You are on page 1of 2

Who Chunk That Rock?

In the civil context as described and wanted by certain individuals, companies, lawyers, etc., it is whoever the computer printout says it is. No if ands and buts about it, guilty! Where monetary value is of concern, one is apt to lie, lie and lie to protect their monetary value. To avoid lying in a civil action, it appears as that those who place value upon a computers word are attempting to protect themself from criminal prosecution.

Following such civil logic criminal defense attorneys would have an impossible time proving a client innocent if such reliance of guilt relied upon the letters on a piece of paper printed out by a printer, for it is not the word of the computer but a reaction to an inquiry. In criminal context, one would have to inquire of the computer what input did the computer intake to produce such printout.

Serving discovery upon a computer in a criminal case is not a logical possible and a physical impossibility and in civil action serving discovery upon a computer would also be an impossibility. Reflections, people faces and images stored upon mechanical devices in fact reproduce an intangible commonly used in a criminal trial. Discovery as to operation of the equipment could be served upon the maker of the equipment as to whether or not the capture capability of data is valid but not to the validity of the data captured. Actually, discovery as to the validity of the data captured has no party that discovery could be served

upon, thus it is left to adjudication to determine if such intangible merits the value of tangible value. Many of todays United States Courts stand divided between that of civil and criminal courts. Old axiom provides, to better a chance of winning, dividing is the first action. Thus many of todays modern courts hear only a civil action and others hear criminal actions and those masterminds could only hope and prey (falsely) that the deception was not discovered. To discover the frailty placed upon the courts and fraudulent deception committed by the criminals required an expansive amount of time that is not affordable in everyday life of the people. The people have their own rocks to chunk, the courts have their own rocks to chunk, and everybody has a rock to chunk. Where the chunk results in no harm and no foul then no party could be held for damage not incurred. However when a rock is chunk without statutory support of law and in violation of state and federal constitution, and injury has occurred and the criminals must be held accountable for criminal crime committed even if there is belief that civil law allows such action. For there is no excuse for committing a criminal act and once the criminal act bell has been rung, there is no unringing of the bell for that is a logical and criminally legal impossibility. If such unringing of a crime was allowable, then fear would instill the population for any criminal would be able to cure his criminal act and it was not a computer that sent a criminal to prison. In final, who, what, when, where and how was the rock chunked?

You might also like