uk.legal

On 19 May 2006 15:29:04 -0700, "Turk182" <digitalradiouk@aol.com> wrote: >Turk182" <digitalradi...@aol.com> wrote in >news:1148076897.986828.324710 >@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > > >> Which part? > >> Turk182 > >>The act says, "Police Purp

"Richard Miller" <richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:M0HRXyZfwgbEFww+@seasalter0.demon.co.uk... > > Yes, so sorry to be biased in favour of stopping rapes and rapists and > against making it as easy as possible for them to get a

In message <0d2dnfM1PeSWmfPZRVny1w@bt.com>, Rob <rsvptorob-usenetREMOVE@yahoo.co.uk> writes >Richard Miller wrote: >|| >|| But it is very difficult to find an appropriate balance. To my mind, >|| the best compromise here would be to allow evidence o

In message <0p0s62d1g2aigoalq94j2oj0rk4a2lutcn@4ax.com>, Clough <inuit@canoemail.com> writes >On Fri, 19 May 2006 18:27:04 +0100, Daytona <me@privacy.net> wrote: > >>On Fri, 19 May 2006 16:23:05 +0100, Richard Miller >><richard@seasalter0.demon.co.u

On Fri, 19 May 2006 20:24:34 +0100, PeteM wrote: >>On Thu, 18 May 2006 16:26:32 GMT, Periander <sour@puss.twit> wrote: >> >>Now having had the children settled in a safe nurturing environment for >>5 years or so you have to ask yourself would it be

In message <4d6nsdF18n0bqU1@individual.net>, chippy <chippy@wood.co.uk> writes >Richard Miller wrote: > >> In message <1148028112.080966.257070@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, >> thedarkman <A_Baron@ABaron.Demon.Co.UK> writes >> > >> > It will be ve

<me@privacy.net> wrote > Now let me see - Derek Hornby tells me something, and the Shit-heap > tells me something else. I wonder who I would believe? Do some digging on Google to see who said this: "Now I use a variety of ISP's to stop you g

In message <446e17b4$0$2690$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net>, Geoff B <Geoff@nojunkthanks.com> writes > >On my route to work there is an large billboard showing a well toned naked >woman advertising a large fitness chain. It is certainly one of t

Albert wrote: > Ok! you've made me mad enough to respond one FINAL time: > > Humble is Appealing is SENTENCE, not his FUCKING conviction, that means > he is going to say he is the FUCKING hoaxer but that he is sorry and he > really didn't mean it

Andy wrote: > Great, so I technically have child pron on my PC, 'pirated' video > and now illegal collections of random digits. > I'm stuffed. I even use hosepipes and own guns. > I'm just off to hand meself in. No need, they're on their way now.

"Turk182" <digitalradiouk@aol.com> wrote in news:1148077744.731630.57880@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > Turk182" <digitalradi...@aol.com> wrote in > news:1148076897.986828.324710 > @j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > > >> Which part? > >> Tur

On 19 May 2006 14:35:08 -0700, "Turk182" <digitalradiouk@aol.com> wrote: > >Alex Heney wrote: >> On Fri, 19 May 2006 20:29:43 +0100, "David Topping" >> <david.topping@gnuemail.com> wrote: >> >> >If a mobile speed van is on double yellow lines and

With encryption becoming a hot topic again, I wonder if anyone in government has given any thought to the engineers friend: signal-to-noise-ratio ? There was a classic scene in "Yes Minister" where Jim Hacker had been caught short on an important t

Choon <invalid@example.invalid> wrote in news:lsmdnQ5_Fqxg2vPZRVnyiQ@giganews.com: > On Fri, 19 May 2006 20:24:34 +0100, PeteM wrote: > >>>On Thu, 18 May 2006 16:26:32 GMT, Periander <sour@puss.twit> wrote: >>> >>>Now having had the children set

Alex Heney wrote: >>Perhaps that needs to be defined in Law. 1 mistake in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in >>1000 .. 1 in a million? >> >>Do you think it is reasonable to send 1 person a year to jail on a >>wrongful conviction? Perhaps 10, 100, 1000? >> > >

On 19 May 2006 20:17:42 GMT, "chippy" <chippy@wood.co.uk> wrote: >Alex Heney wrote: > >> On 18 May 2006 23:01:25 GMT, "chippy" <chippy@wood.co.uk> wrote: >> >> > Richard Miller wrote: >> > >> >> > > And if she had lived and the car thief had ju

Jethro_uk wrote: > >>> In fact, writing your message in esperato, and then encrypting it would >>> cause them enough problems .... >> >> This was one of the methods used by the Americans during the Second >> World War in the Far East... people wh

"Turk182" <digitalradiouk@aol.com> wrote in news:1148076897.986828.324710 @j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > Which part? > > Turk182 The act says, "Police Purposes", the camera partnership is partially funded out of the police budget. HTH -

In article <OEVS2HGB38855.9721990741@twistycreek.com>, anon@comments.header says... > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: RIPEMD160 > > Scott <blackhole@nowhere.com> wrote: > > > > It could be argued that simply having enough evidence ag

What about if one party put up 70% cash and then had a joint mortgage with the second party for the rest "Alex Heney" <me8@privacy.net> wrote in message news:5mbs629in27dn3d9rtct4k817vemu493pt@4ax.com... > On Fri, 19 May 2006 19:29:32 +0100, "The

On Fri, 19 May 2006 20:29:43 +0100, "David Topping" <david.topping@gnuemail.com> wrote: >If a mobile speed van is on double yellow lines and/or otherwise parked >illegally (I have seen quite a few) and a speeding ticket is issued, could >it be arg

On Fri, 19 May 2006 20:08:36 +0100, "Geoff B" <Geoff@nojunkthanks.com> wrote: >On my route to work there is an large billboard showing a well toned naked >woman advertising a large fitness chain. It is certainly one of the most >risqué adverts tha

On 19 May 2006 19:54:54 +0200, Simon Earl <simon@nospam.com> wrote: >Following on from the Bailiffs thread, I wondered if it possible >to erect a sign at my gatepost (where I have no gates), to >prevent certain people from legally crossing the bounda

On Fri, 19 May 2006 19:29:32 +0100, "The Todal" <deadmailbox@beeb.net> wrote: > >"carole" <f@nlworld.com> wrote in message >news:M3nbg.15126$z%.4694@newsfe5-win.ntli.net... >> Does anybody understand the term Tenants in Common and what it means if

Alex Heney wrote: > On 19 May 2006 20:17:42 GMT, "chippy" <chippy@wood.co.uk> wrote: > > > Alex Heney wrote: > > > >> On 18 May 2006 23:01:25 GMT, "chippy" <chippy@wood.co.uk> wrote: > >> > >> > Richard Miller wrote: > >> > > >> >> > > And

On Fri, 19 May 2006 18:44:15 +0100, "Rob" <rsvptorob-usenetREMOVE@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >Richard Miller wrote: >|| >|| But it is very difficult to find an appropriate balance. To my mind, >|| the best compromise here would be to allow evidence of any

On Fri, 19 May 2006 18:09:06 +0100, "Fat Freddy's Cat" <port_26@hotmail.com> wrote: > >"Richard Miller" <richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote in message >news:6omcAGRZLebEFw2i@seasalter0.demon.co.uk... >> And I have no doubt as a result that many

meow2222@care2.com wrote: > Another point that I think affects the whole picture is to do with the > state of the Victorian housing market. A sizeable section of Vic > housing is now almost entirely missing. There were whole areas of towns > where h

On Fri, 19 May 2006 16:53:42 +0100, "Dave Baker" <DaveBaker@nowhere.com> wrote: <snip> > >I'd have to disagree. Maybe someone does have a previous allegation of rape >against him and maybe he even comitted that rape but what better way to >fra

Periander wrote: > "David Topping" <david.topping@gnuemail.com> wrote in > news:1148066638_15383@sp6iad.superfeed.net: > >> If a mobile speed van is on double yellow lines and/or otherwise >> parked illegally > > Ohdear that old chestnut. If the va

> >> In fact, writing your message in esperato, and then encrypting it would >> cause them enough problems .... > > This was one of the methods used by the Americans during the Second > World War in the Far East... people who could speak various Red

"Scott" <blackhole@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:e4koi7$eal$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk... > Jethro wrote: >> you just don't get it do you ? >> > > I think you don't understand what entropy is. It is: > > -\sum_{i=i}^N p(i)log_2 (p(i)) >

you will be amazed at the hits

you will be amazed at the hits.

On Fri, 19 May 2006 18:26:17 +0100, Tone <tone@spamcop.net> wrote: >On Fri, 19 May 2006 11:18:42 +0100, "Alex" ><alex1385NOSPAM@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > >>> >>> I would suspect that, apart from maintenance for the child, she will >>> only be ent

David Topping wrote: > If a mobile speed van is on double yellow lines and/or otherwise > parked illegally (I have seen quite a few) and a speeding ticket is > issued, could it be argued that because the vehicle which took the > picture which initiate

The Todal wrote: > > "Richard Miller" <richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote in message > news:r53IUaJcdZbEFwFt@seasalter0.demon.co.uk... >In message > <4d5dk7F18dr8gU1@individual.net>, The Todal <deadmailbox@beeb.net> > writes > > > > >>"Jet

john2 wrote: > Peter McLelland wrote: >> "LionOfTheSouth" <lion_of_the_south@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:K0gbg.174901$xt.40676@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk... >> >>> I am set to take voluntary Redundancy .I work for the Post Office .They >>>

Geoff B <Geoff@nojunkthanks.com> wrote: <snip> > And on a lighter note... > Could I sue the fitness chain since having paid my membership I have > discovered that the women do not run around naked as portrayed in the > advert. :-( You can sue a

If a mobile speed van is on double yellow lines and/or otherwise parked illegally (I have seen quite a few) and a speeding ticket is issued, could it be argued that because the vehicle which took the picture which initiated the speeding ticket was p

The only thing lower than a British junkie is the man (or beast) who has to ride the Space Cadet. sheeeeesh!!!!

"Rajinder Nijjhar" <chaudhry.nijjhar@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:%2Zag.1538$1Y6.1461@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net... > Hi, > > A reputable Estate Agent had two false references and all that dodgy > things surprises my Agent too. > > Rajinder >

Richard Miller wrote: > In message <1148028112.080966.257070@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > thedarkman <A_Baron@ABaron.Demon.Co.UK> writes > > > > It will be very interesting if and when they catch this bloke and he > > stands trial. Expect him t

Richard Miller wrote: > From Doughty Street website, > > http://www.doughtystreet.co.uk/hrarp/summary/index.cfm?iStartRow=300&s > Sor tBy=dtCaseDate&sOrder=ASC > > http://tinyurl.com/kq7qn > > "Presumption of innocence under Art 6(2) not viol

Alex Heney wrote: > On 18 May 2006 23:01:25 GMT, "chippy" <chippy@wood.co.uk> wrote: > > > Richard Miller wrote: > > > >> > > And if she had lived and the car thief had just run away? > >> > > > >> > > You do have a very strange idea of what j

The Todal wrote: > Doctors who are doing private consultations will almost > invariably charge for a missed appointment. I have my doubts > about 40 quid for a dentist and I'd probably ask him how much of > his time was wasted. About 12 seconds,

The Todal wrote: > "The defendant is required to supply his/her date of birth when > replying to a claim but the court will not be able to refuse to > process a reply simply because the defendant has failed to supply > a date of birth. .... If the de

On my route to work there is an large billboard showing a well toned naked woman advertising a large fitness chain. It is certainly one of the most risqué adverts that I've seen in recent times (it caught my attention :-) The twist is that this bil

"David Topping" <david.topping@gnuemail.com> wrote in message news:1148066501_15381@sp6iad.superfeed.net... > > "Rajinder Nijjhar" <chaudhry.nijjhar@ntlworld.com> wrote in message > news:%2Zag.1538$1Y6.1461@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net... >> Hi, >> >>

On Fri, 19 May 2006 14:05:51 +0100, Scott <blackhole@nowhere.com> was popularly supposed to have said: > Jethro wrote: >> "appear random" and "being random" are quite different things. I will >> guarentee that over the length of the ciphertext, N

On Thu, 18 May 2006 20:50:34 -0400, Stephen K Gielda <steve@packetderm.com.bogus> was popularly supposed to have said: > That is kind of what has been happening to the Patriot act over here, > slowly the teeth are being removed as more challenge

On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:14:36 +0100, Andy <andrew.whitelaw@NoJunkMail.baesystems.com> was popularly supposed to have said: > Given that my program uses a Visual Basic built-in random number generator > that is not actually a true random number gene

On Fri, 19 May 2006 10:13:20 +0100, PeteM <Otcbn@callnetuk.com> was popularly supposed to have said: > Dan Holdsworth <dan1701usenet@ntlworld.com> posted >>On 18 May 2006 14:42:50 GMT, nemo_outis >> <abc@xyz.com> >>was popularly supposed to hav

On Fri, 19 May 2006 07:59:07 -0400, Josh Bettenheimer <JBSkater@gmail.com> was popularly supposed to have said: > > In the US, don't subjects have the right NOT to incriminate themselves > or something like that? I can't imagine being forced to

On 19 May 2006 00:09:43 GMT, nemo_outis <abc@xyz.com> was popularly supposed to have said: > Dan Holdsworth <dan1701usenet@ntlworld.com> wrote in > news:slrne6pu2i.7o3.dan1701usenet@spc1-burn1-3-0-cust209.bagu.broadband.n > tl.com: > >> On 18

"David Topping" <david.topping@gnuemail.com> wrote in news:1148066638_15383@sp6iad.superfeed.net: > If a mobile speed van is on double yellow lines and/or otherwise > parked illegally Ohdear that old chestnut. If the van is there for the pupose o

Following on from the Bailiffs thread, I wondered if it possible to erect a sign at my gatepost (where I have no gates), to prevent certain people from legally crossing the boundary onto my private land. Would a correctly worded sign, eg: THIS PR

On Wed, 17 May 2006 22:44:24 +0100, john boyle <john@johnboyle1.demon.co= ..uk> wrote: > In message <op.s9pnggq9wabk2w@blue.mshome.net>, Peter Hucker > <no@spam.com> writes >> I don't remember writing the above. Couldn't you leave in one or two=

"Granny Smith" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:446c3b5d$0$24231$88260bb3@free.teranews.com... > > <axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk> wrote in message > news:BTWag.300579$8Q3.58390@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk... >> Granny Smith <me@privacy.net> wr

"Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >Alex Heney wrote: >> >> But if the car was just parked on the driveway, and the bailiff walked >> up and put a clamp on it, then it is unlikely he would be committing >> any criminal offence. > >that is mo

Peter Hucker wrote: > Anyone noticed the clearing time has fallen? > > Paypal are now stating 4 working days to transfer to a bank (they used > to be 7). > > Nationwide are now stating 2 working days (they used to be 4). > > --http://www.peter

"carole" <f@nlworld.com> wrote in message news:M3nbg.15126$z%.4694@newsfe5-win.ntli.net... > Does anybody understand the term Tenants in Common and what it means if > two parties separate. I put the deposit down cash and the other person is > no

On Fri, 19 May 2006 18:15:33 +0100, alan@darkroom.+.com (A.Lee) wrote: ><me@privacy.net> wrote: > >> A mate of mine has just got back from the dentist. He was held up in >> the traffic and was late so "missed his appointment" (I don't know how >>

In message <446df57f$0$684$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, Fred <Fred@n0spam.c0m> writes > >"The Todal" <deadmailbox@beeb.net> wrote in message >news:4d68e8F18o5gdU1@individual.net... >> >> It is perhaps surprising it has not been tried yet. The victim o

In message <lJednSQmHuMrZvDZRVnyvQ@pipex.net>, Fat Freddy's Cat <port_26@hotmail.com> writes > >"Richard Miller" <richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote in message >news:6omcAGRZLebEFw2i@seasalter0.demon.co.uk... >> And I have no doubt as a result th

On Fri, 19 May 2006 20:08:36 +0100, "Geoff B" <Geoff@nojunkthanks.com> wrote: >Thoughts/questions: > If the culprit (lets say a muslim) was identified, could the police charge >them? If the culprit was a Muslim I would think it highly unlikely t

In message <e4kpls$jgm$1@news.datemas.de>, Dave Baker <DaveBaker@nowhere.com> writes >I'd have to disagree. Maybe someone does have a previous allegation of >rape against him and maybe he even comitted that rape but what better >way to frame some

carole wrote: > Does anybody understand the term Tenants in Common and what it means > if two parties separate. I put the deposit down cash and the other > person is now trying to claim half of everything. Start here. http://www.lawontheweb.co.u

"The Todal" <deadmailbox@beeb.net> wrote in message news:4d5ja0F191fo9U1@individual.net... > > "Clough" <inuit@canoemail.com> wrote in message > news:kbrq62lr90pqthb81l6cp61t7f1p0ig5c6@4ax.com... >> >> Another lying slut who ruined a young mans

Bob Immenhaus wrote: > Sloppily put. By 'turned on', I meant in the midst of a call. There has > been a case where somebody's cell phone was not making or receiving a > call, at least that's what the owner thought, but it had been hacked so > that i

Richard Miller <richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote: > In message <446db643@212.67.96.135>, "Dave (from the UK)" > <see-my-signature@southminster-branch-line.org.uk> writes > >>With advances in science, I suspect in some cases it might be possible

Richard Miller wrote: || || But it is very difficult to find an appropriate balance. To my mind, || the best compromise here would be to allow evidence of any previous || allegations of rape always to be admitted. You meant previous false allegatio

Anyone noticed the clearing time has fallen? Paypal are now stating 4 working days to transfer to a bank (they used t= o be 7). Nationwide are now stating 2 working days (they used to be 4). -- = http://www.petersparrots.com http://www.ins

On Sat, 13 May 2006 17:09:25 GMT, AlanG <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >GPS for civilian use can be 10 to over 50 metres out. What sort of >error limits would you be getting on your speed calculation if the >minimum and maximum possible error were take

On Fri, 19 May 2006 16:23:05 +0100, Richard Miller <richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote: >But it is very difficult to find an appropriate balance. To my mind, the >best compromise here would be to allow evidence of any previous >allegations of r

On Fri, 19 May 2006 11:18:42 +0100, "Alex" <alex1385NOSPAM@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >> >> I would suspect that, apart from maintenance for the child, she will >> only be entitled to a percentage of his earnings for the time they >> were married >

On Sat, 13 May 2006 14:24:33 GMT, AlanG <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >So if the onboard computer can read the speed accurately enough to >tell you the average speed is less than your indicated speed why isn't >it used to show your true speed instead

Cynic <cynic_999@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > The only time you may legally *swap* the new disk with the old is at > exactly midnight on the day the old disk expires. Only if your car is on the road, surely? -- Alec McKenzie usenet@<surname>.me.uk

On Fri, 19 May 2006 18:25:24 +0100, Cynic <cynic_999@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >On Sat, 13 May 2006 14:24:33 GMT, AlanG <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > >>So if the onboard computer can read the speed accurately enough to >>tell you the average speed is le

On Fri, 19 May 2006 18:29:05 +0100, Cynic <cynic_999@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >On Sat, 13 May 2006 17:09:25 GMT, AlanG <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > >>GPS for civilian use can be 10 to over 50 metres out. What sort of >>error limits would you be gettin

On Sat, 13 May 2006 21:28:29 +0100, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> wrote: >And how often do you come across one of those? > >I can't remember *ever* seeing one, although I know they exist. > >I have wondered occasionally what circumstances they migh

<me@privacy.net> wrote: > A mate of mine has just got back from the dentist. He was held up in > the traffic and was late so "missed his appointment" (I don't know how > late he was). > > The dentist "fined" him forty quid!! One bastard dentis

Sheik Yurbhuti wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: RIPEMD160 > > Scott <blackhole@nowhere.com> wrote: > > >>>I'd say that it's pretty clear under what circumstances this defense >>>would hold up or fail. >> >>Nonsense its so d

"Richard Miller" <richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:6omcAGRZLebEFw2i@seasalter0.demon.co.uk... > And I have no doubt as a result that many rapists are getting away with > it, and many more women are being raped who might have be

All professionals have the option of charging for missed appointments. It is set at a standard rate, and there should be signs informing patients of the rate. Then, whatever productive task that person undertook during the alloted appointment tim

On 14 May 2006 10:37:20 -0700, "Just Another Legal Fan" <smellyfartybum@aol.com> wrote: >Sounds fair to me. I always get my tax disc a few days before so >this type of bollocks doesn't happen. If you put your new tax disk on the windscreen early,

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Chris Lawrence <news03@holosys.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > I use TrueCrypt to store private data. > > http://www.truecrypt.org/ > > It works in the same way that PGPDisk works, or that ScramDisk

"Simon Earl" <simon@nospam.com> wrote in message news:446e066e_1@x-privat.org... > Following on from the Bailiffs thread, I wondered if it possible > to erect a sign at my gatepost (where I have no gates), to > prevent certain people from legally c

On Fri, 19 May 2006 16:49:12 GMT, Mike_B <usenet@localhosts.net> wrote: >In message <4d69a0F18mtl6U1@individual.net>, The Todal ><deadmailbox@beeb.net> writes >> >><me@privacy.net> wrote in message >>news:ldrr62po75va9v0smj3h5f2nf8427mdlf2@4ax.co

On Fri, 19 May 2006 09:55:21 +0100, me wrote: > On Thu, 18 May 2006 23:04:49 +0200, Bob Immenhaus > <immpassable@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >>It's already the case if you own a car with 'Onstar' or half a dozen other >>helpful satellite-related tec

The International Tibet Independence Movement is coordinating a "March for Tibet's Independence" from Charlottesville to Washington, D. C., beginning on June 2nd and ending on June 11th. http://www.hkfront.org/index-sub-en.html Hong Konger Front, ca

On Fri, 19 May 2006 18:27:04 +0100, Daytona <me@privacy.net> wrote: >On Fri, 19 May 2006 16:23:05 +0100, Richard Miller ><richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >>But it is very difficult to find an appropriate balance. To my mind, the >>best co

"The Todal" <deadmailbox@beeb.net> wrote in message news:4d68e8F18o5gdU1@individual.net... > > It is perhaps surprising it has not been tried yet. The victim of a crime > can of course sue the perpetrator for damages - it doesn't happen very > o

me@privacy.net wrote: >>It's already the case if you own a car with 'Onstar' or half a dozen other >>helpful satellite-related technologies installed; or if you own a cell >>phone - doesn't even have to be turned on. > > "doesn't even have to be t

I refer you to an earlier post, where I said one of the first things a dictatorship will do is declare it's criminal justice system "perfect"

Phil Rotsky wrote: > I've heard different - that the phone itself has to be hacked and that this > involves actually modifying the hardware and installing an additional chip > - ie, the kind of stuff that spy agencies might be capable of if they can

reminds me of a quote I read once, from the US : "Do you know why there's a second amendment ?" -Pause- "In case the government forgets there's a first."

On Fri, 19 May 2006 14:55:08 +0100, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> wrote: >But I would not erode that to the point where it becomes impossible to >get a conviction for rape unless sufficient force was used to leave >physical evidence of that force.

Does anybody understand the term Tenants in Common and what it means if two parties separate. I put the deposit down cash and the other person is now trying to claim half of everything.

<me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:ldrr62po75va9v0smj3h5f2nf8427mdlf2@4ax.com... >A mate of mine has just got back from the dentist. He was held up in > the traffic and was late so "missed his appointment" (I don't know how > late he was). >

I recall my lecturer telling me that "It's hot in the sahara" is data, but *not* information, since it didn't tell me anything I didn't already know. I appreciate the distinction between data and information.

A mate of mine has just got back from the dentist. He was held up in the traffic and was late so "missed his appointment" (I don't know how late he was). The dentist "fined" him forty quid!! I thought this was spot on - and as he has said - he wi

"Alex Heney" <me8@privacy.net> wrote in message news:tvir6293d5eec8n1p144k6e1in4gn3de6v@4ax.com... > On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:24:26 +0100, Daytona <me@privacy.net> wrote: > >>On Fri, 19 May 2006 10:37:05 +0100, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> >>wrote:

btw, this isn't a thread about the scientific basis for DNA testing, or otheriwse. Just a comment that sifting through a million records is exponentially harder than sifting through a thousand (but don't ask me to prove it !)

"Alex Heney" <me8@privacy.net> wrote in message news:lhpr62paduau4p1cu9p4vbq1cqervlu19l@4ax.com... > On Fri, 19 May 2006 16:11:39 +0100, Richard Miller > <richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >>In message <hojr625p3q0chl0965lut1dmm61o07s31c@4a

I excuse my talknig bollocks, due to the fact that 15 years of *not* doing comms/compression/encryption dimmed the memory. However, even I, bollocks and all, can tell that if I needed to decide something, which involved any one of the three topics ab

Paul Heslop wrote: > > I would just stop now. You saw how pissed off I got with these idiots? > They're not willing to listen to anything but themselves. Absolutely spot on Paul!

"Richard Miller" <richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:6omcAGRZLebEFw2i@seasalter0.demon.co.uk... > In message <446db643@212.67.96.135>, "Dave (from the UK)" > <see-my-signature@southminster-branch-line.org.uk> writes > >>With ad

.... heard a debate on my local radio station about that poor lad who was stabbed Thursday, and I wondered why no-one could see the obvious solution to the problems : BAN KNIVES .... IIRC there was a nasty incident with a handgun in Scotland a few

In message <4d69a0F18mtl6U1@individual.net>, The Todal <deadmailbox@beeb.net> writes > ><me@privacy.net> wrote in message >news:ldrr62po75va9v0smj3h5f2nf8427mdlf2@4ax.com... >>A mate of mine has just got back from the dentist. He was held up in >>

axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote: > Jethro <jethro_uk@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>you just don't get it do you ? > > > >>For information to be encoded into the bitstream, it must deviate from >>true randomness by a quantifiable amount. There are

as if to prove my point :-) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/19/council_intelligence/ more noise being introduced into the system. I suppose this is what happens after years of systematic dumbing down of sciences, and a general contempt for en

On Fri, 19 May 2006 16:11:39 +0100, Richard Miller <richard@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote: >In message <hojr625p3q0chl0965lut1dmm61o07s31c@4ax.com>, Alex Heney ><me8@privacy.net> writes >> >>> >>>> >>>> My reasoning is that if B knew that A was

Jethro wrote: > you just don't get it do you ? > I think you don't understand what entropy is. It is: -\sum_{i=i}^N p(i)log_2 (p(i)) where p(i) is the probability of the i th symbol occurring, and the sum is taken over all N symbols in the c

On 19 May 2006 07:52:55 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >Alex Heney wrote: >> *Can* be, as you say, but only if other conditions are met. > >Agreed > >> >> Trespass, by definition, is entering without permission or consent, >>

"M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message news:446ad6ec$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... > > "ian henden" <ian@henden.co.uk> wrote in message > news:3tlag.60$bW5.38@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net... >> >> "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.

uk.legal added...so they know what is being discussed!! <ukrc@thebikezone.org.uk> wrote in message news:1147765311.165883.42010@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > Report now available... > > http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/05/340471.html >

In message <446db643@212.67.96.135>, "Dave (from the UK)" <see-my-signature@southminster-branch-line.org.uk> writes >With advances in science, I suspect in some cases it might be possible >to put a probability of error on some cases. (DNA tests per

me@privacy.net wrote in news:ldrr62po75va9v0smj3h5f2nf8427mdlf2@4ax.com: > A mate of mine has just got back from the dentist. He was held up in > the traffic and was late so "missed his appointment" (I don't know how > late he was). > > The denti

In message <hojr625p3q0chl0965lut1dmm61o07s31c@4ax.com>, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> writes > >> >>> >>> My reasoning is that if B knew that A was going to be (or had been) >>> imprisoned for something that he *knew* A had not done, then A *might*

"sothach" <phillips.roy@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1147765812.053634.83880@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > 'wilfully obstructing the highway on a non-motorised vehicle'?? > > So is 'wilfully obstructing the highway on a motorised vehcle', i

In message <4d5nmhF18hcleU1@individual.net>, Sharky <spam@hotmail.com> writes >Richard Miller wrote: >>> >>> >>> >> There is not the slightest reason to expect she would get any >>maintenance for herself whatsoever. They haven't had any kids, ha

On 19 May 2006 07:06:20 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >Alex Heney wrote: >> >then why say it? >> >> Because I think it a *possibility*. > >So is cold fusion, do you think that is less or more likely? > >Nevertheless still as

"Christian McArdle" <cmcardle75@nospam.yahooxxxx.co.uk> wrote: >One reason is that the wall construction was very different, with lime >mortars and flexible materials used in order to mitigate the larger degree >of settlement that foundationless b

<meow2222@care2.com> wrote in message news:1148049006.987820.93760@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> > How many do you guess have been destroyed due to >> > defects? 10%? 20%? 50%? This is interesting. I >> > wonder whether NT will say anything... t

<me@privacy.net> wrote > (Here's a clue - Derek (as far as I know) has never been proven to be > a liar. On the other hand, time and time again, Shit-heap has > clearly lied and has then ignored proof when it has been brought to > his attention)

On 19 May 2006 06:58:20 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >The Todal wrote: >> >> This was the text, I think: >> > >I follow your logic, perhaps i should not have said "so yes". What i >meant was that if one enters without permiss

On 19 May 2006 06:21:09 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >Alex Heney wrote: >> > >> >> I almost wonder if he is really "David" again. >> >> But the style doesn't seem quite right. >> > >Now you have departed from reality, I am

"Joe Soap" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message news:Xns97C89D9175BA3tityifvbdfgvbzdfdf@127.0.0.1... > In response to what The Todal <deadmailbox@beeb.net> posted in > news:4d61lkF17mqbkU1@individual.net: > >> http://www.h

Colin Wilson <void@btinternet.com> wrote: >> www.fancyplates.com are also very good IME > >It took me about 6 weeks to get mine sorted out - took several emails >and faxes. I wouldn't consider using them again if I could help it. IME, the st

Geordie wrote: > Noel do it. You have my backing. Ring him, don't say anymore on here > as other people have eyes, as we well know Noel. Well guess he cant do it cos he aint got any evidence to show.

On 19 May 2006 06:33:58 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >Alex Heney wrote: >> >That is why lenders alway get possession order to enter, that is why >> >bailiffs cannot come in uninvited, etc etc >> >> No it isn't. >> >> Lenders

Geordie wrote: > I agree. Let's see what happens. Let me speak to Noel. Well you spoke to him and he will not put up any evidence to prove his points, everything he says is mere assertion and given that this was my starting point, you should n

> Is it not more a case of settlement not mattering so much because lime > mortar was all they had? Well, whichever way. The effect is the same. > Our Victorian semi seems to have settled quite a lot before the final > fit had even been done, ju

Geordie wrote: > I don't know what to say. I am new to this as you know and there is a > history between you and Noel. All I know is that Sutcliffe didn't > commit all the murders, you know that. How do you know that, from that queers book n

In response to what The Todal <deadmailbox@beeb.net> posted in news:4d61lkF17mqbkU1@individual.net: > http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/files/cpr_info_bulletin_1.pdf > > A defendant to a County Court action is compelled to provide a date of

Turk182" <digitalradi...@aol.com> wrote in news:1148076897.986828.324710 @j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > Which part? > Turk182 >The act says, "Police Purposes", the camera partnership is partially funded >out of the police budget. HTH Po

In article <1148068213.582910.249510@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, davepseudonym@hotmail.com writes >||Sheesh! I pointed you to the correct place on the DVLA website -- >||something you could have found out easily yourself if you'd been >||bothered

>>Kent & Medway Camera Partnership claim they have no police involved and >>they only employ civillians in their vans. >>They have no exemption from speeding or breaking the law as far as I >>know, but they do ALL the time. >As you state regularly

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/files/cpr_info_bulletin_1.pdf A defendant to a County Court action is compelled to provide a date of birth now. So you can sue just about any woman and get judgment because there is no way she'll divulge that

On 19 May 2006 05:12:31 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >Alex Heney wrote: >> >do you have reference to any cases that have succeeded on such grounds, >> >as I find it difficult to comprehend your reasoning >> >> No, I don't. >>

On Fri, 19 May 2006 13:12:50 +0100, "Dave (from the UK)" <see-my-signature@southminster-branch-line.org.uk> wrote: >Alex Heney wrote: > >> Perhaps you don't understand the word "reasonable". It doesn't mean >> "all". > >Perhaps that needs to be d

On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:24:26 +0100, Daytona <me@privacy.net> wrote: >On Fri, 19 May 2006 10:37:05 +0100, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> >wrote: > >>So you would have the already appallingly low conviction rate for rape >>reduced to virtually zero. >

Willy <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote: >> I suspect he is someone doing the rather pointless 'A' level in Law. > if it makes you feel superior, then yes, i am a spotty teenager sitting > for an A level.

"Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:1148046016.512363.191530@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Alex Heney wrote: >> Yes you did >> <1148028450.201307.156310@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> >> >> Maybe not what you intended to m

"Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:1148046067.127249.158390@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > The Todal wrote: >> Are you now or have you ever been a mortgage advisor? > > No, why? > They are fantastic.

On 19 May 2006 00:09:43 GMT, nemo_outis wrote: > I commend the accuracy of your technical observations and I commend even > more strongly the vehemence and passion with which you say them. Thanks, I luv you 2. -- Drop the alphabet for email

The Todal <deadmailbox@beeb.net> wrote: > http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/files/cpr_info_bulletin_1.pdf > A defendant to a County Court action is compelled to provide a date of birth > now. So you can sue just about any woman and get judgmen

On 18 May 2006 20:36:33 GMT, nemo_outis wrote: > Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in > news:a156367764654a589eee794883f2a303@pseudo.borked.net: > >> If some queer likes to look at kiddie porn, he should be allowed to do >> it

In uk.legal Guy King <guy.king@zetnet.co.uk> wrote: > The message <1147997836.83449.3@iris.uk.clara.net> > from Owain <owain47125@stirlingcity.coo.uk> contains these words: >> The Leaning Tower of Pisa is not an example to follow. > It's lasted

On 18 May 2006 19:19:46 GMT, nemo_outis wrote: > However, moving away from that for a moment, let me point out something, > and *my knowledge of this is not theoretical*: > > If you think you can jerk a judge around with patently bull#@($ answers

Alex Heney wrote: > On Fri, 19 May 2006 20:29:43 +0100, "David Topping" > <david.topping@gnuemail.com> wrote: > > >If a mobile speed van is on double yellow lines and/or otherwise parked > >illegally (I have seen quite a few) and a speeding ticket

On Fri, 19 May 2006 17:49:41 +0200, Bob Immenhaus wrote: > Sloppily put. By 'turned on', I meant in the midst of a call. There has > been a case where somebody's cell phone was not making or receiving a > call, at least that's what the owner thought,

noelogara@hotmail.com wrote: > This explains to any new readers where Tony aka Albert aka Robert aka Ben etc etc took the madness from. A nasty show of co operation by a scum bucket like you > > http://www.yorkshire-ripper.com/?cat=19 > >

"Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:1148044868.986007.32590@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Alex Heney wrote: >> > >> >> I almost wonder if he is really "David" again. >> >> But the style doesn't seem quite right. >> >

Geordie wrote: > Once Humble fesses up to not being the hoaxer, the west yorkshire > police are going to have to answer some very big questions aren't > they??? Humble is appealing to his sentance. Ok! you've made me mad enough to respond one

On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:22:11 +0100, me@privacy.net wrote: >On Fri, 19 May 2006 00:35:02 +0100, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> >wrote: > >>On 18 May 2006 13:22:28 -0700, scientistnewsgroups@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> >>>A.Lee wrote: >>>> <turtill@hotm

In article <1148035640.434635.276580@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Jethro <jethro_uk@hotmail.com> writes >from the second website : > >Exemptions : > >People who manufacture plates solely for their own use, rather than for >sale, are not within

On 19 May 2006 04:19:35 -0700, "Becca" <becca@goldserve.net> wrote: > >Alex Heney wrote: > >> That does make quite a big difference. Many of my comments were based >> on the fact that if a judge heard it, then there must have been a >> jury. >>

The message <1147997836.83449.3@iris.uk.clara.net> from Owain <owain47125@stirlingcity.coo.uk> contains these words: > The Leaning Tower of Pisa is not an example to follow. It's lasted a good deal better than many modern houses. -- Skipweasel

On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:04:46 +0100, me@privacy.net wrote: >On Fri, 19 May 2006 00:50:33 +0100, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> >wrote: > >>On Thu, 18 May 2006 23:26:23 +0100, turtill@hotmail.com wrote: >> >>>On 18 May 2006 13:22:28 -0700, scientistne

On 19 May 2006 05:09:55 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote: >> I don't think so. Mere trespass is not a criminal offence in England & >> Wales, although certain circumstances can render it criminal -

The Todal <deadmailbox@beeb.net> wrote: > "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > news:1148046067.127249.158390@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... >> The Todal wrote: >>> Are you now or have you ever been a mortgage advisor? >> No, why?

On 19 May 2006 05:05:49 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >The Todal wrote: >> >> I do believe he is trying to imply that he is a lawyer or police officer. >> But he very obviously isn't either. Perhaps he is a squatter or has had >

In uk.legal Jethro <jethro_uk@hotmail.com> wrote: > Alternatively, rather than risk identifying a party in the conspiracy, > why not dump emails, and just post onto a newsgroup somewhere, and let > the other person pick it up at their leisure ? If you

On 19 May 2006 05:00:05 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >Mr X wrote: >> He has already admitted to me in the past that he goes away and looks >> this stuff up via the Internet > >I don't, I go into the office and look it up, using

Jethro wrote: > "appear random" and "being random" are quite different things. I will > guarentee that over the length of the ciphertext, NO file is going to > be 100% random (i.e. have an entropy of 1) ... it's been a long time > since I did the math

On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:06:29 +0100, "The Todal" <deadmailbox@beeb.net> wrote: > >"Alex Heney" <me8@privacy.net> wrote in message >news:jt3r62daj5p3s06cbj5dilcj2n3ah7dfbr@4ax.com... >> On 19 May 2006 02:25:38 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk>

Jethro wrote: > as I say, I would be curious to know what value of entropy the > authorities will use as a threshold > Any encryption program worth its salt will produce the same entropy as a randomly chosen sequence. So the 'test' is of no signi

Jethro <jethro_uk@hotmail.com> wrote: > you just don't get it do you ? > For information to be encoded into the bitstream, it must deviate from > true randomness by a quantifiable amount. There are various techniques > you could use to try and exac

"Clough" <inuit@canoemail.com> wrote in message news:btar62l03kgpu4v55cm8qeejsavce4foi9@4ax.com... > On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:08:52 +0100, "The Todal" <deadmailbox@beeb.net> > wrote: > >>> The children in this case were very young. Someone at 5 year

The phrase is 'scot free' not 'scott free'. I certainly don't work for nothing. :-)

Dan Holdsworth wrote: > Say Person A is a paedophile, but usually for such scum he is relatively > intelligent and keeps all files pertaining to his evil deeds in a form > of strong encryption. Person A will also know the penalties due under > the RIP

Josh Bettenheimer wrote: > > In the US, don't subjects have the right NOT to incriminate themselves > or something like that? Fifth amendment: '...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor...' > I can'

On 19 May 2006 04:39:51 -0700, "Becca" <becca@goldserve.net> wrote: >If you look at my post from yesterday I state quite clearly that he is >my husband. > >I've always found careless people with the inability to read as "pieces >of worthless #@($".

Alex Heney wrote: > Perhaps you don't understand the word "reasonable". It doesn't mean > "all". Perhaps that needs to be defined in Law. 1 mistake in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000 .. 1 in a million? Do you think it is reasonable to send 1 person a

M.I.5¾ wrote: > "Jonathan Bryce" <jonathan@localhost.localdomain> wrote in message > news:JridnZflxcohbPHZRVny1w@eclipse.net.uk... > >>axel@white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote: >> >> >>>Is he entitled to say, "It is no longer encrypted by the traditiona

M.I.5¾ wrote: > "Andy" <andrew.whitelaw@ NoJunkMail.baesystems.com> wrote in message > news:446d899d$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... > >>"M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message >>news:446d7631$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... >> >>>F

Christian McArdle wrote: >CPB wrote, but the attributions were munged yet again: >> I wonder how many buildings have been destroyed due to defects >> rather than to make way for something else, as a fraction of >> the whole? Anyone any ideas? > >

||Sheesh! I pointed you to the correct place on the DVLA website -- ||something you could have found out easily yourself if you'd been ||bothered to get off your arse and look. || ||Don't expect others to do your research for you! Reading back thro

On 19 May 2006 12:55:36 +0200,it is alleged that Chris Bacon <chrispbacon@thai.com> spake thusly in uk.d-i-y: >Christian McArdle wrote: > >CPB wrote, but the attributions were munged yet again: >>> I wonder how many buildings have been destroyed due

Sheik Yurbhuti wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: RIPEMD160 > > Scott <blackhole@nowhere.com> wrote: > > >>>It could be argued that simply having enough evidence against you to >>>justify a warrant, no further evidence apparen

On Thu, 18 May 2006 22:35:25 +0100, turtill@hotmail.com wrote: >On 18 May 2006 03:36:56 -0700, "Becca" <becca@goldserve.net> wrote: > > >>As far as I'm aware with the exception of Mr Hayter-Gare I was one of >>only two witnesses who saw the acciden

Christian McArdle wrote: >> How many do you guess have been destroyed due to >> defects? 10%? 20%? 50%? This is interesting. I >> wonder whether NT will say anything... there >> must be some information "out there" somewhere... > > I never come acr

Peter McLelland wrote: > "LionOfTheSouth" <lion_of_the_south@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:K0gbg.174901$xt.40676@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk... > >>I am set to take voluntary Redundancy .I work for the Post Office .They >>want us to leave as so

Christian McArdle wrote: > plenty of these buildings DID have serious subsidence problems. These > have now either been demolished (it's only the good ones still standing, > obviously!) or been underpinned (which is essential retrofitting the > founda

On Fri, 19 May 2006 10:37:05 +0100, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> wrote: >So you would have the already appallingly low conviction rate for rape >reduced to virtually zero. UK law is based upon the innocent until proven guilty ethos. This reduces

Mike Scott <usenet.10@spam.stopper.scottsonline.org.uk> posted > >Out of curiosity, how would I adduce "sufficient evidence" to "raise an >issue" that I don't know something? It depends on the circumstances. For example in the example of the email

On Fri, 19 May 2006 00:35:02 +0100, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> wrote: >On 18 May 2006 13:22:28 -0700, scientistnewsgroups@gmail.com wrote: > >> >>A.Lee wrote: >>> <turtill@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > The defendants address was not revealed b

Mike Scott <usenet.10@spam.stopper.scottsonline.org.uk> posted >PeteM wrote: >... >> No he doesn't. All he does is produce some evidence that the file was >> received as an unsolicited email attachment. He then has an unassailable >> s.53(3) defence.

The Todal wrote: > "Clough" <inuit@canoemail.com> wrote in message > news:hh9r62ltei84r1ocpn1cvrart4ne9gejk2@4ax.com... > >> >>The children in this case were very young. Someone at 5 years old is >>operatiing in an entirely different mental realit

"M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message news:446da526$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... > If I hand write a message in English, noone (including myself) can decypher > it. Better watch out that you don't spill a scrabble board or the

Richard Miller wrote: > In message <niadnYlLL-kfBvDZSa8jmw@karoo.co.uk>, Alex > <alex1385NOSPAM@blueyonder.co.uk> writes > >> >> "Tone" <tone@spamcop.net> wrote in message >> news:gnrq62h09fe80d83dpejt348c23kpmimr2@4ax.com... >> >>> On Fri, 19 M

"Jethro" <jethro_uk@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1148035180.682375.179950@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > There are statistical tools which can tell if a "file" is a stream of > random bits, or actually holds data. A truly randon file will have

Clough wrote: > On Fri, 19 May 2006 11:00:58 +0100, "The Todal" <deadmailbox@beeb.net> > wrote: > > >>And here's yet another case of a man convicted of serious sexual assault, >>who is cleared by the Court of Appeal because they decide the prosec

Chris Bacon wrote: > Christian McArdle wrote: >> plenty of these buildings DID have serious subsidence problems. These >> have now either been demolished (it's only the good ones still standing, >> obviously!) or been underpinned (which is essential r

On Fri, 19 May 2006 10:06:01 +0100, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> wrote: >On 18 May 2006 18:28:02 -0700, "The Scientist" ><scientistnewsgroups@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>Alex Heney wrote: >>> On Thu, 18 May 2006 23:26:23 +0100, turtill@hotmail.com w

"Jethro" <jethro_uk@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1148028323.161827.315610@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com... > When this load of arse was proposed, someone made a very interesting > comment that the best way terrorists could encrypt something wou

dg wrote: > Why would it not comply? > Remember that the Approved Documents are just examples and not the only > way of meeting the requirements of the Building Regulations and > Building Act. Nowhere in the regulations does it state specific > dimen

"Clough" <inuit@canoemail.com> wrote in message news:hh9r62ltei84r1ocpn1cvrart4ne9gejk2@4ax.com... > On Fri, 19 May 2006 11:00:58 +0100, "The Todal" <deadmailbox@beeb.net> > wrote: > >>And here's yet another case of a man convicted of serious sexu

"Alex Heney" <me8@privacy.net> wrote in message news:jt3r62daj5p3s06cbj5dilcj2n3ah7dfbr@4ax.com... > On 19 May 2006 02:25:38 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> >>Alex Heney wrote: >>> >>> This surprises me, since the CPS don't t

On Fri, 19 May 2006 00:50:33 +0100, Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> wrote: >On Thu, 18 May 2006 23:26:23 +0100, turtill@hotmail.com wrote: > >>On 18 May 2006 13:22:28 -0700, scientistnewsgroups@gmail.com wrote: >> >>>The deceased could probably have

"Alex Heney" <me8@privacy.net> wrote in message news:484r62dktvvginkvuqsvmahc6g2rq16cf6@4ax.com... > On Fri, 19 May 2006 10:11:57 +0100, "Dave Baker" > <DaveBaker@nowhere.com> wrote: > >> >>"Clough" <inuit@canoemail.com> wrote in message >>news:

"Graham Murray" <newspost@gmurray.org.uk> wrote in message news:87k68ixstx.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk... > "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> writes: > >> For the purposes of the RIP act. An encrypted file is any file that the >> authorities

On Thu, 18 May 2006 23:21:22 +0100, turtill@hotmail.com wrote: >On Thu, 18 May 2006 20:15:30 +0100, "Derek Hornby" ><derek.hornby_uk@btopenworld.com> wrote: > >>As for causing problems, he has certainly tried to cause problems for >>others. > >I

Owain wrote: > dg wrote: >> Although Building Regulations have changed over the years, much of the >> basic structural parts are essentially the same - ie that walls and >> foundations are adequate and safe for the loading. >> So to prove that a wall

> How many do you guess have been destroyed due to > defects? 10%? 20%? 50%? This is interesting. I > wonder whether NT will say anything... there > must be some information "out there" somewhere... I never come across any. I suspect vanishingly few

Phil <pj@thecork.trig222.f9.co.uk> posted >Alex Heney <me8@privacy.net> writes: >> >> I don't think many people will regard it as "immense" trouble to >> shield the pad with their other hand. >> >> It is rare they will need to go quite as far as c

"LionOfTheSouth" <lion_of_the_south@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:K0gbg.174901$xt.40676@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk... > I am set to take voluntary Redundancy .I work for the Post Office .They > want us to leave as soon as possible .One bloke was

dg wrote: > Although Building Regulations have changed over the years, much of the > basic structural parts are essentially the same - ie that walls and > foundations are adequate and safe for the loading. > > So to prove that a wall or foundation w

On 19 May 2006 03:44:22 -0700, "Willy" <bbapwilson@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >Alex Heney wrote: >> >> >> > >> >Would "A" have any civil claim against "B" ? >> >> *Maybe*. >> >> If it can be shown that B was aware of the case against A, then A >>

In uk.legal Jethro <jethro_uk@hotmail.com> wrote: > When this load of arse was proposed, someone made a very interesting > comment that the best way terrorists could encrypt something would be > to handwrite it arabic, and fax it. Apparently the NSA ha