funsec mailing list archives
Re: MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon
From: "Brian Loe" <knobdy () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 12:03:53 -0500
Without a charge and a consequent judegment, there is no precedent - besides which, precedent doesn't prevent future prosecutions. On 4/10/06, Justin Polazzo <jpolazzo () thesportsauthority com> wrote:
There would be a leagal precident either way, depending on what the previous fellows who stole the cannon were charged/not charged with :-) -JP
_______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon Fergie (Apr 08)
- RE: MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon Blanchard_Michael (Apr 10)
- RE: MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon Larry Seltzer (Apr 10)
- Re: MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon der Mouse (Apr 10)
- Re: MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon Stephen J. Smoogen (Apr 10)
- Re: MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon Dude VanWinkle (Apr 10)
- RE: MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon Blanchard_Michael (Apr 10)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon Justin Polazzo (Apr 19)
- Re: MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon Brian Loe (Apr 19)
- RE: MIT Pranksters Nab Caltech Cannon Justin Polazzo (Apr 19)