[LargeFormat] People v Shell (was Roman numerals on Zeiss barrel lenses)

[Dan Kalish]

The less said about this the better.  If anything must be said, Richard, 
you put it perfectly.

I practiced criminal defense and its a losing proposition.  Every 
jurisdiction varies but this one doesn't sound good.  Denying bail on
sexual misconduct?  Unheard of.  Lets hope he doesn't get charged with 
murder/manslaughter, and that he gets a fair trial.

Dan K.


From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
To: <largeformat@f32.net>
Subject: Re: [LargeFormat] Roman numerals on Zeiss barrel lenses
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 08:47:38 -0700
Reply-To: largeformat@f32.net


----- Original Message -----
From: "Stuart Phillips" <stuart.phillips@rcn.com>
To: <largeformat@f32.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 8:42 PM
Subject: Re: [LargeFormat] Roman numerals on Zeiss barrel
lenses


 > Marc James Small may know something about Zeiss lenses but
as he's busy
 > defending Bob Shell in Virginia on what may be a murder
charge;  I'd
 > hesitate to bother him. He's already blown the bail
hearing.
 >
   Those interested in the latest should see:
http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/news/story151415.html

   Marc didn't "blow it", he's dealing with a tough
procecuter and a tough case.
  Bail, BTW, isn't free. Even when its remanded you must pay
a stiff fee for it (unless you can go your own). Getting
caught up in the criminal justice system is something you
never want to do, especially if you are innocent.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com