Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
554 views
Skip to first unread message
Peter Moylan
Dec 14, 2014, 2:55:39 AM12/14/14
to
For the past week I've been on a jury, but of course have not been
permitted to say anything about it until the trial was over. I'm now
able to release this detail.
An important part of the evidence was notes recorded on an iPod, and
subsequently printed out by the police. These notes contained many
abbreviations like WTF and OMFG, as you might expect from someone who
uses an iPod. The printout also contained many instances of " ".
This threatened to become an important detail in the cross-examination
of the person who had written the notes. The defence barrister had
worked out (how?) that nbsp stands for "no bullshit please". He made a
big thing of the fact that it appeared many times. The witness denied
that she had written it. The barrister called her a liar, and suggested
that she was in the habit of writing "no bullshit please". She kept
denying it.
Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
while this was explained to the two barristers.
For this barristers charge thousands of dollars per day?
He probably didn't understand TeX, either.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
permitted to say anything about it until the trial was over. I'm now
able to release this detail.
An important part of the evidence was notes recorded on an iPod, and
subsequently printed out by the police. These notes contained many
abbreviations like WTF and OMFG, as you might expect from someone who
uses an iPod. The printout also contained many instances of " ".
This threatened to become an important detail in the cross-examination
of the person who had written the notes. The defence barrister had
worked out (how?) that nbsp stands for "no bullshit please". He made a
big thing of the fact that it appeared many times. The witness denied
that she had written it. The barrister called her a liar, and suggested
that she was in the habit of writing "no bullshit please". She kept
denying it.
Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
while this was explained to the two barristers.
For this barristers charge thousands of dollars per day?
He probably didn't understand TeX, either.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Katy Jennison
Dec 14, 2014, 3:10:00 AM12/14/14
to
--
Katy Jennison
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 14, 2014, 4:33:17 AM12/14/14
to
On 2014-12-14 07:55:35 +0000, Peter Moylan said:
> For the past week I've been on a jury, but of course have not been
> permitted to say anything about it until the trial was over. I'm now
> able to release this detail.
>
> An important part of the evidence was notes recorded on an iPod, and
> subsequently printed out by the police. These notes contained many
> abbreviations like WTF and OMFG, as you might expect from someone who
> uses an iPod. The printout also contained many instances of " ".
>
> This threatened to become an important detail in the cross-examination
> of the person who had written the notes. The defence barrister had
> worked out (how?) that nbsp stands for "no bullshit please". He made a
> big thing of the fact that it appeared many times. The witness denied
> that she had written it. The barrister called her a liar, and suggested
> that she was in the habit of writing "no bullshit please". She kept
> denying it.
>
> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
> while this was explained to the two barristers.
Oh dear. Apparently not only did none of the lawyers know anything
> For the past week I've been on a jury, but of course have not been
> permitted to say anything about it until the trial was over. I'm now
> able to release this detail.
>
> An important part of the evidence was notes recorded on an iPod, and
> subsequently printed out by the police. These notes contained many
> abbreviations like WTF and OMFG, as you might expect from someone who
> uses an iPod. The printout also contained many instances of " ".
>
> This threatened to become an important detail in the cross-examination
> of the person who had written the notes. The defence barrister had
> worked out (how?) that nbsp stands for "no bullshit please". He made a
> big thing of the fact that it appeared many times. The witness denied
> that she had written it. The barrister called her a liar, and suggested
> that she was in the habit of writing "no bullshit please". She kept
> denying it.
>
> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
> while this was explained to the two barristers.
about HTML, they didn't have anyone in their offices either who had
ever looked at the source of a web page. (The standard search page of
Google has only two instances of , but it's a very short page.)
>
> For this barristers charge thousands of dollars per day?
>
> He probably didn't understand TeX, either.
--
athel
> For this barristers charge thousands of dollars per day?
>
> He probably didn't understand TeX, either.
--
Iain Archer
Dec 14, 2014, 4:51:04 AM12/14/14
to
Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote on Sun, 14 Dec 2014 at 18:55:35:
>For the past week I've been on a jury, but of course have not been
>permitted to say anything about it until the trial was over. I'm now
>able to release this detail.
>
>An important part of the evidence was notes recorded on an iPod, and
>subsequently printed out by the police. These notes contained many
>abbreviations like WTF and OMFG, as you might expect from someone who
>uses an iPod. The printout also contained many instances of " ".
>
>This threatened to become an important detail in the cross-examination
>of the person who had written the notes. The defence barrister had
>worked out (how?) that nbsp stands for "no bullshit please". He made a
>big thing of the fact that it appeared many times. The witness denied
>that she had written it. The barrister called her a liar, and suggested
>that she was in the habit of writing "no bullshit please". She kept
>denying it.
>
>Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
>while this was explained to the two barristers.
>
Well done. I've wondered whether I might find myself in a similar
>For the past week I've been on a jury, but of course have not been
>permitted to say anything about it until the trial was over. I'm now
>able to release this detail.
>
>An important part of the evidence was notes recorded on an iPod, and
>subsequently printed out by the police. These notes contained many
>abbreviations like WTF and OMFG, as you might expect from someone who
>uses an iPod. The printout also contained many instances of " ".
>
>This threatened to become an important detail in the cross-examination
>of the person who had written the notes. The defence barrister had
>worked out (how?) that nbsp stands for "no bullshit please". He made a
>big thing of the fact that it appeared many times. The witness denied
>that she had written it. The barrister called her a liar, and suggested
>that she was in the habit of writing "no bullshit please". She kept
>denying it.
>
>Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
>while this was explained to the two barristers.
>
predicament if ever called for jury service. It's a pity tou couldn't
have offered your service as expert witness, for an appropriate fee.
Presumably a minute with Google or the court's clerical assistant did
the trick. Was it made clear in open court that the barrister's line of
attack had been a mistaken one?
--
Iain Archer
Dr Nick
Dec 14, 2014, 5:07:36 AM12/14/14
to
FromTheRafters
Dec 14, 2014, 5:19:38 AM12/14/14
to
on 12/14/2014, Peter Moylan supposed :
Hilarious, thanks for sharing this.
Peter Moylan
Dec 14, 2014, 6:30:47 AM12/14/14
to
the jury was out of the room. When we returned, she commented that it
was a good thing that we had jurors who understood the 21st century.
![Peter Duncanson [BrE]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjU1GGYFBCZgBCNB-pRgkosMu-ej0qpnECw3jc8uGYOTiF8a=s40-c)
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Dec 14, 2014, 6:49:13 AM12/14/14
to
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 18:55:35 +1100, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org>
wrote:
While we tut-tut about the uninformed barristers we should bear in mind
that the fault lies in the printed version provided by the police.
I wonder what the legal position is? If a police employee prints out a
message from an iPod or other device and notices that some characters
have not been rendered correctly what can he or she do? This could be a
particular problem if the method, hardware and software, for printing
from a device has been standardised either by rule or custom. It could
be very difficult for a techie employee to deviate from accepted
practice.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
wrote:
that the fault lies in the printed version provided by the police.
I wonder what the legal position is? If a police employee prints out a
message from an iPod or other device and notices that some characters
have not been rendered correctly what can he or she do? This could be a
particular problem if the method, hardware and software, for printing
from a device has been standardised either by rule or custom. It could
be very difficult for a techie employee to deviate from accepted
practice.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 14, 2014, 9:34:37 AM12/14/14
to
past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
of the case?
Stan Brown
Dec 14, 2014, 11:03:37 AM12/14/14
to
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 18:55:35 +1100, Peter Moylan wrote:
> The printout also contained many instances of " ".
> ...
> The printout also contained many instances of " ".
> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>
> For this barristers charge thousands of dollars per day?
Lawyers (as we call them in the US) can be shockingly negligent/.
> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>
> For this barristers charge thousands of dollars per day?
In a famous case, Swain versus Alabama (1965), Mr. Swain, a black
man, had been convicted of raping and murdering a white woman, and
sentenced to death. The `100-man jury pool(*) was 92 white men and 8
black men, in a county with 26% black population. (No blacks were on
the actual 12-man jury, through a set of challenges by the
prosecution.)
The US Supreme Court rejected Swain's lawyer's contention of racial
bias in selecting the original jury pool, ruling that 8% wasn't all
that different from 26%. Mr. Swain's lawyer(**) apparently had not
thought to consult a statistician, or even a first-semester
statistics student. If he had, he would have included in his brief
that getting as few as 8 blacks in an unbiased sample of 100 from a
26% black population had under 5 chances in a million of occurring.
The Supreme Court did note that there had never, in the preceding 15
years, been more than 15 black men on a Talladega County 100-man jury
pool. Again, any competent statistics student would have been able to
compute how monstrously unlikely that was, if there was no racial
bias in jury selection.
(*) Women were ineligible to be jurors in that era in Talladega
County.
(**) I'm assuming he had one. Even in 1965 Alabama, I think there was
a right to counsel in capital cases.
--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com
Stan Brown
Dec 14, 2014, 11:05:08 AM12/14/14
to
Jerry Friedman
Dec 14, 2014, 11:50:21 AM12/14/14
to
On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:55:39 AM UTC-7, Peter Moylan wrote:
> For the past week I've been on a jury, but of course have not been
> permitted to say anything about it until the trial was over. I'm now
> able to release this detail.
>
> An important part of the evidence was notes recorded on an iPod, and
> subsequently printed out by the police. These notes contained many
> abbreviations like WTF and OMFG, as you might expect from someone who
> uses an iPod. The printout also contained many instances of " ".
>
> This threatened to become an important detail in the cross-examination
> of the person who had written the notes. The defence barrister had
> worked out (how?) that nbsp stands for "no bullshit please".
That meaning is at Acronym Finder (though the first definition is
> For the past week I've been on a jury, but of course have not been
> permitted to say anything about it until the trial was over. I'm now
> able to release this detail.
>
> An important part of the evidence was notes recorded on an iPod, and
> subsequently printed out by the police. These notes contained many
> abbreviations like WTF and OMFG, as you might expect from someone who
> uses an iPod. The printout also contained many instances of " ".
>
> This threatened to become an important detail in the cross-examination
> of the person who had written the notes. The defence barrister had
> worked out (how?) that nbsp stands for "no bullshit please".
"Non-Breaking Space (HTML)"), and it could be very useful in court, on
Usenet, and in many other places.
> He made a
> big thing of the fact that it appeared many times. The witness denied
> that she had written it. The barrister called her a liar, and suggested
> that she was in the habit of writing "no bullshit please". She kept
> denying it.
>
> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
> while this was explained to the two barristers.
It must have been nice to alleviate the boredom as well as to clear
up the foolishness.
--
Jerry Friedman
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Dec 14, 2014, 12:31:33 PM12/14/14
to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voir_dire
Only in some jurisdictions does the process of jury selection involve
the questioning of potential jurors.
Peter Molan is in New South Wales. This webpage has information for
potential jurors in criminal trials in that State.
http://www.turnbullhill.com.au/articles/jury-duty---a-guide-for-potential-jurors.html
When selecting jurors, a pool of possible jurors are lead into the
court by the Sherriff. The trial judge must direct the prosecutor to
inform the members of the jury panel of the nature of the charge,
the identity of the accused and the principal witnesses to be
called. The judge then calls upon members of the panel to apply to
be excused if they cannot bring an impartial consideration to the
case.
Both the prosecution and the defence each have three objections to
any potential jurors. Such objections are made without the
possibility of any questions being asked of juror. If objected to by
either the prosecution or defence the juror is immediately excused.
Charles Bishop
Dec 14, 2014, 1:08:47 PM12/14/14
to
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 14, 2014, 1:53:51 PM12/14/14
to
On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:31:33 PM UTC-5, PeterWD wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 06:34:35 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >It's interesting that someone aware of such things was allowed to get
> >past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
> >for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
> >of the case?
>
> Beware, "voir dire" has different meanings in different jurisdictions:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voir_dire
>
> Only in some jurisdictions does the process of jury selection involve
> the questioning of potential jurors.
>
> Peter Molan is in New South Wales. This webpage has information for
> potential jurors in criminal trials in that State.
> http://www.turnbullhill.com.au/articles/jury-duty---a-guide-for-potential-jurors.html
>
> When selecting jurors, a pool of possible jurors are lead
sic?
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 06:34:35 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >It's interesting that someone aware of such things was allowed to get
> >past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
> >for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
> >of the case?
>
> Beware, "voir dire" has different meanings in different jurisdictions:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voir_dire
>
> Only in some jurisdictions does the process of jury selection involve
> the questioning of potential jurors.
>
> Peter Molan is in New South Wales. This webpage has information for
> potential jurors in criminal trials in that State.
> http://www.turnbullhill.com.au/articles/jury-duty---a-guide-for-potential-jurors.html
>
> When selecting jurors, a pool of possible jurors are lead
> into the
> court by the Sherriff. The trial judge must direct the prosecutor to
> inform the members of the jury panel of the nature of the charge,
> the identity of the accused and the principal witnesses to be
> called. The judge then calls upon members of the panel to apply to
> be excused if they cannot bring an impartial consideration to the
> case.
>
> Both the prosecution and the defence each have three objections to
> any potential jurors. Such objections are made without the
> possibility of any questions being asked of juror. If objected to by
> either the prosecution or defence the juror is immediately excused.
justice.
Mark Brader
Dec 14, 2014, 2:08:46 PM12/14/14
to
Peter Moylan:
> When we returned, she commented that it was a good thing that we had
> jurors who understood the 21st century.
dates from the 20th century!
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "If you want a 20th century solution, the
m...@vex.net | obvious answer is helicopters!" -- Bob Scheurle
>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
>>> while this was explained to the two barristers.
Iain Archer:
>>> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
>>> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>> Was it made clear in open court that the barrister's line of
>> attack had been a mistaken one?
Peter Moylan:
>> attack had been a mistaken one?
> Yes, apparently the judge passed the explanation on to all present while
> the jury was out of the room.
And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
> the jury was out of the room.
> When we returned, she commented that it was a good thing that we had
> jurors who understood the 21st century.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "If you want a 20th century solution, the
m...@vex.net | obvious answer is helicopters!" -- Bob Scheurle
Mark Brader
Dec 14, 2014, 2:46:47 PM12/14/14
to
Well, this thread has been educational. As well as learning about
an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
Peter's original subject line was
Subject:
and most of the followups have had
Subject: Re:
as they should. But Jerry's had
Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Unfortunately, real life is usually
m...@vex.net | not a movie." --Al Kriman
My text in this article is in the public domain.
an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
Peter's original subject line was
Subject:
and most of the followups have had
Subject: Re:
as they should. But Jerry's had
Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Unfortunately, real life is usually
m...@vex.net | not a movie." --Al Kriman
My text in this article is in the public domain.
FromTheRafters
Dec 14, 2014, 3:04:00 PM12/14/14
to
Mark Brader formulated the question :
> Well, this thread has been educational. As well as learning about
> an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
> not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
> in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
> them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
> represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
>
> Peter's original subject line was
>
> Subject:
>
> and most of the followups have had
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> as they should. But Jerry's had
>
> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>
> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
> Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
Sometimes clients get confused by RLO oot
> an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
> not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
> in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
> them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
> represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
>
> Peter's original subject line was
>
> Subject:
>
> and most of the followups have had
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> as they should. But Jerry's had
>
> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>
> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
> Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
Jerry Friedman
Dec 14, 2014, 3:10:16 PM12/14/14
to
On 12/14/14 11:53 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:31:33 PM UTC-5, PeterWD wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 06:34:35 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
>> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>> It's interesting that someone aware of such things was allowed to get
>>> past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
>>> for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
>>> of the case?
>>
>> Beware, "voir dire" has different meanings in different jurisdictions:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voir_dire
>>
>> Only in some jurisdictions does the process of jury selection involve
>> the questioning of potential jurors.
>>
>> Peter Molan is in New South Wales. This webpage has information for
>> potential jurors in criminal trials in that State.
>> http://www.turnbullhill.com.au/articles/jury-duty---a-guide-for-potential-jurors.html
>>
>> When selecting jurors, a pool of possible jurors are lead
>
> sic?
Yes, I looked at the page (which is from a lawyer, not the government).
> On Sunday, December 14, 2014 12:31:33 PM UTC-5, PeterWD wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 06:34:35 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
>> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>> It's interesting that someone aware of such things was allowed to get
>>> past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
>>> for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
>>> of the case?
>>
>> Beware, "voir dire" has different meanings in different jurisdictions:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voir_dire
>>
>> Only in some jurisdictions does the process of jury selection involve
>> the questioning of potential jurors.
>>
>> Peter Molan is in New South Wales. This webpage has information for
>> potential jurors in criminal trials in that State.
>> http://www.turnbullhill.com.au/articles/jury-duty---a-guide-for-potential-jurors.html
>>
>> When selecting jurors, a pool of possible jurors are lead
>
> sic?
Sic also on the dangler and on misspelling "sheriff", not that I've
never misspelled it. Three in one sentence is pretty good.
>
>> into the
>> court by the Sherriff. The trial judge must direct the prosecutor to
>> inform the members of the jury panel of the nature of the charge,
>> the identity of the accused and the principal witnesses to be
>> called. The judge then calls upon members of the panel to apply to
>> be excused if they cannot bring an impartial consideration to the
>> case.
>>
>> Both the prosecution and the defence each have three objections to
>> any potential jurors. Such objections are made without the
>> possibility of any questions being asked of juror. If objected to by
>> either the prosecution or defence the juror is immediately excused.
>
> OMG. That makes the statistics of Alabama jury pool selection look like
> justice.
to ask to be excused if they're friends or relatives of the accused or
the alleged victim, for instance.
--
Jerry Friedman
Dr Nick
Dec 14, 2014, 3:13:43 PM12/14/14
to
m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) writes:
> Well, this thread has been educational. As well as learning about
> an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
> not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
> in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
> them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
> represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
>
> Peter's original subject line was
>
> Subject:
>
> and most of the followups have had
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> as they should. But Jerry's had
>
> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>
> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
> Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
So next time he should use &nbsp; ?
> Well, this thread has been educational. As well as learning about
> an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
> not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
> in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
> them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
> represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
>
> Peter's original subject line was
>
> Subject:
>
> and most of the followups have had
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> as they should. But Jerry's had
>
> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>
> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
> Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
<grins wickedly to himself>
Sam Plusnet
Dec 14, 2014, 3:51:04 PM12/14/14
to
In article <87r3w2p...@temporary-address.org.uk>, nospam-4
@temporary-address.org.uk says...
Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
the court would not know.
The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
--
Sam
@temporary-address.org.uk says...
the court would not know.
The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
--
Sam
Jerry Friedman
Dec 14, 2014, 4:10:14 PM12/14/14
to
On 12/14/14 1:14 PM, Dr Nick wrote:
> m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) writes:
>
>> Well, this thread has been educational. As well as learning about
>> an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
>> not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
>> in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
>> them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
>> represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
>>
>> Peter's original subject line was
>>
>> Subject:
>>
>> and most of the followups have had
>>
>> Subject: Re:
>>
>> as they should. But Jerry's had
>>
>> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>>
>> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
>> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
>> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
>> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
Ah, I had no idea GG would do that.
> m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) writes:
>
>> Well, this thread has been educational. As well as learning about
>> an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
>> not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
>> in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
>> them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
>> represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
>>
>> Peter's original subject line was
>>
>> Subject:
>>
>> and most of the followups have had
>>
>> Subject: Re:
>>
>> as they should. But Jerry's had
>>
>> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>>
>> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
>> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
>> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
>> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>> Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
>
> So next time he should use &nbsp; ?
>
> <grins wickedly to himself>
That comes up at places like Language Log, which allow HTML codes.
Someone says "My angle brackets just vanished."
--
Jerry Friedman
Stan Brown
Dec 14, 2014, 6:02:49 PM12/14/14
to
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:31:28 +0000, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> Peter Molan is in New South Wales. This webpage has information for
> potential jurors in criminal trials in that State.
> http://www.turnbullhill.com.au/articles/jury-duty---a-guide-for-potential-jurors.html
>
> When selecting jurors, a pool of possible jurors are lead into the
> court
>
Does it actually say that? "Lead" for the past tense or past
> Peter Molan is in New South Wales. This webpage has information for
> potential jurors in criminal trials in that State.
> http://www.turnbullhill.com.au/articles/jury-duty---a-guide-for-potential-jurors.html
>
> When selecting jurors, a pool of possible jurors are lead into the
> court
>
participle of the verb is a distressingly common error.
Stan Brown
Dec 14, 2014, 6:06:41 PM12/14/14
to
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:46:45 -0600, Mark Brader wrote:
> most of the followups have had
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> as they should. But Jerry's had
>
> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>
> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
If "Jerry" is Jerry Friedman, then I think that must be either your
> most of the followups have had
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> as they should. But Jerry's had
>
> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>
> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
newsreader client or your news server, or a combination of the two.
Gravity retrieved it from news.individual.net and rendered the
subject line as " ".
What do you see in my subject line?
Stan Brown
Dec 14, 2014, 6:08:51 PM12/14/14
to
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 20:51:04 -0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
> the court would not know.
>
> The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
>
Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
> Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
> the court would not know.
>
> The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
>
Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 14, 2014, 6:36:15 PM12/14/14
to
On Sunday, December 14, 2014 4:10:14 PM UTC-5, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> On 12/14/14 1:14 PM, Dr Nick wrote:
> > m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) writes:
> >> Peter's original subject line was
> >> Subject:
> >> and most of the followups have had
> >> Subject: Re:
> >> as they should. But Jerry's had
> >> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
> >> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> >> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> >> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> >> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
> Ah, I had no idea GG would do that.
It didn't. No such disruption here.
> On 12/14/14 1:14 PM, Dr Nick wrote:
> > m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) writes:
> >> Peter's original subject line was
> >> Subject:
> >> and most of the followups have had
> >> Subject: Re:
> >> as they should. But Jerry's had
> >> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
> >> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> >> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> >> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> >> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
> Ah, I had no idea GG would do that.
Garrett Wollman
Dec 14, 2014, 6:41:14 PM12/14/14
to
In article <MPG.2ef7e28bc...@news.individual.net>,
court, and have a duty not to mislead the court. In a criminal
proceeding, a prosecutor has the further duty to turn over all
potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 20:51:04 -0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
>> the court would not know.
>>
>> The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
>>
>
>Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
>
>Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
>prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
>may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
More than that: the attorneys for all parties are officers of the
>On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 20:51:04 -0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
>> the court would not know.
>>
>> The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
>>
>
>Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
>
>Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
>prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
>may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
court, and have a duty not to mislead the court. In a criminal
proceeding, a prosecutor has the further duty to turn over all
potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Dec 14, 2014, 6:44:43 PM12/14/14
to
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ja197791/
I haven't read it properly yet.
If a juror turns out to have knowledge of people that might result in an
inability to be impartial he/she can be discharged during the trial.
If a juror detects potential lack of impartiality in another juror
during the trial he/she can report that fact.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ja197791/s75c.html
75C Juror may report misconduct and other irregularities
....
(4) In this section:
"irregularity", in relation to a juror's membership of a jury, or
the performance of the juror's functions as a juror, means the
following:
....
(e) the juror's inability to be impartial because of the juror's
familiarity with the witnesses, parties or legal representatives
in the trial or coronial inquest, any reasonable apprehension of
bias or conflict of interest on the part of the juror, or any
similar reason.
I haven't found any mention of punishment for a juror not declaring a
cause of potential impartiality. If there is any such provision it might
be in another Act.
Sam Plusnet
Dec 14, 2014, 6:58:41 PM12/14/14
to
In article <m6l76m$df3$1...@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>,
wol...@bimajority.org says...
Perhaps the barrister was informed of this but found it unconvincing,
preferring his(her) own theory which fitted into the prosecution case
far more neatly.
Is virtue sufficiently restored?
--
Sam
wol...@bimajority.org says...
>
> In article <MPG.2ef7e28bc...@news.individual.net>,
> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> >On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 20:51:04 -0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >> Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
> >> the court would not know.
> >>
> >> The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
> >>
> >
> >Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
> >
> >Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
> >prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
> >may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
>
> More than that: the attorneys for all parties are officers of the
> court, and have a duty not to mislead the court. In a criminal
> proceeding, a prosecutor has the further duty to turn over all
> potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.
>
Let me re-phrase the above.
> In article <MPG.2ef7e28bc...@news.individual.net>,
> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> >On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 20:51:04 -0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >> Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
> >> the court would not know.
> >>
> >> The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
> >>
> >
> >Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
> >
> >Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
> >prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
> >may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
>
> More than that: the attorneys for all parties are officers of the
> court, and have a duty not to mislead the court. In a criminal
> proceeding, a prosecutor has the further duty to turn over all
> potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.
>
Perhaps the barrister was informed of this but found it unconvincing,
preferring his(her) own theory which fitted into the prosecution case
far more neatly.
Is virtue sufficiently restored?
--
Sam
John Varela
Dec 14, 2014, 7:50:02 PM12/14/14
to
registered voters from whom the jury pool was drawn.
--
John Varela
Charles Bishop
Dec 14, 2014, 8:12:36 PM12/14/14
to
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 20:51:04 -0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> > Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
> > the court would not know.
> >
> > The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
> >
>
> Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
>
> Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
> prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
> may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
Presumably a US prosecutor in that case would have been convinced and
> > Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
> > the court would not know.
> >
> > The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
> >
>
> Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
>
> Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
> prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
> may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
just used the   as another fact. However in the US, I think a
prosecutor is bound to turn over the transcripts to the defense lawyers.
If he had they should have noticed the   and been prepared.
Did someone say that there it does have the no bullshit meaning
somewhere? If so it's likely a made up definition to match what someone
had seen, not something that was coincidently made up.
--
charles
Charles Bishop
Dec 14, 2014, 8:13:50 PM12/14/14
to
In article <m6l76m$df3$1...@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>,
defense should have had the same transcript the prosecution had and
might have noticed it in their copy.
--
charles
wol...@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) wrote:
> In article <MPG.2ef7e28bc...@news.individual.net>,
> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> >On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 20:51:04 -0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >> Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
> >> the court would not know.
> >>
> >> The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
> >>
> >
> >Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
> >
> >Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
> >prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
> >may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
>
> More than that: the attorneys for all parties are officers of the
> court, and have a duty not to mislead the court. In a criminal
> proceeding, a prosecutor has the further duty to turn over all
> potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.
>
I don't think the   could be considered exulpatory evidence, but the
> In article <MPG.2ef7e28bc...@news.individual.net>,
> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> >On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 20:51:04 -0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >> Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
> >> the court would not know.
> >>
> >> The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
> >>
> >
> >Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
> >
> >Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
> >prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
> >may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
>
> More than that: the attorneys for all parties are officers of the
> court, and have a duty not to mislead the court. In a criminal
> proceeding, a prosecutor has the further duty to turn over all
> potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.
>
defense should have had the same transcript the prosecution had and
might have noticed it in their copy.
--
charles
Charles Bishop
Dec 14, 2014, 8:18:49 PM12/14/14
to
In article <zqGdnVEmL964dBDJ...@vex.net>,
you mention in the menu.
--
cahrles
m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:
> Well, this thread has been educational. As well as learning about
> an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
> not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
> in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
> them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
> represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
>
> Peter's original subject line was
>
> Subject:
>
> and most of the followups have had
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> as they should. But Jerry's had
>
> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>
> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
> Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
All of the followups I see to the original post aren't munged in the way
> Well, this thread has been educational. As well as learning about
> an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
> not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
> in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
> them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
> represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
>
> Peter's original subject line was
>
> Subject:
>
> and most of the followups have had
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> as they should. But Jerry's had
>
> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>
> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
> Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
you mention in the menu.
--
cahrles
Jerry Friedman
Dec 14, 2014, 8:59:34 PM12/14/14
to
On 12/14/14 4:06 PM, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:46:45 -0600, Mark Brader wrote:
>> most of the followups have had
>>
>> Subject: Re:
>>
>> as they should. But Jerry's had
>>
>> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>>
>> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
>> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
>> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
>> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>>
>
> If "Jerry" is Jerry Friedman, then I think that must be either your
> newsreader client or your news server, or a combination of the two.
>
> Gravity retrieved it from news.individual.net and rendered the
> subject line as " ".
>
> What do you see in my subject line?
The correct subject. However, in my earlier response, T-bird just has
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:46:45 -0600, Mark Brader wrote:
>> most of the followups have had
>>
>> Subject: Re:
>>
>> as they should. But Jerry's had
>>
>> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>>
>> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
>> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
>> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
>> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>>
>
> If "Jerry" is Jerry Friedman, then I think that must be either your
> newsreader client or your news server, or a combination of the two.
>
> Gravity retrieved it from news.individual.net and rendered the
> subject line as " ".
>
> What do you see in my subject line?
the subject line "Re:".
--
Jerry Friedman
Steve Hayes
Dec 15, 2014, 1:15:28 AM12/15/14
to
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 11:03:37 -0500, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm>
wrote:
This is the first time I have seen this thread about  , and the very first
message has drifted to another topic entirely.
So perhaps there is something wrong with Eternal September, in that it is only
showing me the   thread after it has drifted to something else.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
wrote:
message has drifted to another topic entirely.
So perhaps there is something wrong with Eternal September, in that it is only
showing me the   thread after it has drifted to something else.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Steve Hayes
Dec 15, 2014, 1:32:56 AM12/15/14
to
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 10:08:43 -0800, Charles Bishop <ctbi...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
Indeed. I seem to have missed the original.
I thought it was only Microsoft that filled pages with  
wrote:
I thought it was only Microsoft that filled pages with  
Message has been deleted
Peter Moylan
Dec 15, 2014, 2:20:44 AM12/15/14
to
On 15/12/14 06:08, Mark Brader wrote:
> Peter Moylan:
>>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>>> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
>>>> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>
> Iain Archer:
>>> Was it made clear in open court that the barrister's line of
>>> attack had been a mistaken one?
>
> Peter Moylan:
>> Yes, apparently the judge passed the explanation on to all present while
>> the jury was out of the room.
>
> And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
The rest of the jury already knew. The way the information was passed on
> Peter Moylan:
>>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>>> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
>>>> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>
> Iain Archer:
>>> Was it made clear in open court that the barrister's line of
>>> attack had been a mistaken one?
>
> Peter Moylan:
>> Yes, apparently the judge passed the explanation on to all present while
>> the jury was out of the room.
>
> And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
>> When we returned, she commented that it was a good thing that we had
>> jurors who understood the 21st century.
>
> dates from the 20th century!
kicking and screaming into the 20th century.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Peter Moylan
Dec 15, 2014, 2:26:18 AM12/15/14
to
(nor their instructing solicitors) knew what . It was, however,
only the defence barrister who ran with a quirky interpretation and used
it to accuse the witness of lying.
I don't know the answer to Stan's question. Yes, barristers are officers
of the court, but the defence barrister also has the duty of defending
his client, even if he believes the client to be guilty.
Peter Moylan
Dec 15, 2014, 2:29:33 AM12/15/14
to
On 15/12/14 12:12, Charles Bishop wrote:
> Did someone say that there it does have the no bullshit meaning
> somewhere? If so it's likely a made up definition to match what someone
> had seen, not something that was coincidently made up.
I've just looked up Acronym Finder, and the bullshit meaning is number 8
> Did someone say that there it does have the no bullshit meaning
> somewhere? If so it's likely a made up definition to match what someone
> had seen, not something that was coincidently made up.
of 9 entries. The preceding 7 look a lot more plausible, and of course
the HTML meaning is right at the top.
Peter Moylan
Dec 15, 2014, 2:39:32 AM12/15/14
to
On 15/12/14 10:44, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> If a juror turns out to have knowledge of people that might result in an
> inability to be impartial he/she can be discharged during the trial.
Which is quite irrelevant in this case. Several of the jurors knew what
> If a juror turns out to have knowledge of people that might result in an
> inability to be impartial he/she can be discharged during the trial.
means, or at least knew that it was just as irrelevant as the
"<div>" that also occurred multiple times in the iPod dump, and that's
to be expected in a typical cross-section of the population. There would
be no grounds for believing that that would bias them either towards or
against the defendant.
I haven't checked, but I think it's a criminal offence here for a juror
to fail to reveal possible bias. It's just that the point at issue in
the present case falls into the category of "everyday knowledge" rather
than a cause for bias.
Dr Nick
Dec 15, 2014, 2:46:46 AM12/15/14
to
because, as Mark suggested, some newsreaders will interpret it. In my
case I get a special coloured underscore which is how gnus represents
embedded non-breaking spaces.
Peter Moylan
Dec 15, 2014, 4:23:19 AM12/15/14
to
On 15/12/14 06:46, Mark Brader wrote:
> Well, this thread has been educational. As well as learning about
> an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
> not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
> in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
> them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
> represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
>
> Peter's original subject line was
>
> Subject:
>
> and most of the followups have had
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> as they should. But Jerry's had
>
> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>
> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
> Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
That possibility did briefly occur to me, but then I remembered the rule
> Well, this thread has been educational. As well as learning about
> an interesting happening in court, we have now also seen that it's
> not only non-ASCII characters that must be avoided in Subject lines
> in order to prevent the risk of someone else's news software changing
> them in a followup. It turns out that HTML entities that could
> represent a non-ASCII character must also be avoided.
>
> Peter's original subject line was
>
> Subject:
>
> and most of the followups have had
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> as they should. But Jerry's had
>
> Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?B?UmU6IKA=?=
>
> where the gibberish is a way -- that I would not trust all newsreaders
> today to recognize -- of encoding the characters "Re: " followed up an
> ISO 8859-1 non-breaking space character! Which is obviously not how
> Peter intended the subject line to be interpreted.
>
> Caveat propositor -- let the poster beware. Now you know.
that Usenet headers may contain only 7-bit ASCII, with a let-out of
using the =?ISO... encoding as illustrated above.
That by itself doesn't rule out HTML entities, but they're ruled out
anyway by the fact that there's no way to put an <html> tag in front of
the header lines.
Some newsreaders and web-based interfaces got this wrong initially when
HTML e-mail became fashionable, but as far as I know they eventually
responded to the bug reports. Jerry's news client must be one of the
rare ones still stuck in the past.
FromTheRafters
Dec 15, 2014, 5:15:25 AM12/15/14
to
Peter Moylan explained on 12/15/2014 :
[...]
> Some newsreaders and web-based interfaces got this wrong initially when
> HTML e-mail became fashionable, but as far as I know they eventually
> responded to the bug reports. Jerry's news client must be one of the
> rare ones still stuck in the past.
He used Google's interface I think, GG screws up lots of things in
Usenet.
[...]
> Some newsreaders and web-based interfaces got this wrong initially when
> HTML e-mail became fashionable, but as far as I know they eventually
> responded to the bug reports. Jerry's news client must be one of the
> rare ones still stuck in the past.
Usenet.
James Hogg
Dec 15, 2014, 6:24:04 AM12/15/14
to
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> It's interesting that someone aware of such things was allowed to get
> past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
> for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
> of the case?
Does being literate count as technical knowledge?
> It's interesting that someone aware of such things was allowed to get
> past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
> for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
> of the case?
--
James
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Dec 15, 2014, 6:38:07 AM12/15/14
to
On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 18:39:27 +1100, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org>
wrote:
>On 15/12/14 10:44, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>
>> If a juror turns out to have knowledge of people that might result in an
>> inability to be impartial he/she can be discharged during the trial.
>
>Which is quite irrelevant in this case.
Indeed. However, I was replying to PTD's:
It's interesting that someone aware of such things was allowed to get
past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
of the case?
and pointing out that voir dire doesn't exist in the same way as in sone
US jurisdictions.
> Several of the jurors knew what
> means, or at least knew that it was just as irrelevant as the
>"<div>" that also occurred multiple times in the iPod dump, and that's
>to be expected in a typical cross-section of the population. There would
>be no grounds for believing that that would bias them either towards or
>against the defendant.
>
>I haven't checked, but I think it's a criminal offence here for a juror
>to fail to reveal possible bias. It's just that the point at issue in
>the present case falls into the category of "everyday knowledge" rather
>than a cause for bias.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
wrote:
>On 15/12/14 10:44, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>
>> If a juror turns out to have knowledge of people that might result in an
>> inability to be impartial he/she can be discharged during the trial.
>
>Which is quite irrelevant in this case.
It's interesting that someone aware of such things was allowed to get
past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
of the case?
US jurisdictions.
> Several of the jurors knew what
> means, or at least knew that it was just as irrelevant as the
>"<div>" that also occurred multiple times in the iPod dump, and that's
>to be expected in a typical cross-section of the population. There would
>be no grounds for believing that that would bias them either towards or
>against the defendant.
>
>I haven't checked, but I think it's a criminal offence here for a juror
>to fail to reveal possible bias. It's just that the point at issue in
>the present case falls into the category of "everyday knowledge" rather
>than a cause for bias.
--
(in alt.usage.english)
Iain Archer
Dec 15, 2014, 6:47:57 AM12/15/14
to
Peter Moylan wrote on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 at 18:20:39 GMT
Rules yesterday. Here the court officer is duty bound to record, among
other things, "any request for assistance or other communication about
the case received from a juror". So, if Australian rules are similar,
your little note will now be part of the trial record. Do many of those
then eventually get archived?
--
Iain Archer
>On 15/12/14 06:08, Mark Brader wrote:
>> Peter Moylan:
>>>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>>>> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
>>>>> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>>
>> Iain Archer:
>>>> Was it made clear in open court that the barrister's line of
>>>> attack had been a mistaken one?
>>
>> Peter Moylan:
>>> Yes, apparently the judge passed the explanation on to all present while
>>> the jury was out of the room.
>>
>> And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
>
>The rest of the jury already knew. The way the information was passed on
>was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
>written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
>room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
I was coincidentally looking at the England and Wales Criminal Procedure
>> Peter Moylan:
>>>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>>>> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
>>>>> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>>
>> Iain Archer:
>>>> Was it made clear in open court that the barrister's line of
>>>> attack had been a mistaken one?
>>
>> Peter Moylan:
>>> Yes, apparently the judge passed the explanation on to all present while
>>> the jury was out of the room.
>>
>> And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
>
>The rest of the jury already knew. The way the information was passed on
>was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
>written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
>room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
Rules yesterday. Here the court officer is duty bound to record, among
other things, "any request for assistance or other communication about
the case received from a juror". So, if Australian rules are similar,
your little note will now be part of the trial record. Do many of those
then eventually get archived?
--
Iain Archer
Iain Archer
Dec 15, 2014, 6:48:00 AM12/15/14
to
Peter Moylan wrote on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 at 18:39:27 GMT
>Several of the jurors knew what means, or at least knew that it
>was just as irrelevant as the "<div>" that also occurred multiple times
>in the iPod dump, and that's to be expected in a typical cross-section
>of the population. There would be no grounds for believing that that
>would bias them either towards or against the defendant.
Well, there you are then. The witness is at it again. Just look up
'div" in urbandictionary.com.
But offer me £200 an hour to act like an ignorant, insensitive
aggressive prat^W counsel who doesn't mind acting as if that's a serious
argument, and I couldn't.
--
Iain Archer
>Several of the jurors knew what means, or at least knew that it
>was just as irrelevant as the "<div>" that also occurred multiple times
>in the iPod dump, and that's to be expected in a typical cross-section
>of the population. There would be no grounds for believing that that
>would bias them either towards or against the defendant.
'div" in urbandictionary.com.
But offer me £200 an hour to act like an ignorant, insensitive
aggressive prat^W counsel who doesn't mind acting as if that's a serious
argument, and I couldn't.
--
Iain Archer
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Dec 15, 2014, 6:49:58 AM12/15/14
to
On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 18:02:46 -0500, Stan Brown
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:31:28 +0000, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>> Peter Molan is in New South Wales. This webpage has information for
>> potential jurors in criminal trials in that State.
>> http://www.turnbullhill.com.au/articles/jury-duty---a-guide-for-potential-jurors.html
>>
>> When selecting jurors, a pool of possible jurors are lead into the
>> court
>>
>
>Does it actually say that? "Lead" for the past tense or past
>participle of the verb is a distressingly common error.
Yes. I simply "copied and pasted" the text.
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:31:28 +0000, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>> Peter Molan is in New South Wales. This webpage has information for
>> potential jurors in criminal trials in that State.
>> http://www.turnbullhill.com.au/articles/jury-duty---a-guide-for-potential-jurors.html
>>
>> court
>>
>
>Does it actually say that? "Lead" for the past tense or past
>participle of the verb is a distressingly common error.
Yes. I simply "copied and pasted" the text.
Peter Moylan
Dec 15, 2014, 7:07:28 AM12/15/14
to
moves at various times to disqualify educated people from juries -- with
a variety of definitions of "educated" -- on the grounds that they are
rarely the peers of the accused.
Adam Funk
Dec 15, 2014, 7:30:07 AM12/15/14
to
criminals, where X% is the proportion of people accused that are
convicted.
--
You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents,
not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists.
--- Abbie Hoffman
Jerry Friedman
Dec 15, 2014, 9:49:30 AM12/15/14
to
and his subject line looks fine to me with T-Bird and hasn't aroused any
comment.
--
Jerry Friedman
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 10:23:46 AM12/15/14
to
On Monday, December 15, 2014 2:03:39 AM UTC-5, Lewis wrote:
> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm>:
> considering the only thing prosecutors care about is a 95% conviction
> rate.
>
> Not saying you're wrong, you're not. It's just hilarious.
It's because they try to only bring cases they're pretty sure they can win.
The others are either pleaded out or dismissed entirely.
> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm>:
> > On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 20:51:04 -0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >> Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
> >> the court would not know.
> >> The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
> > Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
> > Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
> > prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
> > may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
>
> That is one of the funniest things about the US legal system,
> >> Perhaps the barrister had been informed of this, but took a chance that
> >> the court would not know.
> >> The prosecution barrister is an advocate, not a seeker after truth.
> > Is that the law in NSW, where I believe Peter Moylan lives?
> > Though it is not always honored, in the US the law is that the
> > prosecutor's duty is to ensure that a just verdict is reached, which
> > may mean dropping a case if not convinced of the person's guilt.
>
> considering the only thing prosecutors care about is a 95% conviction
> rate.
>
> Not saying you're wrong, you're not. It's just hilarious.
It's because they try to only bring cases they're pretty sure they can win.
The others are either pleaded out or dismissed entirely.
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 10:31:16 AM12/15/14
to
that there is no justification whatsoever for a client's behavior, that
there isn't the slightest shred of "reasonable doubt," then there shouldn't be a trial at all, but negotiation for the least extreme penalty
available.
But it might be highly unusual for there to be no mitigating circumstances
whatsoever.
You may have heard of the recent case in Staten Island, where a police
officer was video-recorded using what everyone agrees was excessive force
in subduing an alleged perpetrator (whose crime was selling individual
cigarettes on the street without collecting or paying sales tax on them).
The Medical Examiner ruled the death a homicide. A grand jury refused to
return an indictment, and the only grounds that have been publicized are
that he is heard saying "I can't breathe" many times -- and no one could
say "I can't breathe" if he was being choked to death.
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 10:36:05 AM12/15/14
to
put on a panel what "jury of his peers" means in the Constitutional context. (They go all the way back to Magna Carta to explain it.)
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 10:36:38 AM12/15/14
to
I would not recognize it. It is thus technical knowledge.
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 10:37:58 AM12/15/14
to
On Monday, December 15, 2014 5:15:25 AM UTC-5, FromTheRafters wrote:
> Peter Moylan explained on 12/15/2014 :
> Peter Moylan explained on 12/15/2014 :
> > Some newsreaders and web-based interfaces got this wrong initially when
> > HTML e-mail became fashionable, but as far as I know they eventually
> > responded to the bug reports. Jerry's news client must be one of the
> > rare ones still stuck in the past.
>
> He used Google's interface I think, GG screws up lots of things in
> Usenet.
But not that.
> > HTML e-mail became fashionable, but as far as I know they eventually
> > responded to the bug reports. Jerry's news client must be one of the
> > rare ones still stuck in the past.
>
> He used Google's interface I think, GG screws up lots of things in
> Usenet.
FromTheRafters
Dec 15, 2014, 10:39:30 AM12/15/14
to
It happens that Jerry Friedman formulated :
I hadn't noticed that, but you're correct - so maybe it was something
in the path it took, like some server falsely recognized the string as
something that needed to be encoded instead of left to be taken as
literal. I don't know why an NNTP server would do such a thing, so I
guessed that GG did it, since they are working with HTML.
in the path it took, like some server falsely recognized the string as
something that needed to be encoded instead of left to be taken as
literal. I don't know why an NNTP server would do such a thing, so I
guessed that GG did it, since they are working with HTML.
FromTheRafters
Dec 15, 2014, 10:44:44 AM12/15/14
to
Peter T. Daniels presented the following explanation :
Yes, it was called to my attention that /your/ GG experience has no
such problem evident. Even the header field of your response had no
encoding of the "Subject: " string.
such problem evident. Even the header field of your response had no
encoding of the "Subject: " string.
Charles Bishop
Dec 15, 2014, 10:46:00 AM12/15/14
to
In article <m6m36u$9jc$1...@dont-email.me>,
There perhaps it's "everyday knowledge", here it's technical knowledge
since PTD wasn't aware of it and he, apparently, is the standard against
which such things are measured.
--
Charles, _The Wit and Wisdom of PTD_, Popgood and Grooly, 6/2
since PTD wasn't aware of it and he, apparently, is the standard against
which such things are measured.
--
Charles, _The Wit and Wisdom of PTD_, Popgood and Grooly, 6/2
Charles Bishop
Dec 15, 2014, 10:51:37 AM12/15/14
to
In article <BGQ$ykGxcs...@virginmedia.com>,
But yes, I take your point.
[1] While I was trying to get the pound sign from my keyboard, I was
trying various combinations of keys and the 4/$ key and somehow ended up
with what looked like crosshairs as the cursor. It had numbers
associated with it, which changed as I moved the cursor around. It
looked like it took a "screenshot" when I did something else. Any idea
of what that was?
--
charles
Iain Archer <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> Peter Moylan wrote on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 at 18:39:27 GMT
>
> >Several of the jurors knew what means, or at least knew that it
> >was just as irrelevant as the "<div>" that also occurred multiple times
> >in the iPod dump, and that's to be expected in a typical cross-section
> >of the population. There would be no grounds for believing that that
> >would bias them either towards or against the defendant.
>
> Well, there you are then. The witness is at it again. Just look up
> 'div" in urbandictionary.com.
>
> But offer me Ł200 an hour to act like an ignorant, insensitive
> Peter Moylan wrote on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 at 18:39:27 GMT
>
> >Several of the jurors knew what means, or at least knew that it
> >was just as irrelevant as the "<div>" that also occurred multiple times
> >in the iPod dump, and that's to be expected in a typical cross-section
> >of the population. There would be no grounds for believing that that
> >would bias them either towards or against the defendant.
>
> Well, there you are then. The witness is at it again. Just look up
> 'div" in urbandictionary.com.
>
> aggressive prat^W counsel who doesn't mind acting as if that's a serious
> argument, and I couldn't.
How about Ł[1]400/hr?
> argument, and I couldn't.
But yes, I take your point.
[1] While I was trying to get the pound sign from my keyboard, I was
trying various combinations of keys and the 4/$ key and somehow ended up
with what looked like crosshairs as the cursor. It had numbers
associated with it, which changed as I moved the cursor around. It
looked like it took a "screenshot" when I did something else. Any idea
of what that was?
--
charles
Charles Bishop
Dec 15, 2014, 10:57:13 AM12/15/14
to
In article <2a43dca9-bedf-417b...@googlegroups.com>,
Yes, but as we find out time and time again, they don't always care
about the law, following the law, or how they win. "They" in this case
are select prosecutors from the large number of prosecutors in the US,
but still a significant number when considered against what happens to
defendants when they do go against the principles they've sworn to
uphold.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?, usw.
--
charles
about the law, following the law, or how they win. "They" in this case
are select prosecutors from the large number of prosecutors in the US,
but still a significant number when considered against what happens to
defendants when they do go against the principles they've sworn to
uphold.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?, usw.
--
charles
Charles Bishop
Dec 15, 2014, 11:04:32 AM12/15/14
to
In article <m6m2e3$7fd$1...@dont-email.me>,
This statement could be discussed endlessly. A short version is that No,
I don't think it's true to the extent that the defense lawyer should try
to get his client off if he believes the client to be guilty. However we
now get bogged down in definitions and what-ifs. I think what is
partially wrong with the US system is that it's an adversarial system
and putting an innocent person in jail or getting a guilty client off,
is counted as a "Win", rather than a travesty.
This isn't the place to further the discussion though, mostly because of
the lag time and, for me, going over old discussions yet again.
--
charles
I don't think it's true to the extent that the defense lawyer should try
to get his client off if he believes the client to be guilty. However we
now get bogged down in definitions and what-ifs. I think what is
partially wrong with the US system is that it's an adversarial system
and putting an innocent person in jail or getting a guilty client off,
is counted as a "Win", rather than a travesty.
This isn't the place to further the discussion though, mostly because of
the lag time and, for me, going over old discussions yet again.
--
charles
James Hogg
Dec 15, 2014, 11:05:33 AM12/15/14
to
connection has 'never had occasion to encounter " " in that form'.
--
James
Charles Bishop
Dec 15, 2014, 11:05:49 AM12/15/14
to
Richard Tobin
Dec 15, 2014, 1:20:03 PM12/15/14
to
In article <m6mvbg$blq$1...@news2.open-news-network.org>,
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usage.english/gtyEgKti_xs/GeHcbaWBcsEJ
and doesn't appear to have been anywhere outside Google to get there.
So either Jerry did something odd (maybe cut-and-pasting the subject
for some reason), or it's a Google bug.
All recent messages on Google Groups seem to have headers implying
that they've been transmitted as mail at some point, so who knows
what they're up to.
-- Richard
FromTheRafters <erratic...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I hadn't noticed that, but you're correct - so maybe it was something
>in the path it took
It's incorrect on Google's own server:
>I hadn't noticed that, but you're correct - so maybe it was something
>in the path it took
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usage.english/gtyEgKti_xs/GeHcbaWBcsEJ
and doesn't appear to have been anywhere outside Google to get there.
So either Jerry did something odd (maybe cut-and-pasting the subject
for some reason), or it's a Google bug.
All recent messages on Google Groups seem to have headers implying
that they've been transmitted as mail at some point, so who knows
what they're up to.
-- Richard
snide...@gmail.com
Dec 15, 2014, 2:09:20 PM12/15/14
to
Me)_ by Tavris and Aronson. They explicitly discuss, as part of their thesis,
investigators and prosecutors who are absolutely convinced they have right
perpetrator despite evidence to the contrary. These are honest people who
want to do the right thing, but the justification circuits cut in for the
wrong reasons.
Not to deny that there is a group of investigators and prosecutors who are
given to being consciously dishonest, at least for certain instances of
"the end justifies the means". Just pointing out that there are
other explanations that may apply. And I would expect that juries and
grand juries can also give demonstrations of the same effect.
(Another section of the book discusses husband and wife arguments, in
particular where small misunderstandings build up into acrimonious divorces.)
/dps
FromTheRafters
Dec 15, 2014, 2:44:30 PM12/15/14
to
Richard Tobin presented the following explanation :
I noticed that SMTP stuff some time ago, it sure looks odd in a NNTP
header.
header.
R H Draney
Dec 15, 2014, 3:26:02 PM12/15/14
to
Charles Bishop filted:
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
>
>Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?, usw.
Now *that's* macaroni cheese!...r
>Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?, usw.
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
R H Draney
Dec 15, 2014, 3:32:55 PM12/15/14
to
Charles Bishop filted:
There's a high-ASCII character ¤ that can be obtained from the 4/$ on the
US-International keyboard layout with Right-Alt, which charmap identifies as
"Currency Sign"; adding Shift as well gives you the desired £ ....r
>
>[1] While I was trying to get the pound sign from my keyboard, I was
>trying various combinations of keys and the 4/$ key and somehow ended up
>with what looked like crosshairs as the cursor. It had numbers
>associated with it, which changed as I moved the cursor around. It
>looked like it took a "screenshot" when I did something else. Any idea
>of what that was?
A targeting reticule?...
>[1] While I was trying to get the pound sign from my keyboard, I was
>trying various combinations of keys and the 4/$ key and somehow ended up
>with what looked like crosshairs as the cursor. It had numbers
>associated with it, which changed as I moved the cursor around. It
>looked like it took a "screenshot" when I did something else. Any idea
>of what that was?
There's a high-ASCII character ¤ that can be obtained from the 4/$ on the
US-International keyboard layout with Right-Alt, which charmap identifies as
"Currency Sign"; adding Shift as well gives you the desired £ ....r
Pierre Jelenc
Dec 15, 2014, 3:54:34 PM12/15/14
to
In article <ctbishop-4B077D...@news.individual.net>,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_sign_(typography)
Pierre
--
Pierre Jelenc
The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org
Charles Bishop <ctbi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>[1] While I was trying to get the pound sign from my keyboard, I was
>trying various combinations of keys and the 4/$ key and somehow ended up
>with what looked like crosshairs as the cursor. It had numbers
>associated with it, which changed as I moved the cursor around. It
>looked like it took a "screenshot" when I did something else. Any idea
>of what that was?
The currency sign (HTML ¤ or ¤):
>
>[1] While I was trying to get the pound sign from my keyboard, I was
>trying various combinations of keys and the 4/$ key and somehow ended up
>with what looked like crosshairs as the cursor. It had numbers
>associated with it, which changed as I moved the cursor around. It
>looked like it took a "screenshot" when I did something else. Any idea
>of what that was?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_sign_(typography)
Pierre
--
Pierre Jelenc
The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 6:12:10 PM12/15/14
to
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 6:13:40 PM12/15/14
to
the grapholect of those who deal with computer encodings?
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 6:15:55 PM12/15/14
to
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 6:18:55 PM12/15/14
to
and after the euro was invented, what PostScript fonts were still being
offered tended to put the euro sign in its slot.
John Varela
Dec 15, 2014, 7:24:49 PM12/15/14
to
On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:51:33 UTC, Charles Bishop
<ctbi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> [1] While I was trying to get the pound sign from my keyboard, I was
> trying various combinations of keys and the 4/$ key and somehow ended up
> with what looked like crosshairs as the cursor. It had numbers
> associated with it, which changed as I moved the cursor around. It
> looked like it took a "screenshot" when I did something else. Any idea
> of what that was?
Are you using a Mac? If so, it appears that it was behaving as
<ctbi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> [1] While I was trying to get the pound sign from my keyboard, I was
> trying various combinations of keys and the 4/$ key and somehow ended up
> with what looked like crosshairs as the cursor. It had numbers
> associated with it, which changed as I moved the cursor around. It
> looked like it took a "screenshot" when I did something else. Any idea
> of what that was?
designed.
In OS X, pressing Shift-Command-4 opens a screen grab cursor that
looks and behaves as you describe. Hold down the left mouse key and
drag, and a rectangular capture area will appear. Release the key
and a JPEG picture will be taken of the part of the capture area.
When I do that the JPEG appears on the desktop; I don't recall if
that's the default or I changed it to that.
--
John Varela
Robert Bannister
Dec 15, 2014, 8:18:11 PM12/15/14
to
it is. I have only had a computer since 1981, though, so perhaps I lack
experience.
--
Robert Bannister - 1940-71 SE England
1972-now W Australia
Peter Moylan
Dec 15, 2014, 8:21:21 PM12/15/14
to
On 15/12/14 22:19, Iain Archer wrote:
> Peter Moylan wrote on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 at 18:20:39 GMT
>> On 15/12/14 06:08, Mark Brader wrote:
>>> Peter Moylan:
>>>>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>>>>> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into
>>>>>> recess
>>>>>> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>>>
>>> Iain Archer:
>>>>> Was it made clear in open court that the barrister's line of
>>>>> attack had been a mistaken one?
>>>
>>> Peter Moylan:
>>>> Yes, apparently the judge passed the explanation on to all present
>>>> while
>>>> the jury was out of the room.
>>>
>>> And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
>>
>> The rest of the jury already knew. The way the information was passed on
>> was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
>> written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
>> room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
>
> I was coincidentally looking at the England and Wales Criminal Procedure
> Rules yesterday. Here the court officer is duty bound to record, among
> other things, "any request for assistance or other communication about
> the case received from a juror". So, if Australian rules are similar,
> your little note will now be part of the trial record. Do many of those
> then eventually get archived?
A good question, but I think only a lawyer or a law student would be
able to answer it. Nobody else has the patience to go through trial records.
I did observe that such notes may not be on any random piece of paper.
They have to be written on special forms; we had a pile of such forms in
the jury room. That makes it more likely that they are archived.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
> Peter Moylan wrote on Mon, 15 Dec 2014 at 18:20:39 GMT
>> On 15/12/14 06:08, Mark Brader wrote:
>>> Peter Moylan:
>>>>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>>>>> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into
>>>>>> recess
>>>>>> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>>>
>>> Iain Archer:
>>>>> Was it made clear in open court that the barrister's line of
>>>>> attack had been a mistaken one?
>>>
>>> Peter Moylan:
>>>> Yes, apparently the judge passed the explanation on to all present
>>>> while
>>>> the jury was out of the room.
>>>
>>> And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
>>
>> The rest of the jury already knew. The way the information was passed on
>> was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
>> written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
>> room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
>
> I was coincidentally looking at the England and Wales Criminal Procedure
> Rules yesterday. Here the court officer is duty bound to record, among
> other things, "any request for assistance or other communication about
> the case received from a juror". So, if Australian rules are similar,
> your little note will now be part of the trial record. Do many of those
> then eventually get archived?
A good question, but I think only a lawyer or a law student would be
able to answer it. Nobody else has the patience to go through trial records.
I did observe that such notes may not be on any random piece of paper.
They have to be written on special forms; we had a pile of such forms in
the jury room. That makes it more likely that they are archived.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Peter Moylan
Dec 15, 2014, 8:30:34 PM12/15/14
to
Peter Moylan
Dec 15, 2014, 8:35:15 PM12/15/14
to
On 15/12/14 23:24, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2014-12-15, Peter Moylan wrote:
> criminals, where X% is the proportion of people accused that are
> convicted.
In our legal system, a criminal conviction disqualifies you from being a
juror.
Historically, as I understand it, that right to trial by a "jury of his
peers" was given only to the very upper classes. The great unwashed were
not considered to be peers of the realm.
> On 2014-12-15, Peter Moylan wrote:
>
>> On 15/12/14 22:24, James Hogg wrote:
>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>> It's interesting that someone aware of such things was allowed to get
>>>> past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
>>>> for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
>>>> of the case?
>>>
>>> Does being literate count as technical knowledge?
>>
>> On 15/12/14 22:24, James Hogg wrote:
>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>> It's interesting that someone aware of such things was allowed to get
>>>> past voir dire -- don't your attorneys get to challenge any candidates
>>>> for a jury who might have technical knowledge relevant to any aspect
>>>> of the case?
>>>
>>> Does being literate count as technical knowledge?
>>
>> PTD might not be the only person with that opinion. There have been
>> moves at various times to disqualify educated people from juries -- with
>> a variety of definitions of "educated" -- on the grounds that they are
>> rarely the peers of the accused.
>
> Well, I guess you could go on to argue that X% of jurors should be
>> moves at various times to disqualify educated people from juries -- with
>> a variety of definitions of "educated" -- on the grounds that they are
>> rarely the peers of the accused.
>
> criminals, where X% is the proportion of people accused that are
> convicted.
In our legal system, a criminal conviction disqualifies you from being a
juror.
Historically, as I understand it, that right to trial by a "jury of his
peers" was given only to the very upper classes. The great unwashed were
not considered to be peers of the realm.
Stan Brown
Dec 15, 2014, 8:47:44 PM12/15/14
to
On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 18:26:13 +1100, Peter Moylan wrote:
> I don't know the answer to Stan's question. Yes, barristers are officers
> of the court, but the defence barrister also has the duty of defending
> his client, even if he believes the client to be guilty.
That's true of lawyers here too. But as GA says, they have a duty
> I don't know the answer to Stan's question. Yes, barristers are officers
> of the court, but the defence barrister also has the duty of defending
> his client, even if he believes the client to be guilty.
not to mislead the court. For instance, a lawyer has a duty not to
put the witness on the stand if the lawyer expects that the witness
will lie.
There's an asymmetry: the defense lawyer's job is to get the
defendant off if possible; he prosecutor's job is to further the
interests of justice. But prosecutors are under enormous pressure to
up their conviction rate, so they would be less than human if they
didn't occasionally go for a conviction where they had enough of a
case to convince a jury even if they themselves weren't convinced.
And that's without even getting into plea bargains, where before
trial defendants are offered the chance to plead guilty to a lesser
offense and accept a definite jail sentence for the possibility of a
longer one or an acquittal.
--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com
Stan Brown
Dec 15, 2014, 8:49:45 PM12/15/14
to
On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 07:45:56 -0800, Charles Bishop wrote:
> In article <m6m36u$9jc$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote:
>
> > [quoted text muted]
> In article <m6m36u$9jc$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote:
>
> > I haven't checked, but I think it's a criminal offence here for a juror
> > to fail to reveal possible bias. It's just that the point at issue in
> > the present case falls into the category of "everyday knowledge" rather
> > than a cause for bias.
>
> There perhaps it's "everyday knowledge", here it's technical knowledge
> since PTD wasn't aware of it and he, apparently, is the standard against
> which such things are measured.
>
>
Oh, snap!
> > to fail to reveal possible bias. It's just that the point at issue in
> > the present case falls into the category of "everyday knowledge" rather
> > than a cause for bias.
>
> There perhaps it's "everyday knowledge", here it's technical knowledge
> since PTD wasn't aware of it and he, apparently, is the standard against
> which such things are measured.
>
>
Sam Plusnet
Dec 15, 2014, 8:52:29 PM12/15/14
to
In article <m6o1dq$c2r$1...@dont-email.me>, pe...@pmoylan.org says...
> > I was coincidentally looking at the England and Wales Criminal Procedure
> > Rules yesterday. Here the court officer is duty bound to record, among
> > other things, "any request for assistance or other communication about
> > the case received from a juror". So, if Australian rules are similar,
> > your little note will now be part of the trial record. Do many of those
> > then eventually get archived?
>
> A good question, but I think only a lawyer or a law student would be
> able to answer it. Nobody else has the patience to go through trial records.
>
> I did observe that such notes may not be on any random piece of paper.
> They have to be written on special forms; we had a pile of such forms in
> the jury room. That makes it more likely that they are archived.
>
>
Because your note had a direct impact on the course of the trial, I
would imagine that it would have to be included so that the official
record may form a coherent narrative.
--
Sam
> > I was coincidentally looking at the England and Wales Criminal Procedure
> > Rules yesterday. Here the court officer is duty bound to record, among
> > other things, "any request for assistance or other communication about
> > the case received from a juror". So, if Australian rules are similar,
> > your little note will now be part of the trial record. Do many of those
> > then eventually get archived?
>
> A good question, but I think only a lawyer or a law student would be
> able to answer it. Nobody else has the patience to go through trial records.
>
> I did observe that such notes may not be on any random piece of paper.
> They have to be written on special forms; we had a pile of such forms in
> the jury room. That makes it more likely that they are archived.
>
>
would imagine that it would have to be included so that the official
record may form a coherent narrative.
--
Sam
Richard Tobin
Dec 15, 2014, 8:55:03 PM12/15/14
to
In article <m6o27s$c2r$3...@dont-email.me>,
peers (i.e. equals). Peers of the realm were tried by other peers of
the realm, in the House of Lords. That right was abolished in 1948.
The Dorothy Sayers novel "Clouds of Witness" describes the trial of
Peter Wimsey's brother by the Lords.
-- Richard
Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote:
>Historically, as I understand it, that right to trial by a "jury of his
>peers" was given only to the very upper classes. The great unwashed were
>not considered to be peers of the realm.
I don't think so. It's just that the upper classes had different
>Historically, as I understand it, that right to trial by a "jury of his
>peers" was given only to the very upper classes. The great unwashed were
>not considered to be peers of the realm.
peers (i.e. equals). Peers of the realm were tried by other peers of
the realm, in the House of Lords. That right was abolished in 1948.
The Dorothy Sayers novel "Clouds of Witness" describes the trial of
Peter Wimsey's brother by the Lords.
-- Richard
Charles Bishop
Dec 15, 2014, 8:58:21 PM12/15/14
to
In article <cf9fig...@mid.individual.net>,
I've seen it many times, but cannot, just now, remember when and in what
circumstances. Most likely it showed up when I was reading someone
else's posts or email, especially when html first came on the scene. I
cannot say I knew the technical term for it, or why it showed up, but
did recognize it as something that "leaked" through from the fell side.
--
charles
circumstances. Most likely it showed up when I was reading someone
else's posts or email, especially when html first came on the scene. I
cannot say I knew the technical term for it, or why it showed up, but
did recognize it as something that "leaked" through from the fell side.
--
charles
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 11:19:16 PM12/15/14
to
the first time it appeared, but I recognized its value and immediately
assigned it to the taskbar, whence it comes to my service whenever I need it.
I tried looking for it by Search, but <Snipping Tool> didn't turn up
anything. It behaves like the Mac tool described by John but puts the
result on the screen and the clipboard, from which you can Save it or
insert it in a document.
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 15, 2014, 11:21:31 PM12/15/14
to
On Monday, December 15, 2014 8:35:15 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> In our legal system, a criminal conviction disqualifies you from being a
> juror.
In some US states, convicted felons are barred from voting forever after,
> In our legal system, a criminal conviction disqualifies you from being a
> juror.
even after serving their time or probation or supervision. In other states, once you're out of the system, all your rights are back, including
jury service.
Tony Cooper
Dec 15, 2014, 11:35:11 PM12/15/14
to
them by applying for restoration to the Board of Executive Clemency.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
Mark Brader
Dec 15, 2014, 11:38:12 PM12/15/14
to
Peter Moylan:
>>>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>>>> explaining the true meaning of ...
>>>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>> ...apparently the judge passed the explanation on to all present while
>>> the jury was out of the room.
Mark Brader:
>> And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
Peter Moylan:
> The rest of the jury already knew. The way the information was passed on
> was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
> written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
> room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
Oh! From your original wording it didn't sound as though any process
> was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
> written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
> room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
like that was involved. Good.
>>> When we returned, she commented that it was a good thing that we had
>>> jurors who understood the 21st century.
>>
>> dates from the 20th century!
>
> Yes, but how would she know?
Point!
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "[I] have a will of iron."
m...@vex.net | "And a head to match." --Robert B. Parker, "Chance"
My text in this article is in the public domain.
Mark Brader
Dec 15, 2014, 11:44:43 PM12/15/14
to
R.H. Draney:
> There's a high-ASCII character...
No, there isn't; there's no such thing.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "...one man's feature is another man's bug."
m...@vex.net --Chris Torek
> There's a high-ASCII character...
No, there isn't; there's no such thing.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "...one man's feature is another man's bug."
m...@vex.net --Chris Torek
Jerry Friedman
Dec 16, 2014, 12:24:58 AM12/16/14
to
On 12/15/14 11:16 AM, Richard Tobin wrote:
> In article <m6mvbg$blq$1...@news2.open-news-network.org>,
> FromTheRafters <erratic...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I hadn't noticed that, but you're correct - so maybe it was something
>> in the path it took
>
> It's incorrect on Google's own server:
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usage.english/gtyEgKti_xs/GeHcbaWBcsEJ
>
> and doesn't appear to have been anywhere outside Google to get there.
> So either Jerry did something odd (maybe cut-and-pasting the subject
> for some reason), or it's a Google bug.
...
> In article <m6mvbg$blq$1...@news2.open-news-network.org>,
> FromTheRafters <erratic...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I hadn't noticed that, but you're correct - so maybe it was something
>> in the path it took
>
> It's incorrect on Google's own server:
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usage.english/gtyEgKti_xs/GeHcbaWBcsEJ
>
> and doesn't appear to have been anywhere outside Google to get there.
> So either Jerry did something odd (maybe cut-and-pasting the subject
> for some reason), or it's a Google bug.
I didn't cut and paste the subject, so that leaves only infinity
mistakes I might have made.
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
Dec 16, 2014, 12:28:51 AM12/16/14
to
On 12/15/14 12:20 AM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 15/12/14 06:08, Mark Brader wrote:
> On 15/12/14 06:08, Mark Brader wrote:
>> Peter Moylan:
>>>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>>>> Finally I could take it no longer, and passed a note to the judge
>>>>> explaining the true meaning of . The court had to go into recess
>>>>> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>>
>> Iain Archer:
>>>> Was it made clear in open court that the barrister's line of
>>>> attack had been a mistaken one?
>>
>> Peter Moylan:
>>> Yes, apparently the judge passed the explanation on to all present while
>>>>> while this was explained to the two barristers.
>>
>> Iain Archer:
>>>> Was it made clear in open court that the barrister's line of
>>>> attack had been a mistaken one?
>>
>> Peter Moylan:
>>> the jury was out of the room.
>>
>>
>> And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
>
>
> The rest of the jury already knew. The way the information was passed on
> was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
> written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
> room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
...
> was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
> written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
> room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
If the witness doesn't mind another question about NSW trial procedure,
what is this jury room? When I was on a jury in New Mexico, the only
jury room was where we went after the testimony and everything to
deliberate. During the trial we sat in the jury box in the courtroom.
--
Jerry Friedman
R H Draney
Dec 16, 2014, 12:31:34 AM12/16/14
to
Mark Brader filted:
>
>R.H. Draney:
>> There's a high-ASCII character...
>
>No, there isn't; there's no such thing.
Okay, grandpa, I'll get off your lawn....r
>R.H. Draney:
>> There's a high-ASCII character...
>
>No, there isn't; there's no such thing.
charles
Dec 16, 2014, 2:28:01 AM12/16/14
to
In article <m6o27s$c2r$3...@dont-email.me>, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org>
wrote:
peers - in this contect means "equals"
--
From KT24
Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18
wrote:
--
From KT24
Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18
Rich Ulrich
Dec 16, 2014, 2:51:15 AM12/16/14
to
When I was on a jury for a trial that lasted 3 days, the jury room
was where we showed up early in the morning, where we were
served our meals, and where we waited one day for an hour or
so when the final witness was a late-show.
This was in Pittsburgh, but I can't imagine doing the wating or
meals in the jury box.
--
Rich Ulrich
pauljk
Dec 16, 2014, 2:51:37 AM12/16/14
to
"Peter Moylan" <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote in message news:m6m2k7$7to$1...@dont-email.me...
> On 15/12/14 12:12, Charles Bishop wrote:
>
>> Did someone say that there it does have the no bullshit meaning
>> somewhere? If so it's likely a made up definition to match what someone
>> had seen, not something that was coincidently made up.
>
> I've just looked up Acronym Finder, and the bullshit meaning is number 8
> of 9 entries. The preceding 7 look a lot more plausible, and of course
> the HTML meaning is right at the top.
But the "no bullshit please" is NBSP not "ampersand n b s p semicolon".
Ruddy Google mixes them up, but they should not get confused by human readers.
pjk
Peter Moylan
Dec 16, 2014, 4:23:50 AM12/16/14
to
wait in the street for a sheriff's officer to let us in. (We should have
been able to get in with the swipe cards we had been issued with, but
the controlling computer system was down all week.) He let us into the
jury room, which was close to the courtroom, and locked us in. At about
9:30 he'd unlock the door again and we'd file into the courtroom and sit
in the jury box. Whenever there was a recess we were locked back into
the jury room. Sometimes the recesses lasted only a few minutes, as for
example when we were sent off to formulate our note to the judge. (Such
notes had to come from the jury as a whole, not from individual jurors.)
When it came time to agree on a verdict, it took us two days to reach
agreement, and we spent that entire time (except for being allowed to go
home at night) locked in the jury room.
Adam Funk
Dec 16, 2014, 6:30:07 AM12/16/14
to
On 2014-12-16, R H Draney wrote:
> Mark Brader filted:
>>
>>R.H. Draney:
>>> There's a high-ASCII character...
>>
>>No, there isn't; there's no such thing.
>
> Okay, grandpa, I'll get off your lawn....r
snap
> Mark Brader filted:
>>
>>R.H. Draney:
>>> There's a high-ASCII character...
>>
>>No, there isn't; there's no such thing.
>
> Okay, grandpa, I'll get off your lawn....r
--
And remember, while you're out there risking your life and limb
through shot and shell, we'll be in be in here thinking what a
sucker you are. [Rufus T. Firefly]
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 16, 2014, 8:58:22 AM12/16/14
to
On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 12:28:51 AM UTC-5, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> On 12/15/14 12:20 AM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > On 15/12/14 06:08, Mark Brader wrote:
> >> Peter Moylan:
> On 12/15/14 12:20 AM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > On 15/12/14 06:08, Mark Brader wrote:
> >> Peter Moylan:
> >>> Yes, apparently the judge passed the explanation on to all present while
> >>> the jury was out of the room.
> >> And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
> > The rest of the jury already knew. The way the information was passed on
> > was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
> > written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
> > room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
>
> >>> the jury was out of the room.
> >> And then the rest of jury was informed when they came back, you mean?
> > The rest of the jury already knew. The way the information was passed on
> > was by a written note, technically from the jury foreman but actually
> > written by me, given to the judge. The note was passed around the jury
> > room to make sure that everyone agreed to it.
>
> If the witness doesn't mind another question about NSW trial procedure,
> what is this jury room? When I was on a jury in New Mexico, the only
> jury room was where we went after the testimony and everything to
> deliberate. During the trial we sat in the jury box in the courtroom.
It's where you would have been taken if they needed to discuss something
> what is this jury room? When I was on a jury in New Mexico, the only
> jury room was where we went after the testimony and everything to
> deliberate. During the trial we sat in the jury box in the courtroom.
without the jury hearing the discussion. Presumably the same room that
would later be used for deliberations. Maybe the same room where you left
your coat.
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Dec 16, 2014, 10:01:02 AM12/16/14
to
&xxxx; items will be found in the html file that a browser will convert
into readable stuff on screen.
Character references are described as "mnemonic aliases for certain
Unicode characters".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_XML_and_HTML_character_entity_references
A few other examples from that:
© copyright sign
´ acute accent
¼ vulgar fraction one quarter, 1/4
∴ therefore sign
The point of a character or character reference in an HTML file is that
it is "font-free". It specifies what character should be displayed but
not how. The specification of the font to be used is separate.
These character eference sequences should not normally be visible. They
will only appear in a raw HTML file or where software has not rendered
the data for display properly.
What follows is an example of a character reference evading the
rendering process. Information from a webpage has been extracted and
used on a TV teletext news service. For some reason instead of the
character reference &rquote; for "right single quotation mark" this was
used: &rightsinglequotationmark;.
That was not translated into a ' so instead of "he'd" what appeared on
screen was the untranslated "he&rightsinglequotationmark;d"
http://www.peterduncanson.net/images/SkyNews%20DSC_0125.jpg
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages