Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Well, excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me!

root wrote: On Nov 7, 2007 10:53 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Nov 7, 2007 12:47 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: * GUILTY, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act and none of the above judgements is appropri

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Well, excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me!

On Nov 7, 2007 10:53 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 7, 2007 12:47 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >* GUILTY, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified > > rule via the specified act and none of the above judgements > > is appropriate

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Well, excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me!

On Nov 7, 2007 12:47 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >* GUILTY, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified > rule via the specified act and none of the above judgements > is appropriate What judgement would then be appropriate if none of the "above" judg