text:
Hans Reiser was very dumb, he should have listened to his lawyer from the start. Personally, I still believe that Nina fled to Russia, where her mother and her kids are, if I'm not mistaken. She didn't abandon them, it was only a temporary separation.
Edited 2008-04-29 09:01 UTC
I'm sorry, but this behaviour sounds very silly to me, wether the protagonist murdered his wife before or not.
Some aspects of his odd behaviour even speak against him being the murderer, at least in my opinion.
That said I respect the conclusion drawn by the jury. It's just not that plain simple.
p.s.: About the blood stains... backread the coverage on Wired.. they are a _very_ weak evidence..
Edited 2008-04-30 16:08 UTC
I wont speculate in if he's guilty or not, but I find this a bit disturbing:
Rory said he didn't, and that made him feel sad.
"What did you like best about her?" Hora asked.
"Everything," said the boy.
What does this have to do with the case and why is it even allowed in the court? This is obvioulsy just to appeal to the jurors emotions, thereby blurring their judgement, and says nothing about whether he's guilty or not.
I've read about other cases as well where the prosecutor used realtives to the victim to get someone convicted when they otherwise had nothing to do with the case.
It is routine for defense lawyers to do exactly the same thing: picture a weeping old lady saying, "My boy would never do such a thing. I don't know why you people are pickin' on 'im. It's his friends that did it and set him up." &c.
There's a reason that lawyers don't have the best reputation in this country.
I was under the impression that prosecutors could not do this sort of thing until the sentencing phase of the trial, in which case it would be relevant to how heinous the crime is, and how long the perpetrator deserves to sit in jail. Apparently I was wrong.
I don't see a reason to rename the filesystem. I'm not claiming not to be a flawed human plagued by emotional response (I think we all are that), but the filesystem is as much a part of Hans' legacy as the murder of his wife.
He, and Namesys, made it. If they want to rename it, okay, otherwise use it or don't.
What I hoping is that no FS-zelots from other camps use the ruling as flame-fodder. On the other hand, reiserfs(v3) is nearing obsolete I guess... and v4 isn't in linux so...
I think we'll want some time still for good ZFS in linux though. I highly doubt it'll come "native" to linux ever.
Edited 2008-04-29 10:31 UTC
The ZFS license isn't compatible with Linux's GPL licence.
As I understand it, this only means ZFS support can't be written into the Linux kernel. However, ZFS support can run outside of the kernel using a bridge called FUSE.
Does them give in the great nation them inmates a connection onto the internets? otherwise, he'll be facing himself wit some mightly hacking to get his Code past them prison bars.
That might inspire him to the most.. secure file system ever.
Oh come off it. The fact that he had talent and that so many people bought into Namesys' hype has no bearing or relevance on the matter. He killed his wife or he didn't. Before this, positing that Hans was guilty brought down the wrath of all the Holier-Than-Thou Reiser4 fans who were "outraged" that anyone would have the audacity to look at the facts and speculate that he was guilty... always, indignantly arguing that everyone is considered innocent until proven guilty.
Well, now a jury of his peers has painstakingly considered the evidence in the case and determined that he is, beyond a reasonable doubt, guilty as sin. (And yes, that includes considering even the outlandish possibility that she might have defected to Russia with the kids.) So I would remind the "Innocent until proven guilty" contingent that the guy has now been proven guilty. And having been proven guilty, he should be *considered* guilty. So let's dispense with all this "if he's guilty" crap.
Hans murdered his wife. And no amount of Reiser4 hype, deserved or not, changes that fact a whit. Nor does his relative level of ability as a programmer.
Edited 2008-04-29 14:04 UTC
And what if you're like me, and you consider the jury system to be medieval and immensely error-prone?
I'm not saying the system erred in this specific case (I don't know if he's guilty or not) - I'm just stating that "a jury of his peers found him guilty" doesn't bear a lot of weight for people with scientific objections against the jury system.
And what if you're like me, and you consider the jury system to be medieval and immensely error-prone?
So what do you propose? A public phone in? Text Yes to 80111 if Hans Reiser is guilty, No to 80111 if he's not guilty. Phone lines close at midnight?
The jury system, while not perfect is the best thing that we've got.
The jury system, while not perfect is the best thing that we've got.
Err, what about using *gasp* judges to determine if someone's guilty or not? That's what many countries do - including mine. We don't have juries.
Just because the US uses juries, doesn't mean everyone does.
Only minor cases get 1 judge. Anything remotely serious gets 3 or more.
And yes, I trust educated people who studied the law for God knows how long a lot more than people like myself when it comes to determining someone's guilt or innocence.
I believe the idea behind the US system, was that the judges might be biased against you for some political reason or another. So you always have the right to be judged by other people off the street.
As sbergman mentioned, you can request to be judged without a jury instead, and I don't think that kind of request is ever denied.
I would generally trust the judgment of the judge more than a jury as well, if I were innocent. I think a lot of people think it's easier to fool and manipulate juries, since you only have to convince a few to let you go.
In the U.S. a jury trial is considered to be a defendant's right. He can, however, waive that right and request a bench trial.
If the defendant and his legal council choose not to request a bench trial, I really don't see the problem.
Edited 2008-04-29 20:41 UTC
A judge does have the ability to make decisions (at least in some types of cases). I was on a case in NH where the judge was afraid we (the jury) would somehow make the wrong decision in a very one-sided case so while we were deliberating, he dismissed the case outright based on his analysis of the evidence. We (the jury) had in fact come to the same conclusion, but we were not offended that the judge decided to take matters into his own hands.
You should have been offended. That's an example of a current of thought now popular in American law that juries should be excluded from setting precedent whenever possible, or be confined to rendering verdict in accordance with statutory law or judicial instruction. Basically it is a systematic effort by many in the law profession(s) to marginalize the influence of peers in case law; but one of the fundaments of common law is the ability of juries to curtail the unjust application of codified law or legal precedent.
see the current argument over the right/idea of Jury Nullification. Oftentimes prospective jurors will be asked about this and dismissed if they know of / believe in it.
Yes, I am very anti-precedence. But in this case I don't even think it had anything to do with precedence. The case was so obvious, the prosecutor was so inept, that I think he really felt he had no choice. I don't know how he dismissed the case, maybe he called it a mistrial, I don't know. We weren't told everything.
In the US, the role of judges is to referee the prosecution and defense, and ensure that legal procedings closely mirror statutes in place.
The point of a jury is the idea that fellow human beings - your peers - are reasonable. And there are many of them, who can debate the evidence.
While this is imperfect and you can argue that one's peers may not be reasonable, many of us would certainly prefer for us to roll the dice with our peers than put the fate of the accused in the hands of the State.
So no, I don't agree. I am not thrilled with the jury system and I am always open to considering possibilities to address its deficiencies, but the idea that putting a guilty/not guilty determination in the hands of a single person - a representative of the State...
No thanks.
It seems a bit strange to call having a jury of your peers medieval, implying that having your fate decided by a single person or small group in power as not being so despite that being.. well.. how it was done then.
Though really jury or judge alike, neither is going to be all that scientific at all. In both cases it's people looking at evidence presented by both sides and coming to a conclusion. That's not science. (Unfortunately though, regardless of which of those two systems you prefer there, they're both in ways about as good as it's going to reasonably get.)
At a certain point in real-life affairs, it simply does not make sense to continue to play the epistemological skeptic any longer.
A jury of his peers, each member accepted as such by the defense, viewed the known evidence and considered it over a period of nearly 6 months. They were each personally exposed to the arguments and evidence of both the prosecution and of the defense. They rendered a verdict of guilty.
Now, answer me this: Why should I weight the opinions of random OSNews posters, who have gotten their sketchy information mostly from news stories in the press and posts here on OSNews and perhaps in other forums, higher than I weight the determination of those 12 people.
Beyond this point, we may as well be debating the actual existence of a christian god.
Hey, sbergman. I usually agree with you, but I think you're drifting badly here.
The guy is NOT saying Hans is innocent. He is just saying that he prefers not to make any concrete comments on his innocence because he doesn't have enough to say he is guilty or innocent.
Now, you can argue that "when it comes to the law" he IS guilty, but there is more than law in this world and I've seen courts messing up before, at least in my country.
PS: At least that is how I read the guys post. Not too sure if that is exactly what he meant, though.
That is a reasonable view. It's really a matter of "If the show fits, wear it". I'm basically speaking to those people who criticized others for having opinions regarding Hans' guilt, previous to the rendering of the verdict, insisting that all defendants must be considered innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.
Now that he has been convicted, what I am seeing is some of those people assuming the fall-back position that a court of law finding him guilty doesn't really mean anything because courts *can be* wrong. Of course they can be wrong. So can physicians. But do you ignore your physician because physicians "can be wrong"?
At some point, practical reality, and meaningful communication, require that some operational definition of "guilt" be determined. So far, no one has has presented a more credible criterion than the determination of a verdict by peers agreed upon by the prosecution and the defense after deliberating over all the known evidence. All that has been presented are vague suggestions that the courts are somehow corrupt, stupid, or too biased to be taken seriously.
If courts were OSes, we'd *ALL* being screaming bloody murder^W^W^Wcrying FUD on that one! (On that note, perhaps it was Microsoft, afraid of Reiser4, who framed him and paid off the jurors?)
One other general comment. I suspect that some on the "courts can be wrong" bandwagon have been participants in some legal proceeding, whether civil or criminal, in which they feel that the court got something wrong. But I'll bet the case did not drag out for 6 months and involve as much testimony and deliberation as a murder case does. There *is* a difference between how homicides and traffic violations are handled.
Edited 2008-04-29 19:21 UTC
Because judgements of men are insignificant compared to laws of God with eternal consequences. And one of those posters might cite the mind of the Lord based upon God's historical and future dealings with mankind as revealed in holy writ.
Isaiah 2:3
…and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
I think it is pretty obvious that he did kill her if you read the article. However, as the books on murder were bought after she went missing, I don't believe it is first degree murder at all. He probably beat her to death in an argument and then tried, and failed miserably, to get rid of the evidence.
Of course, until a body appears there will be the possibility that she or the murderous ex-friend she was cheating on him with have framed him.
The guy's as guilty as sin, if this was anyone else you'd probably all be saying death row for him. There was solid evidence to convict him, good riddance I say. I don't care if he created a great Linux file system, the guy was an asshole at the best of times, just see some of his posts on the LKML, and just because of what he's done, doesn't mean we should absolve him of his crimes.
Sorry, but I have no pity for him, I have a lot of pity for his children though.
I suppose some of you wanted a OJ style case?
There was no solid evidence, it was all circumstantial (although there was an awful lot of weird circumstantial evidence). Also just because somebody is an asshole does not mean they deserve to be locked up.
Without being in on the case other than through the occasional web article, I have no opinion on whether he has or has not done it, but imagine a scenario where your wife hates you that much that she deliberately plants evidence (a bit of her blood here, a bit more there) then goes missing. The kids are back in Russia now, where she would be if she indeed just left. It is just as possible that she hated him enough to let him hang himself like this.
In US law there are two types of evidence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_evidence and
What is "solid evidence" legally speaking?
I believe Vincent Bugliosi, who prosecuted Charles Manson once described circumstantial evidence as being like a rope, each strand of evidence laid along side of the others builds a stronger and stronger rope. It is that rope of evidence that finally leads to the conviction of the accused.
Not us Europeans. We're much too civilized for that. For that kind of crime he'd get 5-10 years in Denmark and a nice hotel-like room with professional people to take care of his mental condition. "
I'm a European and where I live (Netherlands) a life sentence means a life sentence. You can get sentenced to life imprisonment if you're enough of a sadist.
It's true there are cases where the penalty is way too mild (although it's changing aamof).
But that includes the US - where the greatest murderers of all, you know the people that get soldiers killed by the thousands and citizens by the hundreds of thousands, waging wars based on lies? They always walk.
Hans Reiser doesn't walk. But they'll probably give him a computer in jail, won't they?
(ed.) that was a double.
Edited 2008-04-29 11:55 UTC
The guy's as guilty as sin, if this was anyone else you'd probably all be saying death row for him. There was solid evidence to convict him, good riddance I say.
I disagree. There isn't even a body, nevermind a murder weapon, or a witness. Those are the three biggest pieces of evidence in a murder trial and they don't even have one of them! There seems to be only circumstancial evidence in this case and I'm actually surprised the verdict turned out the way it did.
Mental note: Incinerate bodies and bury weapons well in secret. That makes me innocent.
Is it not possible that Hans Reiser is just an evil, murdering son of a bitch? Is it not possible that someone who rips seats out of his car, washes the car floor out (!?), carries a mess of cash around, and so forth, MIGHT JUST BE GUILTY?
All I keep reading in this case amounts to, "He looks completely guilty, therefore he must not be because it is far more enlightened to just believe the whole system has a 100% failure rate."
Sounds like a guilty, murdering, lying SOB who deserves to rot.
Is it not possible that Hans Reiser is just an evil, murdering son of a bitch? Is it not possible that someone who rips seats out of his car, washes the car floor out (!?), carries a mess of cash around, and so forth, MIGHT JUST BE GUILTY?
All I keep reading in this case amounts to, "He looks completely guilty, therefore he must not be because it is far more enlightened to just believe the whole system has a 100% failure rate."
Sounds like a guilty, murdering, lying SOB who deserves to rot.
Yes he is a guilty, murdering, lying SOB, but it seems the loonies do not care. I am sure if he was the author of FAT32 or WinFS this same crowd would be screaming for a public stoning.
Is it not possible that Hans Reiser is just an evil, murdering son of a bitch? Is it not possible that someone who rips seats out of his car, washes the car floor out (!?), carries a mess of cash around, and so forth, MIGHT JUST BE GUILTY?
You do understand that the state needs to prove BEYOND A RESONABLE DOUBT that the defendant is guilty in order convict don't you? The evidence you speak of is what is called "circumstantial evidence", which basically means that it proves nothing. This type of evidence is usually useful to support other facts that put the suspect at the crime scene or provide motive. The state doesn't even have any hard evidence to show that a murder even occurred. The justice system in the United States doesn't work around the idea that a person is acting guilty, it's based around EVIDENCE. Show me any evidence from the trial that PROVES:
A. A murder occurred.
B. Reiser committed the murder.
C. There is no reasonable doubt to Reiser's guilt.
I just don't see how you can prove any of that without a body, a murder weapon, or a witness.
If you read my post you would have noticed I didn't say whether or not I think Reiser is guilty. That is irrelevant to the fact that I don't think the state made their case. Reiser probably would have been better off without a jury. A judge is less likely to convinct based on only cirumstantial evidence and emotion.
traces of her blood were found in his home and car
I can't really imagine a reason why her blood would be found inside his home and car aside from serious violence. If she had been injured accidentally of course she would have tried to get to a hospital. Blood is blood and it's supposed to stay inside one's body unless something goes very much awry, and for this reason I do believe Hans Reiser is guilty. I may be wrong but I just personally doubt it. Sad that is though, I feel sorry for the children and I abhor violence..
Maybe she had a nosebleed?
Although I think that him removing that passenger side seat from his car was very suspicious. The stories that have come out of this case have just been really bizarre. Everyone involved seems to have some pretty serious mental issues going on, one family friend even confessed to murdering Nina and several other women, and the police decided that he was just crazy.
I can't really imagine a reason why her blood would be found inside his home and car aside from serious violence. If she had been injured accidentally of course she would have tried to get to a hospital. Blood is blood and it's supposed to stay inside one's body unless something goes very much awry, and for this reason I do believe Hans Reiser is guilty. I may be wrong but I just personally doubt it. Sad that is though, I feel sorry for the children and I abhor violence..
I haven't read the details of the case, I've only been following it loosely. However, I do work in law enforcement and I know the difference between visible blood and trace amounts of blood. Something as insignificant as a pricked finger, or a ripped fingernail, can leave traces of blood that can only be picked up by applying a chemical such as Luminol and looking at it with an alternative light source. If it was only trace blood found in the car, it is a possibility that there is a benign explanation. Granted, if he did do it, it's also quite possible that he wasn't careful enough to notice leaving any trace behind when placing her body in the car. Also, it could be more than trace amounts found which would indicate something more serious than a simple cut.
I'm not disagreeing with you at all, just pointing out the possibilities in a case like this.
So you feel "compassion" for someone who is enough of a childish, tempermental damage case that they beat their spouse to death, later citing "She drove me to it, she was being bitchy and I just lost it?" If a person is enough of a c*nt that they cannot step away from their wife and/or kids when they're had a "bad day" they deserve the grinder just like a hardcore predator IMNSHO. Accidentally killing someone in, say, a bar fight or something might be different, but preying on the weak, whether you know them intimately or not, is f--ked up.
the same happens here in Greece. Especially here if you kill more that 100 people you will be never sent t o prison (the same as when you steal 10000 people).
Personally I am against death penalty although the death penalty in Europe has not been withdrawn because of human feelings (personal view).
In Reiser's case the impression conducted by the article is that he is guilty but it is difficult to prove. Such cases happen all the time, even in a small country like mine. I believe that time will show what happened. I cannot be sure that he did it but if we remove "law language" common sense shows that he is likely the killer.
I do not know the juror but can you feel how difficult is for a juror to cope with such a case? I think that they should not close the case until they find something.
ReiserFS is a donation to the community and mankind.If there is a slight possibility that he is innocent they should try hard to find it (or the opposite). He deserves it.
I am very much pro death penalty. I can never understand how society can send a message out there that no matter what kind of crimes you commit you will never pay for them with your life. I can never understand how a society can collect taxes from the friends and relatives of the victims of a serial killer and use that money to provide shelter, clothing, milk a cookies for this very same serial killers. We are talking about the overpopulation, food shortage, global warming and recession, and yet we spend food, water, oxygen and money to support a life which does not deserve any support.
Don't misunderstand my statement, I am not advocating for the death penalty to be used left and right a center, but I believe it should be available as an option for truly extreme cases.
I am very much pro death penalty. I can never understand how society can send a message out there that no matter what kind of crimes you commit you will never pay for them with your life.
Because there is always a chance for error in a crime sentence. A jail sentence can always be removed if for some reason something comes up but a death sentence can't because the person is already dead. In any case, technically speaking, you don't own someone's life. Taking a criminal's life is in no way less wrong than murdering some kids' mother.
Off topic, as an engineer myself, I think it is a disgrace that someone would kill another person just out of an argument about kids.
Because there is always a chance for error in a crime sentence. A jail sentence can always be removed if for some reason something comes up but a death sentence can't because the person is already dead.
I find it difficult to believe that a serial killer who was convicted with direct evidence (DNA and such) of killing, say, 10 people will suddenly turn out to be innocent of all 10 killings. Death penalty should be available as an option for EXTREME cases, much more extreme than a single 1st degree.
someone's life. Taking a criminal's life is in no way less wrong than murdering some kids' mother.
You don't own someone's freedom either, so, would locking up a criminal be the same as locking up your own daughter in the basement for 24 years? http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/04/29/austria.cellar/index.htm...
There have been many people on Death Row that were eventually cleared by DNA testing, so apparently current death penalty cases don't live up to your standards. And there's been a lot of complaining that even the current process takes way too long and costs too much money.
That said, I don't think wrongful convictions are really the issue here. You either believe that killing someone is justifiable punishment for their sins, or you think that killing someone is itself a sin and can never be justified. It's the same as abortion, you either view it as a medical procedure, or as murdering a child. Good luck convincing anyone on either side that they're wrong.
Are you referring to convictions done 20 years ago cleared by modern techniques? If so then yes, those convictions are not up to my standards.
Not quite sure where you are going with this. Are you recommending not going through the "process" today but keeping criminals in jail until it becomes faster and cheaper? What if when such time comes we'll find out that half of those people were in fact innocent?
And yet, here you are...
No, my point was that many people think the current system is too rigorous already. They'd like it to be easier to carry out the death penalty, which is inevitably going to lead to more mistakes, not fewer.
You misunderstood me - I'm actually not advocating either position here, just trying to point out both sides of the argument since the OP said he couldn't understand the other side. Personally, I feel a lot like you - that there's nothing fundamentally wrong with capital punishment, but that it should be put to very limited use.
You are probably referring to States. In Canada, where I live, unfortunately there is no death penalty at all, hence my whole argument that it should be available as an option for extreme cases.
I don't know about that, the sordid details of their personal lives sets up for me a situation where murder may have flowed almost naturally out of the situation. The battle between them was nasty and continual.
I married a woman who had kids from a previous marriage, and at the worst point of the dispute, which involved almost daily harrassment by the Ex, I found myself wishing he would do SOMETHING that would force me to kill him. It would be self defense, of course, but even if it wasn't I would spend a few years in prison, and when I got out my family could live in peace. When I realized the significance of what I was fantasizing about it scared the crap out of me. I moved my family to Alaska without telling anyone and in defiance of a court order. Despite the legal fallout of defying the Judge, I know I made the right choice...
If Hans Reiser, in a much worse situation than mine, made the other choice, I'd understand. I'd still send him to prison though.
You're absolutely right. It's a shame that we spend so much feeding and sheltering murderers. One answer would be to kill them, but a simpler and much less brutal one exists: Just let them go. If they kill again and there is a probability that they will keep doing so, then lock them up for that. The overall cost will be so much lower due to the lower volume of incarcerated people that the tax burden will seem light.
Most people who are convicted of murder would never do so a second time and are unlikely to be any kind of harm to society.
Given the flawed nature of the justice system, represented by the number of people later found to be innocent, it is impossible to justify killing. The framers of the US constitution attempted to design a legal system that minimized false positives. It is far better to have a hundred guilty men go free then it is to deny freedom to a single innocent man.
I support the death penalty; it simply must exist. Sometimes killing people is the only thing to do. However, its application is to me only theoretical; I do not think I can imagine many cases in which it would actually be applied.
Killing someone for revenge is morally wrong. You can call it "justice" if you like, but for the families it is largely just revenge. The questions to ask are "What is the advantage to society?" and "What is the harm to society?"
If you allow a murderer to live and go free society is harmed. There is a potential for another murder, which is inherently harmful. Those still alive who feel victimized are harmed psychologically, which harms society.
If you kill the murderer society is harmed for the same reason that society would be harmed if he killed again. The family of the murderer are harmed psychologically, which harms society.
I see these as almost equal, but since in the case of allowing the murderer to go free you have merely the /potential/ for the harm of killing, that case works out to be less harmful. I know what you're thinking: "What about the harm the murderer already did to society by killing someone?" but this is not important. That harm has been done anyway, the task afterward is to find the best way to minimize the harm to society going forward. Killing the murderer for any other reason than minimizing future societal harm is simply revenge, and thus morally unsupportable.
The defence speculation that the whole thing was a set up and that she's happily living in Russia with her family and kids seems a bit of a stretch. You'd think it'd be easy to prove she was alive if this was truly the case, hire a private investigator to go to Russia and watch the kids. You'd think eventually Nina, being a loving mother, would show up to see the kids. Video tape her alive, and bang! Hans is out of jail.
I find the thought of her framing him and heading to Russia rather hard to swallow, and assuming it's true, I'd find it even harder to swallow the thought that she would avoid her kids for any length of time to keep the fraud alive.
Now, to throw water on the flames that are a-brewin', I know getting a PI to Russia (or hire an honest one there) might prove a bit logistically tricky, and probably would be expensive, but if I was Hans, knew myself innocent, REALLY believed this line of reasoning and was facing all the punishments packaged with a 1st deg. murder conviction, I'd probably move heaven and earth to prove myself innocent.
Just my $0.02
I don't think so. I'll bet that quite a few Russians do this sort of thing. Tracking her down would almost certainly be routine, unless (a) she is heroically able to avoid contact with anyone she knows in Russia, or (b) she is involved with organized crime. Even then it shouldn't be too hard if you know the right people; it's not as if you're going after the organization.
I understood that money was not a problem for Reiser, but I could be wrong.
Raising money to keep Namesys going and make payroll was an ongoing Hans Reiser theme. He'd tell you about it at the drop of a hat.
On the other hand, he sought out Russian employees because they'd work cheap. (This is according to Hans.) He made trips to Russia. He no doubt has contacts there. And services are, apparently, rather inexpensive there. And yet there was no attempt by the defense to actually find Nina there. If the defense did not have enough confidence in the "she defected to Russia with the kids" theory to actually look for her there, why should anyone else accord it more credibility?
Edited 2008-04-29 14:31 UTC
Quite a few Russians simply disappear without a trace? Without any kind of passport record? How did she get back to Russia? Stow away on a cargo ship? Forged passport?
That seems way too far-fetched. Using Hakim's Razor (the simplest explanation is most often correct), Reiser committed murder and disposed of his wife's body -- and that's probably what happened.
Edited 2008-04-29 19:08 UTC
Sure, I'll grant you that it's probably easier to disappear in Russia than here in the United States. But, in this particular case, Reiser's wife would have had to travel back to Russia first. That isn't exactly an easy thing to hide. There are certainly undocumented means of travel (eg. private boat, cargo ship, etc), but (a) it isn't easy to do, and (b) she wouldn't need to hide how she went back to Russia because Reiser would know where she went and she could hide once she got there. Therefore, I don't think that she ever left the United States at all; it's more likely that Reiser killed her, and buried her somewhere so she wouldn't be found. Sad.
Edited 2008-04-29 23:00 UTC
I'm surprised at the relative lack of interest, by this imaginative and creative readership, in the captivating question of just what he *did* do with the body. I'm not one of those people around here who seem to think that if you hide the body well enough you're entitled to a "Get out of jail free" card. But he is certainly due some sort of recognition for his cleverness regarding the disposal of the body. Where's Columbo when you need him?
If I were him, and this was a really bad movie, I'd cut her into pieces and send one piece to each of the guys on the lkml who ever turned down the proposal to include ReiserFS 4 into vanilla.
Then I'd pick up a phone and say in a creepy voice: "Hello Clarice..."
Well, has anyone thought to *ask* Christoph if he's received any suspicious looking body parts via parcel post? Kernel devs, while generally brilliant, tend to get so wrapped up in their kernel work that unrelated issues can get pushed aside.
Edited 2008-04-30 00:19 UTC
Are you deliberately misreading what I wrote???
I am not saying that quite a few Russians disappear in Russia without a trace. I am not saying that it is probably easier to disappear in Russia than in the States.
I am saying, against the first writer, that it is probably quite easy to find someone in Russia whose job it is to find missing people. I am saying that it is quite easy to find a Private Investigator. I am saying that it is not logistically difficult to find someone who has tried to disappear, against the original author who claimed otherwise.
Would you stop misrepresenting what I wrote now?
Or you could hire a PI from Russia for that matter, much cheaper probably.
That story is just too much unrealistic. That she'd be smuggled out of country and that Russian's would keep her presence secret, it's just too much. If she's alive, the place is probably in the U.S. But he probably dumped her body somewhere, and instead of running away believed that he could still win the case.
I think the idea of is wife disappearing in Russia ridiculous. It's a kind of phantasy that we deal with the dark and secret Russia behind the iron curtain and no western citizen can gain access to that country. In a case like this and mass media around everywhere it would be difficult for her to hide without a vid being posted on youtube.
It depends on Nina's connections in Russia. If she were from a poor village, it would be easy to hide away. Some Russian villages are incredibly remote and insular, and won't have electricity or welcome outside visitors, tracking down a 'native' who doesn't want to be found in that sort of social environment would be practically impossible.
Yep. But PI will obviously start from her family, from asking the neighbours.
If Nina is alive and going to live till her death in some Huevo-Tutuevo without ever seeing her kids and parents - well, she's as well as dead.
If not - too many links. People usually go missing all alone...
no but you cannot sentence a person guilty without evidence.. Now sure, if they knew for a fact she was dead, but couldnt find the body.. well.. that would be a start, but then they also actually have to PROOVE that HE did it.. well.. i have seen no proof.
I know for sure that i wouldnt put much trust in the USA courts if i were innocent, but tried as murdorer.. would you?
What I find really really troubling is that there was even a murder trial without a found dead body, or proof that Nina Reiser is in fact dead.
I'm not necessarily saying Reiser is innocent. If he did it, let him receive his punnishment.
But how can there be a muder trial, and conviction, without irrefutable proof that the victim is indeed dead?
Missing != Dead
And with this long rope of individual strands of circumstantial evidence, you'd think that the prosecutors and investigators could have come up with some evidence that Nina Reiser is in fact dead. But, AFAIK, they haven't.
Again, doesn't the victim have to be dead for there to be a murder trial on the perpetrator?
Edited 2008-04-29 16:26 UTC
What I find really really troubling is that there was even a murder trial without a found dead body, or proof that Nina Reiser is in fact dead.
They don't need a body to have a trial and conviction, they simply need a body of evidence.
But how can there be a muder trial, and conviction, without irrefutable proof that the victim is indeed dead?
Likewise where is the irrefutable proof that she is alive?
Likewise where is the irrefutable proof that she is alive?
Since she was known to be alive before all of this, she should be assumed to be still alive until proven dead.
Proof of her being alive is not needed because that was her natural state. Still being alive is simply a continuation of her natural state.
Being dead is a change in her natural state. Being that death is a catastrophic change, it needs to be proven.
That being said, that does not prove Hans Reisers innocence. The fact that blood was found, and he removed a car seat and pressure washed the car, makes him look really guilty of "somehing". But that does not prove Nina Reiser's death. Heck, in a fit of rage, he could have slapped her in the face and gave her a bloody nose for all we know, which would be enough to leave blood on the premises, and probably would not have killed her. That is plausable.
And assuming he did kill her in that incident, couldn't the investigators have found some evidence of body removal?
But the fact that there is no found body or proof of death, it just seems sensible to me that the charges should be different - perhaps assault or domestic violence - both enough to get him locked up for a while. Then if, later on, a body is found, a murder charge (and likely conviction) can be put forward.
Again - It just seems logical to me that a murder charge means someone is dead, and you know they are dead beyond a shadow of a doubt.
And I'm not talking in a complete legal sense. The law is too complex, and I'm too ignorant of the intracacies of it, to know how the law views all this - IANAL.
I'm just trying to talk commen sense and logic.
there are massive amounts of circumstancial evidence, and highly suspicious behavior on the part of Hans.
What a lot of people don't realize is that most convictions are built on circumstantial evidence. It's fairly rare to have hard proof that is beyond any question. Lots of prosecutors have complained about the "CSI effect" on juries, who assume that if there's no absolute proof of guilt then they must be innocent.
All a conviction requires is belief beyond a reasonable doubt. Do the jurors think that it is reasonable to assume that Nina is alive in Russia? Apparently not.
There is ample precedent for murder cases even when there isn't a body and only when circumstantial evidence exists (example: http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/young/joe_hunt/1.html). But the bar is pretty high. You have to convince the jury of the defendant's motive, intentions, ability to carry out the crime, and opportunity. Most of the time, it seems, the cases are about the behavior of the defendant before and after the alleged crime. In this case, Reiser did some truly bizarre things -- things that most people would indicate someone who is actively trying to destroy evidence of a crime.
So if you hide your victims well you should get off scott free? "
If there is no proof you should go free.
Far better to let a thousand dangerous, clever criminals roam the streets then to lock away a single innocent person.
And if the dangerous, clever, criminals, previously acquitted of murders they committed, kill just two innocent people? Is that still a good bargain? "
Either you can prove they did it or you can't. If you cannot prove it then you must assume they didn't. Prosecuting people just because isn't a good idea, and if you don't have proof then you are doing it "just because."
Maybe you don't like them, maybe they're immigrants, black people, pale, smelly, rude, bombastic... for some reason you want to lock them away without being sure that they are involved in whatever grievance currently bothering you. That is always bad.
Go ahead and follow them. Spy on them. Do whatever you like to gather evidence, but don't just lock them up. That's not just and that's not moral.
Unless you're the unlucky one who got killed. Or it was your wife. Or child. Or parents.
Your grasp of legal proceedings are lacking. Lack of body does not mean lack of sufficient evidence.
Too bad pretty much every country has, and is, putting innocent people in jail no matter what their legal system is. If you think this is unique to the american system (which I don't like, but that's not the point) you must be living in a fantasy world.
When did I say that? I am talking about what is moral, what is just and what *should* be. I assert that the american legal system was designed to minimize false positives, and to hell with false negatives.
The American, and all, legal systems incarcerate innocent people every year, but if you're having a debate about what is *right* on a philosophical level (which we are, what with these hypothetical "In this scenario what is the desired response from the legal system?" questions), then the answer I provide is easy and morally correct.
Everyone defending him seriously need to do some more reading on this. He had really really big problems. I would not be surprised if he killed his wife. He was paranoid, delusional, and downright abusive to his child.
I think a large part of the defense of someone like Hans Reiser comes from his prominent position in the community. I think we really need to seperate the man from the technology. Another example of this is Eric Raymond, who wrote my favorite literature on the open source movement, but is also a Gun nut, a racist, and a witch. As a technologist, I have a huge amount of respect for both reiser and ESR. As a person, I have no respect for either.
some highlights
Rory has nightmares. When he's awake, he spends time drawing monsters and soldiers, and he tells his mother that he and his father have a secret. Nina thinks that Reiser is still playing videogames with their son and worries that Rory is developing a condition called sensory integration dysfunction, which can make the smallest sound or touch overwhelming.
I find it troubling that he was convicted of first degree murder with such flimsy evidence.
IMHO he is as likely to not have killed her as having done it.
The actions Hans took were odd however you look at it.
But not evidence of a murder.
So I guess the moral of the story is, don't act odd.
Yes, the evidence is circumstantial, but it's pretty damning. Blood traces found in his home and car. He was seen hosing out the inside of his car, and tried to explain that as "routine cleaning". He removed the passenger seat of the car. The car contained books about murder. Why is it so difficult to believe that the guy committed murder? He was human (like the rest of us), he was going through a bitter divorce, his wife was apparently seeing someone else, and he was under extreme emotional stress. People do horrible, irrational things under similar circumstances and, while I don't excuse the behavior, I can at least appreciate that it happens sometimes.
That said, it isn't clear to me whether a case can be made for premeditated murder. The books about murder were supposedly obtained after the alleged crime. I'm not sure why someone would want such a thing but, then again, people have all kinds of weird fetishes. There's also a world of difference between a planned killing and a crime of passion. One is absolutely intentional and the other is more accidental. Reiser would have been better off if he had gone straight to the police, and confessed to accidentally killing his wife during a fight. Hiding the crime created enough ambiguity that the prosecutor was able to exploit to accuse Reiser of premeditated murder.
Sad, truly sad what has happened to his family. If there's any lesson in all of this, it's that violence is never an answer to life's problems (aside from self-defense, that is). Reiser should have done what most people do: Deal with the emotional pain through therapy, move on after the divorce, raise his children, rebuild his life, meet someone else, be happy, etc. I suspect, though, that he's the kind of guy who was convinced of the primacy of his own intelligence, and believed that it was enough to push him through any obstacle -- and was more concerned with "losing" than trying to find some reasonable middle ground with his ex-wife.
Let this be a lesson to all of you single-minded fanatics out there. You know who you are.
I just love American law system. They have everything what is the best: greedy lawyers, judges that stand above the law, capital punishment and murders without victim's body. If there is no proof even for that crime was made and _no_body_ - how can you judge anyone guilty?
Personally, I think that Hans could do it. The other thing is what judges should do about it - it's a paradox, but no one should be found guilty in this trial. And in most European countries no one would be even charged if no body is found.
To all those suggesting capital punishment for "extreme cases":
1) It's MORE expensive, not less!
At least if you want to make sure somebody is guilty before you kill him. You could, of course, opt for the el cheapo "He looks guilty, let's blast his head!"-method.
2) People don't commit murder because the punishment isn't hard enough. Nobody says "Wow, just one or two decades in jail for murder? I'll do it!". That's just not how it works. People commit crimes because they think they won't get caught.
3) It sends the wrong message. You can't tell people that life is precious and killing is wrong and then turn around and say "Hey, he killed somebody. Let's fry his sorry ass!".
Killing people is only acceptable if it's the ONLY option - let's say a person starts shooting hostages or something along these lines.
4) People often sit in prison for years before they're killed so the "OMG he could get out!"-argument isn't very convincing.
...he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword…
Ezekiel 22:31
31 Therefore have I poured out mine indignation upon them; I have consumed them with the fire of my wrath: their own way have I recompensed upon their heads, saith the Lord God.
Does it say anything in there about getting a life?
Note: I've looked over this guy's posting history, and they consist *entirely* of bible quotes with no original material added. So I don't think my quip is out of line.
Edited 2008-04-30 00:44 UTC
Furthermore, they must be killed via the same method as they employed. No mention of what to do if multiple methods were used for different killings. Then again, we may be generalizing too much. This may only be applicable to killing with swords. Or, it might only apply to killing with one particular sword. It's all left quite ambiguous.
Edited 2008-04-30 00:56 UTC
And how can any such set of documents represent truth when it totally neglects the issue of the Great Juju at the bottom of the sea?
True if a person is willfully devoid of the Light of God.
Doctrine & Covenants 1:16
They seek not the Lord to establish his righteousness, but every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol, which waxeth old and shall perish in Babylon, even Babylon the great, which shall fall.
I just love the "Quote the Bible"-game. Specially without any further information, as you can interpret Bible in many ways.
Like "For wages of sin is death..." Rom 6:23a.
Anyways, I too find it a bit weird to be sentenced without any hard evidence, but hey, here in Europe (Estonia at least) you'd probably only get 5-10 years for homicide, even when there's a body and witnesses.
Edited 2008-04-30 05:26 UTC
You forget, Jesus renounced "an eye for an eye." Since this occurred /after/ the old testament texts it can be presumed that god changed his mind.
There are wide differences between what is moral, what is just, what is legal and what is doctrine of a church. Political philosophy needs to be practiced, as far as possible, outside religion, because religion is not the end-all when it comes to morality. As a certain pirate once said, it's more of a guideline.
Edited 2008-04-30 11:57 UTC
Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
Moroni 8:18
For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.
Mormon 9:9
For do we not read that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and in him there is no variableness neither shadow of changing?
2 Thessalonians 2:8
And then shall that Wicked[lawless one - greek translation] be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
Revelation 20:12
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Revelations is of somewhat dubious origin and questionable interpretation, so let's skip it for now.
As for the rest: You can say if you like that god is unchanging and anything that supposedly was said by god is true forever, but you'd be wrong several ways. Ignoring fallable human transcribers, most of the citations you provided were referring to the *eternal* nature of god and not, in my opinion, referring to the unchanging nature of divine instructions.
As evidence that the christian god changes his mind you have only to look at the "simplification" of the ten commandments that Jesus provided, and to the fact that in the old testament you see a vengeful, wrathful and jealous god who defends the chosen people,, whereas in the new testament all people are welcome.
I wont dispute it with you if you are a fundamentalist, literalist, or anything like that. There's no way to disprove a belief.
Let me part by saying that a citation can be found in the bible to back up any and every position and point of view, even contradictory ones. It is not the best basis for any argument not purely theological and theoretical.
Note that Doctrine and Covenants is not a translated work.
Doctrine & Covenants 29:15-21
And there shall be weeping and wailing among the hosts of men;
And there shall be a great hailstorm sent forth to destroy the crops of the earth.
And it shall come to pass, because of the wickedness of the world, that I will take vengeance upon the wicked, for they will not repent; for the cup of mine indignation is full; for behold, my blood shall not cleanse them if they hear me not.
Wherefore, I the Lord God will send forth flies upon the face of the earth, which shall take hold of the inhabitants thereof, and shall eat their flesh, and shall cause maggots to come in upon them;
And their tongues shall be stayed that they shall not utter against me; and their flesh shall fall from off their bones, and their eyes from their sockets;
And it shall come to pass that the beasts of the forest and the fowls of the air shall devour them up.
And the great and abominable church, which is the whore of all the earth, shall be cast down by devouring fire, according as it is spoken by the mouth of Ezekiel the prophet, who spoke of these things, which have not come to pass but surely must, as I live, for abominations shall not reign.
...the angels are waiting the great command to reap down the earth, to gather the tares that they may be burned; and, behold, the enemy is combined.
I, the Lord, am angry with the wicked; I am holding my Spirit from the inhabitants of the earth.
And the saints also shall hardly escape…
Enoch 47:2 (apocrypha)
[in the last days people]...with united voice petition...that for them he[the Lord] would execute judgment; and that his patience may not endure for ever.
D&C 133:50-51(revelation recieved November 3, 1831)
And his voice shall be heard: I have trodden the wine-press alone, and have brought judgment upon all people; and none were with me;
And I have trampled them in my fury, and I did tread upon them in mine anger, and their blood have I sprinkled upon my garments, and stained all my raiment; for this was the day of vengeance which was in my heart.
There is more text not in the Bible that is consistent with vengeful and wrathful God as pertaining to a yet future day. Not sure about jealous though. Excluding the New Testament there are additional texts showing the same character of God in LDS scriptures and the Apocrypha.
Do you wish to revise this statement?
I will rephrase your words. Yes, the Bible can be misused by those with ill intent, without sound reason, and not well informed. The holy Spirit is the best way (best basis) for obtaining truth, especially moral truth.
I humor people who quote the bible and treat the 'evidence' they find therein as reasonable, because it is a widely accepted view that what is found in the bible is the word of god. Other texts less well established that purport to be the word of god do not get a pass from me. Sorry, but there are only so many sources I am willing to pretend are authoritative for the sake of argument.
Do you wish to revise this statement? "
No. If I insist the world is flat, for example, because that is my belief, then no evidence you can supply will sway me. You can't disprove someone's faith, because it is by nature not based on reason. You can disprove evidence for it, but few people seriously base their religious views on provable facts, figures and events. Almost all go by belief.
Aside from some terminology issues I find that I can agree with this.
To return somewhat to the topic: though I am anti-christian and anti-church I find everything admirable in Jesus' views on morality and the law. Views which, I will note, are a far cry from *** law outlined in the old testament. Either god changed his mind or, perhaps more likely, Jesus hijacked the religion for his own ends.
Do you regularly reject testimonials of life after death too?
Are you familiar with Josephus the historian and his work?
I will disagree with an example. As a child someone asked me in school if I was scared of a butterfly. I said no, and then the other kid clapped his hands before my eyes and I blinked thereby showing by his childish humor that I was indeed scared of a butterfly. Once a person is presented with sufficient evidence for a belief there comes an inevitablity that they cannot disbelieve. In the example, I believed that my eyes were about to have contact with another object therefore I blinked. If I believed that my eyes were safe then I would not have blinked. Therefore the evidence of the clapping of the hands caused the inevitabilty of the belief that my eyes were not safe which resulted in eye blinking.
I will used the word, "belief" in place of, "faith" in the following argument. Belief is based upon evidence as shown in the example above. Whether the belief can be disproved will depend on establishing the evidence as being true or false. In cases that involve likelyhood, or in other words, cases that use circumstational evidence to form a belief, inductive logic is used to arrive at a conclusion and this is also called reasoning. Now I will restate your above sentence into something in which you probably meant to type but that is logically coherent: 'You can't disprove to someone their faith who willfully ignores evidence that their faith is false. Such a person is being unreasonable.'
Historical note: The Jews of the time were expecting a military Messiah to save them from their overseers and to setup a kingdom. Furthermore there are Old Testament references, as you may already know, of the expected Messiah. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_prophecies_of_Jesus
Mark 2:21(see also Matt. 9:17; Luke 5:37-38)
No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse.
I will offer an interpretation of Mark 2:21 keeping in mind the theory that the *** religion was hijacked. The teachings(new cloth) that the Lord gave could not be established within *** customs, tradition, or meticulous observance of what some people interpreted the law to be which would cause conflict or confusion. Also note that the Lord picked and ordained men(to the priesthood) not from the ruling classes of the day but more common folk. You may also remember the part when the Lord was asked by the chief priests where he got his authority.
Matthew 21:23-27
And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching, and said, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?
And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things.
The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?
I say John's baptism was from heaven. And John testified of Jesus who said that Jesus was mightier than himself who was given more authority than John which is to baptise with the Holy Ghost and with fire (Matthew 3). This authority was not hijacked from heaven or the ruling classes of men of the day.
Also note in Matthew chapter 3 the "wrath" and "unquenchable fire" to come as a supporting view of an unchangeable God between the old and new testaments as your doubt lingers over the nature of God as mentioned in the Book of Revelations.
"There was no solid evidence, it was all circumstantial (although there was an awful lot of weird circumstantial evidence)"
yeah, which is why i stand on the fence between not guilty or guilty. i mean, if it's so hard for me to tell what the situation was. i personally kinda FEEL like he is guilty, but that's a feeling and NOT a fact. theres no evidence he did kill her. i guess your not really innocent until proven guilty. i guess you can get proven weird and that's enough. they should change that old adage "innocent till proven guilty" to "innocent until the jury feels your guilty". That's pretty scary, better hope you never get arrested for something you diddn't do.
Back in 2003. No body was found, but my brother was the last person seen with the victim (and old man). The prosecution and his ex-wife painted him as worse than Hitler and the fact that he folded his socks in his drawer was used against him. No DNA. Jury gave him Life without parole at age 44. Real bummer. Cost the family a fortune, and still does.
If you know of any violent, stupid youth in your family or neighborhood, take them to a murder trial and let them see how EASY it is to convict someone. If you don't have at least $1-15 million to defend yourself, just plea and hope to get out in 17-25.


text:
Jay Leno Tickets
If you've been searching for great deals on Jay Leno tickets, GoTickets has a large selection on sale for the 2018 schedule. From premium tickets in the front row to cheap seats in your favorite section, "sold out" events, and last minute discounts, our website is the best place to buy tickets to Jay Leno online.
Jay Leno Schedule and Dates
Get Email Updates on
Jay Leno
Jay Leno Tickets are not currently available. Please enter your email address below and Be the First to Know when they are.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Maybe at last, in this new Congress, action finally will be taken to reduce the size of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and create a new 12th Circuit from the rubble.
Rubble may sound like an odd word to use when speaking of action to break up the nation's largest appellate court. But it is apt.
The existing court, based in San Francisco but with jurisdiction that seems to sprawl across half the world, has more cases than it can efficiently handle -- and the worst record in the American court system.
In a recent term, for example, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed 95 percent of the 9th Circuit cases that it reviewed.
That's a shameful record.
But it has been bad for years, and Congress has dickered and danced and dallied -- and done nothing about solving the problem.
Alaska Sen. Frank Murkowski is making one more try at setting things right. He has introduced a bill that would split the court into two separate circuits: the 9th, embracing California, Arizona and Nevada; and the 12th, handling cases from Alaska, Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, Montana, Idaho, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands.
This is a plan we have endorsed for years and we do so again.
This time around, Murkowski has been joined on his bill by Sens. Ted Stevens of Alaska, Conrad Burns of Montana, Larry Craig and Mike Crapo of Idaho, James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Gordon Smith of Oregon.
That's an all-Republican lineup of co-sponsors, but with any good luck the measure will have broad bipartisan support. It certainly is an issue that should not be hampered by political games.
The jurisdiction of the existing court spreads over an area of 14 million square miles, and it is burdened by a huge caseload that is larger than that of any other circuit in the country. Moreover, the court serves a population nearly double that of the next largest circuit.
Alaskans long have complained that cases involving issues affecting this state too often have been handled by a panel of appellate judges mostly from California and other distant jurisdictions. They may know the law -- although the Supreme Court reversal rate suggests they may not -- but it's fair to say they have no appreciation or understanding of the underlying issues involved in some of the Alaska cases before them.
The court is too big, too bulky, too vast.
It needs to be broke up. Sooner rather than later.
© 2018. All Rights Reserved. | Contact Us


text:
Dwight Howard's Injuries, Future Prove Lakers' Pau Gasol Isn't ExpendableFebruary 24, 2013
The NBA trade deadline is over and Dwight Howard is still a member of the Los Angeles Lakers.
A torn plantar fascia pretty much killed what was left of Gasol's trade value this season. The silver lining? It all but ensured that he will be a member of the Lakers heading into this summer. Howard, we're not so sure about.
As an unrestricted free agent, Dwight is able to simply walk away. Or, if he does stay, with his current injury problems and performance, the Lakers may or may not be better off.
When the Lakers traded for Howard, this is the player they thought they were getting.
A five-time All-NBA First Team center who was the reigning three-time Defensive Player of the Year. Instead, this is the version they got.
Good, but not quite the same dominant force that he used to be.
Sure, he is coming off back surgery and has still posted decent numbers, but does the Los Angeles Lakers version of Howard look like the old? Not really, so instead of a stud, the Lakers now have an injury-prone, chemistry-wrecking center that has apparently forgotten how to run the pick-and-roll.
Good thing that Gasol will be around for whatever may transpire this offseason.
If Dwight somehow gets back to the player he once was, is he really the person to lead the Lakers into their next era? The easy-going guy, the person who is always making fun of teammates—like this—as a member of such a storied franchise like the Lakers?
Not when that franchise is led by Kobe Bryant.
Really, do you think that the Black Mamba enjoys playing with this guy? Is he happy about having to likely play out his career alongside him?
Sure, according to Kevin Ding of the Orange County Register, Howard did say that he and his Laker teammates "have years to play with each other."
But what if they end up missing the playoffs this season? Is that necessarily a good thing?
Remember, this is the same guy who gave us two seasons worth of Dwightmare. Would it be surprising if he decided to take less money to go back to being a bigger fish in a small pond, out from under the L.A. spotlight—to go to a team where he can have fun while surrounding himself with outside shooters like when he was with the Orlando Magic?
I wouldn't put that past him.
Or what if he re-signs and never recovers from his back surgery completely and the injuries just keep piling up?
Whatever happens with Howard, if he never returns to the same player he once was or if he does leave town, the Lakers should be glad that they still have Gasol.
Throughout his Laker career, Gasol has been a champion. He has yet to complain. He's been a true team player—even after being traded, and then not traded, being horribly misused and even relegated to being a sixth man before suffering his current injury, he has not made even a peep.
This summer, Pau will be around if the Lakers need him. Plus, he played very well when Howard was hurt, so they know that he has plenty left in the tank. He will provide a great safety net in case the worst happens and the Lakers miss the playoffs, and Kobe goes off, and then Dwight leaves town because of it.
Or if Howard never fully recovers from his injuries. Not many players are capable of returning to their old selves after serious back problems. Just ask Larry Bird and Brad Daugherty. Gasol will be around to cushion any future problems concerning Howard.
For example, if Howard does refuse to re-sign with the Lakers, hypothetically, wouldn't a sign-and-trade with the Atlanta Hawks for Josh Smith, whom they surprisingly kept at the deadline, make sense?
Dwight can go back to his hometown and back to having fun, while the Lakers would get a power forward who can play defense. Then, they can move Gasol back to the center position, where he belongs, and have Kobe ride out his golden years with those two and Nash.
It works!
It will be an interesting summer for the Lakers. Dwight could remain a Laker for years and get back to his dominant ways, although that is still a great unknown. No matter what has been or will be said, the Lakers will have plenty of options for whatever transpires and should consider themselves fortunate to have a player like Gasol to fall back on.


text:
If love is a battlefield, rebounding with a hunky baseball player fifteen years your younger may be the best weapon. And, since nobody plays war games better that Madonna, she's using her weapon—Alex Rodriguez—to her best advantage.
After devastating her husband Guy Ritchie by letting their son Rocco pose for photographers in a New York Yankee's t-shirt given to him by A-Rod, and parading her boy toy all over New York and LA, Madge has delivered a near-fatal blow to Guy by introducing Alex to their mutual friends.
The UK's Mirror reports that the singer held an intimate dinner party in her New York apartment for A-Rod and invited many of her and Guy's closest pals, including partygirl Ingrid Casares and producer Victor Calderone.
A source said, "it is a massive slap in the face for Guy and he really finds the whole thing quite embarrassing. As you can imagine, both he and Madonna share a lot of mutual friends who they still keep in touch with."
The source says it was one of those mutual friends who spilled the beans on his ex-wife's indiscretions: "Guy found out through one of them about this party and was pretty pissed-off about the whole thing. He thought it showed a great deal of disrespect to him so soon after the announcement of their break up."
Friends say this may be the last straw in the couple's messy divorce battle. "As a result, there's no love lost between Guy and A-Rod and the thought of [Alex] being introduced to all their mutual friends is just too much."
Well, we didn't think there was much love left to be lost between Madge and Guy, but we wouldn't be suprised if her recent behavior would kill any chance for an amicable divorce. Too bad they can't keep their kids and their friends out of the nastiness.


text:
An open day event will be held on the Smith House Estate on Saturday, June 21, from 11am to 1pm to discuss plans for new playground facilities on the estate.
The open day, which has been organised by Calderdale Council, will provide local residents with an opportunity to discuss potential new designs for improved facilities with council officers, councillors and representatives from Pennine Housing.
Brighouse ward councillors Scott Benton and Howard Blagbrough have been campaigning for improvements to playgrounds at Smith House and Whinney Hill Park.
Coun Benton said: "We are working with local residents and Calderdale Council to produce designs for new facilities on both sites.
"We would love to hear the thoughts of local families in relation to what any new playground facilities should look like and so would encourage local people to attend the consultation event on Saturday to share their thoughts."
Coun Blagbrough said: "We are hopeful that the council will be able to find the money required to fund new facilities."


text:
Bean Soup Recipe
Generally associated with winter stews and soups, beans make for a filling and tasty soup which can also be served as a main meal with plenty of fresh home baked bread.
- 1 cup haricot beans (tinned or dried. If dried, they need to be soaked.)
- 1 onion
- 2 carrots
- 2 leeks
- 2 sticks of celery
- 4 tablespoons olive oil
- 4 medium sized tomatoes skinned
- 2 1/2 pints chicken stock or vegetable stock
- 2 tablespoons finely chopped basil OR 6 tablespoons finely chopped parsley
- If dried and soaked, cook beans until soft and reserve the cooking water.
- Peel and chop the onion and carrots and wash and chop the leeks and celery.
- Soften the onion in the olive oil.
- Add the other vegetables and cook until just soft.
- Add the chopped tomatoes with the stock and a little bean water.
- Bring to the boil and then simmer until all the vegetables are cooked.
- Remove from the heat and tip in the beans.
- Season to taste.
- Stir in the basil or parsley.
- Reheat carefully and serve.
Prep Time: 15 minutes
Cook Time: 35 minutes
Yield: 4 portions
Powered by Comment Script


text:
Neighbors' outrage over shooting range that allows gunmen to fire hundreds of bullets while dangling from a helicopter
Residents in a rural Texas neighborhood have expressed their outrage over a shooting range that allows gunmen to fire hundreds of bullets while dangling from a helicopter near their homes.
Homeowners in Denton County, North Texas said the helicopter and gunfire disrupts the tranquil area and they fear that a bullet could ricochet into one of their homes, causing serious damage.
Helicopter Sniper Adventure offers customers the chance to shoot targets on land and water as they fly through the sky on a helicopter.
'It's like the ultimate video game,' Dan Claassen from the company told WFAA.
Fears: A gunman is seen shooting from a helicopter at a shooting range that has concerned neighbors
Customers pay $795 for the game and use as many as 500 rounds as they navigate the course.
But neighbors do not consider it quite so enjoyable - and have captured cell phone footage of the noise of the helicopter as it hovers over the area.
'The first time they were hovering right over our two acres, shooting at whatever,' neighbor Michael Lauer told WFAA. 'You really didn't know - were they shooting at me?'
He added: 'You just know, some day, one of them is going to hit the house or do something.'
'Challenge': Gun lovers board a helicopter in Denton, Texas and shoot targets from the sky
Taking aim: Gunmen shoot balloons and moving targets - but neighbors worry bullets could ricochet
'Like a video game': Another shooter takes aim at target as he zooms over the range, which is entirely legal
But Claassen shrugged off their concerns.
'It's not like we're endangering anybody's life with our flight patterns or our techniques,' he said.
The company insists it is safe, adding that the helicopter is the quietest that has been developed. They add that the helicopter only flies over the shooting range and only goes out every other week.
'It's not like we're hitting this every day,' said Claassen. 'So it's not noise pollution.'
The company details the course on its website.
Worry: Neighbor Michael Lauer said that at first he thought the gunfire was going to hit him
'As you depart in the helicopter with your safety officer, you will be flown through and around various target opportunities,' it explains.
'Targets will fall away, rotate and even explode when hit - be prepared for any and everything! Your score will depend on your ability to adapt to air assault challenges.'
Officials from the Federal Aviation Administration and Denton County said the practice is legal.
The neighbors said they may take the issue to court.
See below for video
Mon Jun 10 15:23:13 PDT 2013
Helicopter target practice irks Denton County neighbors
A low-flying helicopter designed to offer a thrilling adventure is upsetting some residents of a Denton County neighborhood near Aubrey. Shooters armed with assault weapons take aim at targets below. view full article
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2339594/Neighbors-outrage-shooting-range-allows-gunmen-hundreds-bullets-dangling-helicopter.html#ixzz2W2i3xMHz
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
I agree with the neighbors. I'm a gun-loving American, but there should be some kind of law against having a gun range so close to someone's home. And people shooting from a helicopter to boot? WTF? I don't blame them for being scared of stray bullets. Idiots wanting to play Rambo + assault riffle + helicopter + close proximity to homes = Very bad idea.
It's a really neat concept, but they should do it out in the middle of nowhere, where all the stray bullets in the world couldn't hurt anyone.


text:
What does WRCM mean in NASA?
This page is about the meanings of the acronym/abbreviation/shorthand WRCM in the Governmental field in general and in the NASA terminology in particular.
Water Rocket Computer Model
Find a translation for WRCM in other languages:
Select another language:
Discuss this WRCM abbreviation with the community:
Use the citation below to add this abbreviation to your bibliography:
"WRCM." Abbreviations.com. STANDS4 LLC, 2018. Web. 19 Mar. 2018. <https://www.abbreviations.com/term/166906>.


text:
Internal » News » Afghanistan
Taliban destroy nine NATO fuel tankers in western Afghanistan
21 Mar 2012 - 8:49
Islam Times - Taliban militants in Afghanistan's western Farah province have destroyed nine NATO tankers carrying fuel for US-led troops in the war-torn country.
According to local officials, two vehicles escorting the convoy were also destroyed in the ambush on Tuesday.
One person was killed in the attack and two others were injured, the officials said.
A spokesperson for the Taliban, however, claimed that at least six people had lost their lives.
Taliban militants have also destroyed hundreds of NATO tankers and trucks in Pakistan over the past year.
Pakistan recently blocked the border crossings used to transfer NATO supplies for US-led forces into landlocked Afghanistan.
Islamabad took the measure after a US-led airstrike killed 26 Pakistani soldiers on November 26.
Prior to the closure, the supplies would arrive by sea in Karachi, from where they would be carried in long, exposed convoys, through Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province in northwestern Pakistan.
Using other routes, which largely pass through Russia and Central Asian states, has proven to be too costly, both politically and economically.


text:
As far as the YAL category goes, I've read the following and here is my input:
Shadow and Bone: Felt like I'd been there, done that. I am very tired of whiny teenagers taking leadership over a group of adults or other teenagers just because they have some super power and not for any particle of leadership ability. I didn't like this well enough to seek out the sequels.
The Lions of Little Rock: I loved this book. I particularly liked the relationship between the mother and the daughter; because I could really relate. Readers who enjoy historical fiction should eat this up.
The Fault in Our Stars: Dare I say that I've had this on my Kindle for months (along with Code Name Verity) but I've yet to read it? I know both of them are good, it's just that I tend to give all my attention to the books I have out from the library.
Cinder: I liked this one well enough to check out the sequel, Scarlett, and I actually liked that one the best. This one was pretty good even if it felt a little formulaic. I'm a sucker for Byronic heroes, and the main squeeze from number two is definitely a Byronic kind of guy...
Code Name Verity: See above.
Legend: I found this one to be fairly interesting. I thought the author's comments that she based this on Les Miserables and the scenes with Marius and Eponine were telling. What would happen if the detective and the fugitive hooked up? Hmmm.... I liked this one well enough to pick up the next in the series, Prodigy, but I just got it on hold from the library yesterday, so I haven't had a chance to read it yet.
The Scorpio Races: I thought that the characterization was very interesting in this book, but I couldn't really get into the whole water horse thing. The author didn't sell me on why in the world anyone would do such a thing. If you are a fan of great character writing, you'll like this. I also liked the double perspective between Kate and Sean. I'm not sure why I don't rate this book higher than I do -- I think it's because as stated above, I just didn't buy into the mythology.
Ungifted: I haven't read this one yet because it's never in the stacks, which means it's probably a pretty good read.
The False Prince: Ditto Ungifted. I just started working my way through these last month, so this one will be next on my list.
Welcome Caller, This is Chloe: Honestly, I may or may not get to this one as it is not really my cup of tea. I'm just judging from the cover on this, which tells you how important a cover really is.
Rot & Ruin: I liked this one well enough to read all the sequels that are available. It may be my current craze with The Walking Dead, but I liked it. It's more about relationships (and good versus evil) than Zombies, really.
Wrapped: Although this book was completely unbelievable, I did like it enough to read it all the way to the end. I won't be picking up any sequels, as the characters were just slightly off kilter for me.
How was I able to read this many books in about three weeks? Well, my new teaching assignment leads to a lot less time spent at home grading. I used to spend tons of time creating and tweaking curriculum and then added a ton of grading on top. With ELD the curriculum is set, so I just spend time tweaking. Most of my feedback is instant right there in the classroom, so the grading load is very light. If it wasn't for most of my students hating to read and write, this would be a perfect job.


text:
Reading, Nature, Sceince.
Black Ops 2
Nickleback, Five fo Fighting, One Re***,
Anything by Studio Ghibli.
Elementary, Criminal Minds, Arrow, Ax -Men, Hawaii-5-0, Adventure Time, The Amazing World of Gumball.
The Book Thief, The Kite Runner, Harry Potter, Divergent, The Mortal Instruments, The Infernal Devices.
Get up and keep going!


text:
A state hearings board today stayed its ruling that Pierce County acted out of step with state law when it approved comprehensive plan amendments for the proposed Orton Junction development south of Sumner.
The Growth Management Hearings Board ruled last month the county was out of compliance because of the land-use changes. The county requested the stay because its ability to compete for up to $31 million in potential state grant and loan awards could be imperiled by the ruling.
Orton Farms and the City of Sumner also requested the stay. They also have appealed the ruling in Thurston County Superior Court.
The stay will remain in effect until the appeal is decided, which could take six months to a year, said Pierce County deputy prosecutor Pete Philley.
It's unclear whether today's stay will fully restore the county's ability to compete for state grants and loans.
That's because legally the county still remains out of compliance on a comprehensive plan amendment that would have cleared the way for the Bethel School District to build a new high school on an 80-acre site it owns in the Graham area.
The hearings board struck down that amendment last month as well. And on Monday, the board denied the school district's motion to reconsider that ruling. The hearings board did not address the amendment affecting the school district in the stay it issued today.
The school district has 30 days from Monday's denial to appeal to Superior Court.
"We're waiting to see if Bethel appeals to see what we'll do next," Philley said. If Bethel appeals, the county would file specifically for a stay of the hearings board's ruling in the Bethel case, Philley said.
Bethel School District spokeswoman Krista Carlson said no decision has been made as to whether to appeal.
"We are still considering our options," she said.


text:
Girls And Early Puberty: Is It More Than Just Obesity?
An important new study of young girls has determined that childhood obesity is most likely the key driver behind the disturbing, and now widely acknowledged, phenomenon of girls starting puberty at a younger age.
The study, published in the journal Pediatrics, tracked the breast development (thelarche) of girls ages 6-8 in three geographic regions of the U.S. — San Francisco, Cincinnati and New York City.
According to the report, "girls with greater BMI reached breast stage 2 [development] at younger ages." Ethnicity, too, was an important factor: The "median age at onset of breast stage 2 was 8.8, 9.3, 9.7, and 9.7 years for African American, Hispanic, white non-Hispanic, and Asian participants, respectively," researchers report. The bottom line:
We observed the onset of thelarche at younger ages than previously documented, with important differences associated with race/ethnicity and BMI, confirming and extending patterns seen previously. These findings are consistent with temporal changes in BMI.
In an accompanying editorial, "The Enigmatic Pursuit of Puberty in Girls," Marcia. E. Herman-Giddens, of the Gillings School of Global Public Health at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, raises an important question, that is, what else, beyond obesity, might be to blame? "Extensive interacting variables are known to be associated with earlier development in addition to weight and genetics," she writes, noting a long list of possibilites, including "certain intrauterine conditions and exposures, preschool high-meat diets, dairy products, low fiber intake, isoflavones, high-stress families, absent fathers, certain endocrine disruptors, the microbiome as it influences weight, epigenetics, light exposure, hormone-laced hair products, insulin resistance, activity level, geographical location, and others."
Indeed, the study's conclusions, as in so much of research, aren't completely satisfying, particularly for any mother who has surreptitiously surveyed her daughter's elementary school and seen breasts clearly budding on second, third and fourth grade girls, who happen not to be obese.
I know, I know, my little scan around the playground means pretty much nothing when it comes to figuring out what's going on in the population. But it certainly seems like there may be more to this trend than simply the spike in obesity — though that clearly plays a role. (Also, is it still merely a "trend" when it's on the cover of The New York Times Magazine?)
I asked Diane E. J. Stafford, MD, with the Division of Endocrinology at Children's Hospital Boston for her initial take on the Pediatrics study and editorial. Here's are seven (lightly edited) points she made, via email:
1. This supports the previous studies that imply that the "normal" age for puberty may be younger than had been previously documented. It is more helpful in that it was a prospective longitudinal study so it followed the same children over time rather than extrapolating from a cross-sectional study.
2. It is very interesting and, in my opinion, not surprising that those with an increased BMI may be more likely to progress to puberty earlier. I think we have all felt that this was likely be associated. However, "the data support, but do not establish, causality." This is an important caveat and one that will not likely be brought out in the general conversation about this study.
3. There are very likely to be many influences on the timing of puberty, but most of them cannot be easily measured on a population basis, if at all. The assumption of this and other population based studies is that the various other influences (like genetics) are spread evenly throughout the population and "come out in the wash", making obesity the "largest driver" on a population basis. A reasonable conclusion for a large population, but not for an individual.
4. As with all of these studies, I think it is important to remember that these are "secular trends" that may imply a shift in the distribution of the "normal" population (with the average age of puberty moving slightly younger). However, individuals do not always fit into the secular trend and family history, pattern of growth and other factors are important in evaluating a girl with possible precocious puberty. While it is possible that a girl who is overweight may go through puberty earlier than a girl who is thin, how much earlier is "normal" is harder to define. This means that any girl with precocious puberty deserves thought and possible evaluation whether she is overweight or thin.
5. Regarding the editorial, I totally agree with her main point at the end. "Furthermore, because early puberty and menarche are associated with many detrimental health and psychosocial issues, we must not accept this premature development as the "new normal." Data may appropriately alter clinical decisions… but they should not alter forward movement on creating a healthier environment for our children."
6. I would hesitate to start down the path of trying to explain the research into all of these potential environmental concerns. Some have better evidence than others, but almost all have similar problems with confounding variables. I think the bottom line from both the article and the editorial is that first, there are factors that we can control in the environments of our children that we should not ignore from a public health perspective whether it is diet or other exposures. And second, because we still do not know the basic triggers for activation of central puberty, we will likely continue to find factors which may influence the timing of puberty for many years into the future.
7. As for working on the psychosocial effects, I'm not sure there is specific research going on in this area in terms of mitigation, though I suspect that there are many clinical psychologists seeing girls/families to aid in this transition. My own experience has been that the girls who are earlier developers generally do well with the support of their parents to "normalize" the events, and explaining that this is a normal process, just earlier than others will go through it.
Parents, weigh in here please. How are you managing your daughters early development?


text:
Difference between revisions of "User talk:Tarr3n"
Revision as of 18:55, 9 September 2008
This page is for discussing the corresponding article or guide. For questions, comments, or personal stories about this destination or topic, visit Wikitravel Extra. For more about using talk pages check out Wikitravel:Using talk pages.
Hello Tarr3n! Welcome to Wikitravel.
To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page. If you need help, check out Wikitravel:Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub.
Nice work
Hey, I just wanted to fill up your talk page with more comments. You're doing really great work on UK destinations—please keep it up! --Peter Talk 15:36, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
Great job on Edinburgh
Hi Mark. I'm currently copyediting the Edinburgh page and all the district articles and at the present I'm working on New Town. I just want to say that your bar reviews are great, they're written with colour and flair, and contain good anecdotes. I've worked in the travel publishing industry for years and you definitely have talent as a travel writer. --MarinaK 15:23, 21 August 2008 (EDT)MarinaK.
Pub sweep!
Thanks for cleaning up after all us slobs! Those were hugely useful (and overdue) edits. --Peter Talk 23:32, 5 September 2008 (EDT)


text:
Pedro was delighted to lead the line for Barcelona in last night's victory over Inter Milan. The young striker shone in the absence of Zlatan Ibrahimovic as Barca won 2-0 in their Champions League tie.
"It was a very important game for us. We had to stay focused and in the first half we made many chances," said Pedro.
"At the individual level, it was a good game and I have been able to score early in the match.
"I'm happy with my form and also the goal, but it is all thanks to the work of my teammates and they deserve the congratulations."


text: The Conner High School boys and girls basketball teams had a great opportunity to host a basketball player from Australia. The teams played host to the Wanneroo Wolves from Australia. The students from Australia arrived at Conner High School in the morning and stayed for two days. They attended classes with their host student. Thanks to these Conner student and their families for hosting and showing some Kentucky hospitality. Drew Barker said it was an awesome experience and a great way to learn about a different culture. Brady/Kyler Padgett: Brannon Heath, Jay ThwaitesLandon Lamblez: Cameron Morawiec, Luke HollandSam Riddle: Nic Zivanovic, Matt VlahovJacob Gilbreath: Bryce Kenny, Logan ThwaitesDrew Barker: Scott Campbell, Luke DoeHunter Hendricks: Simone Basso, Phoebe PimmEmily Pluto: Tanika Parks, Issy PriestleySam Porter: Maddy Cracknell, Brittany DeMelloBethany Vest: Cathy Hay, Gina Craven


text:
Home Product Directory Sporting Goods & Recreation Pet Supplies Pet Cleaning and Beauty Appliance
Wholesale Dog Grooming Tool
|FOB Price:
|US $1.77 / Piece
|Min. Order:
|10 Pieces
|Min. Order
|FOB Price
|10 Pieces
|US $1.77/ Piece
|Production Capacity:
|10000PCS Each Week
|Transport Package:
|Payment Terms:
|L/C, T/T, D/P, Paypal, Money Gram, Western Union
Basic Info
Product Description
- Model NO.: 05.020
- Cleaning Products Type: Body Brush
- Application: Dog, Cat, Bird
- Size: 24.5*7.5*6.5cm
- Packaging: Case
- Product Name: Dog Grooming Scissors: Sample: Less $5 Is Free
- Trademark: hellomoon
- Type: Grooming Products
- Grooming Products Type: Beauty Scissors
- Operation Type: Manual
- Waterproof: Waterproof
- Season: Year-Round: Design: OEM/ODM Available
- Place of Origin: Zhejiang, China (Mainla: Type: Pet Cleaning & Grooming Products
- Origin: Zhejiang China


text: Hello every1 ive listened to this tune so many times just for the bassline and i cant find it anywhere please people please help me find this tune. Here this tune on youtube, i just want the bass line tune where is it from ive heard it on Underground Stations. http://youtube.com/watch?v=xb2IcNkdjHQ


text:
Hey. So insane BioShock spoilers are out in the wild. Get off the internet now. Stay off message boards, don't click any links, and avoid Twitter. For your safety, no joke, just take the week off.
Don't even come to Eurogamer if you don't want it spoiled. Someone just posted full spoilers in a thread title and it will probably happen again as there seem to be a lot of people who get off on spoiling the game for other people.
#9455707, By ecu BioShock Infinite - Irrational games
ecu 80,429 posts
Seen 9 hours ago
Registered 13 years ago


text: On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote:> On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 11:24:23AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:> > > This patch (as536) simplifies the driver-model core by replacing the klist > > > used to store the set of devices bound to a driver with a regular list > > > protected by a mutex. It turns out that even with a klist, there are too > > > many opportunities for races for the list to be used safely by more than > > > one thread at a time. And given that only one thread uses the list at any > > > moment, there's no need to add all the extra overhead of making it a > > > klist.> > > > Hm, but that was the whole reason to go to a klist in the first place.> > And shows once more that the klist approach was totally misguided.I'll let Pat answer Christoph's comment.Do note that the bus's list of devices and the bus's list of registereddrivers are still klists. Only the driver's list of bound devices getsreverted to a normal list.Alan Stern-To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" inthe body of a message to email@example.com majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlPlease read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


text:
Cooper Young Festival 2012 – Music Lineup
By the Cooper Young Business Association
The Cooper-Young Festival is proud to announce the headliner for our 25th anniversary is Ross Rice, who will perform on the Main Stage at 5:15 p.m. Sept. 15.
Rice has been a professional musician for more than 23 years. After finishing his Bachelors of Music Composition degree at University of Memphis in 1983, he then went to the "real" University of Memphis music: the Memphis club scene. Working his way through the ranks, he ended up in a group called The Coolers, which featured Stax Records house bassist Donald "Duck" Dunn, (Otis Redding, Sam and Dave, but, most notably, Booker T. and the MG's). This became the premier rhythm section in town, backing up Charlie Rich, Ron Wood, Jerry Lee Lewis, Joe Walsh and Luther Ingram, among many others.
After more than two years, Ross left to form Human Radio, which signed with Columbia records, and had a minor hit in 1990, "Me and Elvis," the video of which was briefly in heavy rotation on MTV (back when they actually showed music videos).
After a coast-to-coast tour, and several years in Nashville, the band broke up, and Rice continued writing and performing, co-writing songs on albums by Susannah Hoffs (Bangles) and Adrian Belew (Talking Heads, King Crimson). A batch of publishing demos found its way to Steve Earle, who promptly signed Ross to his new E-Squared label. Ross' CD "Umpteen" was released in 1997 to international critical acclaim (also released on Sony Japan).
Ross relocated back to Memphis, and became a mainstay on the local scene, producing and performing frequently. As a sideman, he contributed to CDs by Steve Earle, Jill Sobule, Steve Forbert, Tim Easton, Amy Rigby, Banyan (w/ Stephen Perkins of Jane's Addiction), Garrison Starr, Swan Dive, and the Bloodthirsty Lovers. He appeared on tour with Banyan, Rob Wasserman's Space Island, Todd Snider, Eek-A-Mouse, Scott Miller and the Commonwealth, Kim Richey, Jamie O'Neal, Willie Waldman Project, Mark Farner (Grand Funk Railroad), and most recently, Peter Frampton.
We are pleased to highlight the following musical performances on three stages the day of the festival. The Main Stage is sponsored by Miller Lite.
Music Lineup for the Main Stage
12:15 p.m. – Side Street Steppers
1:15 – The Memphis Dawls
2:15 – Patrick Dodd Trio
3:15 – Darrel Petties & Strength in Praise
4:15 – Tiger High
5:15 – Ross Rice Band
The Memphis Drum Shop Stage, located at the corner of Young and Nelson Street, will highlight some popular local favorites this year with various genres of music.
Music Lineup for the Memphis Drum Shop
12:30 p.m. – Candy Company
1:30 – Nancy Apple
2:30 – Allied Standard
3:30 – The Soul Thieves
4:30 – Harpeth Rising
The Visible Music College Stage, located in front of the Lifelink Church at the corner of Cooper and Walker, will highlight musicians, sound technicians and bands that are connected with this local Memphis College.
Music Lineup for the VISIBLE Music College Stage
12:15 p.m. – Lindsay Ritter
1:15 – The Covers
2:15 – Darien Clea
3:15 – Freakenyeah
4:15 – She Said


text: On Fri, 25 Feb 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:> > And one year of apparently "no progress" smells. Bad.Side note: I don't actually remember how long it's been. Maybe it just feels a lot longer than it actually is. Linus-To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" inthe body of a message to email@example.com majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlPlease read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/