SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Did Slick Boink Monica?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: ViperChick Secret Agent 006.9 who wrote (4956)2/6/1998 8:22:00 PM
From: Lady Lurksalot  Read Replies (2) of 20981
 
Lisa,

I think that a secretary should be at least as exempt as a spouse, an attorney, a physician, a priest, or a clergyperson from being used as a source of possibly incriminating data--if not more so. To attempt to elicit such information from a secretary comes very close to flying in the face of the doctrine of freedom from self-incrimination. Usually, ones secretary is in possession of more knowledge than even the above-noted people who are generally exempt sources. And there is the always great likelihood of an element of personal spin.

A secretary should not be thought of as a co-conspirator in this case as presented so far. I still subscribe to the American Way of innocent until proven guilty. And I still have to ask, "Guilty of what?"

Holly
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News