text:
I asked if people bring up Measure W, and he said no. About a dozen asked about staff salaries, but the number one question is "When will we build the City Center?" Perkins said the plans are still on the table but Alex Mehran who has them, is waiting until the economy turns around.
Perkins wants to get out and listen to the residents. He feels the Council, including him, didn't listen enough to the concerns about moving the Urban Growth Boundary into Tassajara Valley. He believes the Council should have put it into a separate measure, so the rest of the General Plan would have passed.
I mentioned that Steve O'Brien has a comment on his blog that anyone who disagrees with the Council is ostracized. O'Brien mentions Phil O'Loane, but also links to a story in the Express about Perkin's vote against the General Plan. I asked Perkins if his divergence from the Council Majority has caused him any problems. Perkins smiled and said, "I'm not feeling the love I used to," but he was quick to add that everyone is cordial and there is no hostility.
Perkins and I agree that O'Brien is a good writer, but Perkins wanted to point out that O'Brien's interpretation of the budget is incorrect. Perkins went into the other room and brought bound copies of the Audit Report and the Annual Budget. He said that long term debt must be offset by long term assets and short term debt to short term assets. He compared a home mortgage to the value of the home and a credit card to the value of the last purchase. The City's long-term assets include buildings, land, and even the streets.
He said the City is in very good financial condition and cited the AAA bond rating by Standard and Poor's. "We are able to pay our obligations," he said. The City had to dip into "a small amount of reserves, $3 to $4 Million this year, but we never over run our expense plan." In other words, they have used some reserves last year but never overspent their approved budget.
Perkins said he regretted not comparing Herb Moniz's salary increases with regional averages. The City conducted a study of cities in the 50,000 to 100,000 size range for the offer to new City Manager Greg Rogers. Herb was paid annual increases based on performance and the Council didn't think of looking at the comparisons at the time. Perkins told me that Moniz never asked for a raise, and added, "The City saved Herb's salary many times over by his astute ability to craft contracts to the City's benefit."
I asked Perkins what he thinks about his opponents in the race, Phil O'Loane and Abram Wilson, so far. "Phil is a smart man and a reasonable man," he said about O'Loane. The Councilmembers all know Phil well because he served four years on the Economic Development Advisory Committee and another four years on the Planning Commission.
Perkins considers Abram Wilson, "gifted in the political field." I'm not sure if that's a complement or a criticism.
Since Carol Rowley isn't running for her City Council seat the filing period for City Council is extended to August 17th. Perkins recalled how Ed Cahill filed at the last minute in 2003, and paid his election expenses himself to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest. Cahill later told Perkins it was a mistake. He would have been better off getting donations from supporters.
Perkins has about $9000 left in his past Council account and signed the pledge to keep under the $42,368 voluntary spending limit. I asked since he was walking the City and meeting voters face-to-face if he needed to spend so much money. He said that he still needs the flyers, and even if he walks to another 7-8,000 homes in the next two months that won't cover the whole City.
Perkins sees his position on the Council as two-sided. "I have a responsibility to the 'corporate' San Ramon as a member of the Board of Directors, and to residents as a representative of the citizens. Those two almost always coincide," but Perkins wants to be available to residents when they don't.
The City needs to improve communications. He said that people welcomed Town Hall meeting in their neighborhoods. "I have my phone number and address on the City's website. I want people to know there's a person they can call. I need to listen better. It's an ongoing process."


text:
I would like to start virtual machines in headless mode. The advantage: I can logoff from the desktop, and the machine will continue to run. However, starting the virtual machine blocks the Terminal from closing. Is there a clever solution to have everything like a service in the background? If I do 'sudo service ntp start' it will start, and then I can close the Terminal. I could do the following, but I'm not happy with it:
nohup VBoxHeadless -s "MyGuest" &
- log in from a login shell (tty1-6) which is equipped with Byobu, start the VM, and instead of logging out I could detach with F6.
Better way of doing it?

subset: commoncrawl


text:
valyri Raleigh, North Carolina
hey, i'm valyri. this is my bandcamp, where i-
whoops uh. dont mind that, itll be fixed soon
thank you for being here with me still
(Ext.) refers to when an album is mainly available through external source (A record label, etc) ... more
Streaming and Download help


text:
This post originally appeared on AlterNet.
I happily joined the more than 200,000 people who've signed the "Paul Krugman for Treasury Secretary" progressive fantasy petition. It was a clever way to tell the administration to reject this nutty austerity craze.
Now, however, President Obama has made the far less exciting choice of his Chief of Staff, Jack Lew, for the job. And especially given the experience with Timothy Geithner over the past four years, it's time to develop some more modest wishes for the new top dog at 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue.
1. If you were complicit in the 2008 crash, please fess up and make a convincing case that you've seen the light.
Lew was the chief operating officer of Citigroup's Alternative Investments unit from 2006 through the crash (he left in 2009) and he should reveal more about what he did there. This should also apply to other top Treasury leaders. Since Lew, a former head of the Office on Management and Budget, is considered more of a budget guy than a financial markets guy, there are rumors that President Obama is planning to install a Wall Street executive as his deputy.
When Geithner was up for confirmation in 2009, Senator Carl Levin asked him to respond in writing to 38 hard-hitting questions. Many of his answers were the evasive inanities you'd expect from someone trying to squeak through a polarized Senate (e.g., "I believe that we need more transparency to promote transparency"). But the only questions he flat out refused to answer had to do with his role in the Clinton Treasury's push to deregulate over-the-counter derivatives. The law that resulted, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, gave rise to the explosion of credit default swaps that were a key factor in the crash.
We should've known then that Geithner was insufficiently reformed. In fact recently he was back at it, exempting foreign exchange derivatives from the new Dodd-Frank regulations over the objections of other regulators and consumer protection groups.
2. If you oppose a popular progressive reform, have the decency to explain your position.
The current deficit fixation could be turned into an opportunity for bold, creative thinking on how to use fiscal policy to shift our economy in ways that would make it more equitable, green, and secure. At the Institute for Policy Studies, we've compiled a long list of fair and environmentally friendly proposals that could generate hundreds of billions in additional money per year.
One of our favorites is the idea of a small financial transaction tax that could raise massive revenue while discouraging short-term financial speculation. Over the past four years, much of Obama's core base – including major labor unions and environmental, anti-poverty, public health, and consumer organizations – have been pushing for such taxes. The International Monetary Fund has documented that they are administratively feasible and could be a significant revenue raiser. The European Commission has also produced reams of analysis on the potential benefits, prompting a dozen European governments to commit to implementing such taxes this year.
Here's Geithner's most substantive public statement on the issue: "I have not seen the version of that that I think works." The Obama Treasury has never published a research paper on the topic. Never offered a thoughtful response to the IMF and European Commission analyses. Never engaged in a meaningful debate. Never even responded to the many civil society letters calling for such taxes.
So Mr. Lew, if you're confirmed, please at least be open to a respectful dialogue over this and other bold progressive tax and financial reform ideas.
3. Please don't help rich people and corporations hide their money in overseas tax havens.
In Geithner's response to Senator Levin's questions, he pledged to "treat the offshore tax abuse issue as a high priority." Behind closed doors, he has reportedly advocated a shift to a "territorial" tax system that would exempt U.S. corporations' foreign earnings, giving them even more incentive to disguise U.S. profits as income earned in tax havens. In his most recent book, Bob Woodward wrote that in negotiations with House Speaker John Boehner, Geithner said "The goal is territorial." Boehner's staff confirmed the accuracy of the quote.
As a Senator, Obama co-sponsored legislation with Levin to crack down on tax haven abuse – a practice that drains an estimated $100 billion per year from Uncle Sam's coffers. Fixing the problem would also help level the playing field for small businesses that provide more than half of U.S. jobs – and don't have accounts in the Caymans. Mr. Lew, you could help make this a legacy issue for Obama.
4. Don't be a jerk to other governments
Lew doesn't seem to have much international experience, but he wouldn't have to do much to improve on the current Secretary's record. Geithner has sparked animosity by attempting to impose his opposition to some fair taxation ideas on other countries. After receiving a lecture against financial transaction taxes from her U.S. counterpart, the Austrian finance minister commented dryly, "I found it peculiar that even though the Americans have significantly worse fundamental data than the euro zone that they tell us what we should do and when we make a suggestion … that they say no straight away."
Geithner has also been the main advocate of using U.S. trade agreements to limit other governments' ability to control volatile financial flows. When more than 250 economists urged the administration to lift current trade restrictions on the use of capital controls, Geithner was dismissive. As a result, U.S. trade officials are pressuring the 10 countries negotiating a Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal to give up this legitimate policy tool. By contrast, the International Monetary Fund's new "institutional view" in support of capital controls makes them look like a beacon of enlightenment. Mr. Lew could make sure governments around the world have all the tools they need to prevent financial crisis.
This humble wish list doesn't cover every important issue on the next Treasury Secretary's plate. I haven't even gotten into the core question of whether he or she will put the interests of ordinary homeowners and Main Street businesses above those of Wall Street. But it has allowed me to get some of my gripes about Geithner off my chest. And I can only hope that the incoming Secretary may learn a few lessons from his predecessor's shortcomings.
Sarah Anderson directs the Global Economy project at the Institute for Policy Studies. IPS-dc.org


text:
Vancouver Office
Serving the greater Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington area.
The Emergency Tooth Doctor strives to make your office visit as pleasant and as convenient as possible.
Our dental office is conveniently located to suit your dental care needs.
Emergency Tooth Doctor Vancouver
Open 7 days a week, 365 Days a year
400 W Fourth Plain Blvd
Vancouver, WA 98660
(360) 975-3198
We believe that the Emergency Tooth Doctor dentists are among the best that Portland Oregon has to offer. We proudly provide a wide range of general dentistry services including dental implants, crowns, sedation dentistry, composite fillings, inlays and onlays, fixed bridges, and mercury-free tooth-colored fillings. We also offer emergency care treatment that is the best in the business.
Arguably one of the best dentist in Portland, we at the Emergency Tooth Doctor strive to make you feel as comfortable as possible during dental work. With a range of services from pediatric dentistry to cosmetic dentistry, we have the ability to solve any dental issue you may bring to us in a courteous professional manner.
While patients can choose from a number of dentists, the Emergency Tooth Doctor is hands down the best option. Call or schedule an appointment today and find out for yourself


text:
The Case of the Missing Ancestor
DNA from a cave in Russia adds a mysterious new member to the human family.
In the Altay Mountains of southern Siberia, some 200 miles from where Russia touches Mongolia, China, and Kazakhstan, nestled under a rock face about 30 yards above a little river called the Anuy, there is a cave called Denisova. It has long attracted visitors. The name comes from that of a hermit, Denis, who is said to have lived there in the 18th century. Long before that, Neolithic and later Turkic pastoralists took shelter in the cave, gathering their herds around them to ride out the Siberian winters. Thanks to them, the archaeologists who work in Denisova today, surrounded by walls spattered with recent graffiti, had to dig through deep layers of goat dung to get to the deposits that interested them. But the cave's main chamber has a high, arched ceiling with a hole near the top that directs shimmering shafts of sunlight into the interior, so that the space feels holy, like a church.
In the back of the cave is a small side chamber, and it was there that a young Russian archaeologist named Alexander Tsybankov was digging one day in July 2008, in deposits believed to be 30,000 to 50,000 years old, when he came upon a tiny piece of bone. It was hardly promising: a rough nubbin about the size and shape of a pebble you might shake out of your shoe. Later, after news of the place had spread, a paleoanthropologist I met at Denisova described the bone to me as the "most unspectacular fossil I've ever seen. It's practically depressing." Still, it was a bone. Tsybankov bagged it and put it in his pocket to show a paleontologist back at camp.
The bone preserved just enough anatomy for the paleontologist to identify it as a chip from a primate fingertip—specifically the part that faces the last joint in the pinkie. Since there is no evidence for primates other than humans in Siberia 30,000 to 50,000 years ago—no apes or monkeys—the fossil was presumably from some kind of human. Judging by the incompletely fused joint surface, the human in question had died young, perhaps as young as eight years old.
Anatoly Derevianko, leader of the Altay excavations and director of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography in Novosibirsk, thought the bone might belong to a member of our own species, Homo sapiens. Sophisticated artifacts that could only be the work of modern humans, including a beautiful bracelet of polished green stone, had previously been found in the same deposits. But DNA from a fossil found earlier in a nearby cave had proved to be Neanderthal, so it was possible this bone was Neanderthal as well.
Derevianko decided to cut the bone in two. He sent one half to a genetics laboratory in California; so far he has not heard from that half again. He slipped the other half into an envelope and had it hand-delivered to Svante Pääbo, an evolutionary geneticist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. It was there that the case of the Denisovan pinkie bone took a startling turn.
Pääbo, a transplanted Swede, is arguably the world's leading expert in ancient DNA, especially human DNA. His milestones are many. In 1984 he became the first person to isolate DNA from an Egyptian mummy. In 1997 he accomplished the same feat for the first time with a Neanderthal, a kind of human that vanished more than 25,000 years before the Egyptian pharaohs. That secured his scientific reputation.
When Pääbo received the package from Derevianko, his team was hard at work producing the first sequence of the entire Neanderthal genome—another feat that had once seemed impossible and that was occupying most of his attention. His lab also had a backlog of other fossils to test from all parts of the globe. So it wasn't until late 2009 that the little Russian finger bone drew the attention of Johannes Krause, at the time a senior member of Pääbo's team. (He's now at the University of Tübingen.) Like everyone else, Krause assumed the bone was from an early modern human. He had developed a method for distinguishing the DNA of such a fossil from that of the archaeologists, museum workers, and anyone else who might have handled and therefore contaminated it.
Krause and his student Qiaomei Fu extracted the finger bone's mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), a small bit of the genome that living cells have hundreds of copies of and that is therefore easier to find in ancient bone. They compared the DNA sequence with those of living humans and Neanderthals. Then they repeated the analysis, because they couldn't believe the results they'd gotten the first time around.
On a Friday afternoon, with Pääbo away at a meeting at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on Long Island, Krause called a meeting of the lab staff and challenged anyone to come up with a different explanation for what he was seeing. No one could. Then he dialed Pääbo's cell. "Johannes asked me if I was sitting down," Pääbo remembers. "I said I wasn't, and he replied that I had better find a chair."
Krause himself recalls that Friday as "scientifically the most exciting day of my life." The tiny chip of a finger bone, it seemed, was not from a modern human at all. But it wasn't from a Neanderthal either. It belonged to a new kind of human being, never before seen.
In July 2011, three years after Tsybankov unearthed the bone chip, Anatoly Derevianko organized a scientific symposium at the archaeological camp a few hundred yards from Denisova cave. At an opening night dinner punctuated with frequent toasts of vodka, Derevianko welcomed the 50 researchers, including Pääbo, who had come to see the cave and share their views on how the mysterious new human fit into the fossil and archaeological record for human evolution in Asia.
The year before, two other fossils had been found to contain DNA similar to that of the finger bone, both of them molars. The first tooth had turned up among the specimens from Denisova housed at Derevianko's institute in Novosibirsk. It was bigger than either a modern human or a Neanderthal tooth, in size and shape resembling the teeth of much more primitive members of the genus Homo who lived in Africa millions of years ago. The second molar had been found in 2010 in the same cave chamber that had yielded the finger bone—indeed, near the bottom of the same 30,000-to-50,000-year-old deposits, called Layer 11.
Remarkably, that tooth was even bigger than the first, with a chewing surface twice that of a typical human molar. It was so large that Max Planck paleoanthropologist Bence Viola mistook it for a cave bear tooth. Only when its DNA was tested was it confirmed to be human—specifically, Denisovan, as the scientists had taken to calling the new ancestors. "It shows you how weird these guys are," Viola told me at the symposium. "At least their teeth are just very strange."
Pääbo's team could extract only a tiny amount of DNA from the teeth—just enough to prove they came from the same population as the finger, though not from the same individual. But the finger bone had been spectacularly generous.
DNA degrades over time, so usually very little remains in a bone tens of thousands of years old. Moreover, the DNA from the bone itself—called endogenous DNA—is typically just a tiny fraction of the total DNA in a specimen, most of which comes from soil bacteria and other contaminants. None of the Neanderthal fossils Pääbo and his colleagues had ever tested contained even 5 percent endogenous DNA, and most had less than one percent. To their amazement, the DNA in the finger bone was some 70 percent endogenous. Apparently, the cold cave had preserved it well.
Given so much DNA, the scientists easily ascertained that there was no sign of a male Y chromosome in the specimen. The fingertip had belonged to a little girl who had died in or near Denisova cave tens of thousands of years before. The scientists had no idea, at first, what she looked like—just that she was radically different from anything else they had ever seen.
For a while they thought they might have her toe too. In the summer of 2010 a human toe bone had emerged, along with the enormous tooth, from Layer 11. In Leipzig a graduate student named Susanna Sawyer analyzed its DNA. At the symposium in 2011 she presented her results for the first time. To everyone's shock, the toe bone had turned out to be Neanderthal, deepening the mystery of the place.
The green stone bracelet found earlier in Layer 11 had almost surely been made by modern humans. The toe bone was Neanderthal. And the finger bone was something else entirely. One cave, three kinds of human being. "Denisova is magical," said Pääbo. "It's the one spot on Earth that we know of where Neanderthals, Denisovans, and modern humans all lived." All week, during breaks in the conference, he kept returning alone to the cave. It was as if he thought he might find clues by standing where the little girl may have stood and touching the cool stone walls she too may have touched.
Pääbo grew up in Stockholm with his single mother, a chemist, and on certain days with his father, a biochemist named Sune Bergström, who had another, legitimate family and would later win a Nobel Prize. Pääbo's own first passion was Egyptology, but he switched to molecular biology, then fused the two interests in 1984 with his work on mummy DNA. Once anchored in the study of the past, he never let go. He is 58 now, tall and lanky, with large ears, a long, narrow head, and pronounced eyebrows that arch up and down animatedly when he's excited—about Denisova, for instance.
How had all three kinds of human ended up there? How were Neanderthals and Denisovans related to each other and to the sole kind of human that inhabits the planet today? Did their ancestors have sex with ours? Pääbo had a history with that kind of question.
The Neanderthal DNA he had made headlines with in 1997 was utterly different from that of any person now alive on Earth. It seemed to suggest that Neanderthals had been a separate species from us that had gone extinct—suspiciously soon after our ancestors first migrated out of Africa into the Neanderthals' range in western Asia and Europe. But that DNA, like Krause's first extract from the Denisovan finger, was mtDNA: It came from the mitochondria, the energy-producing organelles inside the cell, and not from the cell nucleus, where the vast bulk of our genome resides. Mitochondrial DNA includes only 37 genes, and it's inherited only from the mother. It's a limited record of a population's history, like a single page torn from a book.
By the time of the Denisova symposium, Pääbo and his colleagues had published first drafts of the entire Neanderthal and Denisovan genomes. Reading so many more pages allowed Pääbo and his colleagues, including David Reich at Harvard University and Montgomery Slatkin at the University of California, Berkeley, to discover that human genomes today actually contain a small but significant amount of Neanderthal code—on average about 2.5 percent. The Neanderthals still may have been swept into extinction by the strange, high-browed new people who followed them out of Africa, but not before some commingling that left a little Neanderthal in most of us, 50,000 years later. Only one group of modern humans escaped that influence: Africans, because the commingling happened outside that continent.
Although the Denisovans' genome showed that they were more closely related to the Neanderthals, they too had left their mark on us. But the geographic pattern of that legacy was odd. When the researchers compared the Denisovan genome with those of various modern human populations, they found no trace of it in Russia or nearby China, or anywhere else, for that matter—except in the genomes of New Guineans, other people from islands in Melanesia, and Australian Aborigines. On average their genomes are about 5 percent Denisovan. Negritos in the Philippines have as much as 2.5 percent.
Putting all the data together, Pääbo and his colleagues came up with a scenario to explain what might have occurred. Sometime before 500,000 years ago, probably in Africa, the ancestors of modern humans split off from the lineage that would give rise to Neanderthals and Denisovans. (The most likely progenitor of all three types was a species called Homo heidelbergensis.) While our ancestors stayed in Africa, the common ancestor of Neanderthals and Denisovans migrated out. Those two lineages later diverged, with the Neanderthals initially moving west into Europe and the Denisovans spreading east, perhaps eventually populating large parts of the Asian continent.
Later still, when modern humans ventured out of Africa themselves, they encountered Neanderthals in the Middle East and Central Asia, and to a limited extent interbred with them. According to evidence presented by David Reich at the Denisova symposium, this mixing most likely occurred between 67,000 and 46,000 years ago. One population of modern humans then continued east into Southeast Asia, where, sometime around 40,000 years ago, they encountered Denisovans. The moderns interbred with them as well and then moved into Australasia, carrying Denisovan DNA.
This scenario might explain why the only evidence so far that the Denisovans even existed is three fossils from a cave in Siberia and a 5 percent stake in the genomes of people living today thousands of miles to the southeast. But it left a lot of questions unanswered. If the Denisovans were so widespread, why was there no trace of them in the genomes of Han Chinese or of any other Asian people between Siberia and Melanesia? Why had they left no mark in the archaeological record—no distinctive tools, say? Who were they really? What did they look like? "Clearly we need much more work," Pääbo acknowledged at the Denisova symposium.
The best of all possible developments would be to find Denisovan DNA in a skull or other fossil with distinctive morphological features, one that could serve as a Rosetta stone for reexamining the whole fossil record of Asia. There are some intriguing candidates, most from China, and three skulls in particular, dated between 250,000 and 100,000 years ago. Pääbo is working closely with scientists at the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing and has set up a DNA testing lab there. Unfortunately DNA does not preserve well in warmer climates. To date, no other fossil has been identified as Denisovan by the only way Denisovans can be known: their DNA.
In 2012 Pääbo's group published a new version of the finger bone's genome—astonishingly, one that in accuracy and completeness rivals any living human's genome that has been sequenced. The breakthrough came from a German postdoc in Pääbo's lab named Matthias Meyer. DNA consists of two interlocking strands—the familiar double helix. Previous methods for retrieving DNA from fossil bone could read out sequences only when both strands were preserved. Meyer had developed a technique for recovering short, single-stranded fragments of DNA as well, greatly increasing the amount of raw material to work with. The method produced a version of the Denisovan girl's genome so precise that the team could discriminate between genetic information inherited from her mother and that from her father. In effect, they now had two highly accurate Denisovan genomes, one from each parent. These in turn opened a window on the entire history of their population.
One immediate revelation was how little variation there was between the parents' genomes—about a third as much as there is between any two living humans. The differences were sprinkled across the genomes, which ruled out inbreeding: If the girl's parents had simply been closely related, they would have had huge chunks of exactly matched DNA. The pattern indicated instead that the Denisovan population represented by the fossil had never been large enough to have developed much genetic diversity. Worse, it seemed to have suffered a drastic decline sometime before 125,000 years ago—the little girl in the cave may have been among the last of her kind.
Meanwhile the ancestral population of modern humans was expanding. Myriad fossils, libraries full of books, and the DNA of seven billion people are available to document our subsequent population history. Pääbo's team discovered a completely different one inside a single bone chip. The thought tickles him. "It's incredibly cool that there is no one walking around today with a population history like that," Pääbo told me, his eyebrows shooting up.
And yet the Denisovans also have something to say about our own kind. With virtually every letter of the Denisovan genetic code in hand, Pääbo and his colleagues were able to take aim at one of the profoundest mysteries: In our own genomes, what is it that makes us us? What defining changes in the genetic code took place after we separated from our most recent ancestor? Looking at the places where all living humans share a novel genetic signature but the Denisovan genome retains a primitive, more apelike pattern, the researchers came up with a surprisingly short list. Pääbo has called it the "genetic recipe for being a modern human." The list includes just 25 changes that would alter the function of a particular protein.
Intriguingly, five of these proteins are known to affect brain function and development of the nervous system. Among them are two genes where mutations have been implicated in autism and another that's involved in language and speech. Just what those genes actually do to make us think, act, or talk differently than Denisovans, or any other creature that has walked the Earth, remains to be seen. The lasting contribution of studying Denisovan DNA, Pääbo says, "will be in finding what is exclusively human."
But what of the little girl herself? The tiny bit of bone that is all we ever had of her—or at least the half that went to Leipzig—is gone now. In pulling DNA from it, Johannes Krause and Qiaomei Fu eventually used it all up. The little girl has been reduced to a "library" of DNA fragments that can be exactly copied again and again forever. In the scientific paper discussing the history of her population, Pääbo and his colleagues did mention, almost in passing, a few facts about her that they had gleaned from that library: She probably had dark hair, dark eyes, and dark skin. It isn't much, but at least it sketches in broad strokes what she looked like. Just so we know whom to thank.


text: Email Story Print Story Protein Stops Blood-Vessel Growth, Holds Promise as Cancer Therapy JUNE 18, 2004 DENVER — Researchers at National Jewish Medical and Research Center have identified a protein that inhibits the formation of new blood vessels. Combined with previous findings that the protein is depleted or missing in a majority of metastatic human cancers, the findings suggest that fibulin-5 may one day be an effective cancer therapy. William Schiemann, PhD, Assistant Professor in the Program in Cell Biology at National Jewish, and postdoctoral fellow Allan R. Albig reported their findings in the June issue of DNA and Cell Biology. "We believe fibulin-5 shows real promise as a cancer therapy," said Schiemann. "When we slightly altered the naturally occurring protein it was even more effective at inhibiting the sprouting of new blood vessels." Cancer tumors need nutrients and oxygen supplied by blood vessels in order to grow. They also use blood vessels to spread to other parts of the body. This process, known as metastasis, is the most lethal characteristic of cancer and the leading cause of cancer-related death. The strategy of fighting cancer by preventing the growth of new blood vessels has generated great interest in recent years, with the first antiangiogenic drug being approved earlier this year. Endothelial cells have been the target of most antiangiogenic strategies. Endothelial cells are specialized cells that develop into blood vessels. Fibulin-5, a member of a family of extracellular matrix proteins that regulate tissue development, remodeling and repair, interacts with endothelial cells. In cell culture studies, Schiemann and Albig showed fibulin-5 levels drop significantly when endothelial cells begin to form blood vessels, a process known as tubulation. They also show that high levels of fibulin-5 could prevent the sprouting of new blood vessels by inhibiting the proliferation and movement of endothelial cells. Fibulin-5 interfered with signaling by the proangiogenic factor VEGF, and increased levels of the antiangiogenic factor thrombospondin-1. The researchers believe that fibulin-5 may work by controlling the relative levels of VEGF and thrombospondin-1. In a previous paper, published in 2002, Schiemann and his colleagues showed the fibulin-5 expression is reduced or lost in a majority of metastatic human malignancies. Schiemann believes that future research on fibulin-5 should focus on patients in whom tumors have not already metastasized. His group is continuing to examine fibulin-5 functions at the molecular level and will soon evaluate its effects in mice. The protein may also serve as a diagnostic tool, a marker of cancer status. Rapidly dropping levels of fibulin-5 might signal a tumor preparing to grow and/or spread. "The good thing about this protein is it's extra-cellular, especially as a diagnostic marker," said Emmanuel Hilaire, a technology transfer specialist at National Jewish. "It's very important because it's detectable in serum and urine." A provisional patent citing the diagnostic merits of fibulin-5 has been filed with additional claims filed after researchers made their most recent observations. Media Resources We have many faculty members, from bench scientists to clinicians, who can speak on almost any aspect of respiratory, immune, cardiac and gastrointestinal disease as well as lung cancer and basic immunology. Accomplishments & Awards Annual Report Financials Media Contacts Our team is available to arrange interviews, discuss events and story ideas. Adam Dormuth 303.398.1002 office 970.222.5034 mobile email@example.com Jessica Berry 303.398.1082 office 303.807.9491 mobile firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
During opening—arguments you heard from the State of Florida that what would be presented to you during this trial would convince you that that man, Justin Barber, seated right over there, murdered his wife. That those hands you see resting on the table, took a .22 caliber pistol, pointed it right at his wife's face, and pulled the trigger. And the evidence has proven that to be true.
But this crime was planned so thoroughly by the defendant, that he thought he was gonna outsmart the police, the prosecutors, everybody. For that reason, your common sense needs to be your constant guide as you wade through, sort, and review the evidence that's been presented to you.
At this point in the trial, you have heard all the evidence, all the testimony. When the lawyers are done talkin' to you, Judge Hedstrom's gonna instruct you on the law. I don't want to spend a lot of time talkin' about this. But very briefly, if it will help in your review of the evidence, Judge Hedstrom will give you what are called the elements of First Degree Murder.
Quite simply, it is the list that the State of Florida must prove to you beyond a reasonable doubt for you to return a—a conviction of First Degree Murder.
That list contains three elements. The three elements are that April Stacy Barber is dead, two, that the death was caused by the criminal act of Justin Barber, and three, there was a premeditated killing of April Stacy Barber. I mention this to you, because it is to the elements, and those alone that the term, "Beyond a reasonable doubt", applies.
It doesn't apply to every fact under the sun, submitted as evidence here, only to the elements. An important thing for your deliberations, if you look at elements number one, that Miss Barber is dead, and that her killing was a res—a result of a premeditated killing, elements one and three; there's no real debate on the evidence. The only debate before you, is element two; that the death was caused by the criminal act of Justin Barber. I mention that to you because—it's narrowed the focus, and the facts that you find that tend to prove or disprove that fact, is where you should spend your time and energy.
This case for—for you, as juror members—has been a—a crash course in forensics and in crime scenes. If I could, the first thing I'd like to discuss with you is blood flow. What do we know about blood flow? What did you hear from the experts? It follows gravity.
It's the same reason, that looking at this photograph, that you know when you look at it this way, it's upside-down. What else do we know about blood flow? That if it's—in the same direction as it relates to this picture, then the head stayed in the same position. Let's review that, if we will, compared to the defendant's version of events from that evening. Amongst the ways that he describes carrying April Barber up that beach, and bear in mind, under his version of events, she's already shot at this point.
He picks her up out of the water, manages to go just a very short distance, then he attempts a cradle carry, with the arm under the neck, and the other under the crook of the knees. April Barber is if not, under his scenario, dead, she's on her way to death. It's a limp body.
Imagine the ways that that head would be moving and bleeding from that gunshot. Under his version of events, he did not have much success with the cradle carry. Next, he attempted what's called a firemen's carry, (NOISE) which is an over the shoulder. Again, her lifeless body, with that head, imagine being thrown over the body, Justin's shoulder, how that head would move. Yet again, he did not have much success carrying April this way.
What did he try next? That he got behind her, with her back to him, his hands under her underarms. Then he went a little bit of a way in that position, but again, not that successful. Then, ultimately, how did he gain his greatest measure of success? With April's back to him, his hand around the front of her waist and him walking backwards.
Imagine her head, her lifeless head in all the positions, and where all that blood would be going, if that were true. That scenario, and the manner in which he—he carried her; if you remember his deposition, the videotape. That included at least two times that he dropped her, and he said that he repeated each of the ways that I've described for you, one more time. Imagine how many times April Barber's head would have moved and that blood would've flowed. And please look at that picture. And as to the testimony, you heard from Dr. Steiner, the medical examiner, who had no explanation for that picture, compared to the—nine different ways that the defendant said that he carried Barber's body.
Except to say, "Looking at the blood flow in that photograph, she was shot where she was found, at the boardwalk, not the waterline." His quote, "There'd be a lot of blood somewhere, if she were moved that way." You heard from Jerry Findley, the State's—crime scene expert.
And in looking at the photographs and the evidence, he said, "That the flow is all consistent, straight down the face." If she was carried nine different ways, the head would change position many, many times, as would the blow—blood flow. Quite simply, he said, "She was shot where she was found, at the boardwalk, not the waterline." The—next area to talk to you about in your crash course in forensics is blood transfer.
Blood transfer. What that means is, someone's bleeding and it transfers some of that blood to somebody else. In the case before you, you have the defendant's blood on April Barber, and some of April Barber's blood on the defendant. All that proves is that he was present when she died. The key is, the blood is not where it's supposed to be if the defendant's story were true.
Specifically, it is not on April Barber's waistline, and the top of the pants. First of all, to explain—why some of April Barber's blood might be on the defendant's clothes. You heard about the abrasions, the cuts on April Barber's arm. Dr. Steiner told you that those abrasions occurred while she was alive, because there's a vital reaction, blood oozing. She was alive. He said the most likely scenario is that she got those abrasions in the water, and they result from pressure and movement.
Pressure from the defendant holding her down, movement as April Barber struggled for her life, against the rough coquina on the shores of Guana Beach. Heard Jerry Findley as well, comment that any transfer from April Barber to the defendant could've easily been the result of these abrasions, as she was carried from the waterline, up to the boardwalk.
As to the—defendant's blood on the victim April Barber, there's testimony before you that his blood appears on her right wrist and her upper left arm. Perhaps that was him checking her pulse, perhaps that was him trying to pick her up and get her into the car. I'm gonna talk to you quite a bit about that in a little while. But what's important is to measure, again, where there isn't blood transfer against the defendant's story. You think about all the ways he said that he carried April Barber, but he really only had success with one way, and that was pulling her by the waistband.
If you heard the testimony in that civil deposition, he didn't just grab the waistband, he tucked his thumbs in. And bear in mind, under the defendant's scenario, he's shot in the hand. And although it's one bullet injury, it's two injuries, it—an entrance wound, and an exit, and both would bleed.
Yet, there is absolutely no transfer of his blood to April Barber's waistline. Now, you heard that from Mr. Gilmore, the DNA expert, who examined the pants and found only April Barber's DNA. But—members of the jury, with a bloody hand from a gunshot, with someone's hand right there, for 100 yards? Forget laboratories, and scientists; if that were true, you'd see it with the naked eye, and it isn't there. Again, something you'll be hearing about in a little while from me—but an interesting note on blood transfer.
And that is, there's not transfer in the defendant's SUV, where he says he looked for his wife's purse which contained the cell phone, specifically in the back seat. There's no blood there. Yet, where the defendant sat as he drove, there's blood in the driver's cockpit, on the steering wheel and the driver's door. But again, more on that in—in a short while.
I'd like to talk to you a little bit about the testimony regarding Justin Barber's wounds. You heard from Dr. Tepas, board certified trauma surgeon, who treated—the defendant that evening. He said that the defendant was stable hemodynamically, physiologically, and neurologically. Neurologically, significantly means no diminished consciousness. "The defendant was not at all confused," was the testimony. There was no derangement of underlining organs, or impediment to organ function.
That means no surgery. That means these wounds were minor. That means they were treated with antibacterial ointment and band aids. Contrast that for me for a moment. Four gunshot wounds to the defendant; salve and band aids, against one gunshot to April Barber right in the face, killin' her.
Again, subject we will discuss in a little bit, but an important thing to start thinking about is, the defendant's four injuries, and the sequence with which they happened. The defendant says he passed out after one shot. If that's the case, how can you possibly explain where the other bullets landed on him? We'll talk more about that in a little bit. But please remember about the wounds—all were—within a range of all the testimony you heard, that is consistent with being self-inflicted. Heard Detective Cole, who went and saw the defendant in the hospital that evening.
Based on his training and experience, they looked funny to him, particularly the one on the side. Dr. Tepas described that wound on the right chest as, "tangential". Tangential, off to the side. Members of the jury, use your common sense; gun shot wound here, gun shot wound here, here, and over here. Compared to, the vital area, (NOISE) all those wounds are out and away, (NOISE) out and away.
Some testimony that I think bears some comment—from yesterday's—the expert hired by the defense—Mr. Jason, who testified about how the holes—bullet holes in the defendant's shirt did not appear to him to align up with where the actual gunshot injury was. Well, let's—let's assume for a moment that that's actually true, and—and if it is, based on what was observed yesterday in the court room, and you can see from the image of that, that shirt was big on the defendant.
He was practically swimming in it. And bear in mind, he had just drowned his wife, and dragged her 100 yards up the beach. Might that explain a little displacement in the shirt? Then also, I'm not sure the evidence tells you how the defendant might have shot himself, or pulled this shirt when he did it. Not sure how that would happen. But to say that's indicative of a struggle is quite a leap.
Another thing that was absolutely fascinating is that Mr. Jason says that there was no blood spatter on the defendant's shirt by the chest wound. First of all, this is the exhibit that he permanently altered, the State's exhibit, by marking it with a red mark. This is a man who told you how precision and accuracy is critical to his analysis. And what does he do while examining a shirt, he permanently alters it with a red marker, right by—of the things that's of evidentiary value; there's no blood tissue there.
That's an important point, yet, red marker is there, for the man who need to be accurate and precise. However, when the testimony from Mr. Warniment, the FDLE firearms expert, and from Jerry Findley, the crime scene expert, said that they saw, if this injury that went through the hand is also the same gunshot that (NOISE) struck the chest; they said that there should be some blood spatter, tissue, spray of blood.
Mr. Jason takes the stand and says, "No, that wouldn't happen if the hand were up against the shirt and the bullet went through." Does that make any sense at all? There may not be blood spatter, but there's gonna be blood and tissue on the other side of that hand, and there's none, just red marker. And bear in mind, this is the same shot that Dr. Sturner couldn't even get in position to do on the stand.
To turn this hand around, and say that this is the same shot. Does that make any sense? And I argue to you it doesn't? But you know why you heard that testimony? These witnesses are testifying for the defendant, and you heard Dr. Sturner, he started out with the defendant's story, and believed it to be true, and came up with his findings accordingly.
Importantly about that, they're married to the defendant's statement that he heard one shot and passed out. How else could you possibly explain a contact wound to the hand for somebody who was passed out? Did the phantom, once Justin Barber was passed out, supposedly pick up his hand and shoot his hand? No. Based on the defendant's story of hearing one shot and passing out; had to come up with something that would explain that wound to the hand, and I argue to you, does not make common sense. What makes perhaps more sense, is if you remember Mr. Warniment, the firearms expert testifying about his examination of the defendant's shirt.
One of the things he said, is that there's an area, over in this area, that had gunshot residue but no corresponding hole. Isn't it more likely that Justin Barber, when the time came, and needed to put that gunshot through his hand, went like this, and pulled the trigger, creating gunshot residue and no corresponding hole?
Another important point that Mr. Warniment made in his examination of the shirt, and that was he—as he examined the residue that deposited in various—areas of the shirt, he said that the—the—"Some of the material looked clumpy, it looked odd." Amongst the possible explanations for that, is that the ammunition got wet. Perhaps wet when the defendant was drowning his wife. One of things that opposing council—made issue with—with—sw—switching gears on you—with some of the witnesses in this trial is—is whether or not some of the first responders to that Guana scene actually saw the blood on April Barber's face.
So, let me review with you the testimony that you heard. First of all, the first person on the scene was Lieutenant Ben Tanner. What did Ben Tanner tell you? That despite how dark it was, he saw foam, and he saw red fluid around it.
The next two people who had interaction with April Bar—Barber's body are paramedic Erb, and Mr. Pryor. Neither of them testified that they did in fact see any blood. (UNINTEL PHRASE) very critical point to that, for your understanding, is that neither of them said they saw the wound either. And everybody knows the wound was there at that point. They didn't see the wound, logic would dictate, they wouldn't see the blood.
But also, if you saw the photographs and the testimony, the bloody side of April Barber's face was facing away from where they were standing. It was on the other side of them. Dark as can be out there on that—that part of the beach. I mean, the photographs you have that illuminate this, have the benefit of huge portable lights, and flash photography.
The other thing about those two witnesses saying they didn't see the blood; that's proof that they didn't move her head, which preserved our blood flow evidence, and also is consistent with their training. Preserve the scene. That's good work. Interest point as well, heard testimony about how April Barber had blood on her wrist. Paramedic Erb and Mr. Pryor didn't see that either. That was closer to 'em than April Barber's face. A very sad, sad truth in this case to share with you is that, given that April Barber was murdered, it is fortunate for law enforcement and the prosecution that she was murdered by a bullet that, sad as it is, actually caused paralysis, immediately.
The reason for that is that had she been shot in a way that didn't cause paralysis, it's possible she could've moved, which would have jeopardized the blood flow evidence. But that paralysis is an important point as we go through the evidence.
I want to talk to you about the phone that's present. It's a very critical piece of information, and you heard quite a bit of testimony about it from Dr. Steiner. This bullet, as we discussed, caused instant paralysis. If you have instant paralysis, there's no breathing. No breathing, no foam. Which flies in the face of the defense theory that April Barber was shot before she was in the water.
But because the defendant held April Barber down in the water before she was shot, she was still breathing. Remember, that's when he's holding her down, causing those abrasions. But he held her down until she was unconscious and limp, which allowed that foam to form. Another important thing I'll get to in a moment, but Dr. Steiner told you, when that foam forms, and the body expresses it, it's gone.
What's important about this is, is that you know when it was expressed. She's up by that boardwalk, 'cuz you can see it in the photographs. It's an important point I'll get back to in a moment. But the defense theory on this case is further defeated by other evidence. The victim bleeds—this is the theory in a nutshell, as told by Dr. Sturner. The victim bleeds out in the water after being shot. The water miraculously washes away the blood, all of it, mind you.
The victim doesn't bleed in the nine ways she's carried and dropped for 100 yards up the beach. Then somehow, when she comes—when the—she's laid—on to the sand there at the boardwalk, somehow blood comes out. Well, members of the jury, this body does not bleed at the convenience of the defendant.
Physics did not cease to exist on August 17th, 2002, in North Saint John's County. You know that the victim did not bleed out in the water. As Dr. Steiner testified that from the photographs, her color looked normal. Even though she was deceased, the color looked normal. Meaning, she had not suffered massive blood loss. Again, another fact to remind you why she didn't bleed out in the water is that, again, a sad fact; Miss Barber did bleed out in the body bag. Also—if I understand the—the defense theory from the testimony, the defendant wants—to explain that the railway at the boardwalk caused the series of abrasions that you've seen.
That simply doesn't work. I mean, just look at the photographs. Look at the nature of those abrasions. That's not a slide down a railing. As—Dr. Steiner told you, "From a railing, you get splinters, you don't get abrasions like that." Also, some of those abrasions are described, behind the ear, on the victim as punctate abrasions. Something's pokin' in there.
As Dr. Steiner told you, given the scenario, it's most likely coquina shells being pushed into her as she's being held down. The other thing is, that the railway doesn't actually make sense is that, under the defendant's own theory if Miss Barber's body slid down that railway, she was already dead. Yet, what did the doctor tell you? Dr. Steiner told you, "Those abrasions had an acute reaction. She was alive."
I like to talk a little bit about the search for the phantom, in this case, the alleged robber. On the evening of August 17th, 2002, as law enforcement became involved in this, they had a very vague description of a car, and the defendant's description of the phantom, which included nothing more than a clothing description.
He said, "He could see his face 'cuz it was too dark out there." Given that vague information, law enforcement still did multiple searches of the Guana Beach area with canines, with metal detectors, with the helicopters, including the Fleer infrared technology. Bear in mind as well, at this—particular area of the beach, A1A (PH) is the only way in and out. And the units responded were look—that were responding, looking for anything suspicious, didn't find anything. Talk to you a little bit about the—testimony of the Pryors, the couple from Tennessee who came in and—and testified that they'd seen a car—somewhere near where Justin Barber's SUV was.
Please, with your common sense review the Pryor's testimony that was presented in this court room. First of all, neither one of them are from this area, or are remotely familiar with that stretch of road. Miss Pryor describes this vehicle as, "light colored". Mr. Pryor, "dark colored".
She described it as a "square sedan". Mr. Pryor describe it as, "What we call a K-Car, probably a Dodge." That's just not very specific, and I'll tell you why. Even including their testimony in this courtroom, they're still referring to Justin Barber's car as a Blazer. A Blazer is made by Chevrolet. He was driving a Toyota 4-Runner. Both of them referred to, what is essentially a 10 mile drive as a "four to five mile drive".
I mean, right off the bat, they're wrong by 50 percent. Mrs. Pryor in a—in a—in a telling moment about her ability to see events, remember them, and testify about them; remember she spent a little bit of time with the defendant as he was—in his SUV awaiting medical attention. She saw the gunshot to his hand, and testified under oath, "It was on his right hand." When it's—not even in controversy that it—it's on his left hand.
She's got a 50-50 chance of gettin' this one right, folks, and she still gets it wrong. Perhaps the truth in the Pryor's testimony came out in the statement like this from Mr. Pryor, "It sure seemed like a lot longer driving back to that beach approach, than it did drivin' north." Let's just even assume they were in the Guana area. How do we even know they were at the—right walkover? You just can't rely on these people for accurate information based on their testimony.
If these people even saw a car, it was nowhere near the defendant's Toyota 4-Runner. As to the investigation as it relates—to the phantom. Detective Cole summed it up best when he was being questioned by defense council. He just followed the evidence. Absolutely critical point for your analysis.
Crime scene technician, John Holmquist, from the FDLE, found absolutely no physical evidence of a third party being on the beach that evening. Further, Mr. Holmquist, and DNA analysts Mr. Gilmore and Miss Lee, "There is no physical evidence on either the defendant or Miss Barber of a third party." I mean, think about that, the defendant's engaged in this struggle for his life, yet no hair, skin, or DNA is found of a third party. Members of the jury, there is no phantom.
I'd like to discuss with you the defendant's drive from Guana Beach to Ponder Vedra Lakes Boulevard. Just look at the position that he left his wife in. He didn't straighten her legs out, didn't put anything under her head, he just drove away. I consider that slightly iron—ironic, given the scenario. He drags his wife 100 yards up the beach in the soft sand. Then he finally gets to a point where he has some traction, and he leaves her.
The defendant says that as he left the boardwalk area, he tried to flag down three different cars on A1A. At least one of them had to swerve to avoid hitting him. Yet, Detective Cole testified there is not one single 9-1-1 call to the sheriff's office about somebody who was shot in the middle of A1A, flagging down cars. And even if someone didn't have a cell phone, I argue to you that one of those motorists would have stopped at one of the gas stations the defendant didn't stop at and call police.
But that didn't happen. The defendant said that, as he got to his car, he was looking for the cell phone. Well, he must've looked everywhere but where it was. He should be desperate to find it. I child could've found that in 10 seconds. He didn't want to find it. Then, what does the defendant do next? Does he just pull up into A1A and block both lanes of traffic, which would certainly someone—summons someone to the area.
No, he drives 10 miles away, passed countless houses, guard houses, and businesses. Doesn't stop at any of 'em. Then he doesn't even stop other motorists. He passed the Pryors, if you believe they're testimony. He didn't try and flag 'em down. His wife's lying on the beach, and why doesn't he stop? "'Cuz some lights were out, and he didn't want to get an old man out of bed." When asked how to describe that, Detective Cole probably said it best, "That is inconceivable." Why did he really drive away?
What does the evidence tell you? He wanted to put time and distance between himself and the crime scene. Let that tide come up and erase some evidence. And remember, driving away was always his plan, 'cuz he had to get rid of the gun. In the four to six weeks prior to Miss Barber's murder, the defendant began a sexual relationship with Shannon Kennedy.
This continued right up until the murder, just a couple of days before. The defendant says that this was a casual relationship, and certainly Miss Kennedy thought so. But does the evidence tell you that the defendant believed that? The defendant asked Shannon Kennedy to go away with him to California and to Georgia within one week of the murder. Not one place, but two. Now, Miss Kennedy said, "I thought maybe he was kind of joking," or—or something like that. That's two different trips he's asking.
And I argue to you, members of the jury, in the politics of men and women, the truth is often said in jest. Then when released from the hospital with his salve and band aids, where does the defendant go? He goes to stay at the Omni Hotel, the very place Shannon Kennedy works. Coincidence? I argue to you it's not, and I'll tell you why.
He insisted on seeing her. The manager of that Enterprise Rent-a-Car, David Esposito, said that he told Justin, "Don't go in and see her. You can use my cell phone and call her." But he went in anyway. The testimony from David Esposito, he had to all but kick the defendant out of the Enterprise office. Then, when the defendant is being—talking to Detective Cole and others at Saint John's County Sheriff's office, he finds out that Shannon Kennedy is there. What's he do? He asks if she'll give him a ride home.
Then, couple weeks after the murder, he calls her again. Couple months after the murder, he comes by with a gift, the maple syrup. Does that sound like somebody who just wants a casual relationship? And if Shannon Kennedy was actually a relationship that was casual in nature to the defendant, would he have lied about it to Detective Cole?
Remember, he only admitted this when he was told that Shannon Kennedy was in another interview—room at the Sheriff's office. Starting at—January 1st of-- 2001, the defendant carried approximately $9,000 in credit card debt. If you fast forward a little more than a year and a half to August, September of 2002, the time of the murder, that figure has risen to $58,000 in credit card debt alone. Not student loans, not mortgages, car payments, credit card debt, $58,000. That went up approximately $50,000 in just a year and a half.
What explains this rapid expansion? The defendant was getting credit card cash advances to pay for his massive e-trade losses. I mention that to you, not just 'cuz $58,000 in credit card debt is just such a big number. This is somebody who affirmatively needed the $2 million in insurance money. If I understood defense council, they will be arguing to you that the insurance was a good idea, because April Barber—Barber's family history had some health problems, and they could get this policy for a relatively cheap amount.
Is that true? Well, what's the defendant say after the murder? Eleven months after they bought the policy, oh, he thought they decided to let it lapse. Let it lapse, it was a good idea 11 months ago? Nothing's changed in their lives substantially, yet now they're deciding to let it lapse? Is that true? It's for you to decide.
But an important point that you must know from the evidence that was testified too, from that witness stand, is that it was the defendant who got the notices on premium payments on April Barber's policy. You heard that that was actually usual from the represent of First Colony (PH) . That someone other than the insurer would receive notices. It went to his address in Jacksonville, while April Barber was residing in Thomasville, was nothing more than a weekend visitor.
That's significant because what happened here based on the evidence presented to you. Logic dictates that Justin Barber told his wife to pay the last premium payment so that when he was questioned by police, and he knew how suspicious $2 million would look, he could say, "I thought we let it lapse. I had no idea my wife paid that." Put nothing passed this man. This crime is that diabolical. Remember please, as well, as it relates to the insurance; the defendant walked into the insurance agent's office and told them, "This is what I want."
That agent never met April Barber. And again, it was the defendant who received the premium notices and correspondence on that policy. And of course, he was always the beneficiary. He stood to profit by his wife's death by $2 million. The old adage is true, even if it's corny, the defendant has two million reasons to commit this crime.
As you heard during the course of the investigation, the Saint John's County Sheriff's office took the defendant's two computers, his work computer and his home computer into evidence. They were subsequently transmitted to the—Tallahassee Crime Lab of Computer Science for the FDLE. Of interest and of note are a few things, and—and the first I want to share with you is the—the February 14th, 2002 search about six months before the murder; "trauma cases gun shot right chest".
So, on February 14th, Valentine's Day of 2002, the defendant types in this search query, "trauma cases gun shot right chest". That's pretty specific. I'm gonna fast forward you to February 20th, a few days later, also in 2002. Hopefully everyone can see that. But the search term, although similar, is slightly different, "medical trauma gun shot chest".
Also on the 20th, "medical trauma gun shot chest". The different between these two, if you recall the testimony, is that we have search results here of 31 through 40, and down here, 41 through 50. What that tells you, the first board you saw in those two is, this is no accident or mistake. This is careful progress of internet research. The defendant is preparing himself for what happened on August 17th, 2002, six months in advance.
Now, I ask you, rhetorically, what are the odds of somebody researching, "gunshot wound to the right chest", getting a gunshot wound to the right chest six months later? Those odds just don't exist. The next search to show you actually occurred on July 19th, of 2002, one month before the murder. Importantly about this are the query terms, "Florida divorce". Also interesting about the testimony about this particular search, it's partially deleted.
I mean, law enforcement was lucky to recover. You don't even have the heading in this search. We'll talk more about that in a little bit. These searches that I've just shown you all took place on the defendant's work computer, his laptop. Switching to his home computer. Right to the day of the murder, August 17th, 2002, in the evening, matter of hours before April Barber was murdered, and very shortly before the two of them went out to dinner that evening.
The defendant's downloading songs and they icue—include, "Used to Love Her", by Guns 'n Roses, "Movin' On", by Rascal Flats, "Knockin' on Heaven's Door". "Knockin' on Heaven's Door" by Guns 'n Roses. I mean, imagine the visual on this as April Barber is getting ready for dinner, and the defendant's having his own little concert, psyching himself up for what he's about to do.
"I Used to Love Her", by Guns 'n Roses, that song was deleted on September 3rd, 2002. Why is that date significant? Well, first of all, it's the only song of the songs that were downloaded on that occasion that the analysts can definitively say was deleted. But it was deleted on September 3rd, 2002, one day before the computer was surrendered to law enforcement. Seven, 19, '02, July 19th, less than one month before the murder a search on the defendant's computer, "Florida divorce".
Mid August, Shannon Kennedy is with the defendant in the Jacksonville condo. She testified that she saw him putting up pictures of his wife and family. She said before she could even ask him about it, he said, "We've got some relatives coming into town, and I need to keep up appearances." What's going on there?
Members of the jury, I get to come back and talk to you in a moment. When I do, I'll be asking you to return a verdict of guilty as charged for First Degree Murder. Thank you. (


text:
2014 AMA Motorcycle Hall of Fame Breakfast at Daytona
The 2014 AMA Motorcycle Hall of Fame Breakfast at Daytona, presented by Yamaha, will again include the popular silent auction fundraiser in addition to the featured guest, Hall of Famer Craig Vetter.
Vetter will be interviewed onstage, answer audience questions and sign autographs with other Hall of Famers at the Daytona 500 Club on Friday, March 14, in Daytona Beach, Fla.
The silent auction will feature one-of-a-kind autographed posters and memorabilia, plus items donated by a number of companies in support of the Hall of Fame. Companies include presenting sponsor Yamaha, Motul USA, Motion Pro and others. Tickets are available here.
This year's special guest, Hall of Famer Craig Vetter, is a renowned motorcycle inventor, designer and racer. Vetter's iconic Windjammer fairings were ubiquitous in the 1970s and '80s, and he designed bikes like the Mystery Ship and the Triumph X-75 Hurricane before turning his attention to high-mileage motorcycles, a cause he still champions today with a series of contests.
"The silent auction is always a great way to pick up something amazing, like a poster autographed by dozens of AMA Motorcycle Hall of Famers, along with some great products from companies that support the Hall of Fame, with all the proceeds going to a great cause," said Jeffrey V. Heininger, chairman of the American Motorcycle Heritage Foundation. "Tickets are still available for our annual Breakfast at Daytona, and we certainly hope you can make it to this Hall of Fame event honoring Craig Vetter."
The AMA Motorcycle Hall of Fame Breakfast at Daytona will be held at the Daytona 500 Club on the infield of Daytona International Speedway on the second Friday of Bike Week, on March 14, with proceeds going to the AMA Motorcycle Hall of Fame. For more information, visit http://www.motorcyclemuseum.org.


text:
Church Planting
Church Planting brings into clear focus a task that lies at the very core of Christian mission, the formation of new churches. While the term does not square with some New Testament metaphors for the church -- body of Christ, a building -- it corresponds well with common New Testament imagery for evangelization: planting, watering, and God making the plant grow. It contributes to the biblical understanding that the church is a living organism. It also serves well to express the process of introducing the gospel into a new community of people, resulting in a new congregation of believers springing forth among them.
The use of this term to give focus to the special task of new church formation is represented in old titles like that of John Nevins' landmark book, The planting and development of missionary churches (1886) and Peill and Rowland's World Dominion Press book, Church planting (n.d.). The term has in recent decades come back into common usage under the influence of the Church Growth movement. Two important principles of church growth are brought into focus in the use of "church planting." First, there are in the world thousands of unreached peoples, clearly definable communities of people among whom there exists no church and no faithful, culturally relevant expression of the gospel.
Secondly, evangelism is not evangelism in the biblical sense unless it results in the incorporation of new believers into the church. The obvious implication of these two principles is that many new churches will need to be formed if the gospel is to be proclaimed to every people.
Certain elements inherent within these church growth principles correspond with Anabaptist concerns. First, the gospel is not fully represented simply through verbal communication. It needs to be expressed in a life of obedience together. Secondly, believers are members of a body, not individuals standing alone in their faith. (On the other hand, Church Growth theory does not adequately recognize that the church is a community of reconciliation in and through which is broken down the wall of enmity that separates individual people and groups of people from each other.)
Anabaptist Vision and Church Planting
In their letter to Thomas Müntzer in September 1524, Conrad Grebel and his friends reveal that their ideas about. the church were changing. They had been faithful colleagues of Zwingli but over the issue of the authority of the government to determine when and how the church was to be reformed, these men had become increasingly doubtful about the authenticity of a church whose very existence was dependent on the decision of the civil government.
After critiquing Müntzer at several points, explaining at the same time their own views, Grebel challenged Müntzer to "go forth with the Word and establish a Christian church," congregations of believers committed together to Christ and his rule. In just a few short months, under threat of imprisonment or banishment from Zürich they themselves would act on this challenge, caught up in a powerful impulse to go from town to town, from canton to canton, from principality to principality, declaring and sharing their new vision of the kingdom of God and his church.
This impulse comes close to the core of the vision that most Anabaptists were caught up with. The premier task was to "go forth ... and establish a Christian church," to set out with the intention of forming new cells of people of God, new expressions of the body of Christ -- in cities, towns and villages, among groups of people where an authentic church had not yet been planted.
It was a vision and an impulse similar to the one that had captured the imagination of the people from Cyprus and Cyrene who had been to Jerusalem on Pentecost and later went to Antioch to form a fellowship of followers of Jesus the Messiah there. That vision captured the imagination of Paul, who seems to the modern Christian observer almost irresponsible in his urge to press on to yet another town to form a cell of believers in Jesus there.
it might well be said that some elements of this urge to form new fellowships of believers wherever possible were carried over from the clear impulse in Hellenistic Judaism to form new synagogue fellowships wherever they could, having clear criteria in mind as to how that was to be accomplished. But in sharp contrast to synagogue fellowships, these cells of believers in Jesus were to be profoundly assimilative. This impulse, imparted by Jesus to his disciples in both word and action, was to gather peripheral people -- the disinherited, the despised, the disregarded, and the disenfranchised of the larger community -- making them members of the body of the new community. This impulse springs to life in the work of Paul, a Pharisee of the Pharisees, who takes into his circle people who in Jewish practice had no hope of ever partaking of the feast of the kingdom.
Mennonites and Church Planting
Within the Anabaptist movement the impulse to go forth and establish the church was subverted within a generation or two. On the one hand, there quickly developed an alternative impulse -- to gather people out of the threatening, evil world, take them to the safe pastures of Moravia, and form colonies of heaven there. The clear implication of this Hutterian strategy of mission was that the world was not redeemable; one needed to be saved out of the world into a pure, safe, colony of heaven.
On the other hand, within the mainstream of Swiss, German, and Dutch Anabaptism, the impulse to "go forth ... and establish a church" by forming new congregations in every village and town was subverted when intense persecution and other factors transformed large segments of the Anabaptist community into "the quiet in the land." It was in the lengthening experience as relatively isolated quiet people in the country that a distinct ethnic, subcultural identity became an increasingly pervasive element in their self-consciousness as church.
The mindset of such a Christian subculture becomes in certain respects like the mindset of the Christendom from which the Anabaptist, had separated: The church has already been established. Everyone that counts is already a Christian. This thought certainly applies within the community, but it also easily comes to apply beyond the community. For Luther, sending someone into another principality to proclaim the gospel and form a new church was tantamount to political subversion. In a corresponding way, to many Christian communities with a strong ethnic identity, going to another community to start a new church appears at least presumptuous. To people of such a mindset, the impulse to form a new congregation is reduced to a function of the migration of a significant segment of the community to a new location. So it is that in the Mennonite experience, migration has been the primary model for the formation of new congregations.
Even entering the 20th century, when Mennonites were stirred to launch new efforts to evangelize and plant new churches in North America and overseas, a strong element of the strategy has been to depend on a number of people migrating or commuting to the new area to form the core of the new congregation. In the case of mission in non-Western societies, the method of the mission compound coupled with the mission boarding school was the core of the strategy to mold or enculturate a community of converts into the image of the sending church in a pattern corresponding substantially to the civilizing vision of much of the establishment-oriented Protestant mission movement.
Models for Church Planting
Transplanting -- taking a whole plant or a branch and planting it in a new place -- is a metaphor that can be helpfully used to describe the process of church formation by migration. It illustrates taking a body of people from one or more existing congregations and gathering them in a new setting to from the core, or even the bulk, of a new congregation. A new congregation formed in this way will have characteristics similar to the congregation(s) of origin. Its capacity for incorporating new people of diverse backgrounds into itself, will not be substantially different from that of the congregation of origin. It is not a foregone conclusion that churches formed in this way will be effectively involved in mission in their surrounding community; the migrating group itself already constitutes a church. If the community into which this group migrates is distinctly different culturally from the migrating group, the possibilities for the new church to become indigenous to the new community are clearly limited.
Hundreds of new Mennonite congregations in cities and rural areas of North America have been started in this way. Many of them have existed for decades, but there is still a clear consciousness of who are the "Mennonites" (that is the immigrants or commuters of Mennonite family background) and who are the "community people" (the members of non-Mennonite background).
Seed-planting -- taking a seed of a plant and planting it in a new place to become a new plant -- is a metaphor that can helpfully be used to describe the sending of representative missionaries or church planters from existing congregations to a different community or society to work towards the formation of a new church made up of people of that community or society. By sending only a few representatives into the new context, the formation of a new church will be dependent on success in calling people of that community to faith and forming them into a body of believers. Since the number of representatives is so small, leaders for the new congregation will have to be recruited from among the people gathered from the community. The cultural patterns of the community will have a formative effect on the new congregation, thus assuring that it will be more indigenous (contextualization).
Church Planting Strategy
In the 1980s a number of Mennonite conferences in North America recognized their need to sharpen their commitment to the mission God has given the church. One form of response was to set goals for stewardship and mission. Taken together, these conferences had goals to plant well over 1,000 new congregations in a decade. While there is much difference of opinion over the validity of setting goals in Christian ministry, these goals stimulated the churches to reflection and new activity in mission.
Mennonite churches in other countries may not be setting goals like the North Americans, but in some places there is evident a similar kind of intentionality about church planting. In the mid-1960s a remarkable number of people were coming to faith in Java. Beginning in about 1970 the leaders of the Evangelical Church of Java took deliberate steps to foster the formation of new congregations. They reflected carefully on the stages and criteria for church formation. The number of "mature" congregations in that conference increased from 18 in 1970 to 60 in 1988, with 105 branch congregations still in earlier stages of development.
One of the major challenges of church planting is the selection and training of people to lead. Church planting requires certain abilities not essential for leadership in established congregations. It requires an ability to envision something that does not yet exist and then bring it into being. It requires the ability to adapt quickly and to tolerate sudden change. It requires the ability to enter and thrive in unfamiliar communities. The challenge is to identify and learn how to develop these characteristics in leaders.
Nevius, John L. Planting and Development of Missionary Churches. N.p.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing House, 1886.
Shenk, David W. and Ervin R. Stutzman. Creating Communities of the Kingdom: New Testament Models of Church Planting. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1988.
Shenk, Wilbert R., ed., Anabaptism and Mission. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1984.
Stoll, Dale L. Church Planting From Seed Time to Harvest. Elkhart, IN: Mennonite Board of Missions, 1986.
Wittlinger, Carolton O. Quest for Piety and Obedience: the Story of the Brethren in Christ. Nappanee, IN: Evangel Press, 1978.: 505-9.
|Lawrence M Yoder
|Date Published
Cite This Article
MLA style
Yoder, Lawrence M. "Church Planting." Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. 1989. Web. 30 Sep 2023. https://gameo.org/index.php?title=Church_Planting&oldid=91447.
APA style
Yoder, Lawrence M. (1989). Church Planting. Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Retrieved 30 September 2023, from https://gameo.org/index.php?title=Church_Planting&oldid=91447.
Adapted by permission of Herald Press, Harrisonburg, Virginia, from Mennonite Encyclopedia, Vol. 5, pp. 157-159. All rights reserved.
©1996-2023 by the Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. All rights reserved.


text:
The successful launch of Microsoft's revamped search engine, Bing, was likely the event that tipped the scales in favor of Yahoo agreeing to a search deal, analysts said.
When Microsoft relaunched Live Search as Bing early last month, the company gained some early ground in search, mainly at the expense of Yahoo, according to analysts' statistics.
That early momentum showed Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz that Microsoft could create a search engine that was capable of drawing new users, and that it would benefit Yahoo to take advantage of the technology, said Neil MacDonald, vice president and distinguished analyst at Gartner Group.
"I credit Bing for being what tipped the deal finally over the edge," he said. "Microsoft has shown they can actually do something that has a chance of reversing the slide of both Yahoo and Microsoft against Google."
Microsoft and Yahoo have been losing ground to Google for some time in search queries and search-based advertising. But it took the companies more than a year to hammer out Wednesday's agreement about how to unify their search businesses.
Under the terms of the 10-year deal, Microsoft's Bing search engine and adCenter platform will power Yahoo's search-based advertising business, while Yahoo's sales team will handle both companies' premium search customers.
Bartz complimented Microsoft on its Bing technology just last week, on a conference call to discuss Yahoo's second-quarter earnings.
"I think Microsoft should be given kudos for Bing; it's a nice product," she said, adding that it was too early to say if people are visiting the site out of curiosity, or if it will help Microsoft to increase its market share over the long term. Microsoft and Yahoo were said to be close to a deal at the time, but nothing official had been revealed.
Though Bing seemed to be a major revamp of Live Search, it consisted mainly of features that had been in Live Search for a while, with some algorithmic and user-interface changes being the main differences, said Matt Rosoff, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft.
The problem was, not a lot of people used Live Search or knew about those features, and the rebrand was Microsoft's way to draw attention to the product, he said.
Bing and the marketing efforts around it have done just that, and early reviews indicate that the new search algorithms are an improvement not only on what Microsoft had before, but also on Yahoo's search engine, Gartner's MacDonald said.
Aside from being good technology, Bing also proved that Microsoft was serious about its investment in search, he said. That likely encouraged Yahoo to give up its search investments in favor of Bing so that it could focus on delivering better online content via its portal to drive online and display advertising.
"I think [Bartz] took a long, hard look at what is Yahoo, and what makes Yahoo distinctive doesn't change," MacDonald said. "The engine underneath isn't Yahoo."
If Bing delivers better search results, he said, it bodes well for Yahoo's ambitions to become a premium destination for online content and to bring more users to its portal.
Yahoo's search direction has been unclear for some time. While it has invested billions in that part of its business with acquisitions of Inktomi and Overture and its own development of search assets, it has never seemed entirely sure whether it wanted to go head-to-head against Google, Rosoff said.
Wednesday's deal shows Yahoo finally made the decision to move ahead as an online portal rather than a search company, he said.
"It was just a matter of deciding whether Yahoo wanted to really be a search company and invest in that area, or wanted to be more of a portal," Rosoff said. Search is Google's core business, he said. "That's what they've always been about. Yahoo's always gone back and forth."
Though abandoning its search efforts may look like a loss for the company, it's likely that Yahoo's search technology—which Microsoft will now have access to—factored into the economics of the deal, he added.
"They had something that Microsoft wanted," Rosoff said. "They're not just giving it up. But it does mean that they're not going to invest in their own search technology anymore."


text:
|By Admin1 (admin) (pool-151-196-110-196.balt.east.verizon.net - 126.96.36.199) on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 6:50 pm: Edit Post
1994: Margaret M. Annes served in El Salvador in San Isidro, Cabanas beginning in 1994
Returned Peace Corps Volunteer Margaret M. Annes can be contacted at mannesaoradfdadgov
Country of Service: El Salvador
Training Group: El Salvador 1
Cities you served in: San Isidro, Cabanas
Arrival Year: 1994
Departure Year: 1996
Work Description: Agroforestry/Soil conservation
Bring us up to date on your life after the peace corps:
I now live in Edmond, OK and work for the FDA as an investigator.
Originally posted: January 3, 2002
Looking for another volunteer who served with this Group?
If you know this volunteer or someone from his or her group and are looking to reconnect with them,
leave a message above where it says "Create New Conversation."
If this is your profile, post any additions, updates or corrections to your profile below where it says "Add a Message."
RPCVs: To add your own RPCV profile click here.
| The Peace Corps Library
Peace Corps Online is proud to announce that the Peace Corps Library is now available online. With over 30,000 index entries in 500 categories, this is the largest collection of Peace Corps related stories in the world. From Acting to Zucchini, you can use the Main Index to find hundreds of stories about what RPCVs with your same interests or from your Country of Service are doing today.


text:
Does satan have the ability to portray his presence everywhere at the same time and where in the bible does it speak of this?
Thanks for the question. First of all, Satan is a created being (Ezekiel 28:15), and he is certainly not God, though he would like to be (Isaiah 14:13-14). And, of course, this is what he promised Eve (Genesis 3:5). In Job 1:7 Satan said that he had been "roaming about on the earth," which surely doesn't sound like omnipresence. Also, in Job 1:6 Satan came before God. In Revelation 12:9 Satan is cast down to earth, out of heaven. Again, this would be impossible if Satan were omnipresent.
Satan has a network of demons, and these (like angels) seem to have a certain restricted territory in which to function (Daniel 10:20; 12:1). I take it that since Satan has demons strategically placed around the world, he is kept informed as to what is happening in the world, but this is not omniscience, nor omnipresence.
Related Topics: Satanology


text:
Confessing Church
Our editors will review what you've submitted and determine whether to revise the article.
- Date:
- c. 1934 - 1948
- Areas Of Involvement:
- Christianity Protestantism
- Related People:
- Martin Niemöller
Confessing Church, German Bekennende Kirche, movement for revival within the German Protestant churches that developed during the 1930s from their resistance to Adolf Hitler's attempt to make the churches an instrument of National Socialist (Nazi) propaganda and politics. The German Protestant tradition of close cooperation between church and state, as well as dislike for the Weimar Republic that governed Germany after World War I, at first caused some churches to take a favourable attitude toward Hitler. But Hitler's church party, the "German Christians," gained control of the German Evangelical Church, a federation formed in 1933 of Lutheran, Reformed, and United territorial churches. Ludwig Müller, supported by the Nazis, was elected Reichsbischof ("imperial bishop") and threatened the authoritative position of the Scriptures and the confessional writings of the Reformation by tolerating the Nazi doctrine of the racial superiority of so-called Aryans.
In opposition to the "German Christians," the Young Reforming Movement was formed within the churches under the leadership of Hanns Lilje, Martin Niemöller, and others. In November 1933 Niemöller founded the Pastors' Emergency League, which resisted the programs of the "German Christians." The Synod of Barmen was held in May 1934, and its theological declaration, spearheaded by Karl Barth, transformed the defensive movement against Nazi control of the churches into an organized revival, especially where German territorial churches were subject to Nazi administration. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who would ultimately be executed for his involvement in a plot to overthrow Hitler, became one of the leading spokesmen for the Confessing Church.
At the end of 1934, at the second synod of the Confessing Church at Dahlem, the church proclaimed its emergency law: the true church in Germany was that which accepted the Barmen Declaration, and, where church leadership was no longer faithful to the true confession, ministers and parishes were to follow the orders of the Confessing Church. Thus, in practice, two Protestant churches developed in Germany: the one under state control and the Confessing Church, which the state did not recognize. The Confessing Church, together with the churches of Bavaria, Württemberg, and Hanover (which had remained independent of Nazi rule), formed the provisional government of the German Evangelical Church.
In 1936 internal confessional and political differences led the Lutheran territorial churches to form the Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Germany, thus eroding the unity of the Confessing Church. The Reformed and United sections of the Confessing Church remained particularly active in protesting against euthanasia and the persecution of the Jews. Nazi pressure was gradually intensified, and increasingly the Confessing Church was forced underground. In 1937 Niemöller and other clergy were arrested. After the outbreak of World War II in 1939, the Confessing Church continued, although it was seriously handicapped by the conscription of clergy and laity. In 1948 it ceased to exist when the territorial churches formed the reorganized Evangelical Church in Germany.


text:
Where to begin??? I can't believe my last posting was almost nine months ago. When I had written that last blog post, I had just been hired to sub for our local school district. I had been warned that it would probably be at least a couple months before I would get a single job, as teachers generally didn't call in sick right away. However, by the third day of school I had a job that was to last two weeks. From there I was hired by a different district to teach RtI...to make a long story short, I have worked the entire school year.
Once I got into my rhythm teaching, I was going to start to blog THEN. But then Stephanie got hit by a car while riding her bike at USC. Then, Dale was injured at work and had to have surgery. (And, as I type this, Dale is still not back) Add that with soccer, football, basketball, Fall baseball, cheerleading, and homework, and you have a recipe for me barely making it onto the computer. In addition, I was still room mom to two kids, Art Master mom for two classes, and team mom. I would (and still do) crash into bed by 9:30 every night.
Crafts? Grocery Game? Scrapping? Baking? GONE, GONE, GONE. I have helped a friend or two when they have needed things or goodies, but that is when people beg. Or bribe. Or look completely desperate. :) However, the word NO has definitely come into my vocabulary this year.
In exciting news, I have lost 29 pounds. I can't believe it myself. For those who know me well, you will know that I hate exercise and the gym. I mostly hate the gym because I hate germs, but that has already been dealt with in another blog post. I joined WW in Feb, and started walking/jogging almost every day. I average 20 miles a week...sometimes more. I love being outside. I am fortunate that where I live there are plenty of hills to kick my booty.
In awesome family news, we have found a church EVERYONE loves. Makes my heart happy. :}
Kids are all doing great. They are all just growing up a little too quickly for me. I can't post without a couple pics, so here are some from last weekends Jr. Prom with Maddi. xoxo
P.S. Stephanie is fine. She saw that the taxi was running the stop sign and dove off her bike right before the taxi rear ended her bike. Here is the kicker though...she carries her bike BACK to her apartment, locks it up, and someone STEALS it. I keep envisioning a homeless man in downtown LA walking around with a jacked up pink Roxy bike. ha ha!