Zombie

Marty try "bookending" the text with "quote" and "/quote" written in square brackets WITHOUT THE QUOTATION MARKS

Australian mobile phones were fully digital from September 2000 when the old analogue (AMPS) network was switched off: https://sites.google.com/a/politicalscience.com.au/home/Home/chronologies/australian-chronology

To all Aussie readers: enjoy gayauthors.com while you still can https://wiki.smu.edu.sg/digitalmediaasia/Digital_Media_in_Australia#What_is_prohibited_online_content.3F: Australian Internet The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) takes the approach of co-regulatory scheme for online content ... Under this scheme, all contents in the World Wide Web sites ... are monitored ... Bloggers or forum owners who allow users to comment or post could find themselves blocked under this proposal should someone say or post the wrong thing. In November 2007, the Australian Government announced their plans to roll out an internet filtering program, known as the "Clean Feed" ... Originally, the plan was to allow adults to opt-out of the program. However, in May 2008, the Government started an $82 million "cybersafety plan", which included an additional mandatory filter with no opt-out provision, applicable to all computers ... The government ... list ...is not available to the public ... critics worry about the lack of transparency ... The obligatory filter, if implemented, would make Australia one of the strictest democracies as far as Internet regulation goes. The Australian communications regulator says it will fine people who hyperlink to sites on its blacklist, which has been further expanded to include several pages on the anonymous whistle blower site WikiLeaks ... Controversies ... The controversy started with the leak of an earlier version of the Government’s top-secret list of banned sites in March 2009, revealing that ... sites on the list ... included ... regular gay ... sites ...

I suspect the wily old ruminant cast his malevolent eyes on this page where (see chapter 19) his devious brain got the idea for his misdirecting title http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4208/contents.htm

Err, so that would be "What goes up ... must come down". And planes, like that nice Mr B's, go up. And then they come down (usually, but not always, in one piece ). Likewise any passengers who ill-advisedly accept a "fright flight" with Mr B. Only, they may not "come down" at the same time, or in the same place, as Mr B's plane ...

Ha! In the above example there was no reason for Fowler to tell Trev not to mention place names because it was a local call within Australia. Surely the good guys, who are clearly personally concerned for Trev, would level with Trev and tell him about their specific fears and concerns about Florida so Trev can fully understand the possible deadly peril he and Shane are up against, not withhold key info. It doesn't make sense - except for you to misdirect us We know: - you've made B a security expert for a story plot reason - you just haven't told us what that reason is so you can spring a nasty surprise on us - you've told us B has a bag of electronic tricks but you haven't told us what he's got in it, or what it can be used for - you are a slippery mis-director and cannot be trusted. So we must therefore infer that the bag of tricks will have a key plot use. Marty suggests for covert surveillance of Fowler. Maybe. But I suspect it's also to help B track down Trev so he can hack off his head. The mobile phone bugging and tracking are possible (and "possibility" is all that's needed to get into a Goat tale). Your smiling assurance gives no comfort. You're up to something. Something bad

Known Unknowns The Goat tells us that phone calls are not "safe". But now wait just a cotton pickin' minute - without the resources of those nice folks at the NSA, what's the realistic likelihood that Basingstoke would be able to intercept and listen into Trev's satphone or cellphone conversations? We know that B has got a bag of electronic tricks, but what specific gizmo would be required, what extra info would he need (e.g. Trev's sat/mobile numbers? the phone model types? Trev's service network details?), how would B get this info and how could he monitor any calls 24/7? Seems like a big ask for a two-bit thugster. And if eavesdropping is possible then what about locating the position of Trev's mobile phone by triangulation - I don't believe this works with sat phones - which, presumably, would also require cooperative "insiders" to be already in place working at Trev's mobile phone company who would also need to have the appropriate skills and access (see http://en.wikipedia...._phone_tracking) Or maybe planting a "roving bug" on Trev's mobile phone so Mr B can eavesdrop on the lovebirds' waistline-reducing activities even when the phone is switched off (possible since at least 2006 according to this website: http://www.schneier...._eavesd_1.html; also see http://www.theintern...hen-turned-off/)

Hmm, sounds delicious but ingredients like that don't help answer the question "Why aren't Trev and Shane obese blobsters?"

Hmm, Benji really does like the idea of Basingstoke getting up close and personal with a salty looking for its dinner.Perhaps you missed my earlier post in Australia: Deadly Paradise which shows that even if T+S don't head north then snap crackle and pop action by salties on Basingstoke is still a possibility much further south on the coast of Western Australia </p>According to Wiki, individual salties can roam "thousands of miles from their native territory":</p></p> http://en.wikipedia....le#Distribution Yikes, according to this site salties have been seen as far south as Carnarvon: http://www.environme...an_distribution So, yeah, it's a definite possibility that Basingstoke, at the very moment of triumph over Trevor, will be snatched into a salty's jaws of death, shrieking in blood-curdling terror at the sudden realisation he has utterly failed, and that his miserable life is about to be crushed and ripped from his broken body with more brutal violence and agony than the collective suffering inflicted on every one of his and Sanchez's previous victims. And all lovingly described in glorious CJ HorrorVision © http://www.gayauthors.org/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

Circumnavigation is educational. I've learned a lot of things I didn't know before, and some things I didn't know I didn't know. Like navigation, diurnal tides, the False Cross, what a dangerous place Australia is; all sorts of good stuff. It should be on the education curriculum http://www.gayauthors.org/forums//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png Remember the famous remark by former US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld - surely one of the slipperiest wordsmiths on the planet (more so even than our esteemed Goat)? I thought it might be fun to make a list of "knowns" and "unknowns". So to start off, here's a few examples: Known Knowns - The World is round (evidence: the title, heheheh) - Garlic crushers are an abomination. - Shane is hot hot hot!!! - Hot dogs can save your life. - Bridget has a disturbing sexual allure (evidence: there must be something about her to tickle George's fancy) - The Goat is a scheming, manipulative puppetmaster who relishes placing his beloved characters in mortal danger and inflicting cruel and unusual suffering (evidence: just read his stories) - The Goat is not to be trusted. - Did I mention Shane is hot? Known Unknowns - Is Rachel dead? - How key is the key lime pie? - Why aren't Trev and Shane obese blobsters? (evidence: read story for copious examples of frequent ingestion of junk food, full fat fry-ups, large helpings of key lime pie etc etc) - How messy and painful is it to have your head hacked off? Unknown Unknowns - Is Bridget in fact Bridget's brother in drag? - Does The Goat sell used cars? If so would you buy one from him? - Does Bridget have any pets? If so what would be an appropriate pet? - Does Sanchez run a party planning business as a side-line?

Thanks for this CJ Like Marty I've done a bit of Googling myself on the, as you say, non-existent interweb and I now understand that what you call "nullification" is an unusual feature in the US system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification_in_the_United_States It seems this arises from the US's colourful history of weird and wonderful laws (slavery, apartheid, prohibition etc) which US juries would, as you say, nullify if they felt the law was wrong. But, as Marty points out, if juries refuse to convict because of their own personal beliefs then this can work both ways i.e. for bad outcomes as well good ones e.g. the jury believe the KKK are good guys doing a swell job cleaning up the neighbourhood. So when you ask "where does one draw the line?" the answer is you can't because you've already crossed the line that was drawn for the jury by the judge when he directed the jury as to how they must consider the evidence presented during the trial and the offence charged in reaching a verdict. And, of course, I'm not going to accuse you of succumbing to the "Twelve Angry Men Syndrome" - the temptation to become Henry Fonda as you step into the Jury Room, anticipating the thrill of a titantic tussle to get a "just" result; maybe some dramatic arm movements to help explain pertinent points of law and justice to especially dim jurors, perhaps with a bit of table thumping at really dramatic moments (and waking up those who've dozed off) until, that is, you remember that the accused is just some old codger on a shoplifting charge who "forgot" he'd trousered some rather attractive bright purple crotchless underwear

Err, I already dealt with this in my last response (which you quoted ): "Trev ... has a clear defence of "necessity" as he could reasonably be presumed to have intended to comply with the 96 hours requirement but, following a little mishap along the way, such compliance was outside his control ..." In other words "necessity" is a recognised legal defence in both the US and English / Australian legal systems - see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_in_English_law http://www.australiancriminallawyers.com.au/web/page/qld_criminal_defence_necessity Hmm, no-one can get too worked up over the outcome of a speeding ticket. So let's take a more serious scenario. You're on the jury in a murder case. The defendent's clearly guilty. The guy's gonna fry. But some of your fellow jurists refuse to convict for murder because they think it's wrong to fry live people (although they are more than happy to fry dead goats ) therefore they will only agree to convict for a lesser charge with a prison term instead. So instead of a hung jury the jury brings in a guilty verdict for the lesser charge. So you'd be comfortable with a jury system operating like that?

An interesting and monstrous miscarriage of justice certainly, but of no relevance to Trev who has a clear defence of necessity as he could reasonably be presumed to have intended to comply with the 96 hours requirement but, following a little mishap along the way, such compliance was outside his control (and he was not required to report a week ahead, or a month ahead, or when he set sail from Florida or at any other point on his voyage, merely to report no sooner than 96 hours before his arrival).

Looks like Kline's life insurance will soon be paying out

Do you believe it should just be for you or for everyone?

Right, so what you in fact meant to say was: Dirk and Jim ... both appear to agree the presence of Joel will help him over the rough times. There was no reference to the presence of Rachel, or what if any influence she might have on the situation, appearing in writing. Why? It is simple. Because the evil puppet master wanted to misdirect the reader to believe Rachel is Dead.

Firearm laws in Australia are enforced at a Federal and State level. Gun ownership is accessible only for those persons with 'genuine reasons' who can obtain a Permit to Acquire from local Police stations. 'Genuine Reasons' focus on primary production, licenced sport, animal control or employment requirements, and do not include 'personal protection.' In New South Wales (and similar in other States), firearm ownership is widely prohibited for convicted offenders. Gun ownership is low in metropolitan areas whose residents would generally not fulfill 'Genuine Reasons' requirements. Gun licences must be renewed frequently and expire automatically. Firearm controls have been in place following the 1996 Port Arthur Massacre. Gun ownership in Australia is not a wide social issue, and major political parties are generally supportive of pro-control legislation (Although parties such as the New South Wales Shooters Party, which represent pro-deregulation, have a small number of seats in State Parliaments). (http://en.wikipedia....ki/Gun_politics) More detailed info here: Gun politics in Australia (http://en.wikipedia....cs_in_Australia) Also: Firearms must be declared on entry. All military-type firearms (greater than .22), machine guns, pistols, revolvers, ammunition, as well as flick knives and knuckledusters are prohibited imports, and will be sealed on board or taken into custody at the first port of entry. Arrangements can be made to transport them to the port of departure if sufficient notice is given of that port and the date of departure. Sporting rifles and shotguns may be kept on board if a permit is obtained from the police. (http://www.cruisersf...untry-1641.html) And my favourite of the lot (I wonder why??? ) In Australia, state laws govern the possesion and use of firearms. They were mostly aligned under the 1996 National Agreement on Firearms. To possess or use a firearm, you must have a Firearms License and (usually) be over the age of 18. Owners must store firearms securely. Before one can buy a firearm, he/she must get a Permit To Acquire. There is a mandatory 28-day delay before it is issued. For each firearm a "Genuine Reason" must be given. Pest control, hunting, target shooting and collecting are valid reasons. Self-defense is not accepted as a reason for issuing a license, though it may be legal to use a firearm for that purpose under some circumstances. Each firearm must be registered to the owner by serial number. Firearms are divided into Categories: -Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles and paintball markers -Category B: Centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), non-antique muzzleloading firearms -Category C: Semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding less than 10 rounds, pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding less than 5 rounds -Category H: Handguns, including air pistols, deactivated handguns and guns less than 65 cm long (target shooters are limited to .38 caliber or less) (barrels on semi-automatic handguns must be >4.72" long, >3.94" for revolvers) -Category R/E: restricted weapons, including but not limited to machine guns, flamethrowers, assault rifles, and anti-tank guns -Antique: single-shot muzzleloading firearms made before 1901, some antique revolvers and repeating firearms Category C and Category D firearms are more difficult to acquire. For Category C, you must be a primary producer, occupational shooter, collector, or clay target shooter. For category D, you must be an occupational shooter, though collectors can acquire deactivated Category D firearms. (http://www.zombiesurvivalwiki.com/page/Gun+Laws+by+Country) Sorry Benji, I should have said PRESUMED DEAD. Marty Now I'm really confused :wacko: You're saying Rachel is "presumed dead" by Dirk and Jim in their conversation with each other?

Marty and Benji have discussed this in the Brain Storming thread https://www.gayauthors.org/forums/topic/32356-brain-storming/page__st__25

But "The rule for conspiracy is a bit different" (see above), so if Dirk and Rachel jointly plotted their criminal enterprise then I hope they like prison food

No he won't - not when he's screaming for his life, strapped helplessly to a rusty old bed frame, as Basingstoke gently pushes sharp pointy things up his fingernails (or worse) More of The Goat's cruelty to his characters (see previous threads where he denied this with barefaced lies )

Hi Marty Not really. I was intrigued by such detailed and ongoing analysis so I just Googled some key words like "limitation" and "criminal" and looked at what came up. Nope, I don't have a problem because I don't have a view - whereas you've examined with an electron microscope the complex web of nefariousness woven by The Goat into his devious plot (and not counting The Goat's personal and brazen wrongdoings for which he has been rightly exposed in this forum ) I've simply been devouring a great story and enjoying the ride, with a few well-aimed snipes along the way when The Goat stumbles into the cross-hairs The CRS Report summarised the law as it had developed at that point. I'm no jurist but I would expect that the bulk of the law in the story timeline and as at today was well established (many of the sources referred to in the footnotes are quite old e.g. Black's Law Dictionary 6th ed. 1990, case law precedents etc). Law in this area (fraud, conspiracy and limitation) is not subject to frequent and radical change - developments in recent years will generally be to address specific problem areas such as anti-terrorism and child sex-abuse. To recap, all I said was "if the excited chatterings around such a plot development are correct then maybe some of the (links) will be relevant"

There's been much forum activity about the statute of limitation (and possible crimes Dirk and / or Rachel may have committed and / or conspired to commit, including possibly faking Rachel's death) and the belief Dirk / Rachel will be "free" after 16 Dec because any legal action will then be time-barred. I've not paid close attention to the forum postings on this aspect but if the excited chatterings around such a plot development are correct then maybe some of the following will be relevant: CRS Report for Congress - Statutes of Limitation in Federal Criminal Cases: An Overview - April 9, 2007(http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL31253.pdf) "Prosecution for most ... federal crimes must begin within five years of the commitment of the offense. There are exceptions. Some types of crimes are subject to a longer period of limitation; some circumstances suspend or extend the otherwise applicable period of limitation ... ... certain crimes against financial institutions and various immigration offenses all carry statutes of limitation longer than the five year standard ... Ordinarily, the statute of limitations begins to run as soon as the crime has been completed. Although the federal crime of conspiracy is complete when one of the plotters commits an affirmative act in its name, the period for conspiracies begins with the last affirmative act committed in furtherance of the scheme. Other so-called continuing offenses include various possession crimes and some that impose continuing obligations to register or report." (Summary page) "Statutes of limitation “normally begin to run when the crime is complete” ... The rule for conspiracy is a bit different. The general conspiracy statute consists of two elements: (1) an agreement to commit a federal crime or to defraud the United States and (2) an overt act committed in furtherance of the agreement. Conspirators left unimpaired will frequently continue on through several overt acts to the ultimate commission of the underlying substantive offenses which are the objectives of their plots. Thus, the statute of limitations for such conspiracies runs not from the first overt act committed in furtherance of the conspiracy but from the last. The statute of limitations under conspiracy statutes which have no overt act requirement runs from the accomplishment of the objectives of the conspiracy or from its abandonment. Concealment of the criminal plot after its completion is considered a natural component of all conspiracies. Consequently, overt acts of concealment after the objectives of the conspiracy have been accomplished may not be used to delay the running of the statute of limitations." (p11-12) "State Felony Statutes of Limitation - Florida (felonies generally) 3 years" (table p25) Also some other interweb stuff: "A faked death, or pseudocide, occurs when an individual leaves evidence to suggest that he or she is dead in order to mislead others. This may be done for a variety of reasons, such as to fraudulently collect insurance money or avoid capture by law enforcement for some other crime." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faked_death) "... if you are defrauded, where the wrongdoer conceals information from you to prevent you from discovering his misdeed, the statute of limitations will not begin to run on the claim until such time as you have had a reasonable opportunity to discover the facts giving rise to your claim..." (http://www.buteralaw.com/newsletters.asp?c=5&id=115) "... people who are presumed dead sometimes turn up alive ... There has been one recent memorable case where this has occurred, such as in the case of John Burney who disappeared after financial problems and reappeared years after, December 1982, to Arkansas. His company and wife had already received the death benefits; so, upon returning, the life insurance company filed a suit against him, his wife, and his company. In the end, Burney’s actions were ruled fraudulent in court, leading to a $470,000 judgement" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_in_absentia)" "... if you get a case where the statute of limitations has seemingly passed, make sure that your case does not fall within one of the four exceptions that most jurisdictions have in some form or other, which can extend the statute of limitations. The first, and the most litigated, is the discovery rule. Under the discovery rule, an action begins to accrue when the injury victim knew or reasonably should have known of the negligence and the harm that ensued ... The third exception is when the culpable party fraudulently conceals knowledge of a cause of action. In this case, in many jurisdictions, the cause of action does not begin to accrue until the reasonable discovery of the fraud ..." (http://www.tlrcblog.com/2007/12/articles/case-work-up/end-runs-around-the-statute-of-limitations/)

I've replied to this in Brain Storming , which seems to be the thread for themes with "long legs"

Even if the meat's tough the skin makes a lovely rug (http://www.rugsinternational.net/goatskin-rugs.html)

I've just whipped out my unabridged copy and, gadzooks, you're right - the complete unadulterated NN text is 322,506 words! (I'm a quick word counter )