes of > yelling. I say yelling because I could hear both attorneys from across the > court room. The judge finally agreed with the other attorney and let me go > from the selection process. I don't know what the final result of the legal > action was but I got the impression that the lie detector test was a big part > of the one attorneys case, and for me to call it in question was a slap in > the face for him. > How is this "lying during the selection process"? From the way you tell it, it sounds to me like you just stated what you thought. /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */ /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
