Are they going to fire them on a Zoom call or on Teams?
Enquiring minds need to know.
9611 publicly visible posts • joined 11 Sep 2009
Hopefully by modulating the laser and using, say, a grid of emitters or possibly reflective surfaces that can fire in turn, the storm energy could be pulsed more gently into an array of storage cells - maybe heating salt water or silica in underground vats. It's hopeful that the seemingly random pattern of lightning strikes could become more directed and controllable.
I don't know for certain, but I'm sure they've made use of some trick or other. Like making each individual store effectively a franchise and thus its own company which would have a much smaller workforce, probably underneath some minimum threshold figure for mandatory employee benefits; so things like health care etc are going to be "perks" that can be withdrawn rather than statutory provisions. They play to the letter of the law, not the spirit of it. Mind you the legal department has amazing pay and benefits, I hear.
Inspector Campbells here; Cream of Scotland Yard. And this is Sergeant Baxters, of the haggis division.
Now then, now then, now then. What's been going on here, then, eh?
Oh dear. Looks like it was croutons for this young lady.
Have you seen this modus operandi before, Sergeant Baxter?
Indeed I have, sir. Could it be... the Cullen Skink?
Ah, indeed it could! We never caught that one. Reckon it was a member of the aristocracy... there are a few game royals up there.
So that the AIRTAGs can be identified by some law enforcement agency rather than having to go through Apple to get the information to discover who is planting the tags and tracking a person. You get warned that there's a device travelling with you that's not registered to you... that warning must be generated on the basis of data that your phone is receiving. these data should be logged and recorded. That's what I'm saying. That those data should be logged, recorded and available to the authorities independently of Apple should someone wish to pursue a complaint.
I would hope the beacon signal can be recorded and would encode the device type and the associated AppleID. OK, so only law enforcement should be able to decode the AppleID bit, but if you get a ping you should be able to know what kind of device it is that you are looking for. AirTags are easily concealed - I saw once photo where it was mostly encased in black silicon mastic - presumably then stuck into a wheel well of a car under the floor mat where it blended in with the undercoat / waterproofing.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-prosecutions/private-prosecutions
Any adult has the right to apply to a magistrates’ court to bring a private prosecution. However, there are a small number of offences where the prosecutor is restricted, or that can only be prosecuted if the Attorney General consents. The Act of Parliament which creates the offence will state whether this is the case.
The Crown Prosecution Service can take over any criminal prosecution, and may then carry out the prosecution. It may end (or ‘discontinue’) the prosecution if it does not believe that it should have been brought.
All prosecutions begin in a magistrates’ court, but may then be heard in the Crown Court. For some offences, such as theft, fraud, or assault occasioning actual bodily harm, the defendant can insist on a trial before a jury in the Crown Court. A prosecutor cannot insist on this, although they may give the court reasons why they should send the case to the Crown Court. Some offences, such as assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, and rape, can only be tried in the Crown Court. Others, such as common assault or harassment without violence, can only be tried in a magistrates’ court.
So you're saying that fare evasion should NOT be a criminal offence as it is at present under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 or the Transport Act 2000 (which covers National Rail rather than TfL)?
Could you claim it was fare avoidance?
TfL will always try to proceed under the Penalty Fare regulations unless they have gathered sufficient evidence, they believe, to prove that the fare evasion is repeated and deliberate.
There is the option to proceed under the Fraud Act 2006.
What do you do about people who try to print their own travel cards? Code their own mag stripes on expired paper tickets? That's criminal - it's not civil by any stretch of the imagination.
DFS could pursue a criminal prosecution for fraud, for example, if they believed that a person was deliberately obtaining goods through fraudulent credit applications (though it's likely that their credit provider would do this).
DFS could bring a civil case for breach of contract.
The Post Office HAD NO SPECIAL STANDING IN LAW at the time of the original prosecutions. They brought private prosecutions (in England) just the same as any other legal body. The CPS has oversight of all private prosecutions and can intervene to take over a prosecution and either continue or dismiss (in the case of insufficient evidence) the case. The Post Office effectively presented the CPS with evidence that was inaccurate, and in doing so gamed the system to achieve their own ends - a criminal conviction. Make no mistake - the Post Office should be up on trial for what they've done. I'm just trying to correct the impression that somehow they did this in some subversive fashion using special case status - they've never had that, TfL doesn't have that, Associated British Ports doesn't have that etc.
Yeah, but TfL cases are heard in the court. They are not judge, jury and executioner. So how's that different to, say, DFS taking me to court for not paying for my sofa, or getting a parking ticket from NCP?
TfL revenue have no power of arrest, by the way. They work alongside e.g. the BTP who DO have a power of arrest. Did I misunderstand which bit of the OP was in error?