Print

Print


To clarify:
   
  There are clearly defined criteria for enforcement and accountability; the "Rule of Law" as counselor Daboll distinguished it in his later post. Some argue that the current US Federal Government is either redefining or evading said accountability, thereby undermining the Rule of Law as so described. 
   
  Other than that, statutes usually say: "You must do this. Except, provided however, or in the event of...in which case ignore what we just said and do this instead" 
   
  Glad to be of service. Where do I send the bill? <G>

"Mann, Dave" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
  Mike Weinstein wrote:
> Sorry, but there is no black and white in the law. Depending upon the
> nature of the cause, we require proof beyond a reasonable doubt,
> clear and convincing evidence, a fair preponderance of the evidence,
> or substantial evidence; all terms of art which are subject to court
> interpretations and guidelines. 

Ah, I've been dying to talk with somebody with your
expertise.

Could you explain to me the legal implications on
IT departments of the Federal Information Security
Management Act (FISMA)? Or COBIT?

Ok, I'm baiting you.... My non-lawyer understanding
is that most legislation is constructed to be ambiguous.
Any black/whiteness that exists is in a) the written
regulations imposed by the Administrative branch,
b) actions taken by enforcing agencies (cops) and
c) actions taken by prosecutors (DAs, the SEC and such).

Clear as mud. 


-Dave

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html


 		
---------------------------------
 All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html