Re: Is there a lawyer in the house? :)

[Glenn Johnson <atlgator@mindspring.com>]

On the lighter side (not to be taken seriously):

Q: What if Alice and Bob are siamese twins?

Could we imagine a constitutional test that turns on whether a majority of
organs are shared?  Could the dissent cite the fact that some of the shared
organs are not vital?

Q2:  Better yet, what if Alice and Bob were only 2 of say 6 distinct
personality manifestations exhibited by one physical person?  Again, would
we need to arrange for a consensus among at least 2 more personalities to
form a majority, thus entitling the collective to shared privacy?

The answers to these and other exciting questions on the next episode of 
"Exhaust that Thread."



At 01:27 AM 12/10/95 -0500, you wrote:
>On Fri, 8 Dec 1995, Black Unicorn wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 7 Dec 1995, Jeff Weinstein wrote:
>> 
>> > Black Unicorn wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > On Thu, 7 Dec 1995, sameer wrote:
>> > > 
>> >   How about if Bob had a contractual agreement with Alice to keep his
>> > key secret?
>> 
>> Then as a defense attorney, I would argue that Bob had an obvious 
>> expectation of privacy with Alice, and that the fact that he relayed this 
>> key to Alice only under those circumstances represents a definite 
>> expression of his intent to keep the key private, thus triggering 4th 
>> amendment protections.  My view is that this would be a very strong argument.
>
>Bob's Fourth Amendment rights are not triggered by his contract with 
>Alice.  Alice can be compelled to give up the key (by testimony or 
>production) and giving up that key does not tend to incriminate *Alice* 
>in a violation of law.  Alice can't invoke Bob's rights against 
>self-incrimination for obvious reasons:  Alice isn't Bob.
>^^^^
>EBD
>
>
>> 
>> Note that this is an academic opinion, not a legal one as I am not being 
>> paid.
>> 
>> >
>> > 	--Jeff
>> > 
>> > -- 
>> > Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist
>> > Netscape Communication Corporation
>> > jsw@netscape.com - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw
>> > Any opinions expressed above are mine.
>> 
>> ---
>> My prefered and soon to be permanent e-mail address: unicorn@schloss.li
>> "In fact, had Bancroft not existed,       potestas scientiae in usu est
>> Franklin might have had to invent him."    in nihilum nil posse reverti
>> 00B9289C28DC0E55  E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information
>> 
>> 
>
>Not a lawyer on the Net, although I play one in real life.
>**********************************************************
>Flame away! I get treated worse in person every day!!
>
>