Harris County Sheriff’s Email Retention Policy
Posted on February 2, 2008
Filed Under Uncategorized |
Here, for the open records fans, are the Harris County Sheriff’s recent email retention policy change memo and a flowchart showing how HCSO emails are handled.
Comments
10 Responses to “Harris County Sheriff’s Email Retention Policy”
Leave a Reply
Polls
Loading ...-
-
Subscribe via Email
-
Mack Arnold Trust
Please donate to the Mack Arnold trust fund. BlogRoll
The Latest from Simple Justice
The Latest from A Public DefenderSubscribe through Feedburner
Now Reading
Planned books:
None
Current books:
-
Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid by Douglas R. Hofstadter
-
The Landmark Herodotus: The Histories by Herodotus
Recent books:
- Deep Survival: Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why by Laurence Gonzales
- The Ten Thousand: A Novel of Ancient Greece by Michael Curtis Ford
- Wilderness Medicine, Beyond First Aid, 5th Edition by William Forgey
- Killing Rommel: A Novel by Steven Pressfield
- World Made by Hand: A Novel by James Howard Kunstler
-
-
Defending People
Defending People is about protecting the people, one at a time, from the only viable threat to their liberty: their government. -
Mark Bennett
"Famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism" - an anonymous prosecutor -
Recent Posts
- Untitled 4
- The Miami Motion to Substitute
- Congratulations!
- Take That, Fort Collins!
- New Harris County Criminal Law Blog
- Guest Post from an Iraq War Veteran
- Anger, Retribution, Oh Crap, Splat.
- Quis custodiet Custodes Ipsos?
- ABA Ten Principles of a Public Defense Delivery System
- Can DUI Be Expunged in Texas?
- Another Mark Bennett
- Thoughts on Independence Day
- DUI No-Refusal Weekend
- The Declaration of Independence
- Not Fail-Safe in the Courthouse
Recent Comments
- Untitled 4 (2)
- Congratulations! (17)
Michael: This 4th of July, I spent Independence Day (in Austin) with a mostly 20- and 30- something crowd of members...
Tarian: That snippet caught my eye, too. I’m not sure what they’re referring to, but I doubt it’s...
Tarian: Mark, that response was disappointing for a lot of reasons, not the least of which were the ad hominem...
Archives
-
Meta


Geez, no sense of humor over at AHCL website. I posted 2 comments about Kelly’s deleted emails and the HCSO, and they were deleted!
So I’ll post them here!
Kely deleted her emails so no one would find any kiss behind the emails on her computer from someone at the HCSO.
And I addressed the deletions in my latest posting. You are really desparate to get your message out there. I’m taking an educated guess that you are PeaceMD from the Chronicle.
You are doing nothing more than trying to circulate an irrelevant and unsubstantiated rumor. Your desperation in trying to do so is very telling.
I think it is rather cowardly, myself.
Just so we’re clear, AHCL, if the rumor (whatever it is — I’m not sure I get it from anonymous’s emails, but if he/she intends to attack someone personally here he/she should be ready to post under his/her own name) is substantiated will you be less stridently against its publication?
It’s your blog, Mark. But I believe that your Anon is a person who was fired from the D.A.’s office under bad circumstances. If it is that same person, she’s a regular poster on chron.com.
She can try to substantiate it all she wants, but I don’t think that will happen. It’s just a personal attack from a disgruntled
ex-employee.
AHCL
Why of course it has to be a disgruntled employee. The DA’s office can do no wrong, especially St. Kelley.
AHCL, only a prosecutor would think she was in a position to tell 9:19 she could post on my blog, and tell me it’s my blog. With all due respect, that’s officious horseshit.
It’s not clear to me what the rumor is. If 9:19 wants to make it clear here without substantiation, he/she will have to post under his/her own name or reveal himself/herself to me and convince me that he/she is a reliable source. (mark at fightthefeds dot com)
I have heard rumblings of the existence of a couple of videotapes that the Republican voters would not publicly approve of. I’ll believe it when I hear from a reliable source who has seen them.
Mark,
You asked me “if the rumor (whatever it is — I’m not sure I get it from anonymous’s emails, but if he/she intends to attack someone personally here he/she should be ready to post under his/her own name) is substantiated will you be less stridently against its publication?”
I responded by stating “it’s your blog” meaning, it wasn’t my place to say anything about what is posted on here.
Didn’t mean to be spreading “officious horseshit.”. Man, you have been cantankerous ever since Ron in Houston started joining your discussions.
Was I ever not cantankerous?
Yeah, but man, you are being harsh these days.
I’ll consider that. Thanks.