Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ccice1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccice5!ccice1!bwm
From: bwm@ccice1.UUCP (Bradford W. Miller)
Newsgroups: net.auto,net.legal
Subject: Re: Question re: Protection of Car Stereos
Message-ID: <347@ccice1.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 18-Jul-85 15:32:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: ccice1.347
Posted: Thu Jul 18 15:32:38 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Jul-85 04:04:56 EDT
References: <3357@dartvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: bwm@ccice1.UUCP (Bradford W. Miller)
Distribution: net
Organization: CCI Central Engineering, Rochester, NY
Lines: 18
Xref: watmath net.auto:7367 net.legal:1842

In article <3357@dartvax.UUCP> markv@dartvax.UUCP (Mark F. Vita) writes:
><...>
>
>    I have a question for the legally-minded net-users out there.  It has
>been pretty well established that "booby-trapping" your car stereo (with
>razor blades or whatever) can result in the would-be thief successfully
>suing you for damages.  My question is:  isn't such a lawsuit tantamount
>to a confession of attempted larceny?  If so, which offense generally
>receives a harsher penalty: "booby-trapping" or theft?  Will the car
>owner come out ahead in the end, or will the thief get a better deal,
>in general?
>
What do you think? Attempted theft is a wrist slap. Cutting off someone's
fingers can run into millions, if you are shown to be liable.

Brad Miller
-- 
..[cbrma, ccivax, ccicpg, rayssd, ritcv, rlgvax, rochester]!ccice5!ccice1!bwm