HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jackie8@dasher.cc.bellcore.com (D)
Subject: Re: The Stalker
Organization: Bellcore - Piscataway, NJ
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 19:18:36 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.134142.2277@ucbeh.san.uc.edu> cho@ucbeh.san.uc.edu writes:
>In article <1992Dec14.132154.23256@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov>, maven@lerc.nasa.gov (Larry Fishbach) writes:
>> If I remember correctly, Morales was getting off the elevator
>> in the garage when the "stalker" drove off after frightening Gwenn.
>> -- 
>But Martinez (isn't it?) could have paid someone to 'scare' her, so that she
>couldn't hold him responsible.  He would need an alibi, and that could be it.
>He's really the only logical person to be the stalker, actually.  

Okay.  Let's everyone remember:  On the show, the man's name is
Daniel Morales.  In real life, the actor's name is A Martinez.

It can't be Morales.  Mostly because the producers/writers
etc., wouldn't have bothered to bring A Martinez onto the cast if
they were only going to make him a psychopath attracted to Gwen.
That's not a feasible storyline for this so called top-notch lawyer
from up north who left a thriving practice to come to the firm.
It's going to be a semi-regular character who is affiliated with
the firm, but whose presence isn't going to be missed all that much
when (and if god help us) this storyline is ever wrapped up. I don't
think it's that whiny attorney old-friend of Gwen's either, because
Gwen is right.  That guy  is obnoxious enough to send gifts, but he'd
send real gifts and sign his name. He wouldn't send this other stuff.
Unless of course he's got a background that we don't know of yet. :-)
They're probably going to make it someone  we'd never have guessed,
yet we see every so often but we've forgotten about.

---
Jackie Brady/jackie8@cc.bellcore.com/908-699-5458 (insert usual disclaimer)     (do not reply to the address in "From:" section. Use id in .sig to reply)
[] Bell Communications Research / Piscataway NJ
Organization: Junior, English, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 14:17:40 -0500 
From: Dawn Marie Neuhart <dn1g+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Old stuff

No, Zoey didn't die.  She healed up, shared a kiss with Tommy, then quit
her job and left town.  To go back home, where ever that is, and think
things through.



-dawn
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: sebruun@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (steve.bruun)
Subject: Re: Thoughts/Spoilers on 12/11 Show
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:23:20 GMT
Summary: Um, well, no...

In article <1992Dec11.163902.3315@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, gjh2j@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Im a Joker Im a Smoker Im a Midnight Toker) writes:
> I'm going to go out on a limb, and say that the stalker is a female, and that
> it is the new associate (played by Lisa Zane)... 
> 
> She could also have a crush on A MArtinez, and followed him in here,
> hey they're both hispanic...

Sorry, Jeff, but the new associate, Melina Parros, is not Hispanic.  I 
believe she is supposed to be Greek.  Perhaps you missed her reference 
last night to [mumble], a Greek island one assumes to be her ancestral
homeland, where, she says, everything is beautiful (or something along
those lines).

With respect to the identity of the stalker, I really don't care...

- Steve Bruun

Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: buckmr@vccnw06.its.rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire)
Subject: Re: law and order
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 22:26:17 GMT

lewkowicz@binah.cc.brandeis.edu writes:

>And I agree with the general consensus that Law and Order is a great
>show.  My husband and I rushed home from childbirth class to make it in
>time for Law and Order.  Conversely, I fell asleep during LA Law last
>night, and I really didn't miss not seeing the last part.  Pretty sad
>state of affairs, considering how addicted I was....

I have taken LA LAW out of my VCR program for the week. I still tape LAW AND 
ORDER and I'LL FLY AWAY and MURPHY BROWN.

-- 
RON BUCKMIRE, 11 Colvin Circle, Troy, NY 12180-3735.  ***Clinton-Gore '92***
uunet!rpi.edu!buckmr||buckmr@rpitsmts.bitnet||buckmr@rpi.edu||+1 518 276 8910
"In any battle for freedom of identity there can be no distinction between the
 private and the political." --David Leavitt's _Family Dancing_
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: lewkowicz@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Subject: Re: LAW'n'ORDER Group??
Reply-To: lewkowicz@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:02:08 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.184513.22319@news.weeg.uiowa.edu>, 
pdpotter@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu writes:
>Is there a Law and Order NewsGroup?  If not, there ought to be.

I think that'd be an EXCELLENT idea, seeing how many people in this
newsgroup (me included) seem to love the show!
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: an3258@anon.penet.fi
Subject: stalking
X-Anonymously-To: alt.tv.la-law
Organization: Anonymous contact service
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 02:10:00 GMT

Stuart would be too obvious.  My 14 year-old thinks it's
Brackman but my doubting wife doubts it.  I still think it is the
English Dude!!!!!!!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Please note you _don't_ have to have an anon id to receive anonymous mail!
To see how your anonymized message would appear, mail it to test@anon.penet.fi
From: kat@banach.WPI.EDU (Christina Lynne Freeman)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Re: The Stalker/This weeks Spoiler
Date: 15 Dec 1992 20:06:26 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: banach.wpi.edu
Originator: kat@banach.WPI.EDU


In article <1992Dec14.215119.6957@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, gjh2j@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Im a Joker Im a Smoker Im a Midnight Toker) writes:
|> I think it won't be too obvious at all....
|> 
|> Morales will be Santa (who isn't necessarily the stalker mind you, it's just
|> a hook to get you to watch). In the usually mistakes she has made with
|> Morales, Gwen will accuse him of being the stalker, while the real one is
|> still free. After the Christmas party, she will walk out to her car
|> and be confronted by the real stalker (whoever it may be). But I would be
|> willing to bet that it is someone who is not currently on the show, and will
|> make a special appearance...none other than that world class backstabber
|> himself:
|>                 FRANK KITRICH!!!!!!!!!!-formerly of Mackenzie/Brackman
|> 


I think I missed a few episodes somewhere... Could someone be so kind as to fill
me in on the dirt about Frank Kitrich?  I'm completely lost!!

Thanks...
kat
 ***************************************************************************
      Christina Freeman                                 kat@wpi.wpi.edu
		"Was there not, from the first, more poison in
 			  your nature than in mine?" 
                           - _Rappaccini's Daughter_ 
			      Nathaniel Hawthorne
                  ********************************************
From: davida@bonnie.ics.uci.edu (David A. Andersen)
Subject: Re: The Stalker/This weeks Spoiler
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Reply-To: davida@ics.uci.edu (David A. Andersen)
Organization: Univ. of Calif., Irvine, Info. & Computer Sci. Dept.
Date: 15 Dec 92 17:16:26 GMT

>to reveal that it's.....KUZAK!!!


How about Sieufentes (sp?) ?


heheheheh

David A.



Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: ch2m@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (Christopher  Houston)
Subject: Re: Thoughts/Spoilers on 12/11 Show
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 22:50:17 GMT


Yes, it's "Melina."  Nice name; stupid character.  All that bobbing and
bouncing in the courtroom made me sick.  She's ridiculous in the same
way that I found Kittridge to be: not in a "person you love to hate" sort
of way (a la J.R. Ewing) but in a simple "person you hate to see" sort of
way.

Unfortunately, LAL is fast becoming the show I hate to see; it's
disturbing to see how bad it's become while knowing how good it once was.
Someone else posted and said they'd mis-set their VCR and just got an
hour of nonsense; they'd have gotten an hour of nonsense either way...

The thing with Gwen, as stupid as it is, is probably the most compelling
element of the show right now (although I too was disgusted by the 
instant attraction to hunk Martinez; cf. topic "Gwen Is a Slut").  The
Stuart thing is just so bad; it's like they were looking for a playmate
for Benny.  Roxanne is adequately defending her spot as the most insipid
person on TV, and worse, they're dragging Tommy (my favorite character
since he arrived) down to her level.  Arnie's endeavors in la-la-land? 
Big yawn.  Etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum/nauseum.  Why do I watch the
show anymore?  Partly because it's something to listen to while I do
work; also because it's almost entertaining (albeit in a tragic irony
sort of way) to see just how bad they can get; what's certain is that
it's not to be entertained in any meaningful sort of way--these days I
have to really on the Simpsons and Cheers for that...

____________________________
Christopher E. Houston
University of Virginia
ch2m@virginia.edu
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: pdpotter@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu
Subject: LAW'n'ORDER Group??
Reply-To: pdpotter@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu
Organization: U. of Iowa - Weeg Computing Center
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:45:13 GMT

Is there a Law and Order NewsGroup?  If not, there ought to be.
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: jam+@cs.cmu.edu (Joe Mattis)
Subject: Re: Thoughts/Spoilers on 12/11 Show
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 19:46:53 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.163902.3315@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gjh2j@faraday.clas.V
irginia.EDU (Im a Joker Im a Smoker Im a Midnight Toker/Jeff Hawkins) writes:
> Then again, it could be Frank Kitrich, seeking revenge on Gwen for getting
> him fired, that he treated her like a prince in a fairy tale and she ripped
> his heart out (proverbially speaking)

I *like* this.  In fact, Kitrich is just creepy enough, and he and Gwen had
just enough chemistry between them, to make me buy into this.  It could make
for the most deliciously scary scene since the mass-murderer confronted Zoey.

Geez...maybe they oughta give *you* a job as script-writer.  Heaven knows,
you couldn't do any worse than they've been doing all season...

-Joe Mattis    ARPA:  jam@isl1.ri.cmu.edu
               UUCP:  ...!ucbvax!isl1.ri.cmu.edu!jam@ucbvax.berkeley.edu

>C'mon Gwen, take a cold shower for Christ's sakes

Actually, Gwen makes *me* need to take a cold shower, but that's another topic.
From: koumis@husc4.harvard.edu (Anthony Koumis)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Re: The show needs help
Date: 12 Dec 92 02:51:01 GMT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Dec11.074320.27482@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mconte@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Marc Vincent Conte) writes:
>
>They've sunk to a new low.  LA Law is now stealing story ideas from 
>the Brady Bunch.  I'm talking about Lincoln stealing the watch. 
>If you remember, Tiger was stealing all kinds of stuff from the 
>Brady kids.  They chased Tiger into his doghouse one day and 
>found everything.
>
>Marc


ANd as revealed in Greg's book, Tiger got run over. Boo hoo so after that
his appearances were very limited.  Perhaps someone could come run
over the scriptwriters and give us a good show.
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: doel@bae.bellcore.com (Michael Doel)
Subject: 12/17 episode (Spoilers)
Organization: Bell Communications Research
Distribution: alt
Date: 18 Dec 92 10:40:37


Just for those interested,

1) I timed the court room scenes again last night.  None in the first 1/4th
   or last 1/4th of the show and only 7.5 min overall.  If I ever get around
   to it, I'm going to time the amount of court action in some of the earlier
   ones to see how it compares with what we've seen so far this season.  I
   suspect we'd find what many of us already suspect - the amount of
   in-court scenes is way down from earlier years.

2) Although last night's ending was like something out of Love Boat (you
   know - where everyone is all happy and everything works out in the end),
   it looks like we might be getting back to normal.  Stuart looked healthy,
   Douglass got his watch back, Rox is preggers, etc.  Maybe we can leave
   a couple of these story lines (especially the Stuart one) behind and
   return to court now.

3) I still fail to see the point of the story-line with Arnie.  Too
   ambitious on one level (notice they didn't include some of the important
   players in the episode - why isn't wheel-chair woman suing?) and much
   too boring on another.

4) The writers pretty clearly stated their opinion on the LA Riots when they
   had Stuart admit he was part of the cause.  I'm not sure if he felt that
   way because he is white or because he represents a judicial system run
   amok. 


--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mike Doel				<doel@bae.bellcore.com>
444 Hoes Lane RRC 1B-209
Piscataway, NJ 08854

"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat
 and wrong." - H.L. Mencken
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: lewkowicz@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Subject: law and order
Reply-To: lewkowicz@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 22:14:43 GMT

And I agree with the general consensus that Law and Order is a great
show.  My husband and I rushed home from childbirth class to make it in
time for Law and Order.  Conversely, I fell asleep during LA Law last
night, and I really didn't miss not seeing the last part.  Pretty sad
state of affairs, considering how addicted I was....
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: Joanna L. Castillo <pefv702@utpe.pe.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: The Stalker
X-Xxdate: Mon, 14 Dec 92 20:20:51 GMT
Organization: UT Petroleum Engineering Dept.
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d15
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 19:25:55 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.134142.2277@ucbeh.san.uc.edu> , cho@ucbeh.san.uc.edu writes:
>But Martinez (isn't it?) could have paid someone to 'scare' her, so that she
>couldn't hold him responsible.  He would need an alibi, and that could be it.
>He's really the only logical person to be the stalker, actually.  

One more time...the actor's name is A Martinez...the character's name
is Daniel Morales.  Those danged Hispanic names...they're all alike,
aren't they?  :-p  (Please take a look at my Hispanic name before 
flaming...thanks.)

I don't see how he's the only logical person at all.  In fact, I think
he's the most illogical person to be the stalker.  Why would he be 
stalking Gwen?  He just moved to LA and met her.  He's got a baby to be
looking after -- and seems to genuinely be concerned about the baby's 
welfare.  He's intelligent (maybe) and would realize the consequenses 
of his actions should he get caught (which would include losing his
child -- at least temporarily -- should he go to jail).

Again, I say...I think the stalker is the obnoxious DA guy -- whose
name slips my mind and wasn't even on the show last week.  I don't see
why Ann thinks the stalker is someone related to the firm -- why would
this have to be the case?  It could easily be someone outside the firm
getting info from one of the secretaries or a messenger who's in and
out of the office frequently.  The person giving the info might not 
even have any idea they're giving info out.

>Did they have their alleged date yet?

I imagine so...but we didn't see it.

>-Pamela Cho-

Joanna.

--
| \____ ----- ____/           |  "Let's just be friends -- friends    |
|      ( o o )                |  who never talk or see each other."   |
|       \   /   Gus-ball!!    |      - David Letterman, 7-22-92       |
|        (_)  Hook 'em Horns! |           pefv702@utpe.pe.utexas.edu  |
From: mcsweinberg@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Re: The Stalker/This weeks Spoiler
Date: 16 Dec 92 09:37:52 -0600
Followup-To: poster
Distribution: world
Organization: Memphis State University

> Interesting, but this may be another red herring.  I say that because
> in a local TV schedule for last week I saw a picture of Gwen and
> Daniel together, with Daniel in a Santa suit.  I wondered about it,
> because there was no such scene in that week's show.  Putting it
> together with what you say above makes me think that:
> 
>    o  Daniel is going to be Santa
> 
>    o  Gwen accuses him (wrongly!) [I say this because from the end of
>       last week's show, Gwen seems to think it's Daniel, but as most
>       people here seem to agree, it's probably not him -- plus the
>       fact that I suspect they will tease us about this even longer.]
> 
> Although I suppose it's possible they could have more than one person
> dressed up as Santa, and draw the whole thing to a close here.
> 
I think you're right! NBC ran another preview and now it looks like she
(Wrongly) tell Daniel to stay away from her. Gwen needs to cool her
accusations.

I wish I had been right about Santa being the stalker.
Rai.

Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: jsl7@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (J. Shawn Landres)
Subject: The Stalker
Reply-To: jsl7@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (J. Shawn Landres)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 17:58:36 GMT

Candidates for stalker:
1) Daniel Martinez (not likely, given that he'd have to go to jail off screen)
2) Tommy (NOT!)

and my choice . . .

3) a (male/female) office worker with designs on (Daniel/Gwen) who is jealous
   of their romance.

Remember, there is no reason that the first gift (flowers) could not have been
from Leland because of her conduct in that old case. And that's when Gwen
pounced on Daniel . . . and he responded.

Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law,rec.arts.tv
From: dmb@world.std.com (Deborah M Brown)
Subject: Re: LAW'n'ORDER Group??
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 16:47:51 GMT

In article <92353.173001JH8414A@auvm.american.edu> Julia E. Hawley <JH8414A@auvm.american.edu> writes:
>Still, this is a great show and there are no groups for criminal justice--at le
>ast I haven't seen any.  This show is realistic and accurate and not media hype
>like COPS, et al.

There IS misc.legal for one.  That episode where the religious couple
let their daughter die by not calling the doctor (against their
religion) generated metric tons of postings for weeks on the tv, legal 
and civil liberties groups.  It was great!

While the pilot grabbed me immediately, it took me a while to warm up to
the characters, as they don't go out of their way to tell us anything
about them, least of all show us their private lives.  I kind of like 
it that way actually.  

>my 2 cents...begin one!

This is one of three shows I will not miss for ANY reason, but I think
the net.volume it generates and the small number of people who I see posting 
about it when there ARE articles to rea lead me to believe that we wouldn't
get enough votes to get it passed per usenet guidelines.

-- 
*********** "Oh shut up, Frank!"  Dr. Clayton Forrester, MST3K *********
Disclaimer: "Disclaim THIS, pal!" (Crow bit me - it IS fun!)
Internet:   dmb@world.std.com   -or-   dmb7229@ultb.isc.rit.edu 
Debbie Brown | Prodigy: NCNX32A | America OnLine: misty15930@aol.com   
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: dp35@mc1adm.UWaterloo.ca ()
Subject: Re: The Stalker/This weeks Spoiler
Organization: University of Waterloo
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:05:33 GMT

maven@hercules.lerc.nasa.gov writes:
>mcsweinberg@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
>> 
>> Well I suppose next week we will get the "low-down" on the "stalker" and put
>> this to rest. Why? Because in the previews for this weeks episode they show
>> Gwen confronting the "stalker", I assume, by chastising the person dressed up
>> as SANTA at the Christmas party to stay away from her!
>> 
>> Ok the Stalker--

   [ Ruling out of Stewart, Daniel, X-Wife (she's not in the office) ]

I hope it's either Jonathan or Anne cause I don't like either. 8-).

I know I've seen that Jeep that tore out of the parking lot before.  Wasn't
that the same type of vehicle that Ann and Stewart took on their vacation
in the mountains about 5 seasons ago. It's a little far fetched, but throw
me a bone. :->

The only other person I can think it might me is none other than...

            Mr. Frank Kitridge (sp?)

Oh well, guess I'll just tune in.

C Ya, and I hope I've given you something to think about.
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: hulburt@leland.Stanford.EDU (Kris Anne Hulburt)
Subject: 12/17 episode
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 20:24:36 GMT

A person wrote in requesting that someone either post or mail to her what 
happened during last night's episode -- I would also like to know, so maybe
someone could post this info.  
Thanks,
Kris
From: jct@mti.sgi.com (Chris Thomas)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Re: The Stalker
Date: 12 Dec 92 19:58:59 GMT
Organization: Mips Technologies, Inc.
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: ecstasy.mti.sgi.com

jsl7@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (J. Shawn Landres) writes:

>Candidates for stalker:
>1) Daniel Martinez (not likely, given that he'd have to go to jail off screen)
>2) Tommy (NOT!)

>and my choice . . .

>3) a (male/female) office worker with designs on (Daniel/Gwen) who is jealous
>   of their romance.

Gee... maybe it could be... Arnie???  Maybe all that new-age mumbo-jumbo
is just a cover, maybe it's sent him more over the edge than we're being
told.  Maybe he's still despondent over Gwen.  Maybe he "is jealous of
their romance."

At this point, anything is possible....  Sheesh, the way they kept talking
about the "new associate" for a whole week without revealing who she was,
I thought that she was going to be Rosalind Shays' daughter or something!
In fact... maybe she's just the reincarnation of Roz... :)

Welcome to L.A. Peaks, where sometimes your arms bend back.

-- 
Chris Thomas                                                (415) 390-4118
S4/7 b g+ l y+ z+ n+ o+ x-/+ a++ u v-/+ j++                jct@mti.sgi.com

Xref: sparky alt.tv.la-law:860 rec.arts.tv:24150
From: geoffb@coos.dartmouth.edu (Geoff Bronner)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law,rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: LAW'n'ORDER Group??
Date: 17 Dec 92 13:18:47 GMT
Reply-To: geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU
Organization: Amos Tuck School
Followups-To: rec.arts.tv
Disclaimer: I don't represent Dartmouth and Dartmouth doesn't represent me.

In <1992Dec14.184513.22319@news.weeg.uiowa.edu> pdpotter@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu writes:

>Is there a Law and Order NewsGroup?  If not, there ought to be.

[Note Followups-To!!!]

As much as a I love _Law_&_Order_ it doesn't generate all that much
regular discussion.  This isn't a soap opera that invites lots of
speculation between episodes. rec.arts.tv handles the existing traffic
quite well.

-Geoff
--
geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU - Computing Support Consultant, Tuck School of Business

	"A [Supreme] Court that rests on realpolitik alone becomes
	 a court without integrity."  - David A. Kaplan
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: raymond.hodgson@rose.com (raymond hodgson)
Subject: 12/17 episode
Organization: Rose Media Inc, Toronto, Ontario.
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 07:23:40 GMT
X-Gated-By: Usenet <==> RoseMail Gateway (v1.70)


Date Entered: 12-19-92 02:14

 D(> 4) The writers pretty clearly stated their opinion on the LA Riots
 D(> when they had Stuart admit he was part of the cause.  I'm not sure
 D(> if he felt that way because he is white or because he represents a
 D(> judicial system run amok. 

 D(> Mike Doel    <doel@bae.bellcore.com> 444 Hoes Lane RRC 1B-209
 D(> Piscataway, NJ 08854

        I think it was because Stuart's job is to help rich people get
        away with paying as little tax as possible.  He thought that if
        more money was spent on providing services to poorer areas, they
        would not want to riot.

        Raymond.


... New Mail not found.  Start whine-pout sequence? (Y/N)
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.11
---
   RoseMail 2.00 : Usenet: Rose Media - Hamilton (416) 575-5363