text:
Phillip Alpert found out the hard way. He had just turned 18 when he sent a naked photo of his 16-year-old girlfriend, a photo she had taken and sent him, to dozens of her friends and family after an argument. The high school sweethearts had been dating for almost 2½ years. "It was a stupid thing I did because I was upset and tired and it was the middle of the night and I was an immature kid," says Alpert.My question: When did nudity become pornography?
Orlando, Florida, police didn't see it that way. Alpert was arrested and charged with sending child pornography, a felony to which he pleaded no contest but was later convicted. He was sentenced to five years probation and required by Florida law to register as a sex offender.
"You will find me on the registered sex offender list next to people who have raped children, molested kids, things like that, because I sent child pornography," says Alpert in disbelief, explaining, "You think child pornography, you think 6-year-old, 3-year-old little kids who can't think for themselves, who are taken advantage of. That really wasn't the case."
April 8, 2009
A question about sexting.
101 comments:
- Xmas said...
About the time that taking pictures of your baby taking a bath became "creepy".
- Bissage said...
My question: When did nudity become pornography?
My answer: Right about the time Oprah showed up at my rainbow party.
- peter hoh said...
Should everyone who made "Blue Lagoon" be arrested?
- Jeremy said...
It may have something to do with intent. The original intent of the picture being taken was assuredly of a sexual nature. She wasn't trying to emulate a Grecian statue. Further, the intent of his forwarding the pic was (presumably) to shame the girl by exposing her sexuality - if it was a high art "life portrait", there wouldn't be anything shameful about it, perhaps.
Just a guess.
- The Other Jeremy
- lawprof2 said...
The moment the idiot decided to take it from the consensual to the nonconsensual disclosure to friends and family. However, had he a decent attorney,if this is truly a first offense, he likely would have gotten an offer for deferred prosecution and plea to something like disorderly conduct. I'm going to take a wild stab at it and say if the guy is 18 now, and dating what is now a 16 year old for 2 1/2 years, he sent out a picture of a 14-15 year old. Not cool.
- Ann Althouse said...
Jeremy, do you think free speech law should have a high art/low art distinction?
- Ann Althouse said...
@lawprof2 I would like to see a distinction between pornography and bad behavior. An angry boy did something mean that took advantage of the intimate expression his girlfriend had shared with him. That wasn't nice at all. Where is the pornography? Isn't the girl a pornographer too? She took and sent the picture.
- Synova said...
Nudity became pornography when the picture was of a minor.
That's it.
And I'm fine with giving the guy a good slap and putting him on probation for five years. If nothing else it's a cautionary tale for other idiots.
And it really *is* profoundly stupid to put someone on a sex offender registry for this. He's already a felon for the rest of his life.
- PG said...
do you think free speech law should have a high art/low art distinction?
No, but the existing jurisprudence on free speech does make a meant-to-arouse sexually/ meant-to-inspire-non-sexual-thoughts distinction. There's plenty of what I'd consider low (as in crappy) art that uses nudity in a non-sexual way. There's decent art that uses nudity in a non-sexual way (I've fought to retain the nudity at the end of theater performances of "W;t" -- it's a nekkid cancer patient at the moment of death, not really a turn-on). There's both high and low art that uses nudity to arouse -- and that's the kind that the caselaw says can be limited in its freedom of speech.
Also, while I dislike the prosecutions of teens for sending images of themselves to their significant others, I have no sympathy for the kid in this case. Teens who think that distributing private pictures of their boyfriend/girlfriend will be a consequence-less act for themselves now can be warned. This isn't even some unfortunate trapped by the strict liability aspect of child porn laws -- he *knew* the girl was under 18 in the pics.
- bearing said...
The girl sent a naked picture of herself to her boyfriend? I assume the point was to titillate him? Then the girl is a pornographer, the young man is the distributor. If the law allows juveniles to be charged with pornography violations, then it's only fair to charge them both.
So is he also guilty of violating her copyright?
- Synova said...
Oh, sure... that would be a good one. Since the girl sent the child pornography to start with, *she* should be on a sex offender registry for the rest of her life, too.
- PG said...
College students who streak and get arrested are stuck with that the rest of their lives. (As noted on the last episode of "House.") My college had a strong streaking tradition from which the Ed School students were excluded because they were terrified of getting arrested and being unable to work with children in the future. I can think of *so* many people who have been arrested for child porn, or categorized as sex offenders, whom I find more sympathetic cases than this kid.
- Jeff said...
Should everyone who made "Blue Lagoon" be arrested?
Yes, but for completely different reasons.
- molly said...
Photos of naked teenagers flying around are going to be a permanent fact of life from now on. Classifying idiot high schoolers as sex offenders is not the best way to deal with this issue, in my opinion.
- MadisonMan said...
College streakers at my alma mater successfully fought their arrest because the DA could find no one who saw it who was offended, or something like that, as required by Pennsylvania law.
The obvious reason why the girl wasn't arrested: She's an innocent girl in all of this, not the evil boy.
- Seven Machos said...
Fuck intent. Intent doesn't matter if you don't have the crime in the first place. It's a two-part deal.
We know pornography when we see it. A standard picture of a nude sixteen year old is not pornography.
Does she have her legs behind her head? Different story.
- rhhardin said...
Child abuse was discovered in the 60s as a public possibility, elevated from just a kid showing up with bruises at the ER now and then.
It became child sexual abuse in the 70s, a story with even better public interest.
Anything that entertains enough of the public will become the material of media obsession.
Guggenbuhl-Craig analyses the hysteria effect as partial archetypes. If the child is taken as pure innocence, some scapegoat for pure evil will then arise to fill the world. But he's a Jungian.
It's not that it's pornography, but that it's child pornography. Pornography has lots of supporters in the public still. Indeed it's a possble career path.
Any story template that entertains news audiences will be elevated into an input for public policy.
Anybody not so entertained by the crap on the news today will remain eternally puzzled.
- Trooper York said...
I don't know if everyone who was a part of "Blue Lagoon" should be
arrested, but I would like to see Brooke Shields in handcuffs.
- Jeremy said...
Althouse -
No, though society should. The Law, however, should have a distinction between exploitation and non-exploitation, particularly with regard to child subjects. High art/low art is not the same distinction, though it's not unrelated.
-The Other Jeremy
- John Stodder said...
If we're going to tell teens, as we have done over the past 20 years, that there's nothing we can do to stop them from having sex, that there is nothing to be ashamed of, that anyone who counsels abstinence is from Mars and doesn't "get it," that we'll take care of the girl and support her choices if she gets pregnant -- total abortion privacy if that's what she wants, special schoolrooms for pregnant girls if that's what she wants -- then for God's sake we should dump these cruel and capricious laws concerning statutory rape and change the child porn laws so that societally encouraged randy behavior such as in this case is won't be criminalized. To make this kid have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life is all but ruining his chances for a normal, productive existence.
The point of child porn laws was not to stop girls from sending sexy pictures of themselves to their boyfriends. And any girl who sends a digital picture of herself to anybody needs to know that she is giving up control of that image for life. No matter what choices she makes later, such as breaking up with the boy, deciding to marry another person, becoming a nun, becoming a nominee for secretary of state, or becoming a mother, that picture can and probably will show up.
I don't think making or sending such images should be illegal, but I do think kids should by eighth grade be given a rudimentary education about the potential consequences of living digitally -- that future employers, potential dating partners, curious bloggers and your worst enemies will look you up and find everything you said and did -- for the rest of your life.
- Hoosier Daddy said...
Anyone notice the irony of these two statements?
It was a stupid thing I did because I was upset and tired and it was the middle of the night and I was an immature kid," says Alpert.
You think child pornography, you think 6-year-old, 3-year-old little kids who can't think for themselves, who are taken advantage of. That really wasn't the case."
Evidently Alpert couldn't think for himself either.
- Hoosier Daddy said...
Nudity became pornography when the picture was of a minor.
Synova wins the prize.
- Seven Machos said...
All pictures of minors nude are nudity? Really?
Well, there's a book I happened upon in the photography section of the bookstore on the corner that is basically nothing but naked 14-year-olds at some Bohemian Nantucket summer house. Scores of people should be arrested as a result of that.
And what of the fact that this girl took the picture of herself? Why isn't she in jail?
The attempt to make pornography into some kind of black and white, national issue in this age of diffuse and never-ending media is very disturbing.
- Laura(southernxyl) said...
Remember this sad story?
Jessica Logan's nude cell-phone photo - meant for her boyfriend's eyes only - was sent to hundreds of teenagers last year in at least seven Greater Cincinnati high schools.
The 18-year-old Sycamore High School senior was then bombarded with taunts: slut, porn queen, whore.
On July 3, Jessie hanged herself in her bedroom.
She was Albert and Cynthia Logan's only child.
- peter hoh said...
Synova wrote: Oh, sure... that would be a good one. Since the girl sent the child pornography to start with, *she* should be on a sex offender registry for the rest of her life, too.
Yes, teen girls have been indicted as kiddie pornographers.
- Ron said...
Althouse, I don't know if you remember the Nude Mile tradition here at UM, but you had hundreds of naked people, running through the center of town. What would this be then, pornography en masse?
- Hoosier Daddy said...
The point of child porn laws was not to stop girls from sending sexy pictures of themselves to their boyfriends.
Good point John but tell me, is that line crossed when the BF starts putting those randy pictures on a webpage for the world to see as opposed to texting a few choice shots to family and friends? Minors receive special protection because society agreed that until you turn 18 you're still a dumbass kid (and as this dipshit proved, doesn't end with majority age) who really isn't responsible for what you do. I agree that he shouldn't be up there with real sex offenders but the problem is the legal slippery slope that sending nude photos of minors leads to. How do you jail some 50 year old pervert with a computer full of nude minors where a guy with nudies of his 16 year old girlfriend is given a finger wagging lecture? To me the only way around that is lowering the legal age of consent.
- ricpic said...
Everyone's complaining about the harshness of the law. What's the alternative, a lenient law that would result in hundreds of child pornographers not being tagged as such? Which is worse, a fool being punished like a criminal knave or criminal knaves escaping the net to commit more crime?
- Peter V. Bella said...
Alpert's attorney Larry Walters agrees and he's fighting to get Alpert removed from Florida's sex offender registry. The law lags behind the technology, he says. "Sexting is treated as child pornography in almost every state and it catches teens completely offguard because this is a fairly natural and normal thing for them to do. It is surprising to us as parents, but for teens it's part of their culture."
Is this attorney smoking something? Since when is it natural and normal for teens to send nude photos to others? Part of their culture? What culture?
- traditionalguy said...
OK all you philosophers out there in Althousiana, Why do we forbid nudity? Its not pornographic. Its not harming anyone. Its not dangerous to the nude person or to others. We just don't want anyone else getting away using it for public attention, since we fear doing it ourselves. The Law must stop this conduct of the others for us. Oh wait, all sexual activity related restrictions are "religiously based" and therefore violate the Living Constitution. Let's compromise: adults are free to act anyway they want, but we still imprision the persons who include anyone under 18in their actions. That fixes it. Both groups can claim to have fought and won something really important to the titilated public opinion come the next election season. Let the games continue, but be very alert at all times.
- pduggie said...
ricpic: The alternative is neither; instead: a star chamber of wise elder who will determine what penalty is appropriate.
This "nation of laws, not men" thing bites us on the rear sometimes.
- Seven Machos said...
Jesus. Gross error. That nudity should have read pornography.
I leave it up for the hilarious posterity of it all.
- rhhardin said...
I must have grown up as a kid in a world mysteriously without child pornographers.
It never came up. Nowhere. Not in the media, not in the weird health talk they give to the boys while the girls were getting the menstruation talk, not in kids' TV shows.
Somehow we all lived.
Or it's possible that the danger is very profitable, I assume for the politicians and the media, and won't go away ever regardless of its validity.
I have a similar argument for dogs running at large. It works fine. I've seen it. The dogs play with the kids.
In the 70s - apparently a time when the profit opportunities of stories were being discovered - the crackdown began on dogs, until today it's a rare dog that has any chance at learning to socialize with people in general; and in public policy every dog is a problem dog.
- Seven Machos said...
Eighteen is a dumb age of majority.
- pduggie said...
Peter Bella: I bet statutory rape laws catch a lot of 18 and 17 year olds off guard too, but once its enforced, the teens won't be so caught off guard. They'll have a special term like "jailbait" for it.
- rhhardin said...
Is this attorney smoking something? Since when is it natural and normal for teens to send nude photos to others?
I would guess the invention of the ``send'' button did it.
The interest of teens in it is certainly natural and normal. The survey I remember was on Imus in the 70s, that the average young guy thinks of sex five times an hour. Imus claimed only once for him, but it was for 55 minutes.
- Synova said...
What's the alternative, a lenient law that would result in hundreds of child pornographers not being tagged as such? Which is worse, a fool being punished like a criminal knave or criminal knaves escaping the net to commit more crime?
What is worse? Letting a murderer go because there is no proof, or convicting an innocent person because everyone thinks they did it?
The argument to harm the innocent in favor of making sure that the guilty do not escape is contrary to our traditions and sensibilities.
There are supposedly a vast cadre of people with higher than average intelligence who make careers of figuring out how to tell the difference between what is a criminal act and what is not. Is it beyond them to understand the difference between a sexual predator and stupidity? Is it that impossible to develop a sensible standard for who gets put on a sex offender registry or not?
When it comes to that... considering the life-long consequences of being on that list, I'd think that someone could challenge it as cruel and unusual, or at the very least utterly disproportionate.
Are people just that lazy?
- Hoosier Daddy said...
Is it beyond them to understand the difference between a sexual predator and stupidity? Is it that impossible to develop a sensible standard for who gets put on a sex offender registry or not?
I don't necessarily disagree with you but look at my example above. A 50 year old man gets jailed for a computer full of nude photos of minors but an 18 year old with nude photos of his 16 year old girlfriend is ranked as stupidity but not illegal. That starts getting a bit fuzzy doesn't it? So when they're no longer BF/GF as in this case is it still stupidity or has he now crossed the line into child porn?
- Synova said...
They'll have a special term like "jailbait" for it.
And to be clear... I'm not arguing against arrest and punishment.
I'm arguing against a lifetime on a sex offender registry for something that simply isn't predatory.
In order to be branded for a life-time punishment, the offense should warrant a life-time punishment. Consensual sex between teenagers, pictures unwisely given to a girlfriend or boyfriend, don't. The young man in the story definitely deserves some serious consequences, but there is no reason given to think that he poses any sort of continuing threat to the community, which is the excuse given for sex offender registries.
- Synova said...
A 50 year old man gets jailed for a computer full of nude photos of minors but an 18 year old with nude photos of his 16 year old girlfriend is ranked as stupidity but not illegal. That starts getting a bit fuzzy doesn't it?
Not having seen any child pornography I do have to wonder... does the 50 year old man with a computer full of nude photos of minors have a computer full of nude photos of 16 and 17 year olds who are physically indistinguishable from 18 and 19 year olds? Or are the pictures of minors who are actually visually identifiable as minors? Isn't that sort of the point? Again, I wouldn't know... but isn't the attraction of child pornography the fact that the pictures are obviously pictures of children?
And I didn't say that what the "idiot" did shouldn't be illegal.
I said it shouldn't qualify him as a life-long member of the sex offender registry.
- Hoosier Daddy said...
Not having seen any child pornography I do have to wonder... does the 50 year old man with a computer full of nude photos of minors have a computer full of nude photos of 16 and 17 year olds who are physically indistinguishable from 18 and 19 year olds? Or are the pictures of minors who are actually visually identifiable as minors? Isn't that sort of the point?
Is it? Isn't a minor defined by thier age and not by thier physical attributes?
Again, I wouldn't know... but isn't the attraction of child pornography the fact that the pictures are obviously pictures of children?
I don't know either but again, who determines that line? In Indiana at least a child is someone who is under the age of majority, ie; 18 years of age. So one guy gets the sex offender title for a photo of a 12 year old prepubescent teen and another doesn't because his nude photo is a 17 year old with a body like Pamela Anderson.
And I didn't say that what the "idiot" did shouldn't be illegal.
I know and I didn't mean to imply that you did. Sorry.
- Hoosier Daddy said...
I said it shouldn't qualify him as a life-long member of the sex offender registry.
Actualy I'd argue that poessession of child porn alone shouldn't qualify as a 'sex offense' provided sex wasn't involved.
- PJ said...
Since we're trying to draw a line here, would it be productive to approach the line from the other side? If the BF had sold the picture to Penthouse with intent that it be published, and Penthouse had published it, then would it be pornography? If so, what changed its character? If Penthouse thinks it's pornography, then it is? Is it the commercial exploitation? Suppose the BF had given the picture to Penthouse for free? Is he still a pornographer if he merely intended for the photo to be published but gained only revenge and not money? In this case, the BF did not distribute the photo via mass media, but only to selected individuals; does that make a difference? Is it pornography only if it enters a distribution stream with other pornography, commercial or otherwise? In this case, the BF's motive apparently had nothing to do with the prurient interest of potential viewers; is that determinative? Is a picture either pornography or not at the moment it is taken, regardless of how it is used later? If the minor here intended the photo to appeal to BF's prurient interest (and was willing to so testify), could he raise a First Amendment issue by claiming that it in fact had artistic value? Is a minor who is deemed by law to be incapable of consenting to sexual contact or entering into most kinds of contracts nonetheless to be deemed legally capable of consenting to dissemination of nude photographs of him/herself?
(BTW, I agree with Synova about the registry, I'm just trying to think about what qualifies as pornography and, regardless of that, whether a criminal sanction was appropriate in this case.)
- joewxman said...
To me this is another example of where common sense is dead. This should have been handled by the parents of both sides. Frankly in an earlier time both of the kids would have had the tar beaten out of them by angry parents. It would hurt for a few days for sure. But social services has taken all the joy out of parenting.
I would like more details as to why prosecuters decided they had to make an example of this kid whose life is now ruined because of one really stupid act. Did the parents of the girl insist on pressing charges? And what about the girl who thought it was okay to send a nude pic of herself? She took the pic. She sent it to the boy. If its child "pornography" isn't she guilty of producing it and transporting it?
- lawprof2 said...
Here are the relevant statutes:
"Child pornography" means any image depicting a minor engaged in sexual conduct.
Florida Statute 847.001(3)
"Minor" means any person under the age of 18 years.
Florida Statute 847.001(8)
"Sexual conduct" means actual or simulated sexual intercourse, deviate sexual intercourse, sexual bestiality, masturbation, or sadomasochistic abuse; actual lewd exhibition of the genitals; actual physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or, if such person is a female, breast with the intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of either party; or any act or conduct which constitutes sexual battery or simulates that sexual battery is being or will be committed. A mother's breastfeeding of her baby does not under any circumstance constitute "sexual conduct."
Florida Statute 847.001 (16)
Again, I hardly suspect this was a tasteful pose. If you want Scalia's take on child pornography, read his opinion in U.S. v. Williams, upholding federal statutes substantially similar to the Florida statutes.
- jaed said...
Who cares whether it was a "tasteful pose"? Do we really want to draw the line between "stupid behavior" and "vilified criminal pervert deserving of lifetime punishment" based on whether his girlfriend's pose was "tasteful"?
A 50 year old man gets jailed for a computer full of nude photos of minors but an 18 year old with nude photos of his 16 year old girlfriend is ranked as stupidity but not illegal. That starts getting a bit fuzzy doesn't it?
The stereotypical 50-year-old has photos of children - not teenagers - being raped or otherwise exploited, without their consent. The 18-year-old has a photo his girlfriend took and sent to him. I'm somehow not seeing the fuzziness there. If the 18-year-old had a computer full of rape photos of children, I don't think anyone would look on him any differently than the 50-year-old. The circumstances of the two cases are fundamentally different in ways that have nothing to do with the putative offenders' ages.
Under the law, the girl's guilt is if anything more serious, since she is the pornographer and he is merely in possession of kiddie porn. I do think that if the boy's conviction had meant the girl was also arrested, convicted of producing kiddie porn, and placed on the registry for life, we might have seen a bit more hesitation on the part of prosecutors. Which perhaps points up the dangers of selective prosecution: it makes absurd laws a bit more practical if you can just ignore the most ridiculous cases. If this law were enforced impartially there'd be a lot more pressure to rewrite it.
- David said...
So, why not post a link to the picture here? Since we "know it when we see it," then we could each decide if it's porn.
Wait, you think that's a bad idea? Maybe even a violation of some law, perhaps?
So how is it any different than what the boyfriend did, other than in scope of exposure.
But if they felt a need to prosecute this kid, couldn't they have come up with a better theory than pornography? With all the stuff out there that courts will say is not pornography, this is?
If only he had embedded the photo in some dumb ass essay, it would be art or social commentary.
- David said...
I do not see how the girl can be guilty of pornography under Florida law, no matter what the definition of "pornography."
The girl here is 16, the boy 18. Under Florida law consensual sex between the two is legal. (The age of consent in Florida is 18, but there is a "close in age" exception, so that if one party is 16 or 17, and the age 24 or under, consensual sex is not a crime.)
The girl gave him the picture in a private, intimate act. You might even argue that it was an element of foreplay for legal sex. If her giving her body to him sexually is legal, then her giving a representation of the body surely is not illegal.
His distribution of the image can not criminalize her conduct, because she made and transmitted the image to him for a legal private consensual sexual purpose. There is no way that she can be guilty of a crime if she distributed the photo without intent beyond their private and intimate relationship.
He is a jerk of the first order and she is foolish (not to mention her bad judgment in boys) but she has not committed a crime.
So says me, anyway.
(I got my info on Florida law from Wikipedia, certainly not the best source, but if that's the law, I think my analysis is correct.)
- Sofa King said...
This is all screwed up.
The pornography charges are pretty clearly inappropriate, as this photograph was clearly intended only to be shared within a romantic relationship (statutory rape laws aside, teenagers are still entitled to have romantic relationships. I hope.) And indeed if the boyfriend had just kept it to himself nobody would have had a problem.
The real offense is the public distribution of the photo, causing humiliation and loss of social standing.
Clearly, the girl should just have sued the former boyfriend for public disclosure of private information. This is just the type of situation that tort should cover.
- XWL said...
How are you supposed to tell the 'real' registered sex offenders who might actually pose a threat to children and the stupid late teen, early twenties guy who does something petty and dumb?
Should there be registries beyond the sex offenders one?
(cause the way that registry has been trivialized suggests that just general social rudenesses maybe should have a police run registry of offenders)
A registry of discourteous drivers?
A registry of non-curbing dog owners?
A registry of folks who fail to wipe down gym equipment after sweating profusely?
A registry of frequent farters?
A registry of loud celphone talkers?
- Henry Buck said...
I think the issue here is prosecutorial discretion. It is impossible to distinguish ahead of the conduct that should and shouldn't be subject to criminal punishment. Criminal laws as written often can be applied to acts in the fuzzy zone that should not be subject to criminal punishment.
We elect (or appoint through another elected official) prosecutors who will reflect community values and exercise discretion in choosing who should be prosecuted.
We have made it both financially and politically impossible, though, for responsible officials to exercise discretion. Thus we wend up with cases like this. The same dynamic apears in "zero tolerance" policies at schools.
- peter hoh said...
A registry of non-curbing dog owners
I am so down with this idea.
- Synova said...
Henry, even if you're right, I don't think that the discretion extends to who is put on a sex offender list and who is not.
I think it would have been wrong not to punish someone who violated another person's privacy the way that he did. But if he's charged with something relevant and convicted, the ability for someone to say, but a lifetime brand as a sex offender isn't appropriate, doesn't exist. Does it?
- bearing said...
I don't think either of them should be on the sex offender list for life; I'm just pointing out that there's a double standard going on here. If the law is to be applied strictly and without nuance of any kind, it's rather unfair to apply it strictly to only one party. Did he consent to have the nudie pic sent to his cell phone in the first place?
Re: Florida law: Not every consensual sexual act is legal. See: "prostitution." You can argue whether that's a good idea or not, sure, but the question of whether the girl is a pornographer would turn on the Florida definition of pornography, not on your gut feeling of what kind of activities "should" count as foreplay.
- William said...
I don't know if it's even possible for one generation to judge another's mores. Belly button bling, Chinese tattoos on the ass, sexting, rap music: it's all so horribly incomprehensible......I don't know if we're missionaries bringing ugly dresses to the Polynesians or Brits outlawing suttee. I see the principle here, but there is always the subtext of adults don't get it.
- BJM said...
In 1990 SF art photographer Jock Sturges was put through the legal wringer by the feds over his nude portraits of children of close friends and family.
Community sentiment aligned with Sturges and a grand jury refused to indict.
Parents should think carefully before taking photos of their kiddies unclothed, in costumes or in undies.
One can can run seriously afoul of the law if someone chooses to make an issue of it as this article from 1995 demonstrates.
- An Edjamikated Redneck said...
There are several websites dedicated to the posting of nude pictures and videos of ex-girlfriends.
One of the problems with the information age is it too easily becomes the 'Too Much; infomration age.
The taking of nude shots for a 'significant other' has been around since at least the Polaroid days, when it became possible to take and develop a nude photo that you were sure nobody else would see. At worst, if it survived the trip in a wallet, a few guys at work, if the bum was so inclined.
Now, with digital cameras and cell phones able to take pictures, as well as probably any package of frozen broccoli (it maybe possible; I haven't checked yet today)the possibility of 'private' pictures has expanded, and teh internet has expanded the distribution possibiities as well.
At the same time the new norm is TO take and display nude photos, as opposed to avoiding them. Its a crash course in developing the 'AhShit' moment.
- holdfast said...
I don't know if it is p0rnography, but it became offensive when it was sent out of spite to a bunch of people who were not the intended recipients, and who would not want to be recipients. The girl was dumb as a bag of rocks to send it, but that's not really the point. If I am tired and pissed off one late night and punch my wife in the face, does being tired, po'd and late at night make it ok.
I wouldn't put this numbskull on the offender registry, but surely this is still a crime?
- srfwotb said...
Probably the same reason you have to have an ID to get the A&F catalog.
The law will catch up - too late for this guy though. It's behind in most digital areas at the moment.
A cop once told me that the reason the age of consent was set so relatively high in CA (eighteen I think?) was so someone couldn't pretend they thought a twelve-yr-old was a lawful fifteen. IOW, it was useful in practice, rather than ideal in theory.
I'm guessing that's the same situation with child v pederast/adolescent porn v evil ex-boyfriend. A lot of states require a set age difference between major/minor as well.
- veni vidi vici said...
"Guggenbuhl-Craig analyses the hysteria effect as partial archetypes."
If there were an award for obtuse wordiness in blog commenting, that would be the clear winner.
- Eli Blake said...
I have been telling my girls to be very careful about ever letting anyone take nude pictures of them. It can ruin your career.
That said, I think we are becoming way too puritanical as a society. This is just the modern version of 'kids getting into trouble,' which has been going on since the dawn of time.
Punish actual rapists and child molesters harshly, but beyond that we seem to have gone completely overboard at punishing 'sex crimes.' What this is, is no crime, certainly not one that is worth keeping this kid on a sex offender registry for the rest of his life.
- Eli Blake said...
We are also a very voyeuristic society.
In Europe nobody would care about this because Europeans have much more of an open attitude about sex.
In America sex is that taboo that people can't get enough of, that we are not supposed to mention but when someone's sexuality is exposed, everyone runs to gawk at it.
- Hoosier Daddy said...
The stereotypical 50-year-old has photos of children - not teenagers - being raped or otherwise exploited, without their consent. The 18-year-old has a photo his girlfriend took and sent to him. I'm somehow not seeing the fuzziness there.
I wasn't aware that was the case with all 'sterotypical 50 year olds.' I guess if you set the 'facts' in the manner in which you laid out above I suppose you can see quite clearly.
- Hoosier Daddy said...
In America sex is that taboo that people can't get enough of, that we are not supposed to mention but when someone's sexuality is exposed, everyone runs to gawk at it.
Oh give it a break Eli, sex is hardly taboo in America anymore. The 1950's are over in case you didn't know. Unless of course you're living in some evangelical compound in Utah. There's a difference between being puritanical and exercising some common sense discretion.
- Hoosier Daddy said...
I have been telling my girls to be very careful about ever letting anyone take nude pictures of them. It can ruin your career.
That said, I think we are becoming way too puritanical as a society.
Maybe I'm not reading that right Eli but are you really saying be very careful about letting someone take nude photos of you because it'll ruin your career, not because it's a fucking stupid thing to do from a simple basis of self respect?
- Wendy said...
This is the kind of problem you get when you have old law made for non-analogous technologies trying to decide new facts, a problem that gives us nifty setups like patent law covering cloning.
As I see it, the keyword here isn't "pornography" but "publish." Publishing used to involve several steps, physical resources, a lot of intent. Old-school publishing was not a mistake that could be made in the heat of the moment, like it is today. The picture wasn't intended to be porn, and the taking of the picture didn't cause harm - it's the publication that caused the harm. We do have consent law about the publishing of photos taken without the subject's consent but that's murky given she took the photo herself.
What's the line between tort and crime? Instinctively I feel I want this to be a crime - but not a felony. (If he'd sold the picture to a porn site and sent a link rather than an image to her friends and family I'd feel differently.)
I think there needs to be new law designed to deal with the new possibilities. But who's willing to get serious and make it?
- Jeremy said...
Hey William,
Are you sure "if it's even possible for one [person] to judge another's mores ... it's all so horribly incomprehensible"?
As parents, it's our responsibility to judge and even shape our childrens' mores.
- Eli Blake said...
are you really saying be very careful about letting someone take nude photos of you because it'll ruin your career, not because it's a fucking stupid thing to do from a simple basis of self respect?
Why does it have to do with self respect? Should I teach them to be ashamed of their bodies? Like I said in a lot of countries it wouldn't matter. Recognizing it does here, that's why I tell them to be careful not to do that.
- UWS guy said...
nudity becomes pornography when the former arouses a teenage male to masturbate.
.....if that ain't a slippery slope I don't know what is!
next up, Macy's catalog underwear section.
- Jeremy said...
Wendy said, "The picture wasn't intended to be porn"
I don't understand why you would say this? What do you think it was supposed to be?
- Hoosier Daddy said...
Why does it have to do with self respect? Should I teach them to be ashamed of their bodies?
Wow...just wow. Clearly we do stand oceans apart in terms of liberal versus conservative. You can be proud of your body without having to pose naked for your boyfriend's camera.
Then again maybe I'm too puritanical to insist that my daughter not pose nude for some guy and not just because it could be a career ender for her.
- rhhardin said...
Dog being led astray.
- rhhardin said...
I think it was Lileks long ago who commented that he was planning on being a liberal parent and wouldn't mind if his daughter started dating around age 26.
Anyway somebody said that, aware that the protective instinct isn't a good guide.
- Revenant said...
Nudity became pornography when the picture was of a minor. That's it.
I own nude photos of my nephews and, even more shocking, my then six-year-old mother. Apparently I'm a notorious child pornographer and just never knew it.
- Duscany said...
"In Europe nobody would care about this because Europeans have much more of an open attitude about sex."
You're so right about this. I remember about 20 years ago i was on the beach at Santa Monica when a French coupled showed up with their two children, one a toddler (male) who was naked and the other a tall and rather striking 10 or 11 year old girl who was topless. She was also prepubescent and flat as any boy. If there had been any sheriff's deputies around they would have arrested the parents for contributing to the delinquency of a minor, if not a lot worse.
We are such a crazy puritan country and we've gotten worse over the last 40 years. I think that the extreme feminists of the sixties and seventies were so anxious to give women power that they acted like the mildest most minor sexual act could easily inflict lifelong trauma.
Some schools, like the much unlamented Antioch, which under the principle of karma deservedly went bankrupt last year, required the male to get explicit verbal permission at each stage of sexual activity ("May I unbutton the top button of your blouse? May I unbutton the next to top button of your blouse?"
The idea apparently was that sex was so traumatic you needed to go about it with a checklist of the sort they used to arm nuclear weapons.
Another consequence of this desire to politicize intimate relationships between men and women are the absurd policies prohibiting teachers from hugging kids or kids from hugging other kids (or at once school from touching each other in any way--an unbelievably sexually uptight and dysfunctional idea).
We have always been a sexually uptight country (thank you Puritans for that). But instead of easing up as the centuries go by, in the last 40 years we've gotten uptight about heterosexual sex even as we celebrate the homosexual variety.
- Revenant said...
Wow...just wow. Clearly we do stand oceans apart in terms of liberal versus conservative. You can be proud of your body without having to pose naked for your boyfriend's camera.
You can't be proud of your body and think that showing it off undermines your self-respect, though.
There are, as others have noted, plenty of good reasons to not want naked pictures of yourself floating around (although having them out there isn't a "career ender" for most careers). But the argument that you should refrain from them out of self-respect only makes sense if you assume that letting the photographer see you naked is shameful.
This girl thought that the only person who'd be seeing her naked was a guy who already saw her naked anyway. Her problem was a lack of common sense, not a lack of self respect.
- Cedarford said...
peter hoh said...
Should everyone who made "Blue Lagoon" be arrested?
Add in the Boorman mainstream, globally distributed movie "The Emerald Forest". A couple dozen 15 and under naked girls. Any National Geographic special of naked or part naked dancing boy and girl 3rd Worlders.
Interestingly, there is little or no prosecution of two groups who actually have sex with the pubescent, not child, underage. Not taking pictures of them - boinking them.
The 1st is the victims of gay pederasts. States find it hard to
prosecute the chickenhawks because parents don't want it publicly known that their little Billy took 100.00 to be pawed and buggered by some 50-year old Queen on the prowl.
The 2nd is the group of ghetto 'hos, now various hispanic chollos - showing up at OB-GYN clinics or abortion facilities knocked up between the ages of 10 and 15. Thousands of 'em every year. Most with Sugardaddies well over 18. Little to no prosecution because the culture opposes "ratting out" the men, and many of the men belong to gangs that will lean hard on any girl or parent that goes to The Law.
And in the midst of actual crisis, you have dipshit "zero tolerance" officials trying to ruin the lives of kids ready to be productive members of society and brand them "sex offenders" forever.
Similar to the dipshits that have made being caught urinating in public into public exposure and thus on the permanent "registered sex offender lists".
Beyond stupid!
- zt said...
@Rev said: This girl thought that the only person who'd be seeing her naked was a guy who already saw her naked anyway. Her problem was a lack of common sense, not a lack of self respect
Really doubt this. No teenage girl is this oblivious. You know very well the boyfriend going to brag about the pics/vids, strut about, and at least show his friends at some misty point in the future - assuming he refrains from showing them in the moment - it's the main reason why girls refuse.
Not a career ender, but certainly an "issue". Imagine how naked pix of teenage Michelle Obama could have been used against her by enemies even if one side insisted she was respecting her body. Or look how Sarah Palin's beauty pageant clips provided ammunition for the so-called "respect your body" side. Oh yah.
- Robert said...
I still remember when I was 18 and my girlfriend was 17. We didn't hae cell phones, but we had cameras. 1. She would have never let me have a nude a nude picture. 2. Everybody I would have distributed it too if I did have one and was so inclined, would have thought I was a complete douchebag and I would never have gotten laid or dated anybody in my high school again.
I guess "Shame" kept us all in line 15 years ago.
- Robert said...
I guess "wine" keeps me from coherent, correctly spelled, comments.
- Seneca the Younger said...
When politicians and prosecutors learned they could get in the papers without having to think about unexpected consequences.
- Seneca the Younger said...
Isn't the girl a pornographer too? She took and sent the picture.
Actually, from recent experience I suspect she's lucky she's not been charged.
- Seneca the Younger said...
All pictures of minors nude are nudity? Really?
"Septembner Morn"
- ironrailsironweights said...
On a related note, what is truly disturbing is the way so many adult women shave or wax themselves into pre-pubescent looking hairlessness: the hideous pedophilic Bald Eagle.
Nothing is finer - and more appropriately adult - than a thick, rich, luxuriant bush.
- MadisonMan said...
@UWS: What doesn't arouse a teenage male to masturbate?
- Joe said...
I blame the increased worship of childhood and especially the teenage years. What used to be a period of your life endured until you became an adult has been extended and placed in a cocoon. If that wasn't enough, there has been a strong push to extend childhood even further. We should, in fact, be going the opposite direction. Stop public schooling at 16 (as is done most everywhere else on this planet of ours.)
Add to this mix the insistence of the law and order crowd to criminalize everything and you create an absurd environment.
BTW, forget taking pictures of your baby in the bath, there are adults who freak out of you taking pictures of your kids in parks. A common theme showing up on TV dramas is a guy just taking pictures is now a pedophile.
One common thread; baby boomers in charge. The hippies have turned into hypocritical fascists.
- Hoosier Daddy said...
You can't be proud of your body and think that showing it off undermines your self-respect, though.
I guess that depends on how you show it off doesn't it? If not then I suppose there is really no difference between the SI swimsuit model and the babe who pole dances at the local strip bar.
But the argument that you should refrain from them out of self-respect only makes sense if you assume that letting the photographer see you naked is shameful.
Again, I guess it's why you're being photographed to begin with. I bet most dad's would not object quite as much to thier daughter being the swimsuit covershot of SI as opposed to Penthouse.
This girl thought that the only person who'd be seeing her naked was a guy who already saw her naked anyway. Her problem was a lack of common sense, not a lack of self respect.
Considering she was 16 years old I'd say a combination of both.
- Revenant said...
Really doubt this. No teenage girl is this oblivious.
I would go so far as to say MOST teenagers, male or female, are that oblivious. Teenagers are notoriously bad about thinking through the consequences of their actions.
I'm sure at some level the girl knew it was theoretically possible that her boyfriend would send the picture to other people, just like teenagers who have unprotected sex know it is theoretically possible that they'll have to spend the next 19 years raising a kid. Its just that they don't really believe it'll happen to THEM.
- Eric said...
Should everyone who made "Blue Lagoon" be arrested?
They weren't that stupid. They used an 18-year-old body double for the nude shots.
- Revenant said...
If not then I suppose there is really no difference between the SI swimsuit model and the babe who pole dances at the local strip bar.
That's a pretty bad example, isn't it? It is generally acknowledged that the SI swimsuit issue is nothing more than a wank mag for married men. The two differences between an SI model and a pole dancer are (a) income level and (b) that the former never actually meet the guys they're gratifying.
I bet most dad's would not object quite as much to thier daughter being the swimsuit covershot of SI as opposed to Penthouse.
Sure, but that's got nothing to do with self-respect. Your self-respect is not measured by how little you're horrifying your parents. :)
- jaed said...
I wasn't aware that was the case with all 'sterotypical 50 year olds.'
Well, you specified a 50 year old who gets arrested for having nude pictures on his computer. In the kind of case this brings to mind (and which I assumed perhaps mistakenly you were thinking of), the pictures are actual child porn - not a photo of a girlfriend. (By "actual child porn" I mean the kind of thing I described above - photos depicting rape or exploitation of children without their consent - which the "my girlfriend took a picture of herself and sent it to me" doesn't fall into.)
Suppose the 50-year-old has a photo of his then-16-year-old girlfriend from 30-odd years ago. Under the law as it stands now, he's in possession of child porn, and liable for the attendant criminal penalties. Do you think this is reasonable?
- Jason (the commenter) said...
ricpic : Which is worse, a fool being punished like a criminal knave or criminal knaves escaping the net to commit more crime
Since when was the idea that it's better to convict a hundred innocent men then let one guilty one go free part of the Western judicial system?
- Jason (the commenter) said...
When did nudity become pornography?
It's always been pornography. The real question is what right do you have to keep me from making pornography and showing it around?
- Jason (the commenter) said...
By the way, I can't wait for the Japanese to perfect human looking robots. People will be walking around with sex-bots that look and act like children, animals, aliens, you name it. Of course, by that time Florida will probably have raised the age of consent to 21 and people who masturbate will be sent to prison.
- zt said...
@rev Let me put it less hypothetically, were YOU that oblivious when you either asked your gf or were asked by your bf for pics/vids as a teen?
I wasn't. At all. And I hypothesize that today's kids, the porn gen, are more sophisticated by far (hence Sasha Grey for this gen v Jenna v Savannah v Traci Lords for previous gens.)
However even I was surprised at the crap that came back to bite Palin/Obama before that gen assumed full power. Why would anyone care in 2008 about Obama's college photos? Why would anyone care that Palin did a swimsuit competition in the 1980s when she was 20? But they did still care.
- Revenant said...
Let me put it less hypothetically, were YOU that oblivious when you either asked your gf or were asked by your bf for pics/vids as a teen?
Naked pictures of GFs/BFs weren't really a possibility in the 80s. Not unless you owned your own darkroom. :)
- Hoosier Daddy said...
Well, you specified a 50 year old who gets arrested for having nude pictures on his computer.
That's correct. I was making a general case of an adult male having nude pictures of minors on his computer. The key word is minor which the law specifies as a person under the age of 18.
In the kind of case this brings to mind (and which I assumed perhaps mistakenly you were thinking of), the pictures are actual child porn - not a photo of a girlfriend.
You are consistently missing the point. The girl in question was a minor. Whether it's a girlfriend or not is irrelevant. So now if the guy sends his 16 year old GF's nude photos to his 25 year old cousin, is the 25 year old exempt because its his cousin's girlfriend and since she consented it's really not child porn?
(By "actual child porn" I mean the kind of thing I described above - photos depicting rape or exploitation of children without their consent
Well then I suggest we examine what the law defines as child porn. Perhaps it varies from state to state but I'll wager it doesn't say 1) 8 year old being raped = child porn and 2) 17 year old consenting to gratutitous beaver shot is not child porn.
- TMink said...
Synova wrote: "I'm arguing against a lifetime on a sex offender registry for something that simply isn't predatory."
Me too. There are people on the sex offender registry that we need to know about. Having stupid teenagers on the registery waters down its utility.
It also incorrectly brands people for life.
The Feds are pressuring Tennessee to put adolescent offenders on the registery. Many, maybe most of the adolescents who are sexually acting out against other kids are sexually reactive to their own abuse. The research shows that they can be succesfully treated. It also shows that you can do some testing that really helps to get an idea of how dangerous they are.
So the Feds want to put real victims who acted out on a list that will haunt them LONG after their problem is treated.
- TMink said...
Part of the problem is that pedophiles are not like you and me. They are sneaky and sinful and slick. They need to be locked up forever.
They do not view the world as we do. I honestly will not go into the details because it is disgusting to think about long enough to type.
They are a real problem and I have not read good research that suggests there is any answer short of lifetime incarceration.
- Joe said...
For those who claim nudity has always been pornography, that simply isn't true for society at large. For most of the 20th century, nudity may have been scandalous, but not pornographic.
The word pornography is such a pejorative that moral crusaders have increasingly applied it to everything, though most people soundly rejected many of these attempts. Even among the socially conservative, highly religious crowd I grew up in in the 1960s, Playboy wasn't considered pornographic--scandalous yes, but not pornographic. Reflecting back, the switch happened in the 1970s about the time that moral crusaders got the magazines put behind the counter along with smokes and the increase in ID checks for booze. (My parents didn't smoke or drink, but my wife's did and she can remember in the late 60s early 70s, going to the local convenient store to pick up beer for her dad and smokes for her mom.)
I find it telling that the accelerated erosion of civil liberties and the increase in nanny statism lagged just behind this. It also coincides with Roe v Wade and, especially, the ERA. One irony is that they very nanny state mechanisms used by feminists and socialists were then used by conservative crusaders, often in cahoots with the self-proclaimed feminists in demonizing all sorts of otherwise accepted or at least tolerated behavior. And once government gets power, it does what it can to expand it.
- Roux said...
The idiot prosecutor should be disbarred. It is up to prosecutors to use discretion.


text:
Hi everyone,
Where to start - with Homeric or with Attic Greek? The long term plan is to pick up both (plus Koine) and the order does not really matter - I can start with either Homer or something else. So looking for what will end up the better progression.
I am not very good with reading courses - give me an old fashioned grammar-based class and I can get through almost anything (and the knowledge remains for the future); a reading class that hides the grammar or presents it as a feature of the text usually goes just fine while I am working on it and I forget it almost immediately. I know that most people prefer the new methods of language study but... they simply don't work for me. Textbooks using the reading method make for very good readers though.
So - Attic or Homeric? And based on my preference of type of class, which textbook (self-study so I need something that actually has an answer key - does not matter if it is free or paid)?

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The Soldotna boys basketball team opened up play at the Clark Cochrane Christmas Classic in Ketchikan on Tuesday with a 60-39 victory over North Surrey, British Columbia.
The Spartans had a tough time getting to Ketchikan, and once North Surrey got there Soldotna made things no easier.
North Surrey was warned its Monday flight from Seattle might not make it to Ketchikan, but the Spartans took the chance. They ended up spending the night in Sitka, then arrived at the gym in Ketchikan as Soldotna was already warming up for the 2:15 p.m. contest.
Soldotna senior Evan Withrow then jumped on the Spartans in the first period, scoring 13 of his game-high 25 points. By halftime, Withrow had 19 points as the Stars had a 32-20 lead.
Cory Carver took over in the second half, scoring 14 of his 16 points as the Stars coasted to victory.
The Stars move on to face Service today at 5:45 p.m. The Cougars pounded Wrangell 87-25 on Tuesday.
Stars 60, Spartans 39
N. Surrey1010712—39
SOLDOTNA (60) — Tanner Fowler 7, Colton Young 6, Cory Carver 16, Evan Withrow 25, Mitchell Daugherty 2, Garrett Bosick 4.
NORTH SURREY (39) — Baltaj Mangat 5, Jesse Iversen 6, Arshvir Pandher 2, Eric Sanher 11, Harman Basra 2, Brad Lenglet 9, Shameez Khan 5.


text:
Two $1,000 scholarships offered to college-bound students
READING -- The Kansas Wildlife Officers Association (KWOA) has announced that it will grant two $1,000 scholarships to students pursuing higher education in Kansas during the 2006-2007 school year. These scholarships help KWOA promote public awareness of the nature and diversity of wildlife law enforcement and help provide educational opportunities for individuals who appreciate Kansas' natural resources.
Applicants must complete an official application form, write a brief resume', and submit a letter of recommendation from any current or retired employee of the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks. Applicants may also be required to attend an oral interview with the KWOA Scholarship Committee in early summer this year.
KWOA will accept applications through May 15. For more information or a scholarship application, write Dave Adams, KWOA Secretary, Box 155, Reading, KS 66868; phone, 620-699-3395; or email firstname.lastname@example.com .


text:
Opened and poured, and while not yet singing, it still has much to say for itself. Bright red fruit, but also a veil of earthiness and floral notes. Caressing on the palate, but still very primary fruity. Delicious, but give any bottles at least 3-5 more years, as the wine was significantly more full and interesting 2 hours later. It was very good to peek in on this.
By the way, the label said Vieille Vigne, so I guess there isn't much of this wine. One poor old vine. Talk about small plots of land!


text:
8/5/11 Braves at Mets: Citi Field
Today was the final chapter of the book "Why I despise going to baseball games during kids week." This would be the line in front of me when I got to the game 30 minutes early:
But wait, it gets better. Here is the line behind me 10 minutes before the gates opened:
I initially wasn't going to go to this game but then a member of the senior "club" that I volunteer at knew me as a person who went to baseball games offered me two tickets. So I went to the game and offered the other ticket to another ballhawk who happens to be my next door neighbor, Greg Barasch. Crazy, no? Though, looking back on it, I might have been better served to invite his dog as he makes for very tough competition. The one positive was that there was no season ticket holder section on the field:
Of course, that didn't matter as nothing even came close, hit or otherwise, during the Mets portion of bp. I moved around a bit but not as much as I usually do. My desperation strategy for the last day of kids week was to stay put more and see if things would work out that way. It is safe to say that this strategy failed utterly and my first and only ball came from Alan Butts:
Butts is simply listed as "coach" on the roster and I suspect he is the bullpen catcher. Anyway, in the picture, the arrow pointing straight down shows where I was standing and the arrow pointing diagonally upwards is the path of the ball from Butts' hand to my glove. That was it for batting practice.
Now to the game. This was a game/postgame of tough breaks. Due to paint's inability to accurately depict this next scene I will put up the picture of where I was sitting and write out what then unfolded:
Josh Thole was up and he hit a sort of high foul ball. From that view, it immediately went into the lights. I knew that it would get out of the light so I just kept my eyes still on where I thought it would exit the lights. It then exited them on the left, sliced back to the right but was now under the lights. I could tell it was coming right at me. I mean RIGHT AT ME! Thole couldn't have thrown it to me more perfectly. I simply stood up and was ready to make the easy chest level catch when the person in front of me, who is illuminated by my flash, stood up and deflected the ball just enough for it to scoot to the right of my glove and in the row behind me. To add insult to injury, the ball hit the person in the row behind me and one seat to my left. Just as I turned to see where it had gone the ball rolled under the seat right next to me:
Then it rolled two rows below me and to add a law suit against a person who has been both insulted and injured I climbed over a row and was a quarter of a second late to the ball as a lady in that row grabbed it:
Then after the game, I convinced the home plate umpire to flip me a ball but the person in front of me reached for it and as a result swatted it down beck into the tunnel the umpires exit through. A security supervisor who has a disposition against ballhawks then picked it up and walked straight past me before giving it to someone else. I would have been fine with this had the umpire blindly thrown the ball into the crowd because that is free game but he only reacted after I called him out by name and I am 97.639% sure that the ball was intended for me.
Oh and did I mention that it was also Fiesta Latina and as a result there were Jose Reyes banners being given away. Though most people used them as a cape instead:
On the subway, I saw a father and son decked out in Braves gear and could tell they had traveled a ways to get here. I also saw that the son had a glove with him. So, as is my natural inclination, I asked him if he had gotten a ball. When he said no, I then took my ball out of my backpack and gave it to him. They asked me if I was sure and I think I explained to them what I did or just told them to keep it.
- 1 ball at this game (no picture because I gave it away) number 188 for my career
- 127 balls in 30 games= 4.233333 Balls Per Game
- 56 straight games with at least 1 ball
- 26 straight games with at least 1 ball
- 1 ball*30,607fans= 30,607 competition factor
- Time At Game 4:45- 10: 12= 5 hours 27 minutes


text:
When starting the WPF project, the saved devices load correctly, and display properly in the collapsible containers.
My task was to turn this into a service. To allow UI access, I created a tray app, which can call the WPF application. These are in two separate projects in the same solution (if that makes a difference). Currently, I have not changed any code in the WPF application, just the startup project. The issue that I have is that the Sender list and Receiver list don't seem to be bound properly to the collapsible containers when loading from the tray. I just get an empty container. I've included the image below to help describe what I mean.
I know the Senders and Receivers are being properly loaded from observing the Load method, and they show up in a different part of the application (see above). I have revved up my reporting, and notice that I get several Information messages saying that the WPF "Cannot retrieve value using the binding...", but research has shown that this is normal as Information, and should only cause concern if there is a Warming. I've included a sample of them below just in case I am mistaken, and they can be helpful.
System.Windows.Data Information: 10 : Cannot retrieve value using the binding and no valid fallback value exists; using default instead. BindingExpression:Path=ReceiversList; DataItem=null; target element is 'RepeatControl' (Name=''); target property is 'List' (type 'IList') System.Windows.Data Information: 10 : Cannot retrieve value using the binding and no valid fallback value exists; using default instead. BindingExpression:Path=DataContext; DataItem=null; target element is 'ContentPresenter' (Name=''); target property is 'DataContext' (type 'Object') System.Windows.Data Information: 10 : Cannot retrieve value using the binding and no valid fallback value exists; using default instead. BindingExpression:Path=CollapsedContent; DataItem=null; target element is 'ContentPresenter' (Name='PART_CollapsedContentPresenter'); target property is 'Content' (type 'Object')
I seem to get these when setting the WPF as startup as well, which confirms that they are probably not related.
I've also included a brief sampling of the xaml below. I've tried to keep it relative to the issue, and have cut out quite a bit to keep the listing a reasonable length.
<UserControl.Resources> <DataTemplate x:Key="SenderSummary"> <Border BorderThickness="1" BorderBrush="LightGray" CornerRadius="5" Padding="10" Width="720" Margin="10,1,3,0" > <WrapPanel Orientation="Horizontal" MaxWidth="750" Margin="10,0,0,0"> <TextBlock Name="appinfo"> ... <DataTemplate x:Key="SenderTemplate" DataType="{x:Type m:SenderReceiverManager}" > <c:CollapsibleSection Header="{Binding Path=ApplicationName}" Width="750"> <c:CollapsibleSection.CollapsedContent> <ContentPresenter Content="{Binding}" ContentTemplate="{StaticResource SenderSummary}" Margin="0,1,0,0" Width="750"/> </c:CollapsibleSection.CollapsedContent> <Grid MinWidth="710" Margin="20,0,0,0 " > ... <c:CollapsibleSection Header="Senders"> <c:CollapsibleSection.CollapsedContent> <c:RepeatControl Margin="30,0,0,0" ItemsSource="{Binding SendersList}" ItemType="{x:Type m:Sender}" List="{Binding SendersList}" ItemTemplate="{StaticResource SenderSummary}"/> </c:CollapsibleSection.CollapsedContent> <Border BorderThickness="1" BorderBrush="Chocolate" Margin="30,0,0,0"> <c:RepeatControl ItemsSource="{Binding SendersList}" ItemType="{x:Type m:Sender}" List="{Binding SendersList}" ItemTemplate="{StaticResource SenderTemplate}"/> </Border> </c:CollapsibleSection>
Any insights on what I might be doing wrong would be extremely appreciated. I have not worked with WPF before, and am finding it difficult to debug the xaml. Thank you all in advance!


text:
Accident Saturday night
A Higbee resident, Courtney E. Hayes, 22, sustained moderate injuries in an accident at 10 p.m Saturday three miles north of Wein on Highway 129 in Chariton County.
According to the Missouri State Highway Patrol, Hayes was driving a 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt northbound that went off the road and came to rest against an embankment.
The vehicle was totaled.
Hayes, who was not wearing a seatbelt, was taken by a private party to Pershing Hospital in Brookfield.


text:
Kenny Leon Calls Obamas' 'Raisin in the Sun' Night 'Historic'
President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama attended Friday evening's performance of Broadway's "A Raisin in the Sun" starring Denzel Washington, and director Kenny Leon called it a momentous night.
"This was an historic evening in the Barrymore [Theatre], where the first African American woman presented her first play on the Broadway stage some 55 years ago," Leon said of Lorraine Hansberry and "Raisin," which was performed at the Barrymore in 1959 by Sidney Poitier and Ruby Dee.
"President Obama became our first African American president and for me it is the stuff of which dreams are made," Leon said.


text:
Issue Type: Bug Created: 2009-04-28T17:37:05.000+0000 Last Updated: 2009-08-20T13:14:29.000+0000 Status: Resolved Fix version(s): - 1.9.2 (25/Aug/09)
Reporter: Leandro Rodrigues Chaves (leandrorc) Assignee: Thomas Weidner (thomas) Tags: - Zend_Validate
Related issues: Attachments:
When filtering a value using the new Zend_Filter_LocalizedToNormalized, Zend_Validate_Date doesn't recognize the normalized date array. Zend_Validate_Date::isValid($value) just convert $value parameter to array. Or maybe Zend_Filter_LocalizedToNormalized could return a Zend_Date object, then Zend_Validate_Date should recognize a Zend_Date object. It's necessary, specially, when using Zend_Filter_Input to make batch filtering and validation. If it isn't solved, how could we use Zend_Filter_Input to convert and validate dates?
Actually, i think there is another questions about dates filtering and validations. Like, for example, it should be possible using Zend_Validate_GreaterThan, Between, Identical and LessThan to make aditional dates validations.
Posted by Thomas Weidner (thomas) on 2009-04-29T10:00:14.000+0000
Why would you want to validate a normalized date with a localized validator ?
Zend_Filter_LocalizedToNormalized will not return a localized date object. A normalized date is, when the date object is splitted into it's date parts. That's the reason why you get a array. A string is always localized due to dayname, monthname timezone and so on... A normalized date is no longer a Zend_Date object, that's the difference.
Additional you should note that a validator does never change content. A validator does only return true or false.
In my eyes this is not a bug but a discussable feature enhancement.
Regarding the other filters... you should not that these filters check only numbers. There are already proposals for date validators but they have not been approved for incubator until now. But as said... also this is a new feature and not a bug.
Posted by Leandro Rodrigues Chaves (leandrorc) on 2009-04-29T10:30:30.000+0000
Ok. Let's make the things clear. A normal register process works the following way: 1 - The user types his name and date of birth in a form. Let's suppose the date field is in format "d/m/Y". 2 - The user clicks on the submit button. Then i use Zend_Filter_Input to make data processing. The problem is: how could i use Zend_Filter_Input to filter and validate this date?
Posted by Thomas Weidner (thomas) on 2009-04-29T10:37:54.000+0000
First: Validate the input and look if it conforms your needs. Second: Filter the validated and correct value for further processing for your application.
The thing is: It would make no sense to filter/change the input when it's not valid.
Posted by Leandro Rodrigues Chaves (leandrorc) on 2009-04-29T10:56:43.000+0000
So, did you mean i can't use Zend_Filter_Input? Because Zend_Filter_Input filters, then validates. And you suggested the inverse order.
Posted by Leandro Rodrigues Chaves (leandrorc) on 2009-04-29T17:09:16.000+0000
In addition, using Zend_Filter_Input in only one execution have some problems. If you say the correct order is validate the input, then filter the validated and correct value, we have a problem here. For example, if a user enter with the value (1,500.00) of a number field and click submit , we can have the following validation rules to apply in Zend_Filter_Input:
$validation = array( 'salary' => array('Float', array('Between', 0, 99999999.99) );
But, making validation before filtering, Float validation will pass (because 1.8 supports locale), but the Between validation will fail. I'm not sure about the best solution to make these things with only one instance of Zend_Filter_Input, maybe we could define a chain combining filters and validations, something like:
$chain = array( 'filters' => array( 'name' => 'StringTrim', 'biografy' => 'StringTrim', 'StripTags' ), 'validators' => array( 'name' => 'notEmpty', 'Alnum', array('StringLength', 1, 100), 'biografy' => array('StringLength', 0, 1000), 'salary' => 'Float' ), 'filter' => array( 'salary' => new Zend_Filter_LocalizedToNormalized(array('precision' => 2)) ), 'validators' => array( 'salary' => array('Between', 0, 99999999.99) ) );
And use a new class Zend_Filter_Input_Chain:
$input = Zend_Filter_Input_Chain($chain, $data, $options);
Posted by Leandro Rodrigues Chaves (leandrorc) on 2009-04-29T17:21:31.000+0000
Just correcting the array:
$chain = array( 'filters' => array( 'name' => 'StringTrim', 'biografy' => array('StringTrim', 'StripTags') ), 'validators' => array( 'name' => array('notEmpty', 'Alnum', array('StringLength', 1, 100)), 'biografy' => array(array('StringLength', 0, 1000)), 'salary' => 'Float' ), 'filter' => array( 'salary' => new Zend_Filter_LocalizedToNormalized(array('precision' => 2)) ), 'validators' => array( 'salary' => array(array('Between', 0, 99999999.99)) ) );
Posted by Leandro Rodrigues Chaves (leandrorc) on 2009-04-29T19:37:40.000+0000
An for date processing, we could have:
$chain = array( 'validators' => array( 'birth_date' => 'Date', 'another_field' => 'AnotherValidator' ), 'filters' => array( 'birth_date' => 'DateFormat', // For converting a string date to Zend_Date ), 'validators' => array( 'birth_date' => array( 'DateGreaterThan', $date ) // Zend_Date objects validations ) );
Posted by Leandro Rodrigues Chaves (leandrorc) on 2009-04-29T19:46:12.000+0000
Just complementing the idea:
$chain = array( ... 'filters' => array( 'birth_date' => 'DateObjectToDb' // For converting a Zend_Date to database format ) );
Well, that's my idea. It's really a bit immature yet. But the idea is that we could have as many as possible data filtering and processing using Zend_Filter_Input.
Posted by Thomas Weidner (thomas) on 2009-04-29T23:53:00.000+0000
Please note that this issue is about Zend_Validate_Date. Zend_Filter_Input improvements are not part of this issue.
As said before: When you propose a improvement for a component then please fill in a new issue for this particular component.
Posted by Leandro Rodrigues Chaves (leandrorc) on 2009-04-30T04:41:05.000+0000
Ok, i will open a improvement issue for Zend_Filter_Input.
Posted by Leandro Rodrigues Chaves (leandrorc) on 2009-04-30T20:11:40.000+0000
Thomas, i agree that the issue is about Zend_Validate_Date, but it's related to Zend_Filter_Input too. So, i would like you answer me the following question:
You said:
"First: Validate the input and look if it conforms your needs. Second: Filter the validated and correct value for further processing for your application.
The thing is: It would make no sense to filter/change the input when it's not valid."
The question is: processing order of Zend_Filter_Input is filter, then validate. So, how do you explain your comment? Are you suggesting i can't use Zend_Filter_Input? In addition, would we use only simple filters with Zend_Filter_Input, like StringTrim or HtmlEntities because "it would make no sense to filter/change the input when it's not valid", as you said? If not, i think my new issue #ZF-6478 could be the solution.
Posted by Thomas Weidner (thomas) on 2009-05-01T02:48:23.000+0000
I don't know Zend_Filter_Input, but the mentioned filter and the validator to which you wrote your issue are by me so I know how they work.
Zend_Validate_Date allows it to validate localized dates. As you already know the format as you mentioned before simply give this format to Zend_Validate_Date.
There is no reason to change the date to a normalized array just for that. you would need a normalization of dates when you want to store them into a database for example or do something else like only have the year or do some further processing.
A normalized date input is no longer a date object. As mentioned a date object is always localized. So the main question is: Why would you have a need to normalize a date in your case ? According to your point 1 you already know the format you expect and when your user does not input his date in the proper format, Zend_Validate_Date will return false. No need to normalize this date.
When you need the date in a different format then there is actually no filter available as you want to change from one localized format to another one. This is actually not supported.
Posted by Thomas Weidner (thomas) on 2009-05-01T02:51:17.000+0000
I could imagine one way... add a LocalizeToNormalize and additionally as imediately next filter a NormalizedToLocalized filter with the format you want to have, and then give this format to ValidateDate when the validator is processed AFTER the filter.
Your problem is that the date looks differently before and after filtering. You need to know which of the dates you want to validate... the date before or the date after.
This is untested but it could work.
Posted by Leandro Rodrigues Chaves (leandrorc) on 2009-05-01T06:00:55.000+0000
So, due to your answer, let's agree that sometimes it makes sense filter/change the value before validating, right? But this is due to the current behavior of Zend_Filter_Input, because, if we can pass a chain of operations in Zend_Filter_Input, as i suggested in #ZF-6478, so we could validate a date string, then convert it to database format. And, in future, when additional date validators are available, we can validate a date string, convert it to Zend_Date, make date operations validation (GreaterThan, Between and etc) and, finally, convert it to database format, to store the register.
I like to make filtering and validating in the model, because i have models saved from anothers models, so, for example, sometimes the programmers can define values that doen'st come from user input, so when a child model is saved from it's parent model _postInsert method, for example, i can avoid that programmers set wrong values to the row objects and, consequentially, a database, like mysql, set a default value like '0000-00-00' to a date column. Therefore, pass a operations chain to Zend_Filter_Input, would be great.
Posted by Thomas Weidner (thomas) on 2009-08-20T13:14:29.000+0000
Fixed with r17695
Have you found an issue?
See the Overview section for more details.


text:
- Home
- About the Center
- Treatment at CTSA
- About the Disorders We Treat
- Training Opportunities
- OCD Assessment Workshop (June 8, 2018)
- Intensive Workshop in Exposure & Response Prevention (Ex/RP) for OCD
- Introduction to CBT for Anxiety and Related Disorders (Sep. 14, 2018)
- Assessment of PTSD in Children and Adolescents (Sep. 28, 2018)
- Intensive Workshop in Prolonged Exposure Therapy for PTSD (Oct. 8-11, 2018)
- Prolonged Exposure for PTSD in Adolescents (Oct. 12, 2018)
- Consultant Workshop in Prolonged Exposure Therapy for PTSD (Oct. 22-26, 2018)
- Professional Opportunities
- PE Certification Program
- Find a PE Consultant
- Find a PE Therapist
- Sitemap
- Other Resources
- Contact Us
- Support Our Work
- Follow Us on Twitter
- Join Us on Facebook
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
Treatment of PTSD
Cognitive behavioral therapy
Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has been implemented for the treatment of a wide range of psychological disorders. The specific CBT techniques used to treat PTSD vary by case but the approach generally seeks to alter irrational thoughts and dispel any negative emotions associated with the traumatic experience.
Several forms of cognitive behavioral therapy have been proven effective in treating PTSD.
- Exposure Therapy: patient exposed to repeated exposure of stressful stimuli
- Stress Inoculation Training (SIT): patient educated about anxiety symptoms and coping mechanisms
- Cognitive Therapy: patient taught to identify trauma-related irrational or dysfunctional beliefs that influence decision-making and emotional responses
- Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR): patient discusses trauma while tracking the movement of a rapidly moving finger with his/her eyes
- Combination: patients may undergo many of the above techniques concurrently (e.g. exposure therapy with stress inoculation training)
CBT reduces both the severity of PTSD as well as other psychological states associated with the disorder such as general anxiety and depression. The benefits of treatment are typically retained with low rates of relapse without continued CBT sessions or other forms of treatment (medication, supportive counseling, and relaxation). Other forms of treatment that are incorporated into CBT include general supportive counseling and deep breathing exercises, a form of relaxation treatment.
Exposure therapy, SIT, and cognitive therapy are the most widely accepted CBT treatments of PTSD and controlled research studies and case reports provide strong empirical evidence for the efficacy of these techniques. While clinical studies also demonstrate the efficacy of EMDR, the unconventional aspects of the treatment still raise questions about the technique. The technique was devised by Dr. F. Shapiro and the protocols and discussion of the treatment are recorded in Shapiro (1999, 2001, 2002).
Prolonged Exposure (PE) has been shown to be one of the most effective treatment strategies developed and tested by Dr. Edna Foa. Treatment typically involves 9-12 weekly sessions that last 90-120 minutes. The CTSA offers a treatment program based upon PE. The Center's program is focused upon discussing fears, recalling the traumatic event, relaxation training, and confronting safe situations that involve memories of the trauma.
Learn more about Prolonged Exposure (PE) for PTSD.
Psychosocial treatments
Brief psychological debriefings directly following traumatic incident are common preventative measures for the development of chronic PSTD. Debriefings facilitate open discussion about the sequence of events as well as emotions, thoughts, and impressions associated with the incident. They also aid in the development of coping mechanisms for future stresses. Although patients subjectively indicate the treatment to be helpful, research suggests psychological debriefings are unable to facilitate long-term recovery. Short-term amelioration of symptoms is thus attributed to natural recovery.
Short-term cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), however, has also been shown to prevent chronic symptoms. Patients who undergo 4-5 CBT sessions 2-4 weeks after the episode experience significant reduction in the severity of post-traumatic stress. These sessions implement the same techniques used in chronic PTSD scenarios and have been deemed effective in preventing chronic PTSD.
There is strong evidence that conversation-based therapy can be effective in treating PTSD. Counseling and group therapy sessions have both been used to relieve PTSD symptoms and these counseling strategies draw from an intervention approach familiar to many therapists. PTSD therapy has a strong focus upon education and the development support networks. However, there is a growing body of support for the necessity of incorporating cognitive behavioral techniques into effective therapeutic practices.
Self-help treatment
There is a small collection of books written for PTSD sufferers that record potentially useful self-help techniques. The books aim to help the individual manage and transform their disorder by furthering their own self-awareness and understanding. Self-help texts may provide some symptomatic relief but it is widely believed that professional treatment is necessary for a complete recovery.
More Information: Books
Foa, E. B. & Wilson, R. (1991). Stop Obsessing! How to overcome your obsessions and compulsions. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell. Translated into Spanish: (1993).Venza sus obsesiones. (Stop obsessing!). Barcelona, Spain: RobinBook. Translated into German: (1994). Hor endilch auf damit. (Stop obsessing!). Heyne: Germany.
Davidson, J. R. T. & Foa, E. B. (Eds.) (1992). Posttraumatic stress disorder: DSM-IV and beyond. Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Press, Inc.
Foa, E. B. & Rothbaum, B. O. (1997). Treating the Trauma of Rape. New York: Guilford Publications, Inc.
The use of drugs in PTSD treatment has been helpful in relieving symptoms of PTSD patients. A collection of antidepressants have been found helpful and three medications more specifically designed for PTSD treatment are listed below:
- Fluoxetine
- Sertraline
- Paroxetine
Unfortunately, because these drugs do not treat the underlying cause of the disorder, PTSD medications are commonly associated with relapse. They do nonetheless provide some symptomatic relief.
Back to Top


text:
The Metropolitan Police are investigating after Frank Lampard's 200th Chelsea goal was marred by incidents of coin-throwing during Sunday's London derby with West Ham at Stamford Bridge.
Lampard, who joined Chelsea from West Ham in 2001, celebrated his 19th-minute header in front of the away end along with substitute John Terry and his team-mates, with missiles hurled in the players' direction from the visiting support.
A Met Police spokesperson said: "We are investigating instances of coin-throwing at Chelsea verses West Ham on Sunday, March 17. There have been no arrests. Inquiries continue."
The incident could lead the Football Association to take disciplinary action.
CCTV footage will be studied to identify the offenders and the clubs will work together following the incident during Chelsea's 2-0 Barclays Premier League win.
A West Ham statement read: "West Ham United will be working with Chelsea to investigate the reports of missile throwing during Sunday's game at Stamford Bridge.
"Any individual found to have acted in an inappropriate way will have to face the consequences of their actions, including the possibility of a ban from attending future matches."
There have been previous incidents of coin-throwing during the fixture.
In October 2004, Mateja Kezman was hit by a coin while playing for Chelsea against West Ham in a League Cup tie.
Source: PA


text:
|Q: Help! I'm about to graduate from college and head to veterinary school, but I'm living paycheck to paycheck—even though I have $120,000 stashed
A: Wow, most students I know would have dipped into that $120,000 cookie jar by now. High five to you! But you're right; you should use part of that nest egg to build some security for yourself, stat.
First, living paycheck to paycheck puts you at risk of going broke, because you don't have a cushion for emergencies.
Add up your basic monthly living expenses and multiply by six. Let's say you're living on $1,200 a month: Take $7,200 and put it aside for emergencies in a money market fund at Vanguard, Fidelity or Charles Schwab (basically a savings account, with withdrawal limits).
Next, assuming you will earn at least $5,000 this year, take $5,000 and open a Roth IRA at the same institution (it makes managing your accounts much easier). To keep your life simple, I recommend investing that money in a target date 2050 fund (a mix of stocks and bonds that will gradually get more conservative, as you approach age 65). You don't have to keep it there, but that's a start.
What happens to the remaining $107,800?
If you're not sure when you'll buy a house, I recommend this keep-it-simple formula for the rest of your assets. Put 50% in a money market fund to give you flexibility on the timing of buying your home—that could be part or all of the down payment.
Then, invest the remainder in low-cost index funds in a regular, taxable investment account (i.e. not a retirement account). For your age I'd recommend investing 75% of the money in a total stock market index fund and 25% in the total bond market index fund.
These two index funds track, or mirror, the U.S. stock and bond markets, and most investment companies offer these funds—although the names and ticker symbols vary from company to company.
I am a big fan of these three investment firms: Vanguard, Fidelity, and Charles Schwab. They will work with investors at virtually any asset level—i.e. you don't have to be rich. And they'll happily walk you through the surprisingly easy process of transferring your assets over—literally, a few forms and a phone call or two. On top of it, all three institutions have in-house staff who will answer questions and talk to you about your investment goals.
Charles Schwab—866-232-9890
DailyWorth is dealing with some unfortunate server issues and our website is down today. If you have any questions or responses related to today's post, please leave your comments on the related post on our Facebook page.


text:
- The Royal Trophy, Day One
Europe make dominant start in Brunei
ESPN will be showing live coverage of the Royal Trophy this week. For more information and details on how to subscribe, click here
Europe dominated the opening foursomes at the Royal Trophy on Friday to take a 3½-½ lead against Asia after the first day in Brunei.
European team captain Jose Maria Olazabal was the only man not to win his match - as the Spaniard and compatriot Miguel Angel Jimenez were held to a half with the strong Asian pairing of YE Yang and Kyung-tae Kim, following a birdie at the 18th from the home duo.
But all the other European pairings emerged victorious - with Henrik Stenson and Gonzalo Fernandez-Castano producing the biggest victory of the day, a 5&4 demoltion of Ryo Ishikawa and Sang-moon Bae.
It was a remarkable performance from the partnership, who were eight-under par by the time the match came to a conclusion at the 14th.
Described as Europe's "secret weapon" by captain Olazabal ahead of the event, the Italian pairing of brothers Edoardo and Francesco Molinari delivered the opening point with a 2&1 victory over Yoshinori Fujimoto and Wu Ashun.
The duo were one-down after eight holes, but a run of five successive birdies from there to the 14th - an impressive feat considering the alternate shot format - laid the platform for success.
The other match saw Ryder Cup hero Nicolas Colsaerts and team-mate Marcel Siem sneak a slender one-up victory over Jeev Milkha Singh and Kiradech Aphibarnrat.


text:
WEST GOSHEN — Two men were arrested for bad checks as the result of separate investigations, police announced this week.
Thomas Antonio Ortiz-Ayala, 23, of Reading, was arrested on June 14 after he was stopped by police in Reading. According to the West Goshen Police Department, Ortiz-Ayala was wanted for an outstanding warrant in connection to an investigation into an erroneous paycheck issued in December. Police said Ortiz-Ayala was overpaid on a direct deposit made by his employer. When the error was caught Ortiz-Ayala agreed to return the funds, police said, but when the payroll company attempted to withdraw the money it was gone.
Police said Ortiz-Ayala never returned to work, and attempts to contact him were unsuccessful. Police then obtained an arrest warrant for Ortiz-Ayala and entered it into a national crime database.
After he was detained in Reading, Ortiz-Ayala was transported back to Chester County for an arraignment on theft charges. He was briefly incarcerated at Chester County Prison and later released on bail, according to court records.
A second and unrelated arrest occurred after West Goshen police received a report of a bad check on June 13. Police said investigators were told that Philip Satterfield Jr., 29, of Philadelphia, had cashed a payroll check at the United Check Cashing business in the amount of $654.78. When the check cleared it was learned that it was written on a closed account.
Investigators learned that Satterfield was the owner of the company that issued the payroll check, though he had previously identified himself as an employee. Police said Satterfield also forged a signature on another check that was cashed at the same time.
An arrest warrant was issued, and Satterfield was arrested after he came into contact with police in Milford, Delaware. Satterfield was extradited back to Pennsylvania and taken to Chester County Prison while he awaited a court hearing. Police said Satterfield admitted to the crimes during an interview.
Follow Daily Local News staff writer Michael N. Price on Twitter @MikePriceWrites and on Facebook at www.facebook.com/michaelnprice.


text:
Ruud van Nistelrooy believes Robin van Persie can be the key to Manchester United reclaiming the championship from Manchester City this season.
Van Persie has made an impressive start in his debut season, scoring 11 times. Van Nistelrooy, who scored 95 goals in 137 league starts for United, said of his countryman: "I spoke to him a little while before and I congratulated him on his fantastic start at the club and I wished him to continue like this. Its like he's been [at United] forever, he scored his first goal quickly, and he [continued] ever since and never stopped. Hopefully it will continue."
United lead City by a point as Sir Alex Ferguson's side host West Ham United on Wednesday evening, with their 32 league goals seven more than Roberto Mancini's side, and the best in the division.
Van Persie has scored eight of these while also being a creative force. Asked if the Dutchman can be the difference in the title race, Van Nistelrooy said: "I think, as he's proving right now he is making the difference on many occasions. If he can continue like this for the whole season I can see United going for another league win. Its great to see the way he plays – it fits into United's playing style. He's everywhere – he's involved in the play, and also in the finishing, so that makes him special."
Van Nistelrooy also enjoyed instant success when he joined United in the summer of 2001, and he added: "Its important for a striker when you come to a new club to get your goals and then you take it from there. He had the same. He had the experience in the Premiership already and he's proved he's a great signing."
Wayne Rooney has identified West Ham's Andy Carroll as a threat at Old Trafford on Wednesday. Carroll, who is on loan from Liverpool, scored his first goal for West Ham in Sunday's 3-1 defeat at Tottenham Hotspur. Rooney, who plays with Carroll for England, told the Manchester United website: "Andy Carroll is a handful. I am sure if you ask any defender, they find it difficult to play against someone like that who is good in the air and on the floor. He is physical and he makes it difficult. That type of player doesn't always get all the goals but they can cause trouble up front and create problems. I am sure that is what Sam Allardyce [the West Ham manager] wants him to do."
City's draw at Chelsea on Sunday meant United's two main title rivals dropped points, and Rooney added: "We know City and Chelsea will be looking out for our results as we look out for theirs. But it is important for us to concentrate on our own performances and make sure we get the wins because there are a lot of games coming up. It is tough. I am sure the manager will use his squad. It will have to come through for him."
Anderson is sure to start against West Ham, following an impressive cameo as a substitute in Saturday's 3-1 over Queens Park Rangers, according to Ferguson. "His performance was outstanding," he said. "He took the game by the scruff of the neck and he was so positive and determined in his play that he picks himself on Wednesday."
While Paul Scholes is suspended, Antonio Valencia's hip problem makes him a doubt. "We'll see what Antonio is like today and tomorrow," Ferguson said. "Nani is still going to be out [but] Chris Smalling and Phil Jones were on the bench on Saturday and they're available."


text:
Your browser does not support iframes.
The Bedford County School Board is still looking at the possibility of constructing a new middle school near Liberty High School, but it appears any possibility of building the school on the current LHS site is gone.
An $1,800 corporate grant from Lowe's will pay for Career Safe OSHA cards for students at Bedford Science and Technology Center (BSTC).
The Bedford County School Board will look at two sites to construct a new middle school in the Liberty Zone as the result of action Thursday night.
The board unanimously approved funding for studies of a site off Wheatland Road near the Bedford Area Family YMCA and for a yet-to-be identified site near Liberty High School, off Va. 122.
The Wheatland Road site, located south of U.S. 460, is owned by developer George Aznavorian, who has offered to donate between 35 to 40 acres for the school.
A panel of judges has selected three finalists for 2014 Bedford County Teacher of the Year.
They are: Kathy Barton, Thaxton Elementary School; Kelly Brown, Liberty High School; and Wendy Singleton, Jefferson Forest High School.
The overall county winner will be announced during an annual recognition dinner at Boonsboro Country Club next Tuesday, May 14 at 6:30 p.m.
Kathy Barton
Two 2011 Dodge Avengers will be joining Bedford Public Schools' drivers' education program.
According to Dr. Mac Duis, the school division's director of instruction, the focus of the driver's ed program has been changed from using a driving range at Bedford Science and Technology Center to over-the-road training. This will provide a more realistic experience to the students.
The children at the Growing Place, a pre-school run by Bedford Baptist Church, got a recent visit by the Bedford Police Department.
The effort part of a bicycle safety program and one of the police department's bicycle patrol officers shows up each year. This time, they got two patrol officers — Joe Dooley and Tim Stanley — along with Lt. Todd Foreman.
Employees of Bedford County Public Schools will receive their first significant salary increase in five years—a 3 percent raise—following action Tuesday night by the Bedford County School Board.
Next Tuesday, May 7, there will be a public hearing and work session held in the auditorium at Liberty High School to discuss the building site of a potential new middle school in the Liberty Zone.
The public hearing will be held at 6 p.m. and the work session will begin after that hearing. A feasibility study conducted earlier this year on having the new middle school built alongside Liberty High School can be accessed at the school system's Web site.
Disappointed by comments directed at teachers last week by a member of the Board of Supervisors, Bedford County School Board Chairman Gary Hostutler said county constituents should be welcomed at county public meetings, not demeaned for stating their opinion.
Last week, District 6 supervisor Annie Pollard stated "I don't want to rob taxpayers, who can't afford it, to pay a bunch of crybabies."
During a work session Thursday, the Bedford County School Board began the chore of chopping $3.5 million from its proposed budget in order to match the expected local funding from the Board of Supervisors.
The meeting was held at the School Board Office Conference Room located at 311 S. Bridge Street in Bedford. In action taken by the board on Thursday, all future school board meetings will be held there, instead of the Bedford Science and Technology Center, unless prior notice is given.
Copyright © 2018
The Bedford Bulletin is your source for local news, sports, events, and information in Bedford County and Bedford, VA and the surrounding area.