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

Re: [infoguys-list] Help!

Expand Messages
  • prudenter@juno.com
    How do you know who you are running plates for? Prudenter Discreetly Performed Investigations 21 Years Law Enforcement Experience Michael K. Balcom Chief of
    Message 1 of 16 , Apr 23, 2004
      How do you know who you are running plates for?


      Prudenter Discreetly Performed Investigations
      21 Years Law Enforcement Experience
      Michael K. Balcom Chief of Police EPD (Retired)
      www.PrudenterInvestigations.com
      413-292-7168
    • invcons
      ... That would require a conversation with some back up checking with the police department in that jurisdiction.
      Message 2 of 16 , Apr 23, 2004
        on 4/23/04 12:35 PM, prudenter@... at prudenter@... wrote:

        > How do you know who you are running plates for?
        >
        >
        > Prudenter Discreetly Performed Investigations
        > 21 Years Law Enforcement Experience
        > Michael K. Balcom Chief of Police EPD (Retired)
        > www.PrudenterInvestigations.com
        > 413-292-7168
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > <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-unsubscr
        > ibe@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
        > <p><hr></p>
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        That would require a conversation with some back up checking with the police
        department in that jurisdiction.
      • malice084@aol.com
        call me we can talk bob gallo gallo investigations ny ret nypd 1800 381 0422 we can most likly work in your budget [Non-text portions of this message have been
        Message 3 of 16 , Apr 24, 2004
          call me we can talk bob gallo gallo investigations ny ret nypd 1800 381 0422
          we can most likly work in your budget


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • spies_online
          Dear Kat, First of all, I m sorry that you have been treated so rudely and unprofessionally. Now, let me tell you a little something about the Driver s
          Message 4 of 16 , Apr 26, 2004
            Dear Kat,

            First of all, I'm sorry that you have been treated so rudely and
            unprofessionally. Now, let me tell you a little something about the
            Driver's Privacy and Protection Act of 1994. In order to obtain
            plate information on anyone, even private investigators must have a
            permissible purpose to do so. According to the DPPA, courtesy of
            Docusearch:

            "Pursuant to the Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994 (DPPA), you
            may only access this data for one of the following permitted uses:

            1. Use by a court, law enforcement agency or other government agency.

            2. Use for any matter of motor vehicle or driver safety or theft to
            inform an owner of a towed or impounded vehicle; or by an employer or
            insurer to obtain or verify information relating to a holder of a
            commercial driver's license.

            3. Use in the normal course of business, to verify the accuracy of
            personal information submitted by the individual to the business and,
            if the submitted information is incorrect, to obtain correct
            information, but only for the purpose of preventing fraud by, or
            pursuing legal remedies against, the individual.

            4. Use in connection with a civil, criminal, administrative, or
            arbitral proceeding.

            5. Use in research or in producing statistical reports, but only if
            the personal information is not published, re-disclosed, or used to
            contact any individual.

            6. Use by an insurer or insurance support organization, in connection
            with claims investigation activities, anti-fraud activities, rating
            or underwriting.

            7. For any other use if the motor vehicle department has provided a
            notice that personal information may be disclosed to any business or
            person and has provided an opportunity to prohibit such disclosures.

            8. Use by a licensed private investigative agency or licensed
            security service for a purpose permitted in items 1 through 7 above.
            Written consent of individual."

            As you can see from the above, being curious about who might be
            parked out in front of your house is not a legal, permissible
            purpose. Even a private investigator must have a valid reason per
            items 1 thru 7. PIs aren't allowed to peek at peoples' records just
            because they feel a whim, either.

            If you have a valid reason for the information, you can purchase the
            information from Docusearch yourself here:

            http://www.docusearch.com/dmvb.html

            You don't need a PI to get the information, but you *MUST* follow the
            law. Even PIs must follow the rules of the DPPA, and if they don't,
            they can lose their licenses to be PIs (and much worse).


            Best,

            Joanne Waldron
            Spies Online
            http://www.spiesonline.net



            --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "witchcat2006"
            <witchcat2006@y...> wrote:
            > I am in Iowa, and I believe I am being stalked. I have called
            > police, but by the time they arrive, the car(s) are gone. They
            don't
            > seem to be taking this seriously as I have given them car/plate
            info,
            > but they have not followed up. (I've noticed stay-at-home moms are
            > not given as much credence as professionals...)
            >
            > Can someone run the plates in Iowa for me? They tend to be older
            > cars...one car had different plates on front and back. (Neighbor
            > helped me get the info...she has seen the cars and is helping me
            > gather info.)
            >
            > I'm a stay-at-home mom, never been arrested, and only got my first
            > speeding ticket a few months ago - in other words, a clean record.
            > We are on a very limited budget (daughter is adopted and has
            > some "special needs) and I can't afford a P.I.
            >
            > I'm really scared...was stalked in college by the guy that turned
            out
            > to be the I-5 serial killer...tho I didn't know it until years
            > later. Needless to say, I'm freaking out.
            >
            > Could someone please, please, help.
            > Kat
            > Email privately.
          • spies_online
            Typo correction on my last post:
            Message 5 of 16 , Apr 26, 2004
              Typo correction on my last post:

              <<8. Use by a licensed private investigative agency or licensed
              security service for a purpose permitted in items 1 through 7 above.
              Written consent of individual.">>


              That should have read:

              8. Use by a licensed private investigative agency or licensed
              security service for a purpose permitted in items 1 through 7 above.

              9. Written consent of individual.



              Best,

              Joanne Waldron
              Spies Online
              http://www.spiesonline.net
            • Condor
              This woman was NOT treated rudely. There is no reason to appologize for anything and I would appreciate it if you would check with the other party involved(ME)
              Message 6 of 16 , Apr 26, 2004
                This woman was NOT treated rudely.

                There is no reason to appologize for anything and I would appreciate it if
                you would check with the other party involved(ME) before making such a
                comment on a list. I do not need to have anyone speak on my behalf.

                It is important to have the facts straight rather than listen to some "rant"
                from a woman that is in question whether she wants to follow advice or not.
                End of story.

                Again this woman is NOT telling the truth. Take it or leave.

                Have a nice day

                John


                John Carman-Former U.S. Secret Service- U.S. Customs/INS-SDPD
                Director-Carman Investigations & Security Consultant
                California State License P.I. 8686
                P.O. Box 3811
                La Mesa, Ca. 91944
                Pager:(619)601-9250
                john@...
                www.CarmanInvestigations.com

                CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING!!! This electronic message contains information
                which may be privileged and/or confidential. This information is intended
                for the exclusive use of the individual(s), entity, or persons named or
                indicated above. Any unauthorized access, disclosure, copying, distribution,
                or use of any parts of the contents of this message/information is strictly
                prohibited by federal law. Any attempts to intercept this message are in
                violation of Title 18 U.S.C. 2511(1) of the Electronic Communications
                Privacy Act (ECPA). All violators are subject to fines, imprisonment, civil
                damages, or both.
              • HollowayPI@aol.com
                Seems that someone from a group called Spiesonline just cannot get enough of the bull Crap that goes happens on her own list she has to spread to other list.
                Message 7 of 16 , Apr 26, 2004
                  Seems that someone from a group called Spiesonline just cannot get enough of
                  the bull Crap that goes happens on her own list she has to spread to other
                  list. That is why I left her list.

                  Cordially,
                  Roger

                  Roger Holloway TPLI
                  PO Box 851
                  Iowa Park, TX 76367
                  940-592-7000
                  www.TexasDetective.com
                  TX License # A10709


                  Member:
                  TPSA, TALI, IPSA, ION, NNA, NSA,
                  NAPPS, USPSA, NRRN, IWWA





                  "CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING":
                  This electronic message contains Information which may be privileged and/or
                  confidential.
                  The information is intended for use only by the individual(s) or entity
                  named/indicated above.
                  Be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the content of
                  this
                  message / information is prohibited. If you received this message in error
                  please contact us right away.
                  Please be advised any advice or opinions should not be considered legal
                  advice I am not an Attorney.


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Toxey H. McDavid
                  Sorry John, If you ll notice, I did not include the text of your email in my reply, but another person s. My email had nothing at all to do with you. Toxey ...
                  Message 8 of 16 , Apr 26, 2004
                    Sorry John,

                    If you'll notice, I did not include the text of your email in my
                    reply, but another person's. My email had nothing at all to do with
                    you.

                    Toxey

                    --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "Condor" <johncarman@e...>
                    wrote:
                    > This woman was NOT treated rudely.
                    >
                    > There is no reason to appologize for anything and I would
                    appreciate it if
                    > you would check with the other party involved(ME) before making
                    such a
                    > comment on a list. I do not need to have anyone speak on my behalf.
                  • Toxey H. McDavid
                    I m not sure what meaning this message was supposed to convey exactly, but it s clear that Joanne simply quoted the DPPA of 1994 and explained that PI s cannot
                    Message 9 of 16 , Apr 26, 2004
                      I'm not sure what meaning this message was supposed to convey
                      exactly, but it's clear that Joanne simply quoted the DPPA of 1994
                      and explained that PI's cannot just give someone DMV info. She also
                      stated that if Kat has a valid reason you may legally obtain this
                      information through Docusearch. Whether Docusearch has improperly
                      given out information is irrelevant to this statement.

                      As for your righteous departure from Spies Online, the reason you
                      left Spies Online was because list rules prevented the posting of
                      Spam. You got mad about that, and left. The only "bull Crap" on the
                      list was your spam.

                      Toxey McDavid
                      McDavid & Meek Investigations

                      --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, HollowayPI@a... wrote:
                      > Seems that someone from a group called Spiesonline just cannot get
                      enough of
                      > the bull Crap that goes happens on her own list she has to spread
                      to other
                      > list. That is why I left her list.
                      >
                      > Cordially,
                      > Roger
                      >
                      > Roger Holloway TPLI
                      > PO Box 851
                      > Iowa Park, TX 76367
                      > 940-592-7000
                      > www.TexasDetective.com
                      > TX License # A10709
                      >
                      >
                      > Member:
                      > TPSA, TALI, IPSA, ION, NNA, NSA,
                      > NAPPS, USPSA, NRRN, IWWA
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > "CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING":
                      > This electronic message contains Information which may be
                      privileged and/or
                      > confidential.
                      > The information is intended for use only by the individual(s) or
                      entity
                      > named/indicated above.
                      > Be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the
                      content of
                      > this
                      > message / information is prohibited. If you received this message
                      in error
                      > please contact us right away.
                      > Please be advised any advice or opinions should not be considered
                      legal
                      > advice I am not an Attorney.
                      >
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • spies_online
                      Kirsti, Yes, I am not a licensed PI. I am a highly educated computer scientist. Being a computer scientist does not require a license. However, the DPPA law
                      Message 10 of 16 , Apr 26, 2004
                        Kirsti,


                        Yes, I am not a licensed PI. I am a highly educated computer
                        scientist. Being a computer scientist does not require a license.
                        However, the DPPA law is pretty clear to anyone who can read.

                        Since you seem to have misread my post, let me be very clear. Your
                        post implied to Kat that the only reason you weren't going to help
                        her was that she wasn't going to pay you money for doing so. My
                        whole point is that she did not (according to my reading of the law)
                        have a permissible purpose for the information. You cannot "run a
                        plate" just because you are curious. That was MY point. You can't
                        run it for her. Docusearch can't run it for her, either. Nobody
                        can. She has no permissible purpose. Period.


                        Joanne Waldron
                        Authorized Partner, Ontrack Data Recovery
                        Spies Online
                        http://www.spiesonline.net
                      • Will Ray
                        Toxey, Great reply, you made many good ideas, suggestions and corrections in your article. Everyone should heed your remarks, Professional_______has become as
                        Message 11 of 16 , Apr 27, 2004
                          Toxey,
                          Great reply, you made many good ideas, suggestions and corrections in your
                          article. Everyone should heed your remarks, Professional_______has become
                          as frequently used as, Hey you, or Hay boy, professional has lost the
                          meaning it truly stands for. Now if a person is doing
                          something.......he/she refers to them self as a professional ---- --------.
                          That is fine if the person has many years of successful experience along
                          with some basic education.

                          In the PI Industry it takes many years of successful practical on the job
                          training. There are so many variations and category of Investigations no
                          one can be a professional expert in all investigations.
                          We can all be PROFESSIONAL in our humanities, ethical standards.........It
                          is simple to be a Professional in the Ethical standards. Simply do as Our
                          Lord asked us to do..............DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO
                          UNTO YOU......See it is so simple that we can all be ethical in everything,
                          our name calling, poking fun, remarks about another spelling, writing,
                          color, religion. We learn that it is simply not necessary for to be the
                          offender of anyone.
                          God Bless All,
                          Will Ray


                          "IN GOD WE TRUST"
                          "THE LAND OF THE FREE, HOME OF THE BRAVE"
                          "When you have a lot to lose it makes sense to trust the best"
                          E-Mail: willraypi@... http://www.willraypi.cjb.net
                          "For what ever is hidden is meant to be disclosed, and what ever is
                          concealed is meant to be brought out into the open" (Mark 4:22 NIV).
                          Wilburn "Will" Ray CMI State of Oregon License No. 071
                          Legal Investigator
                          POB 547
                          Sutherlin, Oregon 97479-0547
                          Mobile 541--430-0463 Fax 541-459-9175 Ph. 541-459-3545
                          Civil++++++++++Criminal+++++++++++Domestic
                          Evidentiary DNA Collector/Custodian
                          Surveillance++++++++++++++Process Services
                          Member Of:
                          Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyers Association
                          Association Of Christian Investigators
                          National Association Of Investigative Specialist
                          Oregon Association Of Licensed Investigators (Southern Regional Director)
                          Southern Region is: Southern Oregon and California
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: "Toxey H. McDavid" <toxey@...>
                          To: <infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com>
                          Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 6:30 PM
                          Subject: [infoguys-list] Re: Help!


                          I'm not sure how you derived your statements about the "Joann's"
                          (sic) of the internet from the quote you have posted below. For the
                          benefit of those who are unable to comprehend this very short and
                          very specific paragraph, let's take it apart shall we, and see what
                          it actually says:

                          "If you have a valid reason for the information, you can purchase the
                          information from Docusearch yourself here:
                          http://www.docusearch.com/dmvb.html"

                          It appears Joanne is stating that if you have a valid reason for the
                          information, you can purchase the information from Docusearch, and
                          then she gives the publically available URL for Docusearch.
                          Considering that this statement followed immediately after her
                          listing of all the permissible purposes for obtaining DMV, I think it
                          is clear to anyone with the simplest level of comprehension
                          that "valid reason" should be read synonymously with "legal reason"
                          or "permissible purpose".

                          "You don't need a PI to get the information"

                          I'm sure this stings, but it is actually true. If Kat has a valid
                          reason, i.e. permissible purpose, she can legally obtain this
                          information from a number of sources (including Docusearch). She
                          certainly is not required to give any money to a private
                          investigator, no matter how snotty or irrational he or she may be.

                          "but you *MUST* follow the law."

                          Again, I believe that it is clear to most that she was referring to
                          the DPPA which she had just listed when she referred to "the law". We
                          may also assume that she was recommending that Kat obey all laws. I'm
                          not sure what your objection to this part could possibly be.

                          "Even PIs must follow the rules of the DPPA, and if they don't, they
                          can lose their licenses to be PIs (and much worse)."

                          In this part, Joanne is stating what all PI's should already know.
                          The laws that apply to Kat also apply to PI's. We have no special
                          powers or priviledges afforded to us by our profession, and must obey
                          the law on an equal footing with normal citizens. Failure to do so is
                          correctly correlated with the possibility that a private investigator
                          may lose his or her license. She also implies that the loss of a
                          license is not the worst thing that can happen if a private
                          investigator fails to obey the law. I think this is clear and need
                          not be thoroughly explained, even to the simplest of thinkers: "You
                          break law, you go jail."

                          I'm not sure which part of this paragraph qualifies as "warm and
                          fuzzies". Perhaps you meant the parts where Joanne completely failed
                          to insult, abuse, and humiliate Kat. Most people don't define factual
                          statements about laws and legalities as "warm and fuzzies". Nor do
                          they see the absence of rudeness as a negative.

                          As for licensed or unlicensed, and the word professional, I agree
                          that Joanne is not a licensed private investigator. Nor has she ever
                          claimed to be. Nor has she ever offered services as a private
                          investigator. She has however consistently acted in a manner that
                          indicates her intelligence, her knowlege, and her kindness towards
                          others. In other words, she has acted in a "Professional" manner. You
                          are indeed licensed, and can claim the title "professional" just as
                          any person who receives monetary rewards for the performance of a
                          duty can claim (i.e. professional garbageman, professional sewage
                          worker, professional car thief). However, being paid for duties is
                          not the same thing as "acting professionally." Your comparison of
                          Joanne as an unlicensed professional was trite, and merely served as
                          an attempt to denigrate her publically to bolster your own self-
                          esteem. Not professional, not in the least.

                          I know you will not apologize for your previous post because I know
                          your personality. Therefore I did not in fact ask you to apologize,
                          nor was I apologizing for you. I only apologized for members of this
                          list with a sense of tact and decorum.

                          In addition, the article you cite yourself clearly states the
                          following: "The stalker paid a private investigator to find her Los
                          Angeles address, which was readily available from the state
                          Department of Motor Vehicles."

                          It seems clear to me that not only did this article NOT connect
                          Docusearch with Rebecca Schaeffer's murder, instead it pointed the
                          finger at the Department of Motor Vehicles. Why is this important?
                          Because Joanne's post referenced the DPPA (Driver Privacy Protection
                          Act of 1994) which was created to PREVENT similar cases such as the
                          regrettable murder of Ms. Schaeffer. Reading is clearly not the same
                          thing as comprehension.

                          I agree that private investigators have a responsibility to screen
                          clients. That is the single worthy and commendable part of your post
                          that I could find. However, your duties and responsibilities as a PI
                          do not tag along with the automatic right to be as rude and obnoxious
                          as you like. You're welcome to behave as you like of course, and I'm
                          sure you'll discover the end results of that behavior in the long run.

                          "To those dedicated to raising the bar of our profession"

                          I was (almost) speechless when I read this quote from your post. I
                          find it painfully ridiculous, laughable, and astonishing at the same
                          time. I can only suppose that what you and your cohorts
                          believe "raises the bar" of our profession includes: slandering and
                          attacking a judge, slanderously insulting and verbally abusing
                          members of online forums (or allowing this on your own forum set up
                          for this very purpose), mean-spiritedness and backbiting. I submit
                          that this does not in fact promote or improve the professional image
                          of private investigators, but instead causes serious harm (mostly to
                          the reputations of those who participate in these activities).

                          As a final note: "causing ALL Licensed PI's to loose access to
                          MVR's." Besides being factually incorrect, I have to finally say
                          something about this. It is not "to loose". That means nothing in the
                          English language. It's "to lose" (with a z sound). Something can
                          be "too loose", someone can cause you "to lose" something, or you may
                          eat so much at Thanksgiving that you have "to loosen" your belt.
                          But "loose", by itself, is an adjective, not a verb. Sorry, not
                          picking on Kirsti, but I see this so much I had to say something.
                          Feel free to give me a hard time about my consistent homonym abuse.

                          That's all,

                          Toxey McDavid
                          McDavid & Meek Investigations
                          Birmingham, AL
                          http://www.mcdavidmeek.com/

                          --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "kekeholm" <kekeholm@a...>
                          wrote:
                          > Joann (Unlicensed) Wrote:
                          >
                          > "If you have a valid reason for the information, you can purchase
                          the
                          > information from Docusearch yourself here:
                          > http://www.docusearch.com/dmvb.html
                          > You don't need a PI to get the information, but you *MUST* follow
                          the
                          > law. Even PIs must follow the rules of the DPPA, and if they don't,
                          > they can lose their licenses to be PIs (and much worse). "
                          >
                          >
                          > Kirsti (Licensed Professional) Writes:
                          >
                          > Group, the above is a perfect example why non licensed
                          professionals
                          > are unlicensed and distinct differences among us, especially in
                          terms
                          > of accountability, responsibility for "advising" clients, and
                          > consequences of doing so. For those, both the public and LPI's
                          here,
                          > whom may not know or don't remember, Docusearch, the referred
                          company
                          > by a list member, was the company that ultimately, directly and
                          > indirectly, led to several laws causing ALL Licensed PI's to loose
                          > access to MVR's b/c they were directly responsible for "selling"
                          > information to a stalker whom killed Actress Rebecca Schaeffer.
                          Now,
                          > for your reading pleasure, I have included the story below and will
                          > NOT aplogize for previous posts b/c it is a business matter and
                          > absolutely nothing personal; We have a greater responsibility to
                          self-
                          > police and be responsible than be "warm and fuzzy" and jumping at
                          the
                          > request for "help" on the internet. "Warm and Fuzzies" aren't going
                          > to keep the professionals in business, gain respect, maintain
                          access
                          > to information to do our jobs, etc... when we loose MVR's and/or
                          > access to personal information b/c we wanted to lend a "helping
                          hand
                          > to the public". For the Joann's of the internet, and there are
                          many,
                          > it may mean nothing b/c it's all about the "warm and fuzzies'. To
                          > those dedicated to raising the bar of our profession, doing our due
                          > diligence to protect, screen, etc.. clients it means everything.
                          > Perhaps the story below will remind everyone of that.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Changing Your Identity
                          > By Sarah Rupp
                          >
                          > "This is the information age, and information is power!,"
                          advertises
                          > Docusearch.com.
                          >
                          > Liam Youens paid the company to get 20-year-old Amy Boyer's Social
                          > Security number and find out where she worked in Nashua, N.H. As
                          she
                          > left her job on Oct.15, 1999, he pulled up beside her car and shot
                          > her repeatedly with a Glock 9mm handgun, then killed himself.
                          >
                          > The following April, her mother and stepfather, Helen and Timothy
                          > Remsburg, filed suit with the U.S. District Court of New Hampshire
                          > against Docusearch.com for invasion of privacy and personal injury.
                          > Docusearch.com declined to comment on the lawsuit.
                          >
                          > Boyer's death prompted Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire to
                          introduce
                          > a bill that makes it illegal to sell someone's Social Security
                          number
                          > without first getting their consent.
                          >
                          > Stalking victims and those fleeing domestic violence used to have
                          > some veil of privacy. No more. Computer networks and the lightning-
                          > fast flow of information means personal data are more accessible
                          than
                          > ever - and easy to buy.
                          >
                          > For those needing a shield of privacy, changing your identity may
                          be
                          > a last-ditch attempt to shake trouble.
                          >
                          > An infamous case involved actress Rebecca Schaeffer, 21, who was
                          shot
                          > and killed by a stalker in 1989. The stalker paid a private
                          > investigator to find her Los Angeles address, which was readily
                          > available from the state Department of Motor Vehicles.
                          >
                          > About 1 million women and 400,000 men are stalked each year, says
                          the
                          > National Institute of Justice and the Centers for Disease Control
                          and
                          > Prevention. Most people know their stalkers, but many like Boyer do
                          > not. Some are trying to escape an abusive relationship.
                          >
                          > In February 2003, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire found
                          > Docusearch liable for the criminal acts of its customer Mr. Youens.
                          > Generally in tort law, private citizens have no duty to protect
                          > someone from the criminal attacks of third parties.14 Therefore, a
                          > company generally has no duty to foresee the criminal actions of
                          its
                          > customers. However, in special situations, courts find exceptions
                          to
                          > this general principle. Where a party's conduct creates an
                          > unreasonable risk of harm from criminal misconduct, the party owes
                          a
                          > duty to those foreseeably endangered. In this case, the court found
                          > that Docusearch had "a duty to exercise reasonable care in
                          disclosing
                          > a third person's personal information to a client. When Docusearch
                          > sold Ms. Boyer's social security number and employment address,
                          > stalking and identity theft were "sufficiently foreseeable" risks.
                          > Thus, Docusearch was negligent in selling Ms. Boyer's personal
                          > information, and Docusearch is liable for the harm that came to her.
                          >
                          > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          > Kirsti Ekeholm, LPI
                          > Ekeholm and Associates, LLC
                          > GA Private Detective Agency Lic # PDC001919
                          > http://www.ekeholm.com and http://www.screensafecheck.com
                          > (770) 720-8343
                          > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~





                          <p><hr></p>
                          To subscribe, send an empty message to <a
                          href="mailto:infoguys-list-subscribe@yahoogroups.com">infoguys-list-subscrib
                          e@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
                          To unsubscribe, send a message to <a
                          href="mailto:infoguys-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com">infoguys-list-unsubs
                          cribe@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
                          <p><hr></p>
                          Yahoo! Groups Links
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.