text:
During the 2005-2006 Term, the Supreme Court gave favorable decisions to the defendants in three out of the six death penalty cases it announced. In Hill v. McDonough, the Court ruled unanimously that the method-of-lethal injection claims can be brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 rather than under the habeas corpus statute (28 U.S.C. §2254). In House v. Bell, a case involving a death row inmate who claimed that DNA evidence proved he did not commit the crime for which he was found guilty, the Court found in a 5 -3 ruling that the petitioner had satisfied the "gateway" standard for habeas review, but left open the question of whether the Constitution precludes execution of an "innocent" defendant found guilty and sentenced following a constitutionally adequate trial. In Holmes v. South Carolina, the Court unanimously held that a capital defendant cannot be denied the right to introduce evidence of third party guilt. The other cases, in which the Court upheld application of state death penalty statutes, appear to reveal a greater division among the justices over the fairness of capital punishment. The 5-4 decision in Kansas v. Marsh centered around a debate concerning capital punishment as much as it did a ruling on the unusual statute in Kansas which provided that juries should sentence a defendant to die – rather than serve life in prison – when the evidence for and against imposing death is equal. In Brown v. Sanders, a second 5-4 decision, the Court upheld the petitioner's death sentence even though two of the sentencing factors presented to the jury were declared invalid. In Oregon v. Guzek, the Court held that states may reasonably refuse to allow convicted capital defendants to offer alibi evidence for the first time at the sentencing phase of their trials; two Justices would have permitted the exclusion of any evidence at sentencing that cast doubt upon the jury's guilty verdict, but the majority were obviously unwilling to go that far.
During the 2005-2006 Term, the Supreme Court gave favorable decisions to the defendants in three out of the six death penalty cases it announced. In Hill v. McDonough, the Court ruled unanimously that the method-of-lethal injection claims can be brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 rather than under the habeas corpus statute (28 U.S.C. §2254). In House v. Bell, a case involving a death row inmate who claimed that DNA evidence proved he did not commit the crime for which he was found guilty, the Court found in a 5 -3 ruling that the petitioner had satisfied the "gateway" standard for habeas review, but left open the question of whether the Constitution precludes execution of an "innocent" defendant found guilty and sentenced following a constitutionally adequate trial. In Holmes v. South Carolina, the Court unanimously held that a capital defendant cannot be denied the right to introduce evidence of third party guilt. The other cases, in which the Court upheld application of state death penalty statutes, appear to reveal a greater division among the justices over the fairness of capital punishment. The 5-4 decision in Kansas v. Marsh centered around a debate concerning capital punishment as much as it did a ruling on the unusual statute in Kansas which provided that juries should sentence a defendant to die – rather than serve life in prison – when the evidence for and against imposing death is equal. In Brown v. Sanders, a second 5-4 decision, the Court upheld the petitioner's death sentence even though two of the sentencing factors presented to the jury were declared invalid. In Oregon v. Guzek, the Court held that states may reasonably refuse to allow convicted capital defendants to offer alibi evidence for the first time at the sentencing phase of their trials; two Justices would have permitted the exclusion of any evidence at sentencing that cast doubt upon the jury's guilty verdict, but the majority were obviously unwilling to go that far.
The six capital punishment decisions which were decided during the 2005-2006 Term involved issues concerning: (1) a challenge to the lethal injection protocol as cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the 8th Amendment (Hill v. McDonough), (2) constitutionality of a death penalty state statute that requires death if plus and minus factors are in balance (Kansas v. Marsh), (3) whether petitioner's compelling new evidence, though at the very least a colorable claim of actual innocence, was as a matter of law insufficient to excuse his failure to present that evidence before the state courts (House v. Bell), (4) disagreement among the courts regarding whether witness testimony was "mitigating evidence" (designed to spare the 18 year old from lethal injection) or "alibi evidence"(that went directly to whether the defendant was guilty) which should have been presented during the guilt or innocence phase of the trial (Oregon v. Guzek), (5) whether State's law governing admissibility of third-party guilt evidence violates the capital defendant's constitutional right to present a complete defense premised on due process, confrontation, and compulsory process clauses (Holmes v. South Carolina), and (6) whether a new trial is warranted if two of several aggravating factors found by the jury are later held to be invalid (Brown v. Sanders).
In three cases1 the Court kept alive the appeals of the death row inmates in Florida, Tennessee, and South Carolina. In the other three cases,2 the Court affirmed the States' death penalty sentences.
On June 12, 2006, the Court, held unanimously, that the use of lethal injection as a form of execution in the State of Florida constituted a challenge to the cruel and unusual provision of the Eighth Amendment and properly raised a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which provides a cause of action for civil rights violations, rather than under the habeas corpus provisions.
The petitioner (Hill) challenged Florida's injection protocol under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as likely to cause him severe pain and suffering, but the lower courts construed his suit as a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C.§2254 and dismissed it as a procedurally barred second and successive petition.4 In an opinion written by Justice Kennedy, the Court reversed noting the distinction between challenges to the lawfulness or duration of confinement, which must be brought via a habeas corpus petition, and challenges to the circumstances, which need not be.5 The difference is that the former, but not the latter, necessarily challenges the legality of a sentence i.e., finding that a state cannot detain or execute an inmate in one particular manner does not mean that it cannot detain or execute him at all.6 The reasoning of the Court in Hill was that although Florida law prescribed lethal injection as the means of execution, it left the specific method of injection up to the correction officials, and Hill challenged only the particular, three-drug sequence intended for his execution.7 Inasmuch as Hill left open the possibility that Florida could execute him by lethal injection by another method, a decision in his favor under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 did not imply that his sentence by lethal injection generally is unlawful.8
The Court was sensitive to the concerns raised by Florida, the United States Solicitor General and others that death-row inmates will simply challenge individual aspects of their planned executions one at a time and thereby effectively block their executions.9 Notwithstanding, the Court rejected a proposal to require prisoners such as Hill to identify in their complaints alternative means of execution that they would accept.10 According to the Court, heightened pleading requirements should result from changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure similar to the specific pleading requirements which are mandated by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and not, as a general rule, by case-by-case litigation.11 The Court also noted that filing a section 1983 action does not entitle an inmate to a stay of execution, which allows courts to consider factors such as whether a suit is speculative or filed too late in the day.12 At least temporarily, the decision in Hill may delay executions as challenges to the constitutionality to the state's lethal injection method of execution are addressed and decided.
On June 12, 2006, the Court decided its second death penalty case in a 5-3 decision with Justice Kennedy joined by Justices Breyer, Stevens, Souter, and Ginsburg for the majority (Justice Alito did not participate). This case raised an issue which has hung over the imposition of capital punishment in recent years as it relates to newly discovered evidence and the possibility that an innocent person could be executed.
Paul House sought release from Tennessee's death row based on what his appeal to the Court calls "new reliable evidence" of innocence14 which involves an application of the "miscarriage-of-justice" exception to the procedural default of state claims in federal court under Schlup v. Delo.15 House claimed that DNA tests show that the semen found on the murder victim, Carolyn Muncey's clothes belonged to her husband, Hubert Muncey, and not to House, as a jury in Union County, Tenn., found 20 years ago. The lower federal courts rejected his claims.16
The issue before the Supreme Court was first how strong his case for innocence must be to qualify for habeas review in federal court.17 In addition, House asked the Court to resolve an issue left open earlier and find the new evidence exonerated him.18 Although the Court has not explicitly decided that it is unconstitutional to execute a convicted but innocent person, it suggested the possibility in 1993 in Herrera v. Collins.19 There in a 5-4 opinion, however, it ruled that Leonel Torres Herrera had no right to reopen his case 10 years after his conviction, based solely on his claim of new proof of innocence.20 Justices O'Connor and Kennedy joined that opinion without endorsing the suggestion and with the stipulation that they believed that there was little doubt of Herrera's guilt.21
The House Court referred to the standard of Schup v. Delo and held that it was more likely than not that no reasonable juror viewing the record as a whole would find House guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.22 Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority, noted that "...'all the evidence, old and new, incriminating and exculpatory, without regard to whether it would necessarily be admitted under rules of admissibility that would govern at trial'" must be taken into account.23 He stated that when an inmate comes to federal court with evidence of innocence, "[t]he court's function is not to make an independent factual determination about what likely occurred, but rather to assess the likely impact of the evidence on reasonable jurors."24
The majority decided that House's revelation about DNA and the blood stains were enough to overcome the strict standards that must be met before prisoners are allowed to re-argue issues of innocence long after their convictions.25 They declined to reach, however, the question left open in Herrera, whether the Constitution precludes execution of an "actually innocent" defendant found guilty and sentenced in a constitutionally adequate trial.26 Should such a right exist, House had failed present evidence of sufficient persuasion to claim it.27
Chief Justice Roberts, in the dissent, said the majority had ignored the trial judge's determination that House and several of his witnesses were unreliable. The Chief Justice also noted that the trial judge had found that Muncey's autopsy blood was spilled on House's jeans after the FBI already had determined that the blood on his pants belonged to the victim.28 Justice Roberts' dissent agreed with the majority on the Herrera issue, but argued that despite the evidence, "the case against House remains substantially unaltered from the cases presented to the jury."29 As a result, Justice Roberts said, the Schlup standard was not met.30
The judgment upholding the denial of habeas corpus relief was reversed, and the case was remanded for consideration of House's procedurally barred claims.
Holmes was convicted of multiple crimes, including first degree murder, and sentenced to death. At his trial, the court did not allow Holmes to present evidence that a third party had committed the crimes he had been charged with. On May 1, 2006, the Supreme Court, with Justice Alito writing the opinion for a unanimous Court, ruled that South Carolina had deprived Bobbie Lee Holmes of a fair trial when it prevented him from putting on evidence contradictory to the State's case and which also pointed to another possible suspect. The prosecution relied heavily on forensic evidence that strongly supported petitioner's guilt. The petitioner sought to rebut the State's forensic evidence by introducing expert testimony suggesting that the evidence had been contaminated and that the police had engaged in a plot to frame him. The petitioner also sought to introduce evidence that another man by the name of Jimmy McCaw White had been in the victim's neighborhood on the morning of the assault and White had either acknowledged petitioner's innocence or admitted to committing the crimes himself. In White's pretrial testimony, he denied making the incriminating statements and provided an alibi for the time of the assault.32
The trial court excluded petitioner's third-party guilt evidence citing the State Supreme Court's Gregory decision, which held that this evidence is admissible if it raises a reasonable inference as to the defendant's own innocence, but is inadmissible if it merely casts a bare suspicion or raises a conjectural inference as to another's guilt.33 The State Supreme Court, affirming the trial court, cited both Gregory and its later decision in Gay,34 and held that where there is strong forensic evidence of an appellant's guilt, gratuitous evidence regarding a third party's alleged guilt does not raise a reasonable inference as to the appellant's own innocence.35 Applying this standard, the South Carolina State Supreme Court held that the petitioner could not overcome the forensic evidence against him.36
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari based upon the question regarding whether South Carolina's rule governing the admissibility of third-party guilt evidence violates a criminal defendant's constitutional right to present a complete defense grounded in the Due Process, Confrontation, and Compulsory Process Clauses.37
The U.S. Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant's federal constitutional rights are violated by an evidence rule under which the defendant may not introduce evidence of third-party guilt if the prosecution has introduced forensic evidence that, if believed, strongly supports a guilty verdict.38 The Court said:
[S]tate and federal rulemakers have broad latitude under the Constitution to establish rules excluding evidence from criminal trials. This latitude, however, has limits. Whether rooted directly in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or in the Compulsory Process or Confrontation clauses of the Sixth Amendment, the Constitution guarantees criminal defendants a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense. This right is abridged by evidence rules that infringe] upon a weighty interest of the accused and are 'arbitrary' or 'disproportionate to the purposes they are designed to serve.'
While the Constitution thus prohibits the exclusion of defense evidence under rules that serve no legitimate purpose or that are disproportionate to the ends that they are asserted to promote, well-established rules of evidence permit trial judges to exclude evidence if its probative value is outweighed by certain other factors such as unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or potential to mislead the jury. An application of this principle is found in rules regulating the admission of evidence proffered by criminal defendants to show that someone else committed the crime with which they are charged. Such rules are widely accepted and are not challenged here. In Gregory, the South Carolina Supreme Court adopted and applied a rule intended to be of this type. In Gay and this case, however, that court radically changed and extended the Gregory rule by holding that, where there is strong evidence of a defendant's guilt, especially strong forensic evidence, proffered evidence about a third party's alleged guilt may (or perhaps must) be excluded. Under this rule, the trial judge does not focus on the probative value or the potential adverse effects of admitting the defense evidence of third-party guilt. Instead, the critical inquiry concerns the strength of the prosecution's case: If the prosecution's case is strong enough, the evidence of third-party guilt is excluded even if that evidence, if viewed independently, would have great probative value and even if it would not pose an undue risk of harassment, prejudice, or confusion of the issues. Furthermore, as applied below, the rule seems to call for little, if any, examination of the credibility of the prosecution's witnesses or the reliability of its evidence.
[The point of this is that] by evaluating the strength of only one party's evidence, no logical conclusion can be reached regarding the strength of contrary evidence offered by the other side to rebut or cast doubt. Because the rule applied below did not heed this point, the rule is 'arbitrary' in the sense that it does not rationally serve the end that the Gregory rule and other similar third-party guilt rules were designed to further. Nor has the State identified any other legitimate end served by the rule. Thus, the rule violates a criminal defendant's right to have a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.39
Justice Alito was guided by a string of Supreme Court decisions which were used as precedent to set up a balancing test to weigh and determine the opportunity for the defendant to present a complete defense.40 In a situation where South Carolina's rule was that if the State had put on strong forensic evidence of the defendant's guilt, the defendant could be prohibited from raising an alternative theory of a third-party's guilt. Under these circumstances, the Court concluded that Holmes did not have a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense. The Court decided that this rule was arbitrary and irrational for the reason "... that by evaluating the strength of only one party's evidence, no logical conclusion can be reached regarding the strength of contrary evidence offered by the other side to rebut or cast doubt."41
On June 26, 2006, the Supreme Court narrowly upheld the death penalty in Kansas in a 5-4 decision which reversed the Kansas Supreme Court and ruled that the Kansas' death penalty statute does not violate the Eighth or Fourteenth Amendments when it allows imposition of the penalty should the jury determine that the aggravating and mitigating factors are of equal weight.
Marsh was convicted of capital murder, first-degree premeditated murder, and aggravated arson and burglary stemming from the deaths of Mary Anne Pasch and her 19-month-old daughter. The jury sentenced Marsh to death after finding the existence of three aggravating circumstances that were not outweighed by the mitigating circumstances. Marsh appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial court had erred in excluding, based on state law, his evidence connecting the woman's husband to the crime.43
During the time that Marsh's appeal was pending, the Kansas Supreme Court held in State v. Lepas that Kansas' death penalty statute – under which Marsh had been sentenced – was unconstitutional because it mandated a sentence of death when the aggravating and mitigating circumstances offset and counterbalanced each other.44 The court held that the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Walton v. Arizona,45 was not controlling because Arizona did not impose the death penalty when there was a tie between the aggravating and mitigating circumstances.46 Notwithstanding, the Kansas Supreme Court attempted to salvage the death penalty in the Claps case by reconstructing the Kansas statute so that equipoise would not mandate the death penalty by construing it to mean that the aggravating circumstance(s) must "outweigh any mitigating circumstances found to exist" before capital punishment may be imposed.47
When Marsh appealed his death sentence in 2004, the Kansas Supreme Court held that its attempt to rewrite the language of the statute was in error because the process used to select which defendants are sentenced to death does not comport with the fundamental respect for humanity underlying the Eighth Amendment. The Kansas Supreme Court held that there was "no way" that Kansas' weighing equation is permissible under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.48
Justice Thomas, writing for the 5-4 majority, said "our precedents establish that a state enjoys a range of discretion in imposing the death penalty...."49 The decision reversed the Kansas Supreme Court decision which held that the law violated the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual punishment. In upholding the Kansas statute, the U.S. Supreme Court cited Walton v. Arizona.50 In Walton, the Court held that a state death penalty statute may give the defendant the burden to prove that mitigating circumstances outweigh aggravating circumstances.51 Finding that Walton controlled , the Court reasoned that the Kansas' death penalty statute may constitutionally direct imposition of the death penalty when the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that mitigating circumstances do not outweigh aggravating circumstances, even when they are of equal weight.52 Even if Walton did not directly control, the Court stated, a state has a range of discretion in imposing the death penalty, including how the aggravating and mitigating circumstances are weighed, as long as the state system satisfies the requirements of Fermion v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia.53 The Court reasoned that the use of mitigation evidence is a product of the requirement of individualized sentencing.54 The Court also found that the Kansas death penalty statute rationally narrows the class of death-eligible defendants and allows a jury to consider any mitigating evidence that is relevant to its sentencing determination.55
Justice Souter, with Justices Stevens, Ginsberg, and Breyer joining, issued a dissenting opinion.56 Justice Shouter noted that the Kansas statute would lead to death sentences in doubtful cases and "is obtuse by any moral or social measure."57
Justice Souter agrees with the Kansas Supreme Court that essentially, the Eighth Amendment forbids a mandatory death penalty in "doubtful cases," and that this is precisely what the Kansas statute does ( that is, a case where mitigating factors equally balance aggravating factors is a "doubtful case" in Justice Shouters estimation)58. Justice Souter's concern is that in such a case, which he calls a tie, the tiebreaker has nothing to do with the details of the crime or any facts about the defendant, but that the statute presents mandatory death as the tiebreaker.59 Justice Souter is troubled by this in light of the fact that the past decade has shown DNA test exonerating numerous death row defendants.60 Citing the experience of Illinois, Justice Souter's dissent noted that 13 deathrow inmates were released between 1977 and 2000, triggering a state moratorium on executions, and referred to studies that he said, showed that dozens of death row inmates in other states were wrongly convicted.61 Justice Scalia said the studies that Justice Souter cited are factually inaccurate, because many of the inmates they list as innocent were not exonerated but were released for technical legal reasons.62
On February 22, 2006, the Supreme Court in an 8-0 decision (Justice Alito not participating), ruled that Oregon courts are not required to allow the defendant to introduce new alibi evidence pertaining to his innocence at the sentencing phase of the trial.64 Two Justices, Scalia and Thomas, concurred in the result but would have recognized a state right to bar all residual doubt of guilty evidence from sentencing proceedings.65
Oregon tried Guzek, who was 18 at the time he was convicted, for the offense of capital murder. The evidence showed that Guzek and two associates decided to burglarize the Houser family home. After entering the home, an associate killed Rod Houser, and Guzek then robbed and killed Lois Houser. After the police learned that Guzek held a special grudge against the Housers, they traced and apprehended him and his associates. The associates confessed and testified at trial, painting Guzek as the ring leader.
Guzek's defense during the penalty phase of this trial rested in part upon an alibi. He presented two alibi witnesses, his grandfather and his mother, who testified that Guzek had been with one or the other at the time of the crime. The jury, disbelieving the alibi, sentenced him to death.
Guzek appealed and the Oregon Supreme Court affirmed the conviction; but the court ordered a new sentencing proceeding.66 Guzek was again sentenced to death; he again appealed; and the Oregon Supreme Court again ordered re-sentencing.67 Guzek was sentenced to death for the third time; he again appealed; and again the Oregon Supreme Court found the sentencing procedures faulty.68 Seeking to avoid further errors at the next (the fourth) sentencing proceeding, the Oregon Supreme Court also addressed the admissibility of certain evidence Guzek sought to introduce at that proceeding, including live testimony from his mother concerning his alibi.69
The Oregon Supreme Court held that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments provide Guzek a federal constitutional right to introduce this evidence at his upcoming sentencing proceeding.70 At the State's (Oregon) request, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review that issue under certiorari.71
During the sentencing phase of Guzek's trial, the defense tried to introduce witness testimony – "findings of fact" – that placed him away from the murder scene. The defense called this "mitigating evidence" designed to spare Guzek from lethal injection. Different courts have disagreed on whether it was actually "alibi evidence" that applied directly to whether a defendant was guilty and should have been presented during the guilt or innocence phase of the trial.72
The Supreme Court ruled that Oregon courts are not required to allow the defendant to introduce new alibi evidence pertaining to his innocence at the sentencing phase of the trial. The Court reasoned that states may put reasonable limits on the evidence a defendant may present.73 Particularly at the sentencing phase, when the question is not whether the defendant committed the crime but how,74 and since the issue of innocence had already been litigated, and the state law allows the defendant to present evidence of his innocence in the form of transcripts from his original trial by a jury, the Oregon court did not have to hear Guzek's additional evidence of innocence.75
Justices Scalia and Thomas concurred in the result but lamented that the Court had failed to take advantage of "the opportunity to put to rest, once and for all, the mistaken notion that the Eighth Amendment requires that a convicted capital defendant be given the opportunity, at his sentencing hearing, to present evidence and argument concerning residual doubts about his guilt."76 Justice Alito took no part in the case.77
On January 11, 2006, the Court in a 5-4 decision affirmed Sanders' death sentence and refined its death penalty jurisprudence by establishing a new rule: "an invalidated sentencing factor (whether an eligibility factor or not) will render the sentence unconstitutional by reason of its adding an improper element to the aggravation scale in the weighing process unless one of other sentencing factors enables the sentencer to give aggravating weight to the same facts and circumstances."79
Sanders was convicted of first-degree murder, attempted murder, robbery, burglary, and attempted robbery. The jury, at the guilt phase of his trial, found four "special circumstances" under California law, each of which independently rendered him eligible for the death penalty: (1) murder committed during the course of a robbery; (2) murder committed in the course of a burglary; (3) murder committed to prevent a witness from testifying; and (4) murder committed in an "especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel" manner.80 At the penalty phase, the jury was instructed to consider a list of sentencing factors relating to the petitioner's background and the nature of the crime including "the circumstances of the crime to which the defendant was convicted in the present proceeding and the existence of any special circumstances found to be true."81 The jury sentenced the defendant to death. The California Supreme Court, on direct appeal, set aside two of the four "special circumstances": the burglary-murder special circumstance under state merger law, and the "heinous, atrocious, or cruel" special circumstance because it had previously found this standard unconstitutionally vague.82 However, it affirmed the death sentence, referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Zant v. Stephens to uphold a death sentence decision despite the invalidation of two of several aggravating factors.83 The Supreme Court denied cert on direct appeal.84
Sanders then filed for federal habeas, which was denied at the district court level. The Ninth Circuit reversed, concluding that the California court had misapplied Zant, which is only applicable to non-weighing states, in upholding the verdict despite the invalidity of two of the special circumstances, because two others remained.85 It determined California to be a weighing state, and applied the Court's decision in Stringer v. Black to mean that California courts could only uphold the death sentence by finding the jury's use of the invalidated special circumstances to be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt or by independently reweighing the factors.86
The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's decision and held that no new trial was constitutionally required.87 The Court established the rule that a jury's consideration and finding of an invalid sentencing factor taints any death verdict unless the same facts and circumstances evidence a valid sentencing factor also found by the jury.88 The Court said that the existing valid aggravating factors which fit the description of the invalid factors were sufficient and therefore Sanders' death sentence was not "skewed" and neither did the invalid factors narrow the field "... of aggravating facts the jury was entitled to consider in determining sentence."89
Justice Scalia, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice O'Connor, Kennedy, and Thomas, delivered the opinion of the Court. Justices Stevens and Souter dissented because they felt the majority's announcement of a new standard inappropriately complicated the law in the area.90 Justices Breyer and Ginsberg dissented because they felt that in some situations impressing upon the jury that the facts and circumstances supported an invalid finding would taint the process even if the same facts and circumstances also supported and resulted in a valid finding.91
Hill v. McDonough, 126 S. Ct.2096 (2006); House v. Bell, 126 S.Ct. 2064 (2006); Holmes v. South Carolina, 126 S. Ct.1727 (2006).
Oregon v. Guzek, 126 S. Ct. 1226 (2006); Kansas v. Marsh, 126 S. Ct. 2516 (2006); Brown v. Sanders, 126 S. Ct. 884 (2006).
126 S. Ct. 2096 (2006).
Hill v. Crosby, 437 F.3d 1084, 1085 (11th Cir. 2006).
126 S. Ct. at 2101-2102.
Id. at 2102.
Id. at 2103.
Id. at 2104.
126 S. Ct. 2064 (2006).
Id. at 2077-2078.
513 U.S. 298 (1995) cited at 126 S. Ct. 2076-2077 (Justice Kennedy's majority opinion said that House's case fits under the rule announced in the 1995 case Schlop v. Delo which stated that innocence claims should reopen appeals if, in light of new evidence, "it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have found the petitioner guilty").
House v. Bell, 386 F.3d 668, 707-709 (6th Cir. 2004).
126 S.Ct. at 2087.
Id. at 2086-87.
506 U.S. 390, 417 (1993)("We may assume, for the sake of argument in deciding this case, that in a capital case a truly persuasive demonstration of 'actual innocence' made after trial would render the execution of a defendant unconstitutional, and warrant federal habeas relief if there were no state avenue open to process such a claim. . . . .[T]he threshold showing for such an assumed right would necessarily be extraordinarily high. The showing made by petitioner in this case falls far short of any such threshold").
Id. at 417-19.
Id. at 419, 427 (O'Connor and Kennedy, JJ. concurring).
126 S.Ct. at 2076-2077.
Id. at 2077.
Id. at 2087.
Id. at 2086-87.
Id. at 2087.
Id. at 2092-2094.
Id. at 2093.
Id. at 2087. ("The question is not whether House was prejudiced at his trial because the jurors were not aware of the new evidence, but whether all the evidence, considered together, proves that House was actually innocent, so that no reasonable juror would vote to convict him.")
126 S. Ct. 1727 (2006).
Id. at 1730-731.
State v. Gregory, 198 S.C. 98, 104, 16 S.E.2d 532, 534 (1941).
State v. Gay, 343 S.C. 543, 541 S.E.2d 541 (2001).
State v. Holmes, 361 S.C. 333, 342-43, 605 S.E.2d 19, 24 (2004).
Holmes v. South Carolina, 126 S.Ct.34 (2005).
126 S.Ct. at 1728.
Id. at 1728-1729 (internal citations omitted).
I.e., United States v. Schaefer, 523 U.S. 303 (1998); Rock v. Arkansas, 483 U.S. 44 (1987); Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683 (1986); Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1973); Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14 (1967).
Id. at 1735.
126 S. Ct. 2516 (2006).
Id. at 2520-521.
State v. Claps, 272 An. 894, 899-903, 40 P.3d 139, 166-67 (2001). The Kansas statute (An. Stat. Ann. §21-4624(e)) provided that juries should sentence a defendant to die – rather than serve life in prison – when the evidence for and against imposing death were equal.
497 U.S. 639, 649-51 (1990), overruled on other grounds, Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002)(upholding Arizona's death penalty statute that burdened the defendant with establishing mitigating evidence sufficient to justify leniency once the state has established an aggravating factor).
272 An. at 1006-1007, 40 P.3d at 226.
272 An. at 1018, 40 P.3d at 234.
278 An. at 534-45, 102 P.3d at 457-64.
126 S. Ct. at 2525.
Id. at 2522, citing Walton v. Arizona 497 US 639 at 645.
Id. at 2523.
Id. at 2524.
Id. at 2519, citing, Fermion v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972) and Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976).
Id. at 2523.
Id. at 2526.
Id. at 2541 (Souter, Stevens, Ginsberg and Breyer, JJ. dissenting).
Id. at 2546.
Id. at 2543.
Id. at 2542
Id at 2544.
Id at 2544-2545.
Id at 2531-2535.
126 S. Ct. 1226 (2006).
Id. at 1230-231.
Id. at 1233-234 (Scalia and Thomas, JJ. dissenting).
State v. Guzek, 310 Ore. 299, 307, 797 P.2d 1031, 1036 (1990).
State v. Guzek, 322 Ore. 245, 271, 906 P.2d 272, 287 (1995).
State v. Guzek, 336 Ore. 424, 464, 86 P.3d 1106, 1129 (2004).
336 Ore. at 456-63, 86 P.3d at 1124-128.
Oregon v. Guzek, 544 U.S. 998 (2005).
Justice Scalia's concurrence lists a series of state and lower federal court cases that had held that a capital defendant had no right to offer at sentencing mitigation evidence of residual doubt as to his guilt, 126 S.Ct. at 1234 (Scalia and Thomas, JJ. dissenting), citing, Zeigler v. Crosby, 345 F.3d 1300, 1310 (11th Cir. 2003); Evans v. Thompson, 881 F.2d 117, 121 (4th Cir. 1989); Duest v. State, 855 So.2d 33, 40-41 (Fla.2003); Commonwealth v. Fisher, 572 Pa. 105, 115-116, 813 A.2d 761, 767 (2002); People v. Emerson, 189 Ill.2d 436, 501-504, 245 Ill.Dec. 49, 727 N.E.2d 302, 338-339 (2000); State v. Fletcher, 354 N.C. 455, 470-472, 555 S.E.2d 534, 544 (2001); Melson v. State, 775 So.2d 857, 898-899 (Ala.Crim.App.1999).
126 S.Ct.at 1232.
Id. at 1233.
Id. at 1233 (Scalia and Thomas, JJ. concurring in the judgment).
Id. at 1233.
126 S. Ct. 884 (2006).
Id. at 892 (emphasis in the original).
Id. at 893.
Id. at 888.
People v. Sanders, 51 Cal.3d 471, 515-20, 273 Cal.Rptr. 537, 563-65, 797 P.3d 561, 587-99 (1990).
51 Cal.3d at 520-21, 273 Cal.Rptr. at 565-66, 797 P.3d at 589-90.
Sanders v. California, 500 U.S. 948 (1991).
Sanders v. Woodford, 373 F.3d 1054, 1062-67 (9th Cir. 2004).
126 S.Ct. at 894.
Or to repeat the words of the Court, "[a]n invalidated sentencing factor (whether an eligibility factor or not) will render the sentence unconstitutional by reason of its adding an improper element to the aggravation scale in the weighing process unless one of the other sentencing factors enables the sentencer to give aggravating weight to the same facts and circumstances." Id. at 892.
126 S. Ct. at 892-893.
Id. at 895-96 (Stevens and Shouter, JJ. dissenting).
Id. at 903 (Brewer and Ginsberg, JJ. dissenting)("the problem before us is not a problem of admissibility of evidence. It is a problem of the emphasis given that evidence by the State or the trial court. If that improper emphasis is strong enough, it can wrongly place a thumb on death's side of the scale").


text:
Forbidden Zuran Magic (Ice Age only)
by Tremere
Undead Jungle 2.0 (All Common)
by Tremere
Boros Legion [Guilds Block Series]
by Zalbor
Grixis Pirates Aggro
by theologos
Skyshroud Alarm
by ZuranSorcerer
elemental lorwyn block constructed
by jovensferrets
Slivers (Time Spiral Block Constructed)
by CatwizardOfTheIzmagnus
Drove of коров
by MichaelDoumin
Planebound Nicol Bolas God Pharoah
by planeboundmtg
Block Theros
by ellitbo
by FireFish
Dinosaur Clash
by ThePenguinTesseract
KCI Combo Mirrodin Block
by PedroYup
KLD Constructed - Additional Pylons
by Neonate
Snowy Elves
by Tremere
Heroic intervention
by gdesimone
Darkness for all
by gdesimone
SOI Constructed - Of Skaabs n' Ghouls
by Neonate
SOI Constructed - Dronepack Hunts
by Neonate
Monks of Tarkir
by GvilleDoctor
KLD Constructed - কলিকাতা) Rush Hour
by Neonate
Block Decks: SOI Mono-Black Vampires V2
by Rez09
Aurelia's Peacekeeping
by thedarkpwner
BFZ Constructed - Ulamog's Mindmelt
by Neonate
Flying Servos
by Ameba_Da_King
SOI Constructed - A Swamp Makes for a Slimy Grave
by Neonate
Limited samurais from kamigawa
by TheOverall
Block Decks: SOI Blue/Black Zombies
by Rez09
Lorwyn Kithkins
by Llanowarrior
The Enlighten Legion
by Se7enfoot
spirit craft
by SteelLotus
The League
by ezeglace
Block constructed with 2,36 $
by DP87
Frost-burn Snow Raiders
by ellitbo
Cumulative Flyers
by ellitbo
With a Vengence
by CloudScorpion
Kamigawa arcane
by SweViceroy
quillspike and friends
by tyran424
Soul Sister / Angel Factory
by tyran424
The House
by ezeglace
Abzan Budget Block Constructed KTK (W.I.P.)
by Mandrakon
DOM - WU - Control
by RepoBt
Karn, Scion of Urza // artifact // Block Dominaria
by Milysan
Block Decks: SOI red/black Vampires
by Rez09
DOM - WR - Valduk
by RepoBt
Gentlemen, Start Your Engines!
by OldloratH
Swarm Surge From Beyond
by Enitofu
Pitiless Plunder
by AGothicWaltz
Coalition Victory
by Pajchi
Block Decks: SOI Blue/Red Homunculus
by Rez09
my first standard deck from back when...
by Terranlord
Don't Get All Sappy
by CharlesChinigan
Magic the Gathering, FNM is TM and copyright Wizards of the Coast, Inc, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc. All rights reserved. This site is unaffiliated. Articles and comments are user-submitted and do not represent official endorsements of this site.
This site © 2020 TappedOut.net, LLC
Contact |
Feeds |
Help |
Terms of Use |
Privacy statement |
DMCA requests |
Discord Server |
TappedOut.js Blog Widget

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
2018 Top 10 Lifers b… on Do You Wanna See Doñana? Serranía and Salt |… on ShelduckTales Do You Wanna See Doñ… on Greenshanks Was My Deligh… The Music of the Nig… on The Wonder of Woodcocks The Music of the Nig… on Simply Superb
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
Tag Archives: phoebe
California Dreamin'
I welcome any excuse to take a break from the regular routine and get away for a little while. It's even better when the invitation to escape includes cause for celebration. Earlier this year, I received a "save the date" … Continue reading
Posted in Nature Tagged animals, bay area, binoculars, biology, birding, BIRDS, bluebird, bushtit, california, camera, central valley, chickadee, college, coyote, earth, ecology, environment, fair oaks, food, friends, garden valley, goldfinch, hawk, hummingbird, jay, junco, kite, life, magpie, marriage, mountain view, NATURE, palo alto, phainopepla, phoebe, photography, pigeon, research, sacramento, san francisco, school, science, scrub-jay, sparrow, titmouse, towhee, turkey, USA, vineyard, warbler, wedding, west coast, WILDLIFE, wine, winery, woodpecker, wren Leave a comment
Birding in September
The first long weekend of the school year is always cause for celebration. With Thursday and Friday off from work, I was especially excited to get out into the field. For one thing, my camera was back in one piece … Continue reading
Posted in Nature Tagged animals, autumn, beach, binoculars, biology, birding, camera, dowitcher, earth, ecology, environment, falcon, fall, flicker, grosbeak, gull, harrier, hawk, Jones Beach, kestrel, life, Long Island, merlin, migration, nassau, NATURE, New York, OCEAN, pelican, peregrine, phoebe, photography, research, robert moses, school, science, scope, USA, warbler, whimbrel, WILDLIFE 1 Comment
The Nighthawk Cometh
I like to keep tabs on my many friends scattered about the planet. A number of my scientist buddies from college lead interesting lives full of research and adventure, so I get to live vicariously through their stories even when … Continue reading
Posted in Nature Tagged animals, basking ridge, beaver, binoculars, bird, birding, camera, Cornell, crayfish, dam, earth, environment, flycatcher, frog, gecko, great swamp, grosbeak, kingbird, life, lily pad, Long Island, lord stirling park, may, morris, NATURE, new jersey, New York, nighthawk, nightjar, oriole, owl, phoebe, photography, raptor trust, rare, rba, research, science, scope, snake, somerset, sparrow, spring, tanager, USA, vinegaroon, warbler, waxwing, WILDLIFE, woodcock, wren 2 Comments
Surviving the Doldrums
March is not my favorite month. It's a challenging time for a New York naturalist, caught in between seasons without the excitement of either winter or spring. On top of that, it is the only month of the year with no … Continue reading
Posted in Nature Tagged animals, april, binoculars, bird, birding, blackbird, bluebird, breath of the wild, bryant park, bufflehead, camera, coot, crossbill, crow, deer park, duck, earth, ebird, edgewood oak brush plains preserve, EDUCATION, environment, finch, goshawk, great horned owl, grebe, jay, Jones Beach, life, Long Island, loon, Manhattan, march, massapequa, merganser, migration, muscovy, muskrat, nassau, nyc, oak beach, osprey, owl, phoebe, photography, pine, plover, raven, redhead, scaup, school, science, scope, screech-owl, sparrow, spring, suffolk, teaching, teal, texas, vagrant, warbler, wood duck, yellowlegs, zelda 1 Comment


text:
Ontario Parks Association (OPA), established in 1936, is a registered charitable organization whose focus is on Protecting Tomorrow Today®. Through our work as advocates for our parks and open spaces and the training we provide to parks professionals in Ontario, we are helping to preserve our living green infrastructure assets for future generations. OPA is a proud member of the Green Infrastructure Ontario Coalition.
All OPA in-class training sessions have been postponed until after September 1, 2020 due to COVID-19. If you were scheduled to attend a training session, please check your email for further details. Please be sure to watch your email for notices of online training sessions!
Please note that our office will be closed until further notice, with staff working remotely during this time. Please contact us by email if you have any questions or concerns.
Contact Us
Ontario Parks Association
Office Hours: Monday to Friday, 8:30 am to 4:00 pm
Paul Ronan
Keely Powley
Social Media, Events & Membership
905-864-6182 ext. 6730
Keely Powley


text:
$19.00 - $23.00 hourlyProperty Organised Ltd Arrowtown
Seasonal Landscapers, Maintenance gardeners Property Organised is an Arrowtown based landscape and gardening company. We are looking for keen, hardworking girls and guys to join our landscape and garden maintenance teams for the summer season. Experience is preferred but a willingness to learn is more important. The roles are physically demanding and require a good level of fitness. To apply you will need a current driver's license, be able to drive a manual vehicle, have a current work visa and be able to commit for six months. You must have transport to start work in Arrowtown. August to October start dates through until May/June If you are looking for varied outdoor work and have great attention to detail then email your application to: firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
He was using the stop fooling around voice, so I gave him as truthful an answer as I could. "I had a bad dream. I wanted some air."
"And so you just rushed out. Breaking the rules didn't even cross your mind - and neither did putting on a coat."
"Yeah," I said. "That pretty much sums it up."
"Rose, Rose." This time it was his exasperated voice. "You never change. Always jumping in without thinking."
"That's not true," I protested. "I've changed a lot."
The amusement on his face suddenly faded, his expression growing troubled. He studied me for several moments. Sometimes I felt as though those eyes could see right into my soul. "You're right. You have changed."
He didn't seem very happy about the admission. He was probably thinking about what had happened almost three weeks ago, when some friends and I had gotten ourselves captured by Strigoi. It was only through sheer luck that we'd managed to escape - and not all of us had gotten out. Mason, a good friend and a guy who'd been crazy about me, had been killed, and part of me would never forgive myself for it, even though I'd killed his murderers.
It had given me a darker outlook on life. Well, it had given everyone here at St. Vladimir's Academy a darker outlook, but me especially. Others had begun to notice the difference in me. I didn't like to see Dimitri concerned, though, so I played off his observation with a joke.
"Well, don't worry. My birthday's coming up. As soon as I'm eighteen, I'll be an adult, right? I'm sure I'll wake up that morning and be all mature and stuff."
As I'd hoped, his frown softened into a small smile. "Yes, I'm sure. What is it, about a month?"
"Thirty-one days," I announced primly.
"Not that you're counting."
I shrugged, and he laughed.
"I suppose you've made a birthday list too. Ten pages? Single-spaced? Ranked by order of priority?" The smile was still on his face. It was one of the relaxed, genuinely amused ones that were so rare to him.
I started to make another joke, but the image of Lissa and Christian flared into my mind again. That sad and empty feeling in my stomach returned. Anything I might have wanted - new clothes, an iPod, whatever - suddenly seemed trivial. What did material things like that mean compared to the one thing I wanted most of all? God, I really had changed.
"No," I said in a small voice. "No list."
He tilted his head to better look at me, making some of his shoulder-length hair blow into his face. His hair was brown, like mine, but not nearly as dark. Mine looked black at times. He brushed the unruly strands aside, only to have them immediately blow back into his face. "I can't believe you don't want anything. It's going to be a boring birthday."
Freedom, I thought. That was the only gift I longed for. Freedom to make my own choices. Freedom to love who I wanted.
"It doesn't matter," I said instead.
"What do you - " He stopped. He understood. He always did. It was part of why we connected like we did, in spite of the seven-year gap in our ages. We'd fallen for each other last fall when he'd been my combat instructor. As things heated up between us, we'd found we had more things to worry about than just age. We were both going to be protecting Lissa when she graduated, and we couldn't let our feelings for each other distract us when she was our priority.
Of course, that was easier said than done because I didn't think our feelings for each other were ever really going to go away. We'd both had moments of weakness, moments that led to stolen kisses or saying things we really shouldn't have. After I'd escaped the Strigoi, Dimitri had told me he loved me and had pretty much admitted he could never be with anyone else because of that. Yet, it had also become clear that we still couldn't be together either, and we had both slipped back into our old roles of keeping away from each other and pretending that our relationship was strictly professional.
In a not-so-obvious attempt to change the subject, he said, "You can deny it all you want, but I know you're freezing. Let's go inside. I'll take you in through the back."
I couldn't help feeling a little surprised. Dimitri was rarely one to avoid uncomfortable subjects. In fact, he was notorious for pushing me into conversations about topics I didn't want to deal with. But talking about our dysfunctional, star-crossed relationship? That was a place he apparently didn't want to go today. Yeah. Things were definitely changing.
"I think you're the one who's cold," I teased, as we walked around the side of the dorm where novice guardians lived. "Shouldn't you be all tough and stuff, since you're from Siberia?"
"I don't think Siberia's exactly what you imagine."
"I imagine it as an arctic wasteland," I said truthfully.
"Then it's definitely not what you imagine."
"Do you miss it?" I asked, glancing back to where he walked behind me. It was something I'd never considered before. In my mind, everyone would want to live in the U.S. Or, well, they at least wouldn't want to live in Siberia.
"All the time," he said, his voice a little wistful. "Sometimes I wish - "
A voice was carried on the wind from behind us. Dimitri muttered something, and then shoved me further around the corner I'd just rounded. "Stay out of sight."
I ducked down behind a bank of holly trees that flanked the building. They didn't have any berries, but the thick clusters of sharp, pointed leaves scratched where my skin was exposed. Considering the freezing temperature and possible discovery of my late-night walk, a few scratches were the least of my problems right now.
"You're not on watch," I heard Dimitri say several moments later.
"No, but I needed to talk to you." I recognized the voice. It belonged to Alberta, captain of the Academy's guardians. "It'll just take a minute. We need to shuffle some of the watches while you're at the trial."
"I figured," he said. There was a funny, almost uncomfortable note in his voice. "It's going to put a strain on everyone else - bad timing."
"Yes, well, the queen runs on her own schedule." Alberta sounded frustrated, and I tried to figure out what was going on. "Celeste will take your watches, and she and Emil will divide up your training times."
Training times? Dimitri wouldn't be conducting any trainings next week because - Ah. That was it, I realized. The field experience. Tomorrow kicked off six weeks of hands-on practice for us novices. We'd have no classes and would get to protect Moroi night and day while the adults tested us. The "training times" must be when Dimitri would be out participating in that. But what was this trial she'd mentioned? Did they mean like the final trials we had to undergo at the end of the school year?
"They say they don't mind the extra work," continued Alberta, "but I was wondering if you could even things out and take some of their shifts before you leave?"
"Absolutely," he said, words still short and stiff.
"Thanks. I think that'll help." She sighed. "I wish I knew how long this trial was going to be. I don't want to be away that long. You'd think it'd be a done deal with Dashkov, but now I hear the queen's getting cold feet about imprisoning a major royal."
I stiffened. The chill running through me now had nothing to do with the winter day. Dashkov?
"I'm sure they'll do the right thing," said Dimitri. I realized at that moment why he wasn't saying much. This wasn't something I was supposed to hear.
"I hope so. And I hope it'll only take a few days, like they claim. Look, it's miserable out here. Would you mind coming into the office for a second to look at the schedule?"
"Sure," he said. "Let me check on something first."
"All right. See you soon."
Silence fell, and I had to assume Alberta was walking away. Sure enough, Dimitri rounded the corner and stood in front of the holly. I shot up from my hiding spot. The look on his face told me he already knew what was coming.
"Rose - "


text:
December 21, 2009
There'll be nowhere to run from the new world government: 'Global' thinking won't necessarily solve the world's problems (Janet Daley, 12/19/09, Daily Telegraph)
The dangerous idea that the democratic accountability of national governments should simply be dispensed with in favour of "global agreements" reached after closed negotiations between world leaders never, so far as I recall, entered into the arena of public discussion. Except in the United States, where it became a very contentious talking point, the US still holding firmly to the 18th-century idea that power should lie with the will of the people.Posted by Orrin Judd at December 21, 2009 6:44 AM
Nor was much consideration given to the logical conclusion of all this grandiose talk of global consensus as unquestionably desirable: if there was no popular choice about approving supranational "legally binding agreements", what would happen to dissenters who did not accept their premises (on climate change, for example) when there was no possibility of fleeing to another country in protest? Was this to be regarded as the emergence of world government? And would it have powers of policing and enforcement that would supersede the authority of elected national governments? In effect, this was the infamous "democratic deficit" of the European Union elevated on to a planetary scale. And if the EU model is anything to go by, then the agencies of global authority will involve vast tracts of power being handed to unelected officials. Forget the relatively petty irritations of Euro‑bureaucracy: welcome to the era of Earth-bureaucracy, when there will be literally nowhere to run.


text:
Hvid Blanket Bonnie – Otter
Regular price
On Sale
Brand: Hvid
Light knit blanket in pop-corn stitch from Hvid.
Ideal for summer. Merino wool has the property that it cools your baby when it is warm and heats up when it is cold. Perfect for warm days and cool evenings.
Product details:
Color: Otter.
Size: 70 x 95cm.
Material: 100% merinowool.
Made in Belgium.
Washing instruction: machine: ONLY COLD WOOLWASH, low speed, no tumbledry OR wash by hand(cold).


text:
Burna Boy Ye Video Download
Nigerian Afrofusion singer and songwriter, Burna Boy currently signed on to Spaceship Entertainment presents the musical video for the record YE off the Outside Album
Since dropping his "Outside" album on the 26th of January, Burna Boy has enjoyed a lot of success; from selling out every stop on his 'Life on the Outside' #loto US tour to 'Ye' rising to the top of a number of music charts globally. Currently, the artiste is shooting the video for "Ye" , which is a fan's favourite from the album.
The "Ye" video is everything you imagine it will be when you listen to the song. Burna Boy is completely in his element, bringing his famous energy as well as his tough-as-nails attitude to the screen.
Following "Heaven's Gate" and "Devil in California" , "Ye" will be the third video from the 'Outside' album.
Watch the video below.
- Selebobo ft. Tekno – Ova
- Zlatan – Quilox
- DJ Neptune Ft. Victor AD – Tomorrow
- JerryClef ft. Bella Shmurda, Mohbad – Miscreant
- Fiokee x Teni x DJ Coublon – Osan
- Qdot – Jaiye (prod. 2T Boyz)
- Yung L – Tropicana Baby
- Kuami Eugene – Turn Up
- Danny S – Jamisi
- A-Reece – In Hi$ Image
- Dremo Ft. Zlatan – Chairman Remix
- Peruzzi – Gunshot
- Mayorkun – Geng (Prod. By Que)
- Danny Spenza Ft. Davolee – Nobody


text:
Purdue Hosts Wisconsin For Hammer Down Cancer Game
WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. – Purdue (10-9, 3-5) ends a brief two-game homestand when Wisconsin visits Mackey Arena for a Friday night battle. Brandon Gaudin and Stephen Bardo will handle the broadcast on FS1, beginning at 7 p.m. ET. On the radio, Rob Blackman, Larry Clisby and Ralph Taylor will have the call courtside on the Purdue Radio Network and TuneIn.com, beginning with the Purdue Basketball Pregame Show at 6 p.m. ET. Live stats will be available on PurdueSports.com.
• Purdue owns a 109-71 series advantage with Wisconsin, including a 13-9 record under Coach Painter. This is the first of two meetings between the teams as Purdue will return a trip to Madison Feb. 18.
• As part of Coaches vs. Cancer week by the NABC, Purdue will be wearing special Hammer Down Cancer jerseys that will be auctioned off. Proceeds will go to the Tyler Trent Endowment Fund, associated with the Purdue Center for Cancer Research.
• With 12 regular-season games left, 11 of Purdue's 12 opponents are either nationally-ranked or receiving votes.
• SOMETHING TO WATCH: Two very similar teams will face off Friday night in Mackey Arena. Purdue has scored five more points (1,284 to 1,279) on the season and allowed three fewer points (1,149 to 1,152), both coming in 19 games. KenPom predicts a mere 58 possessions in the contest, the same number of possessions that Purdue and Virginia had on Dec. 4.
• Purdue is hoping to return to its form at Mackey Arena from its previous 15-game Big Ten winning streak before Illinois snapped it. The Boilermakers are averaging 75.9 points per game at Mackey Arena, and have shot at least 41.0 percent in nine of 10 home games. In nine games away from Mackey Arena, the Boilermakers have shot over 41.0 percent just once (Ohio).
• In Purdue's three Big Ten wins, the Boilermakers average 70.7 points per game and shoot 42.4 percent from the field and 34.8 percent from deep. In five losses, Purdue is averaging 56.6 points and shoot 34.5 percent from the field and 21.9 percent from deep. In the losses, the Boilermakers average just 8.0 assists per game.
• Purdue is 9-0 this year and 29-1 since the start of last year when shooting a higher field goal percentage than its opponent. The lone loss came to Virginia in last year's Elite Eight.


text:
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has scheduled the hearing of the case related to reservations in promotions for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes categories on 3 August, while The Top Court has refused to pass an interim order against its 2006 verdict which dealt with the application of the 'creamy layer' for reservations to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes categories in government job promotions.
On Thursday, Over 1,000 people, under the banner of Delhi Equality Forum hold out a candle march from patel chowk to Parliament. The protesters were stopped by the police at Parliament Street where they staged a protest for some time and Protesters also let their voices be heard through some ingenious slogans and banners.
Speaking to Ten News Protesters said,
"India is rising to stop discrimination and stop the misuse of the constitutional powers for securing power. We are Thousands of employees are holding candle march under the Banner of delhi equality forum to implement the 23.07.2017 high court orders against reservation in Promotion."
"Reservation in jobs weren't enough that they chose to apply the same to promotions too. Reservation in promotions has been a debatable and gives added advantage to SC STs by way of accelerated promotion over open category," Protesters added.


text:
24 People Whose Habits Drive Us Crazy
Do you get irritated when a waiter takes away your plate before you finish eating or when someone covers the seat in front of you with their hair? And how about people leaving food in non-food parts of the supermarket, or leaving spoons in salad bowls? Sometimes, it seems as if people do these things on purpose.
Bright Side has made a new compilation of 24 photos about people's weird habits. You'll see that you are not alone and that other people hate these things too.
"If you do this, especially with people sitting in front of you, you are absolutely terrible."
Maybe leggings should be banned?
"Server came and took his plate... while he was still eating."
"One socket will do just fine..."
"My girlfriend complains that I always want to buy the same shoes, meanwhile..."
This door opens directly off a cliff.
This woman, taking 2 seats without even using either of them.
It must have taken him a long time to prepare this speech.
"The house across the road from me shut their window with the curtain sticking out."
This guy that took up 4 parking spaces
"Most terrifying bathroom experience I've ever had"
This guy on the plane
"My coworker leaves the spoon like this every time she uses it."
"How my roommate has been using the aluminum foil for the last week..."
"My wife bought the wrong size screen protector weeks ago and it doesn't seem to bother her. Me on the other hand..."
Don't be like her.
"My fish burger. I really want to talk to the chef."
"I just noticed that neither the mirror, nor the lighting fixture are centered with the sink faucet in this hotel room."
People who open packages incorrectly
"My office put out muffins and someone committed a selfish crime."
When people do this... Why?
When people leave items in the wrong aisle:
"My mom eats fries, but not the tips..."
"Passed by this massacre on my way into Walmart. Somebody had a terrible time putting their groceries in the car."
Which annoying habits really irritate you? Tell us in the comment section below!
Preview photo credit unesbuzz, espacio360, reddit, heavy


text: Our new office 13th February Share This week we moved in to our new office in Burder's Barn, we are still on site at the Bridgend Rehoming centre but now share an office with our Wales Campaign team, Dog School and Educational officer. Here is a picture of my colleagues from the Campaigns department, Campaign manager for Wales, Rachel Burr, Veterinary nurse Malcolm Stagg and Campaigns Officer Kirsty Britton. As part of Dogs Trust community team , they travel Wales promoting Responsible Dog Ownership, Microchipping, Neutering and health checks in Local community events as well as national campaigns to highlight Puppy Smuggling and Puppy farming. As Supporter Relations Officer, myself and Linda work along side our Campaigns team in the community, being a point of contact at the Bridgend Centre for our supporters or to talk to people about the free service we provide to dog owners. The Canine care card gives piece of mind to dog owners, if they are worried about who will look after their dog if they need to go into a home or have long term illness, if you would like to discuss the canine care card please call 01656 728923 or email [email protected].


text:
The Silverdale Washington local sluts live engine INFOSEEK on the net revealed how girls who want men word their ads. The ads indicate a popularity of phrases in screening the men people who would like to date the ladies who publish the ads out. It was one of those surveys anyone. You punch in a couple of internet links. In reality concerning what women want in men, as they have advertised on the internet, if a second jeffrey rubenstein elazar prostitutes Silverdale is necessary, go right ahead and test it out for yourself. There is, by almost all girls, at least on the internet, A accent the naked prostitutes Silverdale Washington on financing. As must be demonstrated the importance of monetary qualifications is noted in remarks that were such, or ought to be affluent. How intentionally coarse can you get? But maybe the guys have learned from this feminine attitude. Perhaps they could implement it more effectively and with panache to boot.
I focus on attracting people in and directing them to understanding themselves. I assist them in establishing goals generating in their own lives, and making the path. I offer likeyou're dying attitude, inspiration, enthusiasm, and spirituality with the continuous live. People are changed through daily tasks and my novels.
That quotation gives me goosebumps. I love it. Ifyou're a guy, the first tip in this" Looking for Love" company is to know how to kiss dating apps for 40 Silverdale WA, passion, and sensitivity, and if you don't know how to kiss like this, then you want to begin practicing. I don't know whatyou're going to practice on, maybe you are going to cut a cherry in half, or elseyou're likely to practice on your own hand, or watch some movies which are made by women, that are showing men how to kiss. Watching XXX movies, watching is your first headbutt to disaster.
If there's something that I could say with utmost certainty, it's that the vibe you produce- - the concealed combination of ideas and feelings on mind which affects people around you- - is the deciding factor of your success in only about everything.
It is almost impossible to find french quarter prostitutes Templeton CA that will match your list. Plus it is not necessary! Don't wait for that someone who perfectly fits every thing in your list because you Silverdale local white sluts likely be waiting indefinitely.
I say that my Twin Flame is felt by me and that I continue making love. I am more satisfied before yet I haven't seen my Twin Flame in two 22, that I used to. I went celibate since I feel complete since he was discovered by me.
If you have actually watched on the information we have actually shared, as well as you are truly crazy local sluts Turpin Hills OH to make points function, try it out. We all need a partner with whom you can share the events of the day. The heart always craves for company, and if love doesn't appear to be coming your method, you occasionally require to go and discover it.
Until you have had your coffee Discussing might not work for you. Beginning a dialogue with, " You do so" rather than" I need this, " can set your partner on the casual sex hookups site Silverdale WA.
When I told her this, she only looked at me like" oh no" and I could see the fear and also the look of running away. As we continued to talk, some eased up, but I sensed fear. We made another date. I told her so, and knew I might be overpowering. " Please, don't run. As she grew more comfortable, I needed to appear and tell her, " You are the local dirty sluts Silverdale I have been searching for my whole life. " I would say, " Okay then, let's not observe each other, " and I would spend my day on the job, then come local sluts just to find a text together with meet me in the beach for a picnic. Obviously, this would put a wide grin on my head.
Of course a woman is all sorts of cues that you may or may not local sluts you are sending out, the best way to say this, and checking out everything you say. These very subtle cues, like body language could trigger rather high levels of fascination with a girl. . . or on the reverse side, can kill it dead.
Girl: And then the ass grabbing fast begins Fest *Me: Fast is fine too or your palms can linger for a while, when I am kissing dem sweet lips( kissing emoji) Girl: Definitely linger for some time( kissing emoji) Me: I enjoy how you think, looks like my palms will need to find things to do, so they don't feel left out Girl: This is accurate, we do not need that at all. It would not be reasonable otherwise.
" Hi, I understand I am not good enough to email you so that I apologize for doing it, but I thought you might be brought to pity cases. . . cause if you are, you simply hit the jackpot, baby! " I understand you are trying to put yourself aside from the los- ers by looking forward to doing something average of one of those other losers, but that isn't the way to do it. Not only do you encounter as a pussy moreyou're trying to distinguish yourself by doing something far a lot of guys do.
In a connection, don't let a girl be the abusive meet local sluts Rutherford PA- - it is your job to become violent( a good way) , not a lady's job. Your problem isn't how to get your ex back, but this particular book is all about getting your ex back.
Why Facebook? Local sluts craigslist Silverdale reason is that Facebook is free. It does not cost any money. Before the individual can interact with other users, some dating websites might let a person make an account for free, but will ask for money.
To do so use this Tool Date other guys, or at least Date Yourself Touch items and feel what you are feeling- - this makes it possible to connect to your feminine energy, which is extremely attractive to a man Silverdale WA best dating apps? up some rules and boundaries for yourself, and learn to speak to him from your heart Exercise saying to yourself what it is you need and do not desire: For example, that you don't want to be a" girlfriend" more, that since you would like to be married, you'd appreciate Silverdale senior prostitutes what he sees ahead for you, and that you don't want to shut down all your options while he is taking all of the time he needs Fundamentally, you will never put your life on hold for any guy, and thatyou're not a woman who" waits" You are a woman who" lives" If you'd like to learn, fast, how to do this- - the best way to ways to meet local sluts Silverdale WA your inner power and then talk to your guy in a manner that retains your Silverdale online dating insider- confidence and makes h femel more and more deeply drawn to you- - just" group dating apps boston Silverdale I don't need to become one of these girls who waits to get a guy And I am not looking for a boyfriend I am looking for the real deal I am looking for a man to walk into the sunset with and that I don't want to rush you andyou're total in name to take as much time as you would like you have every right to do whatever you want, however you can have me all to your self.
Recognizing that finding the appropriate one can be an issue of experimentation can greatly decrease your stress and anxiety in the whole ordeal. Gradually, you'll realize that something on your profile isn't quite appropriate. It's triggering ladies to believe something concerning you that you do not really desire them to believe. Maybe a problem with your account, description, or details regarding the type of individual you are seeking. As you glean this information, merely modify your profile and also relocate on. No damage done.
When it comes to the initial tourist attraction, the tricky point regarding ladies is that they have a natural resistance. This is since secretly they desire you to function that little bit more difficult to' obtainthem'. The more challenging you function, the extra deserving you are considered, or more to the point, the less troubled and much more powerful the female has the ability to feel about the circumstance.
Alpha males have their own source of power. They are only comfortable in their own skin, also recognize no one is ideal. They understand themselves. They embrace their defects, while simultaneously hoping to improve upon them. They are okay with being exposed and understand that potency arouses.
Don't make her feel just like you are double coping her. If you would like to maintain this relationship make her feel special. If possible, women will accept if you are on a site you will talk to women but attempt not to remind them of the. It isn't something that you want to shove in your own local cheap young sluts Silverdale WA. And if you do end up going out on a date, do not try to meet them in precisely the exact same place one after the other. You'll get caught and you will not like how these women will see you after that. Remember if she does not feel like she is special to you somehow then she's most likely going to think that you aren't very serious about her.
- Silverdale WA local sluts looking for dick you hygienic and want to local sluts Woodland CA a well groomed appearance? This one should be simple, these traits should be whatever your proud of or comes to mind once you consider things about yourself which makes you happy.
And you know what? That felt great. I ended up feeling adored cherished and admired for being myself. And guys would inform me that I was. Why? He was meant to be, Since I let him be the man.
Here are pointers and more hints to keep in mind in picking out, editing, and uploading the photographs for your own profile Tell your story with meaningful captions. Captions give your photos context and background, so they should be meaningful and more than flirty, one- liners such as" feeling beautiful on my friend's wedding" or vague statements that assume that other people get what you are trying to say. Be clear and specific. Tell how you were feeling during that occasion or where and when the photograph was taken.
Meme) We ship memes back and forth. She sends a cartoon female avatar, which I proceed to make fun of her body. This night it not happening. Thus, we'll pick up the grannys sex dating Silverdale WA, with another meetup effort.


text:
Pizzeria 3301 at Villa Palermo [edit]
3301 W. Canal St.
Milwaukee, WI 53208
(414) 455-0383
3301 W. Canal St.
Milwaukee, WI 53208
(414) 455-0383
Description [edit]
Serving pizza by the slice, classic pizza and wood-fired pizzas, alongside handmade calzones, strombolis, soup, salads and Italian desserts.
Interactive map
Recent articles about Pizzeria 3301 at Villa Palermo
In search of the perfect pizza: Pizzeria 3301By Rick Rodriguez - March 05, 2014
Palermo's updated its cafe at Pizzeria 3301 with a wood-burning oven made in … Read more...
Palermo's founder Gaspare Fallucca diesBy OnMilwaukee Staff Writers - Oct. 04, 2012
Palermo's Pizza founder Gaspare "Jack" Fallucca died today at the age of 82 … Read more...
Palermo's pizza tour is cheesy in a good wayBy Molly Snyder - March 22, 2012
Anyone who loves pizza can take their penchant for Italian pie to the next level … Read more...
Breakfast and lunch at the frozen pizza factoryBy Damien Jaques - Jan. 23, 2012
Name the most unusual place to order breakfast in Milwaukee. How about a frozen … Read more...
Hot pizza on a cold afternoonBy Andy Tarnoff - Dec. 16, 2011
I've often said that I could eat pizza every day. Fortunately, I don't, but when … Read more...


text:
The Western Virginia Workforce Development Board (WVWDB) is hiring for a full-time Grant Accountant. The Grant Accountant is responsible for maintaining financial, accounting and grant support services to meet the needs of the WVWDB, the City of Roanoke (as the Grant Recipient), Virginia Community College System (as the Title I Administrator), the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and other discretionary grantors. This position is responsible for preparing financial statements, maintaining cash control, providing financial reporting and analysis to the WVWDB and the Chief Local Elected Officials (CLEO), processing payroll, and managing all accounts payable and receivable for the WVWDB. This position focuses heavily on budgeting, compliance, reporting and variance analysis functions and is responsible for clearly communicating all results to management.
The full job description can be found HERE.
Interested candidates should send a resume and cover letter to Morgan Romeo, Executive Director at firstname.lastname@example.com. The first review of applicants will take place on June 8th.
The Western Virginia Workforce Development Board is an Equal Opportunity Employer/Program. Auxiliary aides and services are available upon request to individuals with disabilities. TDD-VA Relay: 711.
Morgan Romeo | EO Officer | email@example.com | 540-562-8442


text: NikoBaltimore 4,035 Posted March 27, 2018 Nothing ever made me stop watching, but I know of events that drove two friends away from wrestling. The first was Starcade '97. My friend came over and we were super hyped about the Sting/Hogan match. Come to think of it there were a fair amount of people at school that were heavily into Crow Sting and wanted to see him win. So we watch the show and the main event comes on. Everything's going well until we saw Sting lose yet he didn't. It was like a record scratch and we both asked each other "Wait, did Sting lose?" After the wacky explanation of why it wasn't a loss we lost all interest and my friend never watched wrestling again. And when talking with people at school about it they were just perplexed by it all and just stuck with WWF. The second one of course is the Katie Vick angle. My other friend would watch Raw with us and was generally amused by it all. But once that came on we ended up watching other stuff on Mondays (had it recorded on VCR until we stopped doing Monday hangouts) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites


text:
Review & Photos by Fred Kuhlman
Promoter: Live Nation
Venue: AK-Chin Pavilion
Date: Tuesday August 15, 2017
Two Classic Rock Icons, Alice Cooper and Deep Purple descended on the Valley of the Sun for an outstanding night of rock music at the AK-Chin Pavilion. These 2 groups both flourished in the early 70s, but their styles could not be more different. Alice Cooper is known for their outlandish stage show, while Deep Purple is known for their hard driving sound and as one of the founding influences of heavy metal.
Alice Cooper
Being a child of the 60s, I was first introduced to Alice Cooper when they performed on Don Kirchner's In Concert in late 1972. I had seen a number of rock concerts and shows by then, but I was not prepared for the visual onslaught that Alice Cooper brought to the stage. I was mesmerized and hooked. In 1973 I moved to Phoenix to attend college. and finally, in 1979 I saw Alice Cooper in Tucson where he performed the "Madhouse Rock" tour. Who couldn't love that show with the dancing booze bottles and the spiders dancing around on the stage.
It has been 38 years since I saw that show and Alice did not have as elaborate a stage show, but it is still fantastic. The show starts with Alice coming out in his head to toe silver cape as the band plays "Brutal Planet". Alice removes the cape and starts singing as a curtain of pyrotechnic sparks fall behind him. They then move on to "No More Mr. Nice Guy". Alice is constantly moving around the stage singing and pointing at the audience with his cane. To end the starting salvo of songs, they go into "Under My Wheels". At the end of the song, Alice turns around to display the back of the leather vest he has been wearing and it has a skull in the middle with "Alice Cooper" across the top and "No More Mr. Nice Guy" across the bottom. Alice changes costumes multiple times, sporting a bloody lab coat, leather vest and top hat, and his personalize Diamondbacks jersey with his and honorary number, 18.
The real theatrics started when they played "Feed My Frankenstein". Alice comes out in a white lab coat covered in blood. As he was singing, two costumed stage hands brought out a giant electrode table. Alice was put into the device and they "turned on the power". Spark flew and smoke billowed out around the device. Finally, Frankenstein's monster entered the stage through the smoke. He moved around the stage as the band continued to play and left the stage as the song completed. Next Alice came back on stage and this time he pulled a female dummy out of a box on the stage. The band started to play "Cold Ethyl" as Alice danced around on stage with the dummy and sang. Later Alice pulled a knife and stabbed the dummy in the heart, which caused the band to move into the song "Killer". At this time 2 stage people dressed as executioners come out and grabbed Alice and put him into the guillotine that they had brought on stage. When the song ends, they dropped the blade and cut off Alice's head. One of the stage people grabbed the head and shows it to the crowd as the band played "I Love The Dead". To end the main set, Alice came back on stage and they played "I'm Eighteen". For an encore, they came out and played probably everyone favorite song, "School's Out". I remember hearing this in the fall of 1972 and it became my high school's unofficial graduation song.
I am really sorry that I missed so many great Alice Cooper tours over the years. They truly are a sight to see and hear. They rival shows I have seen in Las Vegas and few bands even come close to the stage production. Alice is still in fantastic form and the band that he has pulled together for this tour is top notch. He now has 3 guitarists, a bass player and drummer performing with him. About the only thing different from older shows is that he only had 1 dancer this time. Of the 3 guitarists, Nita Strauss stole the spotlight. She is not only an extremely talented guitarist, but adds a level of showmanship whenever she did a solo. This is not to diminish the performances by both Ryan Roxie and Tommy Henriksen as they laid down blazing riffs and smooth rhythms. All 3 guitarists traded off solos and backed each other up beautifully. They were a well-oiled machine. The body and soul for the music was provided by bassist Chuck Garric and drummer Glen Sobel. Chuck danced around on the stage and interacted with the audience. Glen was constantly throwing his drum sticks into the air and catching them and did not seem to miss a beat. Together, the band provides the power and punch for each of the songs as Alice struts around the stage.
Photos © Fred Kuhlman 2017
Deep Purple
Growing up in the 60s, we had AM radio and the rock stations usually only played the "Top 40" songs of the day. In reality, it was more like the top 10 to 15 songs with 1 other song thrown in every once in a while. After a while you got tired of hearing the same Beatles or Rolling Stones song over and over. In the late 60's I discovered FM radio. These were initially low budget and power operations so their transmission distance was very limited. The one real advantage FM had was they could transmit in stereo while AM radio as only mono. Also if you could pick up the FM station, it was usually clearer then AM stations. Since they didn't seem beholden to advertisers or the record industry the way AM radio was, they played longer tracks and sometimes even entire albums. It was the only way that you could hear lesser known artists and longer songs. In the early 60s, the mainstay of the record industry was "45 singles" with the main hit on the "A Side" and some other song from the band on the "B Side". About the mid to late 60s it became more fashionable for young people to buy albums. It was through the FM stations out of Detroit, Michigan that I first heard Deep Purple. First with their release of Fireball in 1971 and followed up by their mega hit Machine Head in 1972. The problem was most of their songs were too long for AM radio (over 4 minutes) so they were stuck for the most part on FM stations. By the early 70s automobiles were finally getting AM/FM radios as a standard feature. This allowed more non-top 40s music to be heard. Deep Purple became a real power house in 1972/1973 with their release of the live double album, Made In Japan. I played this album so much that I wore it out and had to buy it again. With Black Sabbath and Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple laid down the groundworks for the heavy metal revolution. The other strange thing about Deep Purple is the numerous lineup changes they have had over their 50-year history. I believe that it is the only band known by "Mark X" indicating the band lineup. To date they are on Mark 10 for this tour.
I first saw Deep Purple back in 1974 at Big Surf in Tempe Arizona. I remember that I was amazed at the keyboard work of Jon Lord, Ritchie Blackmore was outstanding on guitar and David Coverdale voice was electrifying. The other thing I remember from that show was the massive dust kicked up by everyone leaving the parking area and me getting sick with valley fever (a local desert mold). Fast forward to 2017 and I finally got the chance to see them again. Of the 1973 band (Mark 3), only the drummer, Ian Paice was remaining. The other members of the current band, Mark 10 lineup consists of Roger Glover on bass, Ian Gillan on lead vocals, both from Mark 2 (1969-1973) and guitarist Steve Morse from the Mark 9 band (1994). With the passing of the great keyboardist Jon Lord, the band has added a new keyboardist, Don Airey. Some people might complain that this isn't the real Deep Purple, but 3 of the members have been with the band from almost the very start, Ian Paice (founding member) and Ian Gillan and Roger Glover 1 year later.
Unlike Alice Cooper, Deep Purple does not use stage theatric to mesmerize their audience. They just play heart pounding music. From the very start of the set, they came out blazing with "Highway Star". Moving on to "Fireball" and then "Strange Kind of Woman". It is true that Ian Gillan cannot hit the extreme high notes that he was famous for in his younger days, but his voice was still as powerful as ever. Unlike a lot of bands from the 60s and 70s, Deep Purple is still creating new music. For tonight's show that played 2 songs, "The Surprising" and "Time for Bedlam" from their latest album InFinite. But the crowd was there to hear the classic rock songs that put Deep Purple in the Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame (finally, it only took 30 years!). The band did not disappoint. They started their set with "Highway Star" and ended with "Space Truckin'" and "Smoke on the Water". The opening riff of "Smoke On The Water" is one of the most iconic riffs of rock music. Almost anyone that picks up a guitar and wants to play rock music has at some time learned it. They ended the show with a 2 song encore. The last song of the night was their first hit, "Hush".
If you are looking to see a concert where the band plays short 3 to 4 minute songs, then Deep Purple is not your band. But if you truly want to hear some great music, outstanding riffs played by amazing musicians, then you cannot go wrong checking them out. For true metalheads, this is a must-see band.
Photos © Fred Kuhlman 2017
Alice Cooper's Setlist: (Album)
Brutal Planet (Brutal Planet)
No More Mr. Nice Guy (Billion Dollar Babies)
Under My Wheels (Killer)
Billion Dollar Babies (Billion Dollar Babies)
Paranoiac Personality (Paranormal)
Woman of Mass Distraction (Dirty Diamonds)
Guitar Solo
Poison (Trash)
Halo of Flies (Killer)
Feed My Frankenstein (Hey Stoopid)
Cold Ethyl (Welcome to My Nightmare)
Only Women Bleed (Welcome to My Nightmare)
Killer (Killer)
I Love the Dead (Billion Dollar Babies)
I'm Eighteen (Love It to Death)
School's Out (School's Out)
Deep Purple's Setlist: (Album)
Highway Star (Machine Head)
Fireball (Fireball)
Strange Kind of Woman (Non-Album, Single)
Uncommon Man (Now What?!)
Lazy (Machine Head)
The Surprising (InFinite)
Keyboard Solo
Perfect Strangers (Perfect Strangers)
Space Truckin' (Machine Head)
Smoke on the Water (Machine Head)
Time for Bedlam (InFinite)
Hush (Shades of Deep Purple)


text:
ITT Interconnect Solutions has a range of bayonet connectors for military applications and harsh commercial environments that has proven consistently reliable for over 25 years. The success of the CA bayonet series has again been demonstrated with recent wins on major military programmes in the USA and worldwide.
CA bayonet connectors meet the requirements of VG95234 and are well established as suitable and flexible for applications which call for rapid mating, positive unmating and a wide variety of layouts and styles. Featuring a positive bayonet locking mechanism and an optional wave spring for smooth mating, CA bayonet connectors are available in approximately 180 different layouts and a large choice of rear accessories.
Specifications includes multiple insulator and sealing materials to protect the connector from oil ingress and temperatures up to 200degC (392degF) and a choice of plating options, including cadmium and hexavalent green zinc for MIL applications, plus RoHS-compliant nickel and zinc cobalt plating. Suitability for damp environments is assured with waterproofing to 14.5psi (1bar).
This multi-use circular connector series is now available with a wide variety of military and commercial end bells, including universal versions for simpler assembly, making it suitable for many demanding applications, including industrial automation, military vehicles, mining equipment and railway projects.
Keith Teichmann, director of marketing for ITT Interconnect Solutions, says: "We have been providing our military and commercial customers with connectors for the most demanding environments for nearly 70 years and, as recently noted by active wins on major military programmes, the CA bayonet circular connector series continues to be their first choice in the most demanding applications."
Further details can be found in an application note that can be downloaded form www.ittcannon.com.


text:
Elder Scrolls Online DLC Introduces Dragons… Kinda
- Related Games:
- The Elder Scrolls Online
Elder Scrolls Online's upcoming Dragon Bones DLC will feature an undead dragon to battle against, marking the mythical creatures' first appearance in the MMO.
The Dragon Bones DLC and Update 17 are expected to launch in February, with Bethesda offering new information regarding what the update will feature. According to a press release, the DLC pack will include two new dungeons — Scalecaller Peak and Fang Lair — available in both normal and veteran mode, along with a veteran Hard mode for each final boss.
These dungeons will see players facing off against both new and returning enemies, including "plague-ridden ogres, powerful sorcerers and their undead creations, and even the reanimated bones of an ancient dragon." For their achievements in these dungeons, players will be rewarded with items, monsters sets and collectibles, along with a Renegade Priest mask.
A blog post on the Elder Scrolls Online website features the following description for the upcoming DLC:
"Deep within the belly of Fang Lair, an ancient Dwarven ruin, a master of necromancy works a dark ritual in an effort to reanimate the bones of a once-living dragon. It's up to you and your companions to enter the dungeon, face the necromancers, and stop the ritual before this undead monstrosity can be unleashed on Tamriel."
Elder Scrolls Online's Update 17 will also feature a slew of new features, including:
- The Outfit System: allows players to customize the look of their equipment, regardless of equipped gear
- Two New Battlegrounds: the Orc Stronghold of Mor Khazgur and the Dwarven ruins of Deeping Drome bring 2 new arenas for 4v4v4 multiplayer mayhem (Battlegrounds PvP requires ESO: Morrowind)
- Home Storage System: this highly anticipated feature provides players the opportunity to lock items away safely in their homes via the Homestead housing system
- Additional Gameplay Features: new quality of life additions will help new and experienced players get the most out of ESO, including the new Level Up and Skills Advisors, guiding players to the best upgrades when they level up; and improvements to combat, making it easier to identify and activate ability synergies.
The Dragon Bones DLC will be available for free for ESO Plus members and available to purchase from the Crown Store for non-members, while Update 17 will be free for everyone.