<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
	<channel>
		<title>Surveillance and Investigation</title>
		<link>http://workcover.forumotion.com/surveillance-and-investigation-f3/-t1.htm</link>
		<description>Share your experiences here.</description>
		<lastBuildDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2007 13:31:55 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		<ttl>10</ttl>
		
		<item>
			<title>Destroying documents is a favourite past time..</title>
			<link>http://workcover.forumotion.com/surveillance-and-investigation-f3/destroying-documents-is-a-favourite-past-time-t5.htm</link>
			<dc:creator>Matt R.</dc:creator>
			<description>To win a court case by deceit. One must wonder!!!





This was taken from an appeal by

PELIGRINO RINO CHRISTOPHER &lt;&lt;ZOLLO&gt;&gt; V. ANDREW RUSSELL THOMPSON [1996] SAIRC 7 (8 March 1996)

Its a shame that there was no prosecution against workcover under the criminal law act for the destruction of evidence. ( obviously they are a law unto themselves)

http://www.austlii.edu.au//cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/sa/SAIRC/1996/7.html?query=zollo

THE DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE AND THE QUESTIONS  ...</description>
			<category>Surveillance and Investigation</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2007 13:31:55 GMT</pubDate>
			<comments>http://workcover.forumotion.com/surveillance-and-investigation-f3/destroying-documents-is-a-favourite-past-time-t5.htm#5</comments>
			<guid>http://workcover.forumotion.com/surveillance-and-investigation-f3/destroying-documents-is-a-favourite-past-time-t5.htm</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>