Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
... but these guys only got to the position they were in (i.e. they only had access to the phone) via their employment for McDonald's, while acting as agents of McDonald's. If it were simply customers that had done this, then it would be completely different - this isn't some technicality, in my mind.
|
All the information we have seems to be based solely on a civil complainant.
Who seems to be focusing everything on one target.
The one which is best known and has the deepest pockets. And is the easiest target.
Which is rather normal in civil cases. It is that approach or a full bore shot-gun in which you name everyone and everything and let the court sort it all out.
Nothing I have seen, so far, proves that it was the agents/servants of McDonald that caused this. Before or after the stated phone call.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,456804,00.html
"I would strongly caution anyone from jumping to conclusions without having all the facts. I believe this act was perpetrated by individuals who do not represent my organization," Bill Mathews, the McDonald's franchisee, said."
This story will most likely go on for months if not years.
And now the flip side of story:
Tina Sherman Nude Photos Story Likely A Hoax, Naked Pictures Don't Exist
http://www.postchronicle.com/news/or...12188416.shtml
Nude Photos on iPhone a Wakeup Call:
Companies can learn a few lessons from alleged smartphone incident.
"Whether the Arkansas incident bears out -- there have been some online reports it's a hoax -- companies can learn several lessons, Cross said. "
http://www.internetnews.com/security...akeup+Call.htm
Well, let see what snope.com and other fact check sites come up with now.
As well as the court system.