Steve, et al.,
I agree with Marc, and a lot of others I'm sure, that you've added a lot more,
a "light than heat" to this subject
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Laifman [SMTP:laifman@flash.net]
Sent: Monday, January 26, 1998 4:47 AM
To: Marc James Small
Cc: tigers@autox.team.net; Laifman, Jay
Subject: Re: Here Comes the VIN Judge!
Marc James Small wrote:
> Steve
>
> Wonderful posting. Please note that each one of the statutes cited imposes
> criminal liability ONLY if the change of the identification numbers (NOTE:
> NOT VIN plate) is for a fraudulent purpose. I did not see anything saying
> that you could not remove the data plate or ID number tag for routine
> repairs or repainting.
>
> Marc
>
> msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315
> Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!
Marc,
Thank you for your kind response. I do think, however, that the burden of
proof on intent is on the owner if the DMV "believes" that "tampering" has
occurred. The inspection of the ID (which is NOW called the VIN) is on the
regulation inspection forms. I know what the Constitution says, but since when
does the DMV recognize a higher authority?
{8->
Steve
--
Steve Laifman < One first kiss, >
B9472289 < one first love, and >
< one first win, is all >
< you get in this life. >
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
_/_/_/_/_/__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/
_/_/_/
|