Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555) wrote to Jerry Schwartz at 13:43 on 16 Dec 2002:

 MvdV> I see. So Steven has misled us. The "over telephone lines" part
 MvdV> is completely irrelevant here.

Never assume that interception is completely irrelevant.  Jerry is right in
concluding that in most reported cases the law enforcement agencies either
marched in to someone's premises and seized the computers or relied on
informants or both.  However, that does not mean that either interception
of voice communication or data communication did not occur.

I vividly remember one case which occurred 22 years ago where I issued 10
search warrants based on an 11 1/2 page information to obtain the warrants.
 The warrants were challenged and were upheld and I then asked the lead
investigating police officer what had triggered the investigation and he
advised me that a legal wiretap in another unrelated matter had given them
reason to believe that they should investigate the person who was the
subject of the warrants I had issued two years later.

Take care,

Steven Horn (steven_a_horn{at}yahoo.ca)
Moderator, ALASKA_CHAT 
--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+