[Ads-l] Can you touch a fish? A fisherman says you can't.

[Joel S. Berson]

Briefly heard on radio news late this afternoon 
-- in the hearing today the Supreme Court 
justices were described as sympathetic to the 
fisherman's notion that in the context of the 
Sarbanes-Oxley Act a fish is not a "tangible 
object".  Perhaps the prosecutors will be forced 
to re-indict on a more general charge of destruction of evidence.

I'll leave further research to Dennis.

Joel

At 11/5/2014 02:06 AM, Baron, Dennis E wrote:
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64Sent again, this time with the link--
>
>There's a new post on the Web of Language:
>
>
>Can you touch a fish? A fisherman says you can’t.
>
>Can you touch a fishÛ™H€isherman says that you 
>can’t. John Yates, the ex-captain of a fishing 
>boat, was convicted under a law that makes it 
>illegal to destroy records, documents, or 
>tangible objects in order to impede a federal 
>investigation, and he’s asking the United 
>States Supreme Court to reverse that conviction 
>because fish aren’t “tangible objects.” He 
>ought to know; he catches them for a living.
>
>http://bit.ly/weblan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org