Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Using and Choosing Data Providers

Expand Messages
  • Ricky Gurley
    ... take a ... permit fees ... us attempt ... thought so that ... rather watch ... in a written ... Well, to start this on a pleasant note, when you posted
    Message 1 of 17 , Jun 16, 2007
      --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, suesarkis@... wrote:

      > No, Rick, for those of us who are TRULY licensed whereby we had to
      take a
      > State issued exam and we pay State fees outside the local business
      permit fees
      > and the like do not believe we are holier than thou. What some of
      us attempt
      > to do though, is just give what we believe to be "food for
      thought" so that
      > our colleagues are at least aware. It is not legal advice but
      rather "watch
      > your back" advice. If nothing else, it suggests what NOT to put
      in a written
      > report.


      Well, to start this on a pleasant note, when you posted this "Typical
      Sue Sarkis Post", I was watching some videos on the French Foreign
      Legion. MASSIVE respect for those guys. MASSIVE RESPECT!

      And to move onto an observation of mine, based on your final
      paragraph, you must have just gotten back from one of your California
      Underachieving Nitwit TwitS meetings; in which there must have been
      some kind of a pep rally for "TRULEY Licensed P.I.s"....

      I am sorry that you view P.I. Licenses as different in that some
      people who hold licenses from certain states are "TRULEY Licensed"
      and some from other states who hold municipal licenses are not. But,
      the license does not make one person a good P.I. and another person
      not, it is solely dependant upon the person's skill set. I suppose
      that this never occurred to you.

      As for Mike Dores, I am not criticizing him at all, nor am I "messing
      with him", I am (AS I PREVIOUSLY STATED), simply clarifying the
      difference between the implications of his article and the difference
      in that and a Process Server trying to diligently perform his or her
      duties.

      What you seem to miss is that this is actually a "carry over post"
      from another group. This topic actually bled over from ServeNow, and
      this is where I was following up. Maybe you are not on that group? No
      surprise there......

      As for my asinine observation that you so eloquently quoted
      as "dung", that was for the people that want to strictly quote the
      letter of the law without making any considerations for the spirit of
      the law or the intent of the law that they are quoting.



      Rick.
    • Thomas Eskridge
      If nothing else, it suggests what NOT to put in a written ... It sounds like the TRULY LICENSED people omit facts---kinda of a way of saying they lie Now if I
      Message 2 of 17 , Jun 16, 2007
        If nothing else, it suggests what NOT to put
        in a written
        > report.



        It sounds like the TRULY LICENSED people omit facts---kinda of a way of
        saying they lie



        Now if I missed the beginning of this thread and the info
        omitted is opinions, guesses, or other non factual information I would agree
        with sue



        Damn Rick, now that I figured that out for you maybe you'll become a better
        investigator!





        Tom Eskridge, Chief Operations Officer

        High Tech Crime Institute

        28100 US Hwy 19 N, suite 204

        Clearwater Florida 33761

        727-499-7215

        888-300-9789

        www.gohtci.com



        _____

        From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
        On Behalf Of Ricky Gurley
        Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 5:05 AM
        To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [infoguys-list] Re: Using and Choosing Data Providers



        --- In infoguys-list@ <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com>
        yahoogroups.com, suesarkis@... wrote:

        > No, Rick, for those of us who are TRULY licensed whereby we had to
        take a
        > State issued exam and we pay State fees outside the local business
        permit fees
        > and the like do not believe we are holier than thou. What some of
        us attempt
        > to do though, is just give what we believe to be "food for
        thought" so that
        > our colleagues are at least aware. It is not legal advice but
        rather "watch
        > your back" advice. If nothing else, it suggests what NOT to put
        in a written
        > report.

        Well, to start this on a pleasant note, when you posted this "Typical
        Sue Sarkis Post", I was watching some videos on the French Foreign
        Legion. MASSIVE respect for those guys. MASSIVE RESPECT!

        And to move onto an observation of mine, based on your final
        paragraph, you must have just gotten back from one of your California
        Underachieving Nitwit TwitS meetings; in which there must have been
        some kind of a pep rally for "TRULEY Licensed P.I.s"....

        I am sorry that you view P.I. Licenses as different in that some
        people who hold licenses from certain states are "TRULEY Licensed"
        and some from other states who hold municipal licenses are not. But,
        the license does not make one person a good P.I. and another person
        not, it is solely dependant upon the person's skill set. I suppose
        that this never occurred to you.

        As for Mike Dores, I am not criticizing him at all, nor am I "messing
        with him", I am (AS I PREVIOUSLY STATED), simply clarifying the
        difference between the implications of his article and the difference
        in that and a Process Server trying to diligently perform his or her
        duties.

        What you seem to miss is that this is actually a "carry over post"
        from another group. This topic actually bled over from ServeNow, and
        this is where I was following up. Maybe you are not on that group? No
        surprise there......

        As for my asinine observation that you so eloquently quoted
        as "dung", that was for the people that want to strictly quote the
        letter of the law without making any considerations for the spirit of
        the law or the intent of the law that they are quoting.

        Rick.





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Ricky Gurley
        ... of ... I will take some courses on how to omit facts from my reports... Thanks for helping me to decide which continuing education courses might benefit me
        Message 3 of 17 , Jun 16, 2007
          --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Eskridge" <TOM@...> wrote:
          >
          > If nothing else, it suggests what NOT to put
          > in a written
          > > report.
          >
          >
          >
          > It sounds like the TRULY LICENSED people omit facts---kinda of a way
          of
          > saying they lie

          I will take some courses on how to omit facts from my reports... Thanks
          for helping me to decide which continuing education courses might
          benefit me best, Tom... ;o)


          Rick.
        • Rus B Robison
          A major consideration on what to put into your report is whether or not the report is subject to discovery by opposing counsel. If your report is discoverable,
          Message 4 of 17 , Jun 16, 2007
            A major consideration on what to put into your report is whether or not the
            report is subject to discovery by opposing counsel. If your report is
            discoverable, keep it plain vanilla. Make a verbal report to the lawyer that
            hired you on any issues you question and let him decide each issue on a
            case-by-case basis on what is exculpatory or not.



            If your report qualifies as "attorney work product" where you discuss case
            strategies, give opinions etc., then you have less to worry about. Always
            discuss any issues you have with your client before making a questionable
            report.



            With kindest regards, I remain...



            The Robison Companies, LLC

            Private Investigators



            Rus B. Robison

            General Manager



            Voice (405) 721-2295



            rbr@...





            Oklahoma's FIRST State-Licensed Private Investigation Agency.





            __



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • suesarkis@aol.com
            In a message dated 6/16/2007 6:27:02 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, TOM@GOHTCI.COM writes: It sounds like the TRULY LICENSED people omit facts---kinda of a way
            Message 5 of 17 , Jun 16, 2007
              In a message dated 6/16/2007 6:27:02 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
              TOM@... writes:

              It sounds like the TRULY LICENSED people omit facts---kinda of a way of
              saying they lie

              Now if I missed the beginning of this thread and the info
              omitted is opinions, guesses, or other non factual information I would agree
              with sue



              Tom -

              What I was referring to for the non-PI's only was in the states where it
              matters, if I were them I would consider writing something like, "...during the
              course of the attempted serve it was learned that they moved to Boston. A
              forwarding order request at the local post office revealed ...." as opposed to
              "...during the course of the attempted service, the house was boarded up. I
              canvassed the neighborhood for hours only to find that they had moved to
              Boston. A forwarding order request at the local post office revealed ....".

              That is neither a direct lie nor is it a lie by omission. I would NEVER
              suggest that anyone lie in their reports.



              Sincerely yours,
              Sue
              ________________________
              Sue Sarkis
              Sarkis Detective Agency


              (est. 1976)
              PI 6564
              _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

              1346 Ethel Street
              Glendale, CA 91207-1826
              818-242-2505
              818-242-9824 FAX

              "one Nation under God"

              If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
              a military veteran !



              ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Ricky Gurley
              ... where it ... like, ...during the ... Boston. A ... as opposed to ... boarded up. I ... moved to ... revealed .... . ... NEVER ... Tom, I think what Sue
              Message 6 of 17 , Jun 16, 2007
                --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, suesarkis@... wrote:

                > Tom -
                >
                > What I was referring to for the non-PI's only was in the states
                where it
                > matters, if I were them I would consider writing something
                like, "...during the
                > course of the attempted serve it was learned that they moved to
                Boston. A
                > forwarding order request at the local post office revealed ...."
                as opposed to
                > "...during the course of the attempted service, the house was
                boarded up. I
                > canvassed the neighborhood for hours only to find that they had
                moved to
                > Boston. A forwarding order request at the local post office
                revealed ....".
                >
                > That is neither a direct lie nor is it a lie by omission. I would
                NEVER
                > suggest that anyone lie in their reports.


                Tom, I think what Sue is saying here is that the Process Server
                should try to lie to the court in their report and indicate that they
                were not doing anything that may be construed as what is defined in
                California as the functions of a Private Investigator.

                I also think that you open up a good area of conversation here with
                your post; Tom. I think that when one thinks a little about your
                post, one can come to the conclusion that a Private Investigator
                (especially a "TRULY Licensed Private Investigator") or a Process
                Server should not do anything that they could not put in a report for
                fear of implicating their self in something illegal and/or unethical
                (Russ, that statement takes into account your post with regard to
                there being times that it may not be "strategically wise" to put
                certain information in a report, or to even write a report in some
                instances).

                And to expound further, this is the gist of my postings which seemed
                to be lost on some people. Quite simply, if a Process Server chooses
                to knock on a the subject of the serve's neighbor's door; and ask
                about the subject of the serve, the Process Server should feel free
                to put that in his or her report, and not feel like he or she has to
                hire a P.I. to knock on the neighbor's door at a cost of $100.00/Hr.
                ("TRULY Licensed Private Investigators" may charge more) to perform a
                service that he or she will charge approximately $75.00 total for.
                And the Process Server might write something to the effect of "After
                several attempts to serve this subject at this address with no
                success I conducted some field research and made a general inquiry
                (could be replaced with "and I asked the neighbor whether or not "Joe
                Schmuck" still lived next door") with the subject's neighbor as to
                whether or not the subject has been seen at this address lately in
                the interest of trying to diligently complete this serve". I am quite
                sure that this statement pretty well explains that the Process Server
                was simply trying to do his or her job, and not take on the role of a
                Private Investigator (and heaven forbid the Process Server be
                misconstrued as taking on the role of a "TRULY Licensed Private
                Investigator"); especially if the Process Server is charging a
                standard flat rate fee for their service. Furthermore it is truthful,
                it demonstrates that the Process Server has made a reasonable attempt
                to perform their duties, and it gives the court reason to permit
                alternate methods of service if it so chooses.

                Further expounding on this thread; I'd like to reiterate that any
                Process Server here that has been "scared" into believing that if you
                live in California and are not a Licensed Private Investigator
                ("TRULY Licensed"; that is), that you can not legally have an account
                with a database vendor, to put that fear aside. You can have all of
                the accounts you want to have. Having the account in and of itself is
                not illegal; it is how you use the account that may get you into
                trouble, if you so choose to abuse your access. In other words,
                Private Investigators do NOT have a "lock" on subscription based
                database accounts as you might have been led to believe (and YES,
                that applies to "TRULY Licensed Private Investigators", also)....

                Process Server's in California, do yourself a favor, do the research
                for yourself, and don't let someone try to convince you that because
                they are a Licensed Private Investigator (Or rather a "TRULY Licensed
                Private Investigator"), that you can not perform the functions of
                your job without paying them to assist you..



                Rick.
              • david jones
                Facts are facts no matter how they are obtained. There is no sense in disclosing trade secrets. ... of ... I will take some courses on how to omit facts from
                Message 7 of 17 , Jun 16, 2007
                  Facts are facts no matter how they are obtained. There is no sense in disclosing trade secrets.

                  Ricky Gurley <rmriinc@...> wrote: --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Eskridge" <TOM@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > If nothing else, it suggests what NOT to put
                  > in a written
                  > > report.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > It sounds like the TRULY LICENSED people omit facts---kinda of a way
                  of
                  > saying they lie

                  I will take some courses on how to omit facts from my reports... Thanks
                  for helping me to decide which continuing education courses might
                  benefit me best, Tom... ;o)

                  Rick.






                  ---------------------------------
                  8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
                  with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • david jones
                  All investigation work should be objective, this is not an audit. If someone were able to get a court to request the information that you found no matter how
                  Message 8 of 17 , Jun 16, 2007
                    All investigation work should be objective, this is not an audit. If someone were able to get a court to request the information that you found no matter how it was found and its the same information, that is key. You do not have to explain how you know the information, but you better be damn sure its accurate.

                    Rus B Robison <rbr007@...> wrote: A major consideration on what to put into your report is whether or not the
                    report is subject to discovery by opposing counsel. If your report is
                    discoverable, keep it plain vanilla. Make a verbal report to the lawyer that
                    hired you on any issues you question and let him decide each issue on a
                    case-by-case basis on what is exculpatory or not.

                    If your report qualifies as "attorney work product" where you discuss case
                    strategies, give opinions etc., then you have less to worry about. Always
                    discuss any issues you have with your client before making a questionable
                    report.

                    With kindest regards, I remain...

                    The Robison Companies, LLC

                    Private Investigators

                    Rus B. Robison

                    General Manager

                    Voice (405) 721-2295

                    rbr@...

                    Oklahoma's FIRST State-Licensed Private Investigation Agency.

                    __

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                    ---------------------------------
                    Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Thomas Eskridge
                    Here s a better idea. Follow the law. IF it is true that a process server in California is violating the law by using a Data Provider---where this post
                    Message 9 of 17 , Jun 17, 2007
                      Here's a better idea. Follow the law. IF it is true that a process server in
                      California is violating the law by using a Data Provider---where this post
                      started---then just DON'T don't it. Then you have no problem determining how
                      to write your report. It is kind of amazing how soon he lessons of
                      Hewlett-Packard have been lost on some.



                      Tom Eskridge, Chief Operations Officer

                      High Tech Crime Institute

                      28100 US Hwy 19 N, suite 204

                      Clearwater Florida 33761

                      727-499-7215

                      888-300-9789

                      www.gohtci.com



                      _____

                      From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
                      On Behalf Of suesarkis@...
                      Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 10:16 PM
                      To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Re: Using and Choosing Data Providers




                      In a message dated 6/16/2007 6:27:02 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
                      TOM@... <mailto:TOM%40GOHTCI.COM> writes:

                      It sounds like the TRULY LICENSED people omit facts---kinda of a way of
                      saying they lie

                      Now if I missed the beginning of this thread and the info
                      omitted is opinions, guesses, or other non factual information I would agree
                      with sue

                      Tom -

                      What I was referring to for the non-PI's only was in the states where it
                      matters, if I were them I would consider writing something like, "...during
                      the
                      course of the attempted serve it was learned that they moved to Boston. A
                      forwarding order request at the local post office revealed ...." as opposed
                      to
                      "...during the course of the attempted service, the house was boarded up. I
                      canvassed the neighborhood for hours only to find that they had moved to
                      Boston. A forwarding order request at the local post office revealed ....".

                      That is neither a direct lie nor is it a lie by omission. I would NEVER
                      suggest that anyone lie in their reports.



                      Sincerely yours,
                      Sue
                      ________________________
                      Sue Sarkis
                      Sarkis Detective Agency

                      (est. 1976)
                      PI 6564
                      _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi <http://www.sarkispi.com/> .com/)

                      1346 Ethel Street
                      Glendale, CA 91207-1826
                      818-242-2505
                      818-242-9824 FAX

                      "one Nation under God"

                      If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
                      a military veteran !

                      ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol
                      <http://www.aol.com> com.

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Thomas Eskridge
                      Facts are facts no matter how they are obtained See prior post. Wonder if this one worked for HP? Tom Eskridge, Chief Operations Officer High Tech Crime
                      Message 10 of 17 , Jun 17, 2007
                        Facts are facts no matter how they are obtained



                        See prior post. Wonder if this one worked for HP?



                        Tom Eskridge, Chief Operations Officer

                        High Tech Crime Institute

                        28100 US Hwy 19 N, suite 204

                        Clearwater Florida 33761

                        727-499-7215

                        888-300-9789

                        www.gohtci.com



                        _____

                        .


                        <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=1003554/grpspId=1705059354/msgId
                        =11052/stime=1182059619/nc1=3848515/nc2=3848643/nc3=3848571>




                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Thomas Eskridge
                        http://pasco. tbo.com/pasco/MGB5HT6FZ2F.html Can you say pay the feds $110K for facts obtained..oh yeah ..it was
                        Message 11 of 17 , Jun 17, 2007
                          http://pasco. <http://pasco.tbo.com/pasco/MGB5HT6FZ2F.html>
                          tbo.com/pasco/MGB5HT6FZ2F.html



                          Can you say pay the feds $110K for facts obtained..oh yeah ..it was via
                          pretexting.







                          Tom Eskridge, Chief Operations Officer

                          High Tech Crime Institute

                          28100 US Hwy 19 N, suite 204

                          Clearwater Florida 33761

                          727-499-7215

                          888-300-9789

                          www.gohtci.com



                          _____

                          From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
                          On Behalf Of david jones
                          Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 1:43 AM
                          To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Re: Using and Choosing Data Providers



                          Facts are facts no matter how they are obtained. There is no sense in
                          disclosing trade secrets.

                          Ricky Gurley <rmriinc@yahoo. <mailto:rmriinc%40yahoo.com> com> wrote: --- In
                          infoguys-list@ <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com,
                          "Thomas Eskridge" <TOM@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > If nothing else, it suggests what NOT to put
                          > in a written
                          > > report.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > It sounds like the TRULY LICENSED people omit facts---kinda of a way
                          of
                          > saying they lie

                          I will take some courses on how to omit facts from my reports... Thanks
                          for helping me to decide which continuing education courses might
                          benefit me best, Tom... ;o)

                          Rick.





                          ---------------------------------
                          8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
                          with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • david jones
                          I didn t say to violate privacy laws. In Florida, pretexting is legal so long as you do not pretend to represent yourself to be anyone employed by the
                          Message 12 of 17 , Jun 18, 2007
                            I didn't say to violate privacy laws. In Florida, pretexting is legal so long as you do not pretend to represent yourself to be anyone employed by the government: state, city, federal or otherwise and you have permissible use to do so. That will depend on what kind of case you are working on. The same goes for any other method you use to collect data. Using public records database or DMV records to cause service of process is legal in some states but in others, say, Pennsylvania it is not. The investigators in the HP "scandal" violated privacy laws by obtaining records they did not have permissible use to access.

                            Pretexting is a very valid way to collect information. You can collect information in five minutes on a phone that can take you hours to collect on the Internet, if you can even find it at all. Before you do it though, you should obviously make sure your not putting yourself in an actionable position.

                            Thomas Eskridge <TOM@...> wrote: http://pasco. <http://pasco.tbo.com/pasco/MGB5HT6FZ2F.html>
                            tbo.com/pasco/MGB5HT6FZ2F.html

                            Can you say pay the feds $110K for facts obtained..oh yeah ..it was via
                            pretexting.

                            Tom Eskridge, Chief Operations Officer

                            High Tech Crime Institute

                            28100 US Hwy 19 N, suite 204

                            Clearwater Florida 33761

                            727-499-7215

                            888-300-9789

                            www.gohtci.com

                            _____

                            From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
                            On Behalf Of david jones
                            Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 1:43 AM
                            To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Re: Using and Choosing Data Providers

                            Facts are facts no matter how they are obtained. There is no sense in
                            disclosing trade secrets.

                            Ricky Gurley <rmriinc@yahoo. <mailto:rmriinc%40yahoo.com> com> wrote: --- In
                            infoguys-list@ <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com,
                            "Thomas Eskridge" <TOM@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > If nothing else, it suggests what NOT to put
                            > in a written
                            > > report.
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > It sounds like the TRULY LICENSED people omit facts---kinda of a way
                            of
                            > saying they lie

                            I will take some courses on how to omit facts from my reports... Thanks
                            for helping me to decide which continuing education courses might
                            benefit me best, Tom... ;o)

                            Rick.

                            ---------------------------------
                            8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
                            with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                            ---------------------------------
                            Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles.
                            Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.