Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!wuarchive!emory!rsiatl!jgd From: jgd@rsiatl.UUCP (John G. DeArmond) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: CNN Message-ID: <5012@rsiatl.UUCP> Date: 20 Nov 90 10:43:05 GMT References: <1990Nov16.235831.25433@agate.berkeley.edu> <4948@rsiatl.UUCP> <5378@prussian9.UUCP> Organization: Rapid Deployment Systems, Inc. (making go fast things and things go fast) Lines: 38 dogar@motcid.UUCP (Haroon H. Dogar) writes: >>Defend themselves? Considering that according to the papers, CNN >>originally stole these tapes from the government, >Uh... I'm no legal eagle, but it seems to me that for "the government" >to have tapes of conversations between a defendant and his/her lawyer >has got to be against some law. Good thing you're not a legal eagle. As was pointed out in an almost page long article in the Atlanta Constipation Sunday, recording conversations of inmates is a common and repeatedly court blessed practice. It noted that generally lawyer-client conversations are not monitored, though the court has said that it is OK because the attorney is a common method of conducting business as usual by organized crime inmantes. The paper also noted that most holding facilities provide NON-bugged areas that are so-labeled if the inmate wants full privacy. >>Maybe since the tapes are back >>under control of the court, Noriega can stand trial and have some chance >>of it being fair. >Not if the other side knows what he and his lawyer have been talking about. >(I think its equally wrong for CNN to have or broadcast these conversations.) Hardly. As to CNN, the Supreme Court stated rather firmly what it thought of their actions. I'd have figured it would have been CNN that would come up with a case bad enough to have the court break its no-prior-restraint policy. Teddy's done it again. John -- John De Armond, WD4OQC | "Purveyors of Performance Products Rapid Deployment System, Inc. | to the Trade " (tm) Marietta, Ga | {emory,uunet}!rsiatl!jgd | "Vote early, Vote often"