> BM>Since Tom Rightmer posted material that indicated that commandeering 
cars
 > is
  >legal, and that it is the duty of citizens to comply, then by extension, I
  >could say that if somebody tells me he's a bank examiner and wants me to 
hel
  >get the goods on a dishonest teller by going in to that teller, 
ithdrawing
  >dollars of my money, and bringing it out to him, then it is my duty to 
compl
 > Well, there is a difference between commandeering and
 > the scenario you
 > suggest.  The missing factor is "emergency".
I wouldn't think that a bank would consider embezzlement to be of a lower 
priority than usual daily business.  From media reports, I would say that 
embezzlers go for high stakes, not petty theft. It is therefore, IMO, not at 
all unreasonable for a victim to assume "emergency." Otherwise, this practise 
would not succeed at all.
        >--->
---
---------------