Thursday, May 29, 2014

Are You Talking to a Provocateur?

Or even just a compromised snitch? [More]

Be careful. If they're going to pick any fruit, let it be low-hanging.

I had an idea a few years back, essentially a certification that associates are not working for law enforcement in any capacity.  I was told by those I asked to review it that it wouldn't work because cops can lie.

There appear to be limits.

Where my idea was different is it involved having the assurance notarized, meaning the person making it would be providing identification to ensure he's who he said he was, and attesting to it on a notarized statement.  So anyone putting together a group of patriots for training and practice could have a notary show up at the meeting to witness and record signatures.

I still don't know if that would work, but would think, at a minimum, most snitches wouldn't know the law and what they could or could not formally do in that regard.  Those people might hesitate out of fear of setting themselves up on criminal charges if their statement were later proven false, meaning anyone who has to put if off is someone to be wary of.

Any lawyers care to weigh in?

[Via JM]

1 comment:

Ned said...

I worked on a case where a fed identified himself as being someone else, and submitted an affidavit replete with false name and false statements. He was not authorized to use a false name.

Didn't matter. Judge found nothing wrong.

We don't have a justice system - we have a legal system. Big difference.