[pct-l] Mail

[Timothy Nye]

To me, this appears to be a most remarkably one sided view; an us vs. them
posistion that considers only hikers as 'us' and all others being 'them';
even those who are going out of their way to provide assistance to hikers.

I stand by my previous two posts.

This is a matter of civil law, not criminal, between the bailor and bailee.
There may or not be criminal sanctions, but these would arise between the
postal service and the bailor, that is the cafe.  However, the applicability
of the postal service regulations would be subject to the contractual
arrangements between the parties.

Oral contracts are valid; but generally subject to the Statute of Frauds
(able to be completed within one year's time) and contracts may further be
implied as evidenced by the conduct of the parties.

Finally, why is this a big deal other than some inchoate abstract
principle.  Yes, if someones sending drugs through the mail or wanted to and
this frustrates them, then it would matter to them.  Otherwise, pick up your
packages, eat your Jose burgers ( and also order two to take with you for
that night's dinner), and get on with the hike.

(This thread opens up a whole different can of worms for VVR when they would
open up hiker's packages and then resell the contents..now there is a law
school exam question!)