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

Re: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS

Expand Messages
  • suesarkis@aol.com
    This is to everyone. Please get rid of those confidentiality notices as there are no such law that prohibit dissemination. For that matter, if I wasn t the
    Message 1 of 12 , Sep 7, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      This is to everyone. Please get rid of those confidentiality notices as
      there are no such law that prohibit dissemination. For that matter, if I wasn't
      the intended recipient, they would not have wound up in my specific mailbox
      since the Internet is not a careless as my USPS carrier. So many people have
      similar warnings and all one can do is wonder.


      Patrick -

      Since you did send us to YOUR blog and you are the author of that wonderful
      presentation, I humbly request a few things.

      For starters, please grant us permission to share with our Reps and Senators
      which would include your signature line.

      Second, please ask everyone on all lists to actually share with the Reps and
      Senators. Also allow us to share with other lists that are independent of
      the other members. We don't want to inundate with repeats.

      Third, ask that they inform you who and when sent so that we (you) can keep
      track so that the rest of us can divvy up the remaining unnoticed Reps and
      Senators.

      We need to make sure they all start reading intelligent statements about the
      harm they are doing to everyone. It is up to us as individuals to save our
      bacon and we cannot rely on associations that represent, in most cases, a
      very small handful of licensees.

      Thank you for your splendid input.



      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 !



      ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at
      http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • i-direct
      Sue Unintended recipient can refer to the fact that an email travels through many servers to reach its intended recipient and can be intercepted and read at
      Message 2 of 12 , Sep 7, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Sue



        'Unintended recipient' can refer to the fact that an email travels through
        many servers to reach its intended recipient and can be intercepted and read
        at any point along its route unless encrypted.



        It is interesting to note that most UK Solicitors and even the Bar Council
        in the UK advocate the use of such disclaimers. What's good enough for a
        Barrister, is good enough for me.

        One IT Law expert in the UK has written on the subject and starts off by
        saying:

        The value of disclaimers is limited, since the courts normally attach more
        weight to the substantive content of the communication and the circumstances
        in which it is made than to any disclaimer. Having said that, disclaimers
        may possibly be helpful if an issue ends up in court in various respects .
        and, since disclaimers cost (almost) nothing, it is worthwhile to use them.
        Even though their effectiveness in court is doubtful, they may provide a
        useful argument in negotiations to resolve a dispute.

        The comments are based on the position under English law. I email / work
        internationally, so all countries laws may have relevance to me, depending
        on what I am doing and where I am doing it at the time.

        More at http://www.weblaw.co.uk/artemail.php





        Stephen R Peters

        Senior Investigative Consultant
        * Email: <mailto:admin@...> srp@...



        * Office: 0870 990 3211
        * Fax: 0870 990 3212

        * Email: <mailto:admin@...> strand@...

        * Web: <http://www.id-net.co.uk/> www.id-net.co.uk



        MEMBER: BRITISH AGENTS, CPIRC (Canada), LEAA (USA), IWWA

        SIGNATORY: BPPG



        _____

        From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
        On Behalf Of suesarkis@...
        Sent: 07 September 2007 20:31
        To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS




        This is to everyone. Please get rid of those confidentiality notices as
        there are no such law that prohibit dissemination. For that matter, if I
        wasn't
        the intended recipient, they would not have wound up in my specific mailbox
        since the Internet is not a careless as my USPS carrier. So many people have

        similar warnings and all one can do is wonder.


        Patrick -

        Since you did send us to YOUR blog and you are the author of that wonderful
        presentation, I humbly request a few things.

        For starters, please grant us permission to share with our Reps and Senators

        which would include your signature line.

        Second, please ask everyone on all lists to actually share with the Reps and

        Senators. Also allow us to share with other lists that are independent of
        the other members. We don't want to inundate with repeats.

        Third, ask that they inform you who and when sent so that we (you) can keep
        track so that the rest of us can divvy up the remaining unnoticed Reps and
        Senators.

        We need to make sure they all start reading intelligent statements about the

        harm they are doing to everyone. It is up to us as individuals to save our
        bacon and we cannot rely on associations that represent, in most cases, a
        very small handful of licensees.

        Thank you for your splendid input.



        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 !

        ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL
        at
        http://discover. <http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour>
        aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

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





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Patrick Baird
        Excellent point Sue!! Yes I grant permission to any and all that would like to participate in this discussion and to better inform our local, state, and
        Message 3 of 12 , Sep 7, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Excellent point Sue!!

          Yes I grant permission to any and all that would like to participate in this discussion and to better inform our local, state, and federal government to use my post on this matter including my signature line. I know this particular issue is dead, however, I am happy to offer my assistance to the industry in any way possible. Thanks again for your comments!!

          Patrick Baird, TPLI

          1st Source / PDJ Investigations - Lic A10979
          Phone: 817-579-0083
          Fax: 817-579-5301
          Cell: 1-866-440-6110
          U.S. & International Skip Tracing & Telephone Investigations



          ----- Original Message -----
          From: i-direct
          To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 5:35 PM
          Subject: RE: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS


          _____

          From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
          On Behalf Of suesarkis@...
          Sent: 07 September 2007 20:31
          To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS

          This is to everyone. Please get rid of those confidentiality notices as
          there are no such law that prohibit dissemination. For that matter, if I
          wasn't
          the intended recipient, they would not have wound up in my specific mailbox
          since the Internet is not a careless as my USPS carrier. So many people have

          similar warnings and all one can do is wonder.

          Patrick -

          Since you did send us to YOUR blog and you are the author of that wonderful
          presentation, I humbly request a few things.

          For starters, please grant us permission to share with our Reps and Senators

          which would include your signature line.

          Second, please ask everyone on all lists to actually share with the Reps and

          Senators. Also allow us to share with other lists that are independent of
          the other members. We don't want to inundate with repeats.

          Third, ask that they inform you who and when sent so that we (you) can keep
          track so that the rest of us can divvy up the remaining unnoticed Reps and
          Senators.

          We need to make sure they all start reading intelligent statements about the

          harm they are doing to everyone. It is up to us as individuals to save our
          bacon and we cannot rely on associations that represent, in most cases, a
          very small handful of licensees.

          Thank you for your splendid input.

          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 !

          ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL
          at
          http://discover. <http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour>
          aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

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

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





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Ricky Gurley
          To all, I believe that call records have a place in our industry too. However, I also believe that they are a consumer privacy breach. This is why I am a
          Message 4 of 12 , Sep 7, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            To all,

            I believe that call records have a place in our industry too. However, I also believe that they are a consumer privacy breach. This is why I am a proponent of having a system in place where the people in the professions that need them and have a legitimate immediate need to obtain them; could have access to them under some type of a permissible purpose clause.

            There is a point that I would like to comment on. With all due respect, I think it is unfair to suggest that it would be appropriate to obtain these records without some type of authorization by saying �this only affects the people that have something to hide�. That has long since been a recognized way of trying to �trick� someone into giving up one or some of their privacy privileges. It�s kind of like asking someone to strip naked, and when they refuse to do so, then saying �Well why not, if you have nothing to hide ?�.

            I think we are better off acknowledging that obtaining consumer call records by someone other than who these records belong to or who has an account that these records go to is in fact a breach of personal privacy, However, I believe the right approach to this issue is that in some cases there is a need to have consumer call records which is greater than and outweighs any consumer privacy concerns.


            Rick.


            Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc.
            Webpage: http://www.rmriinc.com
            Blog: http://rmriinc.livejournal.com/
            2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
            Phone: (888) 571-0958 Fax: (877) 795-9800 Cell: (573) 529-0808
            Company Email: RMRI-Inc@... Internet Email:
            rmriinc@...
            "He Who Forgets Will Be Destined To Remember"

            RMRI, Inc. Authorized Investigator Portal http://rmri.no-ip.org/mydms



            ----- Original Message ----
            From: Patrick Baird <pdjservices@...>
            To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
            Cc: suesarkis@...
            Sent: Friday, September 7, 2007 8:06:16 PM
            Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS

            Excellent point Sue!!

            Yes I grant permission to any and all that would like to participate in this discussion and to better inform our local, state, and federal government to use my post on this matter including my signature line. I know this particular issue is dead, however, I am happy to offer my assistance to the industry in any way possible. Thanks again for your comments!!

            Patrick Baird, TPLI

            1st Source / PDJ Investigations - Lic A10979
            Phone: 817-579-0083
            Fax: 817-579-5301
            Cell: 1-866-440-6110
            U.S. & International Skip Tracing & Telephone Investigations

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: i-direct
            To: infoguys-list@ yahoogroups. com
            Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 5:35 PM
            Subject: RE: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS

            _____

            From: infoguys-list@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:infoguys-list@ yahoogroups. com]
            On Behalf Of suesarkis@aol. com
            Sent: 07 September 2007 20:31
            To: infoguys-list@ yahoogroups. com
            Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS

            This is to everyone. Please get rid of those confidentiality notices as
            there are no such law that prohibit dissemination. For that matter, if I
            wasn't
            the intended recipient, they would not have wound up in my specific mailbox
            since the Internet is not a careless as my USPS carrier. So many people have

            similar warnings and all one can do is wonder.

            Patrick -

            Since you did send us to YOUR blog and you are the author of that wonderful
            presentation, I humbly request a few things.

            For starters, please grant us permission to share with our Reps and Senators

            which would include your signature line.

            Second, please ask everyone on all lists to actually share with the Reps and

            Senators. Also allow us to share with other lists that are independent of
            the other members. We don't want to inundate with repeats.

            Third, ask that they inform you who and when sent so that we (you) can keep
            track so that the rest of us can divvy up the remaining unnoticed Reps and
            Senators.

            We need to make sure they all start reading intelligent statements about the

            harm they are doing to everyone. It is up to us as individuals to save our
            bacon and we cannot rely on associations that represent, in most cases, a
            very small handful of licensees.

            Thank you for your splendid input.

            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 !

            ************ ********* ********* ******** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL
            at
            http://discover. <http://discover. aol.com/memed/ aolcom30tour>
            aol.com/memed/ aolcom30tour

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

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

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




            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Ricky Gurley
            That s a fine opinion if you are working any type of an investigation where you can afford to wait for a subpoena. Child Recovery Abduction Cases? Wait for a
            Message 5 of 12 , Sep 7, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              That's a fine opinion if you are working any type of an investigation where you can afford to wait for a subpoena.


              Child Recovery Abduction Cases? Wait for a subpoena, you say?

              Kidnapping Cases? Wait for subpoena?

              A Runaway Case? Wait for a subpoena?


              I suppose these types of cases would hold for a subpoena, but the victim's in these cases or the perpetrator of these types of crimes might not.........




              Rick.



              Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc.
              Webpage: http://www.rmriinc.com
              Blog: http://rmriinc.livejournal.com/
              2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
              Phone: (888) 571-0958 Fax: (877) 795-9800 Cell: (573) 529-0808
              Company Email: RMRI-Inc@... Internet Email:
              rmriinc@...
              "He Who Forgets Will Be Destined To Remember"

              RMRI, Inc. Authorized Investigator Portal http://rmri.no-ip.org/mydms



              ----- Original Message ----
              From: Bob Hrodey <rth@...>
              To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Saturday, September 8, 2007 12:48:17 AM
              Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS

              Ricky Gurley wrote:
              > To all,
              >
              > I believe that call records have a place in our industry too. However, I also believe that they are a consumer privacy breach. This is why I am a proponent of having a system in place where the people in the professions that need them and have a legitimate immediate need to obtain them; could have access to them under some type of a permissible purpose clause.

              We already have legal access to them on a case by case basis where their
              relevancy and importance can be demonstrated. It's called a subpoena.

              That's quite loose enough for me, thank you. If you have a legitimate
              need, open the case and get a subpoena. If not, mind your own business,
              not mine!

              --

              Enjoy,

              Bob
              ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _

              Hrodey & Associates Established 1977
              Post Office Box 366 Member of NALI, ASIS, FBINAA, NAPPS
              Woodstock, IL 60098-0366 NCISS, Assoc Det of IL & P.A.W.L.I.
              Licensed in IL & WI (815) 337-4636 Voice 337-4638 Fax
              email: inquiry@hrodey. com or rth@...
              Illinois License 115-000783 Wisconsin 8045-063




              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Bob Hrodey
              ... We already have legal access to them on a case by case basis where their relevancy and importance can be demonstrated. It s called a subpoena. That s
              Message 6 of 12 , Sep 7, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Ricky Gurley wrote:
                > To all,
                >
                > I believe that call records have a place in our industry too. However, I also believe that they are a consumer privacy breach. This is why I am a proponent of having a system in place where the people in the professions that need them and have a legitimate immediate need to obtain them; could have access to them under some type of a permissible purpose clause.

                We already have legal access to them on a case by case basis where their
                relevancy and importance can be demonstrated. It's called a subpoena.

                That's quite loose enough for me, thank you. If you have a legitimate
                need, open the case and get a subpoena. If not, mind your own business,
                not mine!


                --

                Enjoy,

                Bob
                ______________________________________________________________________________

                Hrodey & Associates Established 1977
                Post Office Box 366 Member of NALI, ASIS, FBINAA, NAPPS
                Woodstock, IL 60098-0366 NCISS, Assoc Det of IL & P.A.W.L.I.
                Licensed in IL & WI (815) 337-4636 Voice 337-4638 Fax
                email: inquiry@... or rth@...
                Illinois License 115-000783 Wisconsin 8045-063
              • suesarkis@aol.com
                In a message dated 9/7/2007 8:54:48 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, rth@hrodey.com writes: We already have legal access to them on a case by case basis where
                Message 7 of 12 , Sep 8, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  In a message dated 9/7/2007 8:54:48 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
                  rth@... writes:

                  We already have legal access to them on a case by case basis where their
                  relevancy and importance can be demonstrated. It's called a subpoena.

                  That's quite loose enough for me, thank you. If you have a legitimate
                  need, open the case and get a subpoena. If not, mind your own business,
                  not mine!



                  Bob -

                  I do disagree with you on this one. The police and the municipalities do
                  not need SDT's. Why should we for the same case for the same evidence? Why
                  should we be forced to show our hand in advance robbing us of ANY opportunity
                  for surprise or impeachment? Also, at least here in CA, a consumer notice has
                  to be sent to the party prior to sending a subpoena and if they say NO, the
                  court might side with them. Many hundreds of thousands of dollars later,
                  the Supreme Court after the Appellate Court will send it back and grant the
                  SDT.

                  Not only is this such an outrageous waste of money, it is also a totally
                  unfair disadvantage to our side.


                  If you read most State's PUC laws you will see that LEO's do not need
                  subpoenas. Disclosure to them is permissible.




                  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 new at http://www.aol.com


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Patrick Baird
                  The main issue I was trying to point out was the fact that we simply can not stand still and watch all of tools in our arsenal be taken away from big brother,
                  Message 8 of 12 , Sep 8, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    The main issue I was trying to point out was the fact that we simply can not
                    stand still and watch all of tools in our arsenal be taken away from big
                    brother, in doing so government officials (on all levels) are simply helping
                    the criminals and deadbeats. If this cycle continues the whole financial
                    industry will fold because they will enviably ban skiptracing altogether.

                    Sue made some great points and it is up to each and every one of us to get
                    vigilant, involved and ultimately help ourselves, our associations and most
                    importantly the private investigation industry fight to keep the necessary
                    tools we need to make a difference.

                    Great Group!!

                    Patrick Baird, TPLI

                    1st Source / PDJ Investigations - Lic A10979
                    Phone: 817-579-0083
                    Fax: 817-579-5301
                    Cell: 1-866-440-6110
                    U.S. & International Skip Tracing & Telephone Investigations
                    http://www.FindByPhone.com/
                    .
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "Ricky Gurley" <rmriinc@...>
                    To: <infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 9:29 PM
                    Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS


                    To all,

                    I believe that call records have a place in our industry too. However, I
                    also believe that they are a consumer privacy breach. This is why I am a
                    proponent of having a system in place where the people in the professions
                    that need them and have a legitimate immediate need to obtain them; could
                    have access to them under some type of a permissible purpose clause.

                    There is a point that I would like to comment on. With all due respect, I
                    think it is unfair to suggest that it would be appropriate to obtain these
                    records without some type of authorization by saying "this only affects the
                    people that have something to hide". That has long since been a recognized
                    way of trying to "trick" someone into giving up one or some of their privacy
                    privileges. It's kind of like asking someone to strip naked, and when they
                    refuse to do so, then saying "Well why not, if you have nothing to hide ?".

                    I think we are better off acknowledging that obtaining consumer call records
                    by someone other than who these records belong to or who has an account that
                    these records go to is in fact a breach of personal privacy, However, I
                    believe the right approach to this issue is that in some cases there is a
                    need to have consumer call records which is greater than and outweighs any
                    consumer privacy concerns.


                    Rick.


                    Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc.
                    Webpage: http://www.rmriinc.com
                    Blog: http://rmriinc.livejournal.com/
                    2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
                    Phone: (888) 571-0958 Fax: (877) 795-9800 Cell: (573) 529-0808
                    Company Email: RMRI-Inc@... Internet Email:
                    rmriinc@...
                    "He Who Forgets Will Be Destined To Remember"

                    RMRI, Inc. Authorized Investigator Portal http://rmri.no-ip.org/mydms



                    ----- Original Message ----
                    From: Patrick Baird <pdjservices@...>
                    To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                    Cc: suesarkis@...
                    Sent: Friday, September 7, 2007 8:06:16 PM
                    Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS

                    Excellent point Sue!!

                    Yes I grant permission to any and all that would like to participate in this
                    discussion and to better inform our local, state, and federal government to
                    use my post on this matter including my signature line. I know this
                    particular issue is dead, however, I am happy to offer my assistance to the
                    industry in any way possible. Thanks again for your comments!!

                    Patrick Baird, TPLI

                    1st Source / PDJ Investigations - Lic A10979
                    Phone: 817-579-0083
                    Fax: 817-579-5301
                    Cell: 1-866-440-6110
                    U.S. & International Skip Tracing & Telephone Investigations

                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: i-direct
                    To: infoguys-list@ yahoogroups. com
                    Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 5:35 PM
                    Subject: RE: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS

                    _____

                    From: infoguys-list@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:infoguys-list@ yahoogroups.
                    com]
                    On Behalf Of suesarkis@aol. com
                    Sent: 07 September 2007 20:31
                    To: infoguys-list@ yahoogroups. com
                    Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS

                    This is to everyone. Please get rid of those confidentiality notices as
                    there are no such law that prohibit dissemination. For that matter, if I
                    wasn't
                    the intended recipient, they would not have wound up in my specific mailbox
                    since the Internet is not a careless as my USPS carrier. So many people have

                    similar warnings and all one can do is wonder.

                    Patrick -

                    Since you did send us to YOUR blog and you are the author of that wonderful
                    presentation, I humbly request a few things.

                    For starters, please grant us permission to share with our Reps and Senators

                    which would include your signature line.

                    Second, please ask everyone on all lists to actually share with the Reps and

                    Senators. Also allow us to share with other lists that are independent of
                    the other members. We don't want to inundate with repeats.

                    Third, ask that they inform you who and when sent so that we (you) can keep
                    track so that the rest of us can divvy up the remaining unnoticed Reps and
                    Senators.

                    We need to make sure they all start reading intelligent statements about the

                    harm they are doing to everyone. It is up to us as individuals to save our
                    bacon and we cannot rely on associations that represent, in most cases, a
                    very small handful of licensees.

                    Thank you for your splendid input.

                    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 !

                    ************ ********* ********* ******** Get a sneak peek of the all-new
                    AOL
                    at
                    http://discover. <http://discover. aol.com/memed/ aolcom30tour>
                    aol.com/memed/ aolcom30tour

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

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

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




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



                    <p><hr></p>
                    To subscribe, send an empty message to <a
                    href="mailto:infoguys-list-subscribe@yahoogroups.com">infoguys-list-subscribe@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
                    To unsubscribe, send a message to <a
                    href="mailto:infoguys-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com">infoguys-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
                    <p><hr></p>
                    Yahoo! Groups Links
                  • Bob Hrodey
                    ... That makes it seem pretty obvious that the State of CA deems this information to be confidential and worthy of protection. As for wholesale delivery of
                    Message 9 of 12 , Sep 8, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      suesarkis@... wrote:
                      >
                      > In a message dated 9/7/2007 8:54:48 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
                      > rth@... writes:
                      >
                      > We already have legal access to them on a case by case basis where their
                      > relevancy and importance can be demonstrated. It's called a subpoena.
                      >
                      > That's quite loose enough for me, thank you. If you have a legitimate
                      > need, open the case and get a subpoena. If not, mind your own business,
                      > not mine!
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Bob -
                      >
                      > I do disagree with you on this one. The police and the municipalities do
                      > not need SDT's. Why should we for the same case for the same evidence? Why
                      > should we be forced to show our hand in advance robbing us of ANY opportunity
                      > for surprise or impeachment? Also, at least here in CA, a consumer notice has
                      > to be sent to the party prior to sending a subpoena and if they say NO, the
                      > court might side with them. Many hundreds of thousands of dollars later,
                      > the Supreme Court after the Appellate Court will send it back and grant the
                      > SDT.

                      That makes it seem pretty obvious that the State of CA deems this
                      information to be confidential and worthy of protection.

                      As for wholesale delivery of these records to LEO's... I'll admit to
                      being a bit behind the curve since I've been out of LE for a number
                      years but last I knew the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986
                      (and as it's been amended) prohibits the release of this information to
                      LE without court order or subpoena. MUD and TOLLS, the call records
                      we're talking about required a subpoena from LE even before ECPA.
                      Suspect that this may have changed with the Patriot Act, etc. but...

                      As for kidnappings and parental abductions? If the family hasn't
                      involved LE, that's their problem and that of the victim.

                      > Not only is this such an outrageous waste of money, it is also a totally
                      > unfair disadvantage to our side.

                      Yes, it is. However, to advocate giving carte blanc access to these
                      records to any private detective is just asking for it. These extreme
                      examples, as cited by Ricky, are the exception, not the rule. The
                      firestorm and subsequent legislation that rained down on us did NOT
                      arise due to some PI getting tolls to solve a kidnapping. It came from
                      some idiots figuring that the end justified the means. Well, I think
                      they found out that it didn't.

                      No offense to anyone reading this (but if the shoe fits) but, quite
                      frankly, we all know of folks who are walking around stating they are
                      PI's and, in the eyes of the law, they are. However, there are a number
                      of those folks that I would not trust to pour water out of a bucket if
                      the instructions were printed on the bottom of the bucket and they were
                      instructed to read the directions first<g> These are the folks who are
                      going to have access to my personal records? Don't think so.



                      --

                      Enjoy,

                      Bob
                      ______________________________________________________________________________

                      Hrodey & Associates Established 1977
                      Post Office Box 366 Member of NALI, ASIS, FBINAA, NAPPS
                      Woodstock, IL 60098-0366 NCISS, Assoc Det of IL & P.A.W.L.I.
                      Licensed in IL & WI (815) 337-4636 Voice 337-4638 Fax
                      email: inquiry@... or rth@...
                      Illinois License 115-000783 Wisconsin 8045-063
                    • Ricky Gurley
                      ... these ... extreme ... from ... think ... are ... number ... if ... were ... are ... Let me say this first. Currently; I could care less whether call
                      Message 10 of 12 , Sep 8, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, Bob Hrodey <rth@...> wrote:

                        >
                        > Yes, it is. However, to advocate giving carte blanc access to
                        these
                        > records to any private detective is just asking for it. These
                        extreme
                        > examples, as cited by Ricky, are the exception, not the rule. The
                        > firestorm and subsequent legislation that rained down on us did NOT
                        > arise due to some PI getting tolls to solve a kidnapping. It came
                        from
                        > some idiots figuring that the end justified the means. Well, I
                        think
                        > they found out that it didn't.
                        >
                        > No offense to anyone reading this (but if the shoe fits) but, quite
                        > frankly, we all know of folks who are walking around stating they
                        are
                        > PI's and, in the eyes of the law, they are. However, there are a
                        number
                        > of those folks that I would not trust to pour water out of a bucket
                        if
                        > the instructions were printed on the bottom of the bucket and they
                        were
                        > instructed to read the directions first<g> These are the folks who
                        are
                        > going to have access to my personal records? Don't think so.
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > --
                        >
                        > Enjoy,
                        >
                        > Bob


                        Let me say this first. Currently; I could care less whether call
                        records are outlawed or not. Call records are not how I make a
                        living. I make a fairly good living too, and I have not had a need
                        for call records in quite a while. When they were legal, I
                        occasionally used them. Now that they are not (or even have the
                        slightest possibility of getting me sued), I don't touch them.
                        However, I realize that I am not the only P.I. in the world, and that
                        for some of the other P.I.s in the world, there could be a need. So,
                        I make this post.


                        In my opinion, it is these extreme examples that give way to a need
                        in certain cases for private sector personnel to have access to call
                        records. In a perfect world there could be one entire Police Task
                        Force per criminal, dedicated to bringing that one criminal to
                        justice. But in our imperfect world, the Police are backlogged with
                        cases and short on manpower to meet the demand for combating crime.
                        This is why it is foolish to say "they should have the Police
                        involved" and disregard the private citizen's often enough need to
                        hire someone in the private sector that can dedicate immediate
                        attention to a critical problem. This applies in these "extreme
                        examples" that you quote me on, Bob.

                        Here I am not saying that there is not a privacy issue, what I am
                        saying is that privacy is not always paramount. Call records are in
                        fact a "tool" that has long since been used in our industry with good
                        results, and abused by our industry with the results we are seeing
                        here in this thread. But let me ask you this; how many P.I.s REALLY
                        know how to read a database report? For those that do REALLY know how
                        to read a database report, how are call records any more invasive
                        than a database report? Often times I can determine who someone is
                        banking with from a database report. What kind of vehicle they drive.
                        Who they bought their vehicle from. Who their mother and father are.
                        Sometimes even what their political affiliations are. And sometimes
                        who they associate with. Mind you, some of this is in fact NOT public
                        records. Our "private lives" are already open books for ANYONE to
                        browse if they know how. Just go to: http://www.pipl.com and run a
                        search on someone; you can find tons of personal information on a
                        person there for FREE.

                        The notion that our privacy is sacred has long since been a myth.
                        What is surprising is to see Private Investigators that make a
                        living "snooping" into people private lives appear shocked that this
                        could be happening to them. For a Private Investigator to display
                        such a disdain for what we might consider "breaches of personal
                        privacy" is the perfect illustration of an oxymoron. Not only is this
                        an oxymoron; it raises the "BS Meter" of any intelligent consumer
                        that observes it.

                        Why not just be honest and say; "Yes getting consumer call records is
                        certainly a violation of personal privacy, but "Joe
                        Kidnapper/Rapist's" privacy may not be so important to you when it is
                        your daughter or wife he has kidnapped". I think that the consumer
                        can go with that argument better than any of the others we are
                        offering. I certainly think that argument might give a concerned
                        consumer pause more-so than saying "I snoop into people's lives for a
                        living, and I agree with the concerned consumer", because then the
                        consumer starts to think "this is the guy that is irresponsibly
                        violating people's privacy, he just hasn't been caught yet".

                        I think that some of the problem is that there should be a certain
                        amount of transparency in what we do. I don't think we have to give
                        away "trade secrets" to have that transparency either. If the
                        consumer could see that the P.I. Profession is made up mostly of
                        good, honest, and ethical people, with good intentions; instead of
                        seeing only the "bad press" we get which in reality only illustrates
                        a very minute part of our industry; the consumer would not be so
                        critical of us.


                        Those are just my thoughts.



                        Rick.



                        Risk Management Research & Investments, Inc.
                        "He Who Forgets, Will Be Destined To Remember"

                        MAIL BOX: 2101 W. Broadway PMB 326, Columbia, MO. 65203
                        OFFICE ADDRESS: 607 N. Providence, Columbia, MO. 65203

                        Phone: (888) 571-0958
                        Fax: (877) 795-9800
                        Cell: (573) 529-0808

                        Email
                        RMRI-Inc@...

                        Webpage
                        http://www.rmriinc.com
                      • Patrick Baird
                        To Everyone: Excellent points from everyone. Maybe, we (private investigators) can collectively come-up with a generalized statement that can be used on our
                        Message 11 of 12 , Sep 8, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                          To Everyone:

                          Excellent points from everyone. Maybe, we (private investigators) can collectively come-up with a generalized statement that can be used on our blogs, emails, websites, etc. that helps educate the uninformed of the serious and sensitive predicament we are all in. These links can direct people to a central website/URL that will inform, offer sample text for emails/letters and more importantly list direct links, addresses and fax numbers to the various government agencies that are investigating and/or making these laws.

                          We can not save call records - but as an industry we can try and help our associations and more importantly ourselves from future government intervention.

                          Just a thought....

                          Patrick Baird, TPLI

                          1st Source / PDJ Investigations - Lic A10979
                          Phone: 817-579-0083
                          Fax: 817-579-5301
                          Cell: 1-866-440-6110
                          U.S. & International Skip Tracing & Telephone Investigations
                          http://www.FindByPhone.com/

                          CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:
                          This e-mail contains confidential information and is intended solely for the use of the individual named on this transmission. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail please destroy this message immediately.
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: Bob Hrodey
                          To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 11:06 AM
                          Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] DEATH OF CALL RECORDS IN TEXAS


                          suesarkis@... wrote:
                          >
                          > In a message dated 9/7/2007 8:54:48 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
                          > rth@... writes:
                          >
                          > We already have legal access to them on a case by case basis where their
                          > relevancy and importance can be demonstrated. It's called a subpoena.
                          >
                          > That's quite loose enough for me, thank you. If you have a legitimate
                          > need, open the case and get a subpoena. If not, mind your own business,
                          > not mine!
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Bob -
                          >
                          > I do disagree with you on this one. The police and the municipalities do
                          > not need SDT's. Why should we for the same case for the same evidence? Why
                          > should we be forced to show our hand in advance robbing us of ANY opportunity
                          > for surprise or impeachment? Also, at least here in CA, a consumer notice has
                          > to be sent to the party prior to sending a subpoena and if they say NO, the
                          > court might side with them. Many hundreds of thousands of dollars later,
                          > the Supreme Court after the Appellate Court will send it back and grant the
                          > SDT.

                          That makes it seem pretty obvious that the State of CA deems this
                          information to be confidential and worthy of protection.

                          As for wholesale delivery of these records to LEO's... I'll admit to
                          being a bit behind the curve since I've been out of LE for a number
                          years but last I knew the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986
                          (and as it's been amended) prohibits the release of this information to
                          LE without court order or subpoena. MUD and TOLLS, the call records
                          we're talking about required a subpoena from LE even before ECPA.
                          Suspect that this may have changed with the Patriot Act, etc. but...

                          As for kidnappings and parental abductions? If the family hasn't
                          involved LE, that's their problem and that of the victim.

                          > Not only is this such an outrageous waste of money, it is also a totally
                          > unfair disadvantage to our side.

                          Yes, it is. However, to advocate giving carte blanc access to these
                          records to any private detective is just asking for it. These extreme
                          examples, as cited by Ricky, are the exception, not the rule. The
                          firestorm and subsequent legislation that rained down on us did NOT
                          arise due to some PI getting tolls to solve a kidnapping. It came from
                          some idiots figuring that the end justified the means. Well, I think
                          they found out that it didn't.

                          No offense to anyone reading this (but if the shoe fits) but, quite
                          frankly, we all know of folks who are walking around stating they are
                          PI's and, in the eyes of the law, they are. However, there are a number
                          of those folks that I would not trust to pour water out of a bucket if
                          the instructions were printed on the bottom of the bucket and they were
                          instructed to read the directions first<g> These are the folks who are
                          going to have access to my personal records? Don't think so.

                          --

                          Enjoy,

                          Bob
                          __________________________________________________________

                          Hrodey & Associates Established 1977
                          Post Office Box 366 Member of NALI, ASIS, FBINAA, NAPPS
                          Woodstock, IL 60098-0366 NCISS, Assoc Det of IL & P.A.W.L.I.
                          Licensed in IL & WI (815) 337-4636 Voice 337-4638 Fax
                          email: inquiry@... or rth@...
                          Illinois License 115-000783 Wisconsin 8045-063





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