Stupid Attorney taling about GPS's

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Tarver Engineering wrote:

All the prosecution needs is a Professional Land Surveyor, as registered
by
the State of California. At that point Scott's Attorney would be well
on
his way to giving testimony illegally.

1. Attorneys do not "give testimony".

Clinton was disbarred over his attorny giving false testimony before the
court.

2. There's no law against attorneys making false statements. They aren't
under
oath.

you are mistaken.

"AES/newspost" wrote in message
...
How did the GPS units installed in Scott Peterson's car transmit the
location information back to the police?

The same way new cell phones and those "house arrest" braceletts do.

Some kind of continuous real-time transmitting capability? (Is this
built into the GPS system itself?)

The GPS system doesn't care.

AES/newspost wrote:
How did the GPS units installed in Scott Peterson's car transmit the
location information back to the police?
Some kind of continuous real-time transmitting capability? (Is this
built into the GPS system itself?)
Or did they have to surreptitiously recover the units from time to time
and downloaded data stored in memory? (And if so, are such units
available to the general public?)

There are several commercial tracking operations in business providing
the service. There are different methods of obtaining the tracking data.
Some are realtime transmitters, others are via interrogation.
Some services on high value rental cars will remotely shut the engine
off when the vehicle gets within so many miles of the Mexican border to
prevent auto theft.
Others, like OnStar, can detect airbag inflation, unlock car doors, etc.

The attorney does not sound very stupid to me. His remarks do show what he
thinks of the jury.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
The attorney does not sound very stupid to me. His remarks do show what he
thinks of the jury.



And as a further comment, why would he not think that? Juries are made up of
people who have nothing better to do than watch Oprah. Not only that, but
they actually believe the idiocy spewing from people like Oprah. Anybody
smart enough to actually do something productive for a living either is
excused from jury duty or is excluded by an attorney who does not want
anyone with critical thinking skills on the jury.

The last time I was in a jury pool I told the judge the truth when he asked
whether I would serve on a jury. I told him that no attorney would accept my
presence on a jury because I had an IQ greater than that of a meatloaf
(granted, it is not a lot greater). I said that I had been called for jury
many times and that I had never been allowed to serve on a jury for that
reason. He agreed and excused me, somewhat to the discomfiture of those
already selected to the jury.

The jury is made up of your peers only if you are a complete moron.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
The attorney does not sound very stupid to me. His remarks do show what
he
thinks of the jury.



And as a further comment, why would he not think that? Juries are made up
of
people who have nothing better to do than watch Oprah. Not only that, but
they actually believe the idiocy spewing from people like Oprah. Anybody
smart enough to actually do something productive for a living either is
excused from jury duty or is excluded by an attorney who does not want
anyone with critical thinking skills on the jury.

In fact, laser based surveying is the accepted means for accurate surveying
measurments in California Courts.

The last time I was in a jury pool I told the judge the truth when he
asked
whether I would serve on a jury. I told him that no attorney would accept
my
presence on a jury because I had an IQ greater than that of a meatloaf
(granted, it is not a lot greater). I said that I had been called for jury
many times and that I had never been allowed to serve on a jury for that
reason. He agreed and excused me, somewhat to the discomfiture of those
already selected to the jury.

I just say, "I am a registered professional engineer" and they tell me to go
home.

The jury is made up of your peers only if you are a complete moron.

I think the prosecution can afford to stipulate to the 7.2 meter maximum
error. (unaugmented)

Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.


Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.

"Dave" wrote in message
...
Unaugmented GPS is accurate to within 7.2 meters longitudinally.


Go say that in sci.geo.satellite-nav and see what happens.

My data comes from GPS World, a source far far superior to the WAAS peddlers
at sat.geo.satellite-nav. The sat.geo.satellite-nav newsgroup is known to
be dishonest WRT GPS.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
The attorney does not sound very stupid to me. His remarks do show what he
thinks of the jury.

What jury? Geragos and the DA are still in pretrial motions.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Tarver Engineering wrote:

All the prosecution needs is a Professional Land Surveyor, as
registered
by
the State of California. At that point Scott's Attorney would be well
on
his way to giving testimony illegally.

1. Attorneys do not "give testimony".

Clinton was disbarred over his attorny [sic] giving false testimony before
the
court.

You are inaccurate in several respects. Clinton's license was suspended
for a specific period of time; he was not disbarred. He negotiated a
settlement with the Arkansas bar which had served him with a grievance
complaint for giving false testimony in a _Jones v. Clinton_ deposition.

2. There's no law against attorneys making false statements. They aren't
under
oath.

you are mistaken.

An attorney who knowingly misleads a court violates the canons of
professional ethics and is subject to discipline by the court and the bar.
He does not have to be under oath. However, if an attorney gives
materially false testimony while under oath he is also guilty of perjury,
ordinarily a felony.