text:
Angel Torres worked overtime to complete his student teaching.
Torres' work day began when most people are asleep: At midnight, he started his overnight shift as a senior service technician for People's Gas, helping the Chicago Fire Department and other public service agencies respond to calls about gas-related fires and explosions.
At 8 a.m., when Torres' shift ended, he headed to Ames Middle School for his student-teaching assignment.
Sleep? "Whenever I can, I guess," Torres said during the school year.
The grueling routine is now over, and Torres–along with fellow student teacher Michael Vargas, profiled in the first installment of "Becoming a Teacher" –are both catching up on sleep.
But with the district's budget woes and the labor unrest surrounding the Chicago Teachers Union contract negotiations, the two men face an uncertain job market. Torres, who recently graduated from Northeastern Illinois University through the Grow Your Own program, hasn't yet begun to apply for jobs and is taking a summer class to finish an English teaching endorsement.
"I am trying to make myself more marketable," he says.
Hiring in CPS typically takes place later than hiring in other school districts in the region. In fact, late hiring has long been a factor that, according to teacher educators, hampers the ability of CPS to attract top teaching talent. One educator has said that late hiring "allows the suburbs to cherry-pick" the best teachers and faulted the district for not holding teacher career fairs until the spring.
Yet CPS spokeswoman Robyn Ziegler says that the current hiring process "enables us to attract an excellent talent pool of prospective teachers." The hiring timeline depends on student enrollment projections and the Illinois General Assembly's budgeting process, she adds.
"Suburbs typically are funded with a greater percentage of local property tax dollars than is CPS, thus making their hiring timelines less reliant on state appropriations," Ziegler says.
Teachers who do find jobs face potential layoffs if enrollment on the 20th day after the start of the school year doesn't meet projections. It's another phenomenon that has been problematic in CPS, although the impact has lessened in recent years: Last year, 167 teachers were cut and 86 of them were re-hired in other schools, according to CPS.
At Ames, his supervising teacher suggested to Torres that he also practice teaching other core subjects besides his primary assignment, 7th and 8th-grade world history. The experience will make him more versatile, he says, and prepare him for potential jobs teaching lower elementary grades or self-contained bilingual classrooms–in both cases, teachers must teach all subjects.
Given the shortage of bilingual teachers, Torres will have one advantage in the job market as a bilingual candidate. But teacher supply statistics from the Illinois State Board of Education show that in fall 2010, social science teaching jobs were among the most competitive, with more than 28 graduating teacher candidates competing for each open position.
Meanwhile, Michael Vargas has begun his job search by networking and "trying to use any connections I've made, to try to get someplace that's a good fit." Over the summer, Vargas plans to drop off resumes in person.
"It's about marketing," he says. "I graduated with 300, 400 teachers. That was just at my school [Northeastern Illinois University]. It's a pretty deep pool. You've got to do anything you can to highlight yourself."
Vargas says he also is putting in time to help Grow Your Own, which focuses on increasing diversity in the teaching workforce by training candidates who already have ties to underserved communities, in its ongoing battle for funding. "Since I'm at work, I can't take the trips down to Springfield. But I'm calling legislators," he says. "It gets to the point where they already recognize your voice."
Anne Hallett, the director of Grow Your Own Illinois, says that funding is slated to be cut from $2.5 million to $1 million in the coming fiscal year. She expects candidates will still be able to have their tuition covered, though.
"It's a one of a kind program that generates an enormous amount of excitement around the country," Hallett says. "We just hope we can make sure the legislature feels the same way."
Helping students become 'investigators'
Torres earned an associate's degree before he enrolled in Northeastern Illinois University in 2005 to pursue his teaching goal. Seven years later, he graduated.
As a student teacher, he initially struggled with classroom management. But over the course of the semester, Torres says he learned how to share the classroom with his students by moving from a teaching model that relied on lectures to a model based on discussion. Doing so helped keep his students more engaged in lessons—a key factor that can curb misbehavior.
"I needed to be more aware of the amount of time I was spending either presenting a lesson or speaking," Torres says. Too much time on either one would keep students from becoming "investigators" of the material, he says.
At the start of his assignment at Ames, in Logan Square, Torres' greatest fear was that he wouldn't be successful helping children learn. But he soon discovered that teaching was the easiest part of the job.
The toughest challenge was adjusting to an environment in which his ideas about what school should be like did not match the reality on the ground.
"There are always things you would like to do to benefit children and the [CPS] administration plays a major role in creating obstacles," he says. His observation is that students miss out on deep learning because instructors teach to the test—a complaint that many teachers have voiced because of the pressure to raise standardized test scores.
A case in point: 8th-grade students who don't know how to structure an essay or spell simple words. "Schools have lost the art of [teaching] writing," Torres says. To make matters worse, Ames serves 7th– and 8th-grade students, who come to the school from five different elementary schools—which makes it tough for Ames teachers to align their teaching and coordinate with students' previous teachers. Plus, Ames has one fewer grade than most middle schools and a shorter time to get them ready for high school.
Torres was also frustrated at the reality of bilingual education on the ground. Ideally, students would receive an increasing percentage of their instruction in core subjects in English as their skills grow in their new language. But at Ames, he says, limited resources forced students to be placed in English-only classes, "scattered throughout the school," before they were ready for it.
Not an outsider
Torres has long seen first-hand, from other vantage points, how schools can fail students. Born and raised in Humboldt Park, he had a less-than-positive experience at the neighborhood's Clemente High School.
"They wanted you to graduate, but what you were going to do after that wasn't their concern," he recalls.
His son's experience in school was similar, and solidified Torres' desire to become a teacher. "When my son was in school, no one was actually guiding [him and his peers] in a positive direction," Torres says. "Many kids need a good role model, and they can't find one in the streets."
Now, Torres lives just seven blocks from Ames. At 47, he's the last of six siblings to graduate from college. He has five children, ranging in age from 7 months to 26 years old, and three grandchildren.
His background, Torres says, will allow him to be especially effective in reaching out to male students. Latino male teachers are among the most underrepresented group in the teaching force.
"I try to make that my objective, to reach out to the boys who come from [single-parent] homes," Torres says. To connect with them, Torres talks about sports. And when students ask about his 9 years in the military, the explanation is simple—and likely a reason that many teens in the community can relate to. "I was trying to find a way to go to school, and they offered to pay," Torres says.
Torres, who found out about Grow your Own from an aunt who saw him struggling to continue financing his education, hopes to stay at Ames.
"If I don't have the opportunity to stay at Ames, the neighboring schools that send their students to Ames – if I can get into one of those, I would be happy, as long as I get to stay in the neighborhood," he says.
Torres adds: "I need the students to see that I am part of the neighborhood, not an outsider coming in to make money and leave. You need to try to make changes, not pull your resources out of the neighborhood."


text:
Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
A Virginia trial court accepted respondent's plea of guilty to a charge of manufacturing a controlled substance. At the hearing at which respondent pleaded guilty, one of petitioner police officers gave a brief account of the search of respondent's apartment that led to the discovery of material typically used in manufacturing the controlled substance. Thereafter, respondent brought a damages action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 in Federal District Court against petitioners, officers who participated in the search of his apartment, alleging that his Fourth Amendment rights had been violated. The District Court granted summary judgment for petitioners on the ground that respondent's guilty plea to the criminal charge barred his 1983 claim. The Court of Appeals reversed in pertinent part and remanded.
MARSHALL, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
David R. Lasso argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs was Charles G. Flinn.
Norman A. Townsend argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Sebastian K. D. Graber and Bradley S. Stetler. *
[ Footnote * ] Fred E. Inbau, Wayne W. Schmidt, James P. Manak, Evelle J. Younger, Daniel B. Hales, and David Crump filed a brief for Americans [462 U.S. 306, 308] for Effective Law Enforcement, Inc., et al. as amici curiae urging reversal.
Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were filed by Charles S. Sims and Burt Neuborne for the American Civil Liberties Union; and by Stephen A. Saltzburg for the University of Virginia School of Law Post-Conviction Assistance Project. [462 U.S. 306, 308]
JUSTICE MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the Court.
The trial court accepted respondent John Franklin Prosise's plea of guilty to one count of manufacturing a controlled substance - phencyclidine. At the hearing at which respondent pleaded guilty, a police officer gave a brief account of the search of respondent's apartment that led to the discovery of material typically used in manufacturing this substance. Thereafter, Prosise brought a damages action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 in Federal District Court against petitioner Gilbert A. Haring and the other officers who participated in the search of his apartment. The question presented by this case is whether respondent's 1983 claim is barred by his prior guilty plea.
On April 27, 1978, pursuant to a plea agreement, Prosise pleaded guilty in the Circuit Court for Arlington County, Va., to one count of manufacturing phencyclidine. The Commonwealth then called one witness, Detective Henry Allen of the Arlington County Police Department. Allen testified that on September 7, 1977, he responded to a radio call directing him to an Arlington apartment which turned out to be leased to Prosise. By the time he arrived, two uniformed officers had placed Prosise under arrest for the possession of a controlled substance. After entering the apartment, Allen noticed various chemicals in the apartment as well as a quantity of what he believed to be phencyclidine. A warrant was later obtained for a search of the apartment. Allen and Detective Petti then conducted a search which led to the seizure of devices and chemicals used to manufacture phencyclidine, [462 U.S. 306, 309] receipts for such chemicals, a paper containing a formula for making phencyclidine, and two buckets containing traces of the substance.
At the conclusion of Allen's testimony, the judge accepted Prosise's guilty plea, finding that it had been entered voluntarily and intelligently and that it had a sufficient basis in fact. On June 23, 1978, the court denied Prosise's motion to withdraw his plea and sentenced him to 25 years' imprisonment. 1
On January 23, 1979, while under confinement in the Arlington Detention Center, Prosise filed a pro se action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 against Lt. Gilbert A. Haring and various other members of the Arlington County Police Department who had participated in the search of his apartment. His complaint alleged that the officers had unlawfully searched his apartment prior to obtaining a search warrant, and that after obtaining the warrant the officers conducted a search that exceeded the scope of the warrant.
The District Court granted summary judgment for defendants on the ground that Prosise's guilty plea to the charge of manufacturing phencyclidine barred his 1983 claim. The court reasoned that Prosise's failure to assert his Fourth Amendment claim in state court constituted a waiver of that right, precluding its assertion in any subsequent proceeding. It relied primarily on this Court's decision in Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258 (1973), which held that when a state criminal defendant has pleaded guilty to the offense for which he was indicted by the grand jury, he cannot in a later federal habeas corpus proceeding raise a claim of discrimination in the selection of the grand jury. The District Court stated that, under the reasoning in Tollett, a guilty plea would similarly foreclose federal habeas inquiry into the constitutionality [462 U.S. 306, 310] of a search that turned up evidence of the crime charged. The court concluded:
The Court of Appeals reversed in pertinent part and remanded for further proceedings. 667 F.2d 1133 (CA4 1981). It held that the principles governing guilty pleas announced in Tollett are applicable only to subsequent habeas corpus proceedings and that the preclusive effect, if any, of a guilty plea upon subsequent proceedings under 1983 "is to be determined on the basis of other principles, specifically, of collateral estoppel and the full faith and credit statute, 28 U.S.C. 1738." Id., at 1136-1137. The Court of Appeals proceeded to examine the law of Virginia "to determine whether, and to what extent, that state would give preclusive effect to the criminal judgment here in issue." Id., at 1138. The court found that under Virginia law "criminal judgments, whether by guilty plea or adjudicated guilt, have no preclusive effect in subsequent civil litigation." Id., at 1139. Because the courts of Virginia would not give preclusive effect to the criminal judgment, it was not entitled to any greater effect under 1738. [462 U.S. 306, 311]
The Court of Appeals concluded that in any event a guilty plea should not "have preclusive effect as to potential but not actually litigated issues respecting the exclusion of evidence on fourth amendment grounds." Id., at 1140-1141. The court cited the general view of courts and commentators that "among the most critical guarantees of fairness in applying collateral estoppel is the guarantee that the party sought to be estopped had not only a full and fair opportunity but an adequate incentive to litigate `to the hilt' the issues in question." Id., at 1141. Unlike a criminal defendant who has been convicted after a full trial on the criminal charges, a defendant who pleads guilty has not necessarily had an adequate incentive to litigate "with respect to potential but unlitigated issues related to the exclusion of evidence on fourth amendment grounds." Ibid.
After the Court of Appeals denied rehearing, id., at 1143, petitioners' suggestion for rehearing en banc was denied by an equally divided court. Ibid. We granted certiorari, 459 U.S. 904 (1982), to resolve the uncertainty concerning the impact of a guilty plea upon a later suit under 1983. 2 We now affirm. [462 U.S. 306, 312]
We must decide whether Prosise's 1983 action 3 to redress an alleged Fourth Amendment violation 4 is barred by the judgment of conviction entered in state court following his guilty plea. Petitioners' initial argument is that under principles of collateral estoppel generally applied by the Virginia courts, Prosise's conviction would bar his subsequent civil challenge to police conduct, and that a federal court must therefore give the state judgment the same effect under 28 U.S.C. 1738. 5
In Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90 (1980), the Court considered whether the doctrine of collateral estoppel can be invoked against a 1983 claimant to bar relitigation of a Fourth Amendment claim decided against him in a state criminal proceeding. The Court rejected the view that, because the 1983 action provides the only route to federal district court for the plaintiff's constitutional claim, relitigation of the Fourth Amendment question in federal court must be permitted. No support was found in the Constitution or in 1983 [462 U.S. 306, 313] for the "principle that every person asserting a federal right is entitled to one unencumbered opportunity to litigate that right in a federal district court, regardless of" whether that claim has already been decided against him after a full and fair proceeding in state court. Id., at 103. The Court concluded that the doctrine of collateral estoppel therefore applies to 1983 suits against police officers to recover for Fourth Amendment violations. The Court in Allen v. McCurry did not consider precisely how the doctrine of collateral estoppel should be applied to a Fourth Amendment question that was litigated and decided during the course of a state criminal trial. Id., at 105, n. 25.
We begin by reviewing the principles governing our determination whether a 1983 claimant will be collaterally estopped from litigating an issue on the basis of a prior state-court judgment. Title 28 U.S.C. 1738 generally requires "federal courts to give preclusive effect to state-court judgments whenever the courts of the State from which the judgments emerged would do so." Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S., at 96 . 6 In federal actions, including 1983 actions, a state-court judgment will not be given collateral-estoppel effect, however, where "the party against whom an earlier court decision is asserted did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate the claim or issue decided by the first court." Id., at 101. 7 Moreover, additional exceptions to collateral estoppel [462 U.S. 306, 314] may be warranted in 1983 actions in light of the "understanding of 1983" that "the federal courts could step in where the state courts were unable or unwilling to protect federal rights." Ibid. Cf. id., at 95, n. 7; Board of Regents v. Tomanio, 446 U.S. 478, 485 -486 (1980) (42 U.S.C. 1988 authorizes federal courts, in an action under 1983, to disregard an otherwise applicable state rule of law if the state law is inconsistent with the federal policy underlying 1983).
The threshold question is whether, under the rules of collateral estoppel applied by the Virginia courts, the judgment of conviction based upon Prosise's guilty plea would foreclose him in a later civil action from challenging the legality of a search which had produced inculpatory evidence. 8 Because there is no Virginia decision precisely on point, we must look for guidance to Virginia decisions concerning collateral estoppel generally. While it is often appropriate to look to the law as it is generally applied in other jurisdictions for additional guidance, we need not do so in this case because the state-law question is not a particularly difficult one.
The courts of Virginia have long recognized that a valid final "`judgment rendered upon one cause of action'" may bar a party to that action from later litigating "`matters arising in a [462 U.S. 306, 315] suit upon a different cause of action.'" Eason v. Eason, 204 Va. 347, 350, 131 S. E. 2d 280, 282 (1963), quoting Kemp v. Miller, 166 Va. 661, 674-675, 186 S. E. 99, 104 (1936). 9 However, "the judgment in the prior action operates as an estoppel only as to those matters in issue or points controverted, upon the determination of which the finding or verdict was rendered." Ibid. Unless an issue was actually litigated and determined in the former judicial proceeding, Virginia law will not treat it as final. See, e. g., Luke Construction Co. v. Simpkins, 223 Va. 387, 291 S. E. 2d 204 (1982); Eason v. Eason, supra. Compare Brown v. Felsen, 442 U.S. 127, 139 , n. 10 (1979). Furthermore, collateral estoppel precludes the litigation of only those issues necessary to support the judgment entered in the first action. As the Virginia Supreme Court stated in Petrus v. Robbins, 196 Va. 322, 330, 83 S. E. 2d 408, 412 (1954), "[t]o render the judgment conclusive, it must appear by the record of the prior suit that the particular matter sought to be concluded was necessarily tried or determined, - that is, that the verdict could not have been rendered without deciding that matter." Cf. Block v. Commissioners, 99 U.S. 686, 693 (1879); Segal v. American Tel. & Tel. Co., 606 F.2d 842, 845, n. 2 (CA9 1979). [462 U.S. 306, 316]
It is clear from the foregoing that the doctrine of collateral estoppel would not be invoked in this case by the Virginia courts for at least three reasons. First, the legality of the search of Prosise's apartment was not actually litigated in the criminal proceedings. Indeed, no issue was "actually litigated" in the state proceeding since Prosise declined to contest his guilt in any way. Second, the criminal proceedings did not actually decide against Prosise any issue on which he must prevail in order to establish his 1983 claim. The only question raised by the criminal indictment and determined by Prosise's guilty plea in Arlington Circuit Court was whether Prosise unlawfully engaged in the manufacture of a controlled substance. This question is simply irrelevant to the legality of the search under the Fourth Amendment or to Prosise's right to compensation from state officials under 1983.
Finally, none of the issues in the 1983 action could have been "necessarily" determined in the criminal proceeding. Specifically, a determination that the county police officers engaged in no illegal police conduct would not have been essential to the trial court's acceptance of Prosise's guilty plea. Indeed, a determination that the search of Prosise's apartment was illegal would have been entirely irrelevant in the context of the guilty plea proceeding. Neither state nor federal law requires that a guilty plea in state court be supported by legally admissible evidence where the accused's valid waiver of his right to stand trial is accompanied by a confession of guilt. See Kibert v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 660, 222 S. E. 2d 790 (1976); cf. North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 37 -38, and n. 10 (1970); Willett v. Georgia, 608 F.2d 538, 540 (CA5 1979). 10 [462 U.S. 306, 317]
We therefore conclude that Virginia law would not bar Prosise from litigating the validity of the search conducted by petitioners. Accordingly, the issue is not foreclosed under 28 U.S.C. 1738.
We turn next to petitioners' contention that even if Prosise's claim is not precluded under 1738, this Court should create a special rule of preclusion which nevertheless would bar litigation of his 1983 claim. As a general matter, even when issues have been raised, argued, and decided in a prior proceeding, and are therefore preclusive under state [462 U.S. 306, 318] law, "[r]edetermination of [the] issues [may nevertheless be] warranted if there is reason to doubt the quality, extensiveness, or fairness of procedures followed in prior litigation." Montana v. United States, 440 U.S. 147, 164 , n. 11 (1979). Yet petitioners maintain that Prosise should be barred from litigating an issue that was never raised, argued, or decided, simply because he had an opportunity to raise the issue in a previous proceeding. Petitioners reason that by pleading guilty Prosise should be deemed to have either admitted the legality of the search or waived any Fourth Amendment claim, thereby precluding him from asserting that claim in any subsequent suit. According to petitioners, such a federal rule of preclusion imposed in addition to the requirements of 1738 is necessary to further important interests in judicial administration.
There is no justification for creating such an anomalous rule. To begin with, Prosise's guilty plea in no way constituted an admission that the search of his apartment was proper under the Fourth Amendment. During the course of proceedings in Arlington County Circuit Court, Prosise made no concession with respect to the Fourth Amendment claim.
Petitioners contend that we should infer such an admission because Prosise had a substantial incentive to elect to go to trial if he considered his Fourth Amendment claim meritorious since the State would most likely have been unable to obtain a conviction in the absence of the evidence seized from Prosise's apartment. In our view, however, it is impermissible for a court to assume that a plea of guilty is based on a defendant's determination that he would be unable to prevail on a motion to suppress evidence. As we recognized in Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 750 (1970), and reaffirmed in Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S., at 263 , a defendant's decision to plead guilty may have any number of other motivations:
We similarly reject the view, argued by petitioners and accepted by the District Court, that by pleading guilty Prosise "waived" any claim involving an antecedent Fourth Amendment violation. Petitioners rely on our prior decisions concerning the scope of federal habeas review of a criminal conviction based upon a guilty plea. See, e. g., Brady v. United States, supra; Tollett v. Henderson, supra; Blackledge v. Perry, 417 U.S. 21 (1974); Lefkowitz v. Newsome, 420 U.S. 283 (1975); Menna v. New York, 423 U.S. 61 (1975) (per curiam). In Brady, we reaffirmed that a guilty plea is not simply "an admission of past conduct," but a waiver of constitutional trial rights such as the right to call witnesses, to confront and cross-examine one's accusers, and to trial by jury. Brady, supra, at 747-748, citing Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 242 (1969). For this reason, a guilty plea "not only must be voluntary but must be [a] knowing, intelligent ac[t] done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and likely consequences." Brady, supra, at 748. In Tollett v. Henderson, we concluded that an intelligent and voluntary plea of guilty generally bars habeas review of [462 U.S. 306, 320] claims relating to the deprivation of constitutional rights that occurred before the defendant pleaded guilty. We held that, because "[t]he focus of federal habeas inquiry is the nature of [defense counsel's] advice and the voluntariness of the plea, not the existence as such of an antecedent constitutional infirmity," 411 U.S., at 266 , Henderson was not entitled to a writ of habeas corpus on the basis of infirmities in the selection of the grand jury.
Our decisions subsequent to Tollett make clear that a plea of guilty does not bar the review in habeas corpus proceedings of all claims involving constitutional violations antecedent to a plea of guilty. A defendant who pleads guilty may seek to set aside a conviction based on prior constitutional claims which challenge "the very power of the State to bring the defendant into court to answer the charge brought against him." Blackledge v. Perry, 417 U.S., at 30 . Because a challenge to an indictment on grounds of prosecutorial vindictiveness was such a claim, we concluded that a federal court may grant the writ of habeas corpus if it found merit in that constitutional challenge. Id., at 30-31. We also applied this principle in Menna v. New York, supra, in holding that a double jeopardy claim may be raised in federal habeas proceedings following a state-court conviction based on a plea of guilty. In Lefkowitz v. New York, supra, we held that Tollett does not apply to preclude litigation of a Fourth Amendment claim subsequent to a guilty plea when the State itself permits the claim to be raised on appeal.
Under our past decisions, as the District Court correctly recognized, a guilty plea results in the defendant's loss of any meaningful opportunity he might otherwise have had to challenge the admissibility of evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. It does not follow, however, that a guilty plea is a "waiver" of antecedent Fourth Amendment claims that may be given effect outside the confines of the criminal proceeding. The defendant's rights under the Fourth Amendment are not among the trial rights that he [462 U.S. 306, 321] necessarily waives when he knowingly and voluntarily pleads guilty. Moreover, our decisions provide no support for petitioners' waiver theory for the simple reason that these decisions did not rest on any principle of waiver. The cases relied on by petitioners all involved challenges to the validity of a state criminal conviction. Our decisions in Tollett and the cases that followed simply recognized that when a defendant is convicted pursuant to his guilty plea rather than a trial, the validity of that conviction cannot be affected by an alleged Fourth Amendment violation because the conviction does not rest in any way on evidence that may have been improperly seized. State law treats a guilty plea as "a break in the chain of events [that] preceded it in the criminal process," Tollett v. Henderson, supra, at 267. Therefore, the conclusion that a Fourth Amendment claim ordinarily may not be raised in a habeas proceeding following a plea of guilty does not rest on any notion of waiver, but rests on the simple fact that the claim is irrelevant to the constitutional validity of the conviction. As we explained in Menna v. New York, supra, at 62-63, n. 2:
Adoption of petitioners' rule of preclusion would threaten important interests in preserving federal courts as an available forum for the vindication of constitutional rights. See England v. Medical Examiners, 375 U.S. 411, 416 -417 (1964); McClellan v. Carland, 217 U.S. 268, 281 (1910); Willcox v. Consolidated Gas Co., 212 U.S. 19, 40 (1909); Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264, 404 (1821). Under petitioners' rule, whether or not a state judgment would be accorded preclusive effect by state courts, a federal court would be barred from entertaining a 1983 claim. The rule would require "an otherwise unwilling party to try [Fourth Amendment] questions to the hilt" and prevail in state court "in order to [preserve] the mere possibility" of later bringing a 1983 claim in federal court. Brown v. Felsen, 442 U.S., [462 U.S. 306, 323] at 135. Defendants who have pleaded guilty and who wish to bring a 1983 claim would be forced to bring that claim in state court, if at all. Not only have petitioners failed to advance any compelling justification for a rule confining the litigation of constitutional claims to a state forum, but such a rule would be wholly contrary to one of the central concerns which motivated the enactment of 1983, namely, the "grave congressional concern that the state courts had been deficient in protecting federal rights." Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S., at 98 -99, citing Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225, 241 -242 (1972), and Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 180 (1961). See Patsy v. Florida Board of Regents, 457 U.S. 496 (1982).
We conclude that respondent's conviction in state court does not preclude him from now seeking to recover damages under 42 U.S.C. 1983 for an alleged Fourth Amendment violation that was never considered in the state proceedings. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is
[ Footnote 2 ] In Metros v. United States District Court for the District of Colorado, 441 F.2d 313 (1970), the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that a guilty plea to one count of possession of heroin must be given preclusive effect in a subsequent civil rights action against police officers who had searched the premises in which the narcotics were found. Other federal courts have concluded, however, that civil rights plaintiffs are not barred from litigating issues that could have been raised in prior proceedings in state court on a different cause of action. See, e. g., New Jersey Ed. Assn. v. Burke, 579 F.2d 764, 772-774 (CA3 1978); Lombard v. Board of Ed. of City of New York, 502 F.2d 631, 635-637 (CA2 1974). Since no motion to suppress evidence on Fourth Amendment grounds was ever raised at the state-court proceedings, this case does not present questions as to the scope of collateral estoppel with respect to particular issues that were litigated and decided at a criminal trial in state court. As we did in Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 93 , n. 2 (1980), we now leave those questions to another day.
[ Footnote 3 ] Title 42 U.S.C. 1983 at the time in question provided:
[ Footnote 4 ] The Fourth Amendment provides:
[ Footnote 5 ] Title 28 U.S.C. 1738 provides, in relevant part, that the "Acts, records and judicial proceedings" of any State, Territory, or Possession "shall have the same full faith and credit in every court within the United States and its Territories and Possessions as they have by law or usage in the courts of such State, Territory or Possession from which they are taken."
[ Footnote 6 ] If the state courts would not give preclusive effect to the prior judgment, "the courts of the United States can accord it no greater efficacy" under 1738. Union & Planters' Bank v. Memphis, 189 U.S. 71, 75 (1903).
[ Footnote 7 ] We have recognized various other conditions that must also be satisfied before giving preclusive effect to a state-court judgment. See generally Montana v. United States, 440 U.S. 147 (1979). For example, collateral-estoppel effect is not appropriate when "controlling facts or legal principles have changed significantly since the state-court judgment," id., at 155, or when "special circumstances warrant an exception to the normal rules of preclusion," ibid.; see, e. g., Porter & Dietsche, Inc. v. FTC, 605 F.2d 294, 300 (CA7 1979); cf. Montana v. United States, supra, at 163 [462 U.S. 306, 314] (preclusive effect to a state-court judgment may be inappropriate when the 1983 claimant has not "`freely and without reservation submit[ted] his federal claims for decision by the state courts . . . and ha[d] them decided there . . . .'") (quoting England v. Medical Examiners, 375 U.S. 411, 419 (1964)).
[ Footnote 8 ] It is our practice to accept a reasonable construction of state law by the court of appeals "even if an examination of the state-law issue without such guidance might have justified a different conclusion." Bishop v. Wood, 426 U.S. 341, 346 (1976). See id., at 346, n. 10. Because we would be particularly hesitant to consider creating a new federal rule of preclusion, however, where a state rule of preclusion may itself be given effect under 28 U.S.C. 1738, we consider petitioners' assertion that the Virginia courts would give collateral-estoppel effect to Prosise's conviction. We emphasize, however, that, standing alone, a challenge to state-law determinations by the court of appeals will rarely constitute an appropriate subject of this Court's review. See this Court's Rule 17.
[ Footnote 9 ] Like the federal courts, the courts of Virginia apply different rules of preclusion to matters arising in a suit between the same parties and based upon the same causes of action as those involved in the previous proceeding. Under the doctrine of res judicata, "`the judgment in the former [action] is conclusive of the latter, not only as to every question which was decided, but also as to every other matter which the parties might have litigated and had determined, within the issues as they were made or tendered by the pleadings, or as incident to or essentially connected with the subject matter of the litigation, whether the same, as a matter of fact, were or were not considered.'" Eason v. Eason, 204 Va., at 350, 131 S. E. 2d, at 282, quoting Kemp v. Miller, 166 Va. at 674, 186 S. E., at 103-104. This doctrine does not apply, however, to a later action between different parties or to a later action between the same parties on a different claim or demand. Ibid.
[ Footnote 10 ] The court below found that, even if the Fourth Amendment issue had been litigated and necessarily determined by the state court, that determination would not be given preclusive effect for an additional reason: under Virginia law, "`a judgment rendered in a criminal prosecution, whether of conviction or acquittal, does not establish in a subsequent civil action the truth of the facts on which it is rendered.'" 667 F.2d 1133, [462 U.S. 306, 317] 1139 (CA4 1981), quoting Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Anderson, 200 Va. 385, 388, 105 S. E. 2d 869, 872 (1958). This general rule is based largely on the traditional principle that collateral estoppel may only be asserted by persons who were either a party or privy to the prior action. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Anderson, supra, at 389, 105 S. E. 2d, at 872. Although the doctrine of mutuality of parties has been abandoned in recent years by the courts of many jurisdictions, see, e. g., Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 439 U.S. 322, 326 -333 (1979); Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation, 402 U.S. 313 (1971), it has not been rejected by the courts of Virginia. Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. Bailey Lumber Co., 221 Va. 638, 272 S. E. 2d 217 (1980).
In one reported case, however, the highest court of the State has allowed a stranger to a criminal conviction to invoke the doctrine of collateral estoppel in an action brought against him by the convicted person. Eagle, Star & British Dominions Ins. Co. v. Heller, 149 Va. 82, 140 S. E. 314 (1927). In Eagle, Star the court held that a convicted arsonist was foreclosed from seeking to recover the proceeds of a fire insurance policy. This exception to the mutuality doctrine was expressly limited to cases in which "the plaintiff who brings [the] action has committed the felony, and seeks to recover the fruit of his own crime." Id., at 105, 140 S. E., at 321. That Eagle, Star announced only a narrow exception to the rule that a criminal conviction may not be given preclusive effect in a later action was confirmed by the court in Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Anderson, supra, at 389, 105 S. E. 2d, at 872. See also Smith v. New Dixie Lines, Inc., 201 Va. 466, 472-473, 111 S. E. 2d 434, 438-439 (1959). Since a 1983 action is not a suit to "recover the fruit" of the plaintiff's crime, the court below reasonably concluded that, under Virginia law, a criminal conviction would not be given preclusive effect in a 1983 action with respect to any issues, including issues that were actually and necessarily decided.
[ Footnote 11 ] Although petitioners also contend that a special federal rule of preclusion is necessary to preserve important federal interests in judicial administration, we fail to understand how any such interests justify the adoption of a rule that would bar the assertion of constitutional claims which have never been litigated. See Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S., at 95 , n. 7; cf. Patsy v. Florida Board of Regents, 457 U.S. 496, 501 -502, 512-513, and n. 13 (1982); Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp., 456 U.S. 461, 476 (1982). Petitioners allude generally to the interests that underlie the principles of collateral estoppel, such as the elimination of "the expense, vexation, waste, and possible inconsistent results of duplicatory litigation." Hoag v. New Jersey, 356 U.S. 464, 470 (1958). Yet these interests are quite simply inapplicable to this case. When a court accepts a defendant's guilty plea, there is no adjudication whatsoever of any issues that may subsequently be the basis of a 1983 claim. There is thus no repetitive use of judicial resources and no possibility of inconsistent decisions that could justify precluding the bringing of such claims. Cf. England v. Medical Examiners, 375 U.S., at 419 . [462 U.S. 306, 324]
Was this helpful?
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
|Club Name
|Game World Name
|Clubs Taken
|Game World Access
No clubs are currently available.
Language: English
Sign Up | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Privacy Policy | Site Map | Corporate | Contact Us
© 2005-2023 Soccer Manager Ltd. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.


text:
Slax author's Blog (RSS)
Network broken on Slax beta, fixed in Slackware current
Lots of people reported that network manager doesn't work on Slax 7.0.9 beta and thus makes them some problems connecting to internet. It has been also noticed that installing dhcp package fixed the issue.
I can see that the same problem has been addressed in Slackware current today. From Slackware's changelog:
n/NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-x86_64-2.txz: Rebuilt. Switched back to dhcpcd instead of dhclient as the default DHCP client in the NetworkManager.conf file. Either one will work, but it's probably better to use dhcpcd by default to avoid a nasty surprise for people who didn't install the dhcp package since they aren't running a DHCP server.
I'm happy that the fix made its way into official Slackware, which means easier maintenance for me :)
User comments
Because I have some connection problems with my "Intel Centrino N-2200" wifi card in Slax7.0.9 (I posted that on blog, http://old.slax.org/forum.php?action=view&parentID=86039, but no reply yet), I try to deal with "NetworkManager-0.9.8.2" you talking about, but using i486 variant, hopping to get a valid connection to my home wireless network.
I download "NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2.txz" from Slackware site and converted from txz into sb module (using 2 ways to obtain .sb module: "txz2sb" and extracting .txz content to a directory and then use "dir2sb").
In both cases, after activating the "new" module, network capabilities gone!
No network at all. Not even those have it before activation!
Deactivating back, the network comes again, but the connection problem still exist.
I'm sure something goes wrong, right?!
I think most likely you'll need some more packages updated, not just network manager.
Stáhnul jsem si také NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2.txz.
Nepoužil jsme však txz2sb ani dir2sb.
NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2.txz jsem rozbalil v adresáři /mnt/live/memory/changes do složky NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2
Zde jsem udÄ›lal modul pÅ™Ãkazem mksquashfs NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2 NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2.sb -comp xz -b 512k.
Připojenà k internetu pomocà Wifi nynà funguje.
Google translate
I downloaded a NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2.txz.
However, we did not use txz2sb or dir2sb.
NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2.txz I unpacked in the directory /mnt/live/memory/ changes in the folder NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2
Here I made a module using mksquashfs NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2 NetworkManager-0.9.8.2-i486-2.sb-comp xz-b 512k.
Connecting to the Internet via Wifi now works.
Here is the download: http://uloz.to/xDEvmFU8/networkmanager-0-9-4-0-i486-2-sb
Hello Tomas. Thank you for the great job with Slax.
Waiting for the next version with network fixed.
I don't want to be rude... but is there an ETA?
Thank you!
I caught up a broken link to gtk+3 on page http://www.slax.org/modules.php?detail=gtksourceview3
A common way to monetize distribution is their development.
Thomas! Close the project and not have us.
Maybe this is not the best way for to get some help, but a still needing it. I am trying to help a lady that unplugged her computer and damaged to her Windows. At first everything was fine, I was doing a backup of her files thanks to Slax. I got all her .jpg and all her .doc but later Slax stoped working. I made a new USB Slax drive but this one never works again. What I got was this messages:
"In: sbin/fsch.aufs: no such file or directory."
"Fatal error occured - can't find excecutable chroot command."
"/memory/union #"
Can you give me some advice?
Thanks in advance.
Tomas - If you have a moment, I'm having a problem with the buildscript server. I uploaded a buildscript which was accepted but now it appears to be in an odd state. No longer shows up in the modules list but also cannot be uploaded again, updated or deleted. Details:
I'm exploring using rEFI as a route for creating a universally bootable slax usb. I'm close to it working, I opened a thread on the forum discussing this.
sorry that was supposed to be on the "Boot usb from a mac" post :(
Where have disappeared the module 2679-kernel-source-slax.sb for kernel version 3.8.2 ???...
Slax 7.0.8 - for bootinst.sh to make a usb/ext hdd bootable on linux, it runs fine.
However, when I try to boot the usb/external hdd, extlinux reports:
"Could not find kernel image: linux"
For consideration - Cinnamon is going to be built _without_ gnome dependancies as a standalone DE. Instead of KDE, Cinnamon might be a nice option/change.
Also for consideration - Plymouth for the initrd.xz, the-no-kernel-patch-for-bootsplash like all the other major live distros use.
Zip repair easily repair corrupt and damaged zip files CRC errors and fix zip files corruption issues
Didn't know where to submit a bug report.
Dragging a file from the archiver (i.e. a file that is in a zip archive) to the desktop places it in root and not on the Desktop, for some reason.
First off, sorry for posting this on the wrong blog post! But I didn't find anywhere else to ask this question.
How do I modify the ISO file so that Copy to Ram is selected by default and Persistent changes is not?
I've looked through 'syslinux.cfg', but there are so many lines that I have no clue where to start.
@ Krizz:
That's easy, replace "slax.flags=perch,xmode" with "slax.flags=toram,xmode" in line 32 (the default section)
Hi everyone! Does anybody know when can we expect 7.1.0? :)
Through a 3 year. Immediately 8.0. It's a tradition.
Thomas need money. But he does not want them to take.
Users require Slax. But they don't want to do it yourself. This is a conflict of interest.
Hi There, I've noticed for a while that posix overlay has been dropped, just wondering about the what's and why's of that? Also, are the older (older than 6.1.2) versions of slax available anywhere, like on github or sorceforge or something? Thanks in advance.
Older version of slax available at
Score, thanks jcsoh.
the wireless can't work
Finally got round to trying the latest SLAX. Looks very good and installing modules is very slick.
But it doesn't work with the WIFI in my Acer Aspire 725. So I plugged in an old Philips wifi usb dongle and it immediately found my access points but it seems unable to remember the WPA keys.
Is there a bug tracker or forum where I should report this sort of thing?
Also Firefox seemed unable to play any sound. I tried Libre.fm and the player loaded but no sound came out. I tried messing about with the mixer and sound setup and the test button on the sound setup dialog gave a pleasant noise so it seems that it should work.
I'd like to use SLAX as it seems like a very light and slick distro but the application I have in mind relies on reading from the sound card and connecting via WIFI.
That is passed but no wlan interface stores the network password, could you give me some information about it, every time I go to connect through wlan have to enter the password?
These cameras are being widely used by the secret agents and detectives across the globe to resolve their tricky cases. But this thing becomes difficult to some extent for an ordinary person but now, there are ample such products in the market. These spy cameras have been made available for the common people as well to protect their nearest and dearest and valuable properties from any mishap and safeguard their rights as well.
In the world of utmost corruption, these spy cameras can also prove their worth and can let the cat out of the bag. One can use these spy cameras in home, office, shops, hotels, restaurants or wheresoever's to keep a track of the activities and to be aware of any crime taking place. These spy cameras could be a great help for the police department as well. They can be used by them to nab the culprits and recover the lost items.
Dear Tomas,
when can we expect version 7.0.9 with repaired connection to network
(since the BETA version will be one year old soon)?
Hi, I am using Slax Latest Release. I just downloaded from this website. And now internet is not working. It is connected to internet, but it is not updating any repository and also not pinging anything. I tried to ping 192.168.43.1(My default gateway) it worked. Please fix this issue or tell me how I can fix this. Thank you.


text:
"We're rebranding/remaking our company. We need a new image. When people think about our company, we want them to think (fill in the blank)."
Call me cynical (many of you already do), but I've heard this story before. It's just not that easy to turn a ship (or a company) that's become so big and has already grounded a reputation (be it good or bad).
That's the mindset I had when I spoke to the folks at Fairchild Semiconductor. But with this company, maybe more than any other, I have to give it the benefit of the doubt due to its history. Most people in the industry would agree that this company played a big role in making Silicon Valley what it is today. It was founded in the 1950s by a group of people who would become some of the biggest names in the industry, including Gordon Moore and Bob Noyce. The list of firsts is equally impressive.
Fast forward to the early 2000s, and you have a company that's plodding along. It's staying afloat but not making any big news. That's a not a bad story, but it's not a great one, either, and and the current leaders are looking to take the company beyond that.
Something clearly started happening at Fairchild about a year ago. I wasn't sure what it was, but it's since been revealed. In the company's own words: "Fairchild is building a culture that is focused on inventing and 'design thinking' -- part of our DNA and heritage that remains an essential part of Fairchild today."
That seems interesting, but what does it actually mean?
The company wants to be known as a leader in power-related products. I met recently with Sajal Sahay, Fairchild's new vice president of corporate marketing. He said the areas where his company wants to excel include power efficiency, mobile power, power for home appliances, and industrial power. That's a good starting point, because those are all areas that are in need of improvement in our industry.
Can the company do it? With a new tag line of "the power to amaze," it has the ideas down right. Now comes the hard part -- putting those ideas into play. We know that Fairchild's founders clearly could have pulled it off. Let's hope the current crop of leaders can write a similar script.
Related posts:


text:
Certified Professional Dog Trainers serving Gaston County, Lincoln County, York County and South Charlotte.
Whether you are bringing home a new puppy, adopting a rescue dog, or just want your best friend to have the best manners, we can help your dog to be a perfect pet dog for your family. With an emphasis on building a stronger relationship between human and canine, Perfect Pet Dog Training, LLC shows owners how to better communicate with their dog to build mutual trust and respect. We provide expert training in your home or at our facility. Our training programs will give you results that will last a lifetime.
Please contact us to schedule your appointment by phone 704.770.8205, or email email@example.com, and we will get you on our calendar.
To Get Started:
Contact Perfect Pet Dog Training, LLC to schedule an initial consultation in which we will meet with you and your dog for an assessment of your dog's behavior and training needs. We will then work together to determine a training program that is customized to your training goals and will deliver the best results in addressing your dog's behavior.
Facility hours are by appointment. Please contact us to schedule a tour, evaluation or lesson.
FREE LIFETIME SUPPORT with the completion of any of our training programs!
Perfect Pet Dog Training Services
Perfect Pet Dog Training's Private Lessons are designed to suit you and your dog's individual needs and your busy schedule.
Our Group Classes are great for socialization and help your dog learn obedience in a real life environment.
Our Day Training program starts with an evaluation to develop a detailed training plan and schedule.


text:
The Catalan artist José Colomer Fonts started out doing stories like 'Chiton Se Rueda!', 'Gaspar Mastropicio' and 'Publicidad OK' for Spanish comic books in the 1970s. He was affiliated with Francisco Bargadà's Studio Recreo between 1978 and 1983, where he produced comics art in various styles and genres for various European publishers. He has worked extensively in Disney comics, illustrating stories for the Italian, Danish as well as the Dutch publishers.
Between 1981 and 1983, he anonymously illustrated several stories with 'Mickey Mouse', 'Donald Duck' and 'Uncle Scrooge' for the Italian publisher Mondadori in Topolino and Almanacco Topolino. From 1982, he was also present in the Dutch Donald Duck weekly with 'José Carioca' and 'Donald Duck'. He also took on 'Duck' stories for Denmark. He began working independently for the Italian Topolino in 1988, while continuing his contribution to Denmark and Holland.


text: A U.S. senator has asked the Federal Trade Commission to scrutinize the use of big data by Facebook and other Internet companies, following a controversy over a Facebook experiment on some of its users."....I think the industry could benefit from a conversation about what are the appropriate rules of the road going forward," Senator Mark R. Warner of Virginia said in a statement.His comments Wednesday follow widespread outrage over a 2012 experiment by Facebook which adjusted the content of news feeds of 689,003 English-speaking users to study the impact on their moods.In a letter to the FTC, Warner has asked whether the Facebook experiment violates the agency's consent agreement of 2011 with the company and also section 5 of the FTC Act which prohibits ''unfair or deceptive acts or practices."Privacy group Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a complaint earlier this month to the FTC stating that the study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, violated the privacy consent order that requires the social-networking company to protect its users' privacy, and is also a deceptive trade practice.Warner is also aiming at the establishment of a broader framework for the use of big data that is collected by social networks. The increasing collection and analysis of big data, and its growing role in the business plans of Internet companies, raises questions whether oversight, if any, is appropriate and whether best practices should be developed and implemented by the industry or the FTC, he wrote in his letter to the FTC.While Facebook may not have been legally required to conduct an independent ethical review of its research, the experiment raises questions whether procedures need to be in place to govern such research, Warner wrote.The senator asked whether the FTC makes any distinction between the passive observation of user data in contrast to "actively manipulating" it. He also wants to know if consumers should be provided with more of an explicit option to opt in or out of such studies. Citing reports, he said that it was not clear whether Facebook users were adequately informed and given an opportunity to participate or not. Warner also asked the FTC if it is appropriate for research findings to be shared with participants before being made public.However, the senator is not in favor of increased federal regulation, recommending instead industry self-regulation to address public concerns."It's clear that people were upset by this study and we take responsibility for it. We want to do better in the future and are improving our process based on this feedback," a Facebook spokesman said via email. "The study was done with appropriate protections for people's information and we are happy to answer any questions regulators may have."The FTC confirmed receipt of Warner's letter but declined further comment.The Facebook researcher behind the experiment has defended it, and said the research aimed to investigate a common concern that seeing friends post positive content leads others to feel negative or left out.( The three researchers were also concerned that exposure to friends' negativity might lead people to avoid visiting Facebook.The Facebook algorithm reduced exposure to friends' positive emotional content in the news feed in one experiment, while reducing exposure to negative emotional content in the feed in a parallel experiment. In the paper, the authors held that the experiment procedure "was consistent with Facebook's Data Use Policy, to which all users agree prior to creating an account on Facebook, constituting informed consent for this research."John Ribeiro covers outsourcing and general technology breaking news from India for The IDG News Service. Follow John on Twitter at @Johnribeiro. John's e-mail address is firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
Fanorama (also known as Fanorama Society and Fanorama Cabal) is a Rhode Island-based zine and zine distro produced by journalist/activist REB (b. Richard E. Bump, May 25, 1956, Portland, ME, USA).
First published in 1992, Fanorama emerged as part of the queercore movement, largely inspired by the zine J.D.s (edited by G.B. Jones and Bruce LaBruce), and the Toronto scene from which J.D.s came. Initially a punk-edged collage of gay porn and commentary, REB soon added a strong, anti-assimilationist political voice to the mix, turning the zine into an artful version of the weekly "Queerbeat" column he contributed to Rhode Island's alternative arts rag, The NicePaper. The Fanorama tag line at the time became, "For those who want a little smut with their politics, or a little politics with their smut."
As REB's political leanings grew heated, Fanorama began to generate controversy, particularly as it addressed racism and sexism in the gay mainstream establishment; one detractor in the media called REB a "kiddie pornographer-turned-moral watchdog". During this period, REB was instrumental in leading protests against a local gay bar over a management-led racist incident - a battle which would take center stage in the gay politics of Rhode Island for the better part of a year. Despite what he began to call his "infamy," REB's popularity as a personality grew, and he was invited to emcee a mid-90'S Rhode Island Gay Pride celebration; though accepting the position, he would take its organizers to task in later years for the increasing commercialism of the event.
Over the course of its publication, Fanorama ran interviews and photo essays with such queer counter-culture heroes as comic book artist Robert Kirby, punk rockers Pansy Division, filmmaker and zine editor Scott Treleaven, and Tommy Ace of the controversial AIDS humor zine, Diseased Pariah News. It has been dubbed "the Grandaddy of Queerzines" by Factsheet 5. After publishing an issue in which REB mourned his break-up with future Juha frontman Collin Clay, Fanorama took a turn towards pagan spirituality, influenced greatly by his work with the Radical Faeries.
The current incarnation of Fanorama is essentially a prisoners' rights magazine (though it retains the porn and spiritual angles), influenced initially by the stories prisoners sent to its "Letters" section. The relationships REB developed with prisoners over time, particularly zine editor Neil Edgar, were also the impetus for Fanorama to become a publisher of prisoner-authored works. This has led to its constituency expanding from its queer following to include an anarcho-punk/activist readership, particularly since having caught the attention of Maximum Rock 'N' Roll and Punk Planet, and more recently gaining the praises of headbanger favorite, Metal Maniac. REB told Punk Planet in 2005: "After doing my zine for over 12 years, after publishing and distributing countless inmate-produced publications, after corresponding with literally hundreds of prisoners, the only folks who ever made me feel 'unsafe' were folks in the free world."
The film division of Fanorama has included REB's documentary Queer Rage (chronicling events leading up to and coming out of a riot at the RI State House) and art films Nocturne In E Flat, Jerk Off, Waltz of the Flowers, and the upcoming 13 Boys. Shot mostly on Super-8 film or video, they have been played at queer indie film festivals across the United States. REB also facilitates workshops and is a speaker on the issues of zine making, queer rights, and prisoners' rights. Excerpts from Fanorama have been published in the gay-oriented encyclopedia Out In All Directions (Warner Books), That's Revolting: Queer Strategies For Resisting Assimilation (Suspect Thoughts), and Afterwords: Real Sex From Gay Men's Diaries.
Ambiguous Ambrosia by Paul Moore
Birdland by a Soledad State Prison collective
Chairman Of The Bored by a Folsom State Prison collective
Fanorama by REB
Flakes by Darren Hamby
Flowers From The Grave by Walter James
The Hated by William Wright
Left Back by Chadd Beverlin
One Woman's Story by Kebby Warner
Punk Pagan by Michael Killeen
Reflections by Frederick Fisher
Solitary Existence by Travis "SK8" Harramen
Thoughts Of My Liberation by Frederick Fisher
Unheard Silence by Devin Baker
Wiener Society by Neil "Wiener" Edgar
Obscene Emission by Neil Edgar


text:
She was born to be my Unicorn
Robed head of ferns
Cat child tutored by the learned.
Darkly ghostish host
Haggard vizier of the moats
Seeks the sandled shores of Gods
Baby of the moors.
The night-mare's mauve mashed mind
Sights the visions of the blinds
Shoreside stream of steam
Cooking kings in cream of scream.
Jackdaw winter head
Cleans his chalcedony bed
A silken word of kind
Was returned from Nijinsky Hind.
Giant of Inca hill
Loosed his boar to gorely kill
The dancing one horned waife
In doublet of puffin-bill.
The beast in feast of sound
Kittened lamb on God's ground
Ridden by the born of horn
Jigged like a muse on life's lawn
|« Stones For Avalon
|Unicorn Композиции
|Like A White Star, Tangled And Far, Tulip That's What You Are »


text:
Saturday December 29th, 2012 Byron Roche will be playing at Uncommon Ground (Clark & Grace), splitting the night with Larry Rand and each playing a set between
10-12 PM. www.uncommonground.com
Sunday June 24th, 2012 6PM - Byron will be performing in the Concert for Earl Pionke's (Earl of Old Town) on June 24th at Fitzgerald's in Berwyn. The Concert will celebrate Earl's 80th Birthday. (see poster on my Music page for a list of performers).
Luminous Ground: Artists With Histories, featuring artist Leo Segedin.
Illinois State Museum, Chicago Gallery, April 4th-August 26th, 2011
Public Reception Friday, April 8th 4:30-6:30 PM, James R. Thompson Center
Chicago Now: Art Talk Chicago Interview with Byron Roche, January 9th, 2010.
Byron Roche is featured in the new book "The Chicago Music Scene" by Dean Milano.
The Lost Video - Byron Roche at the No Exit, Christmas party 1981.
Chicago Now Article - The Byron Roche Gallery public space is closing.
Sweethearts Across The Pacific -
Jewelry made by US Servicemen in the South Pacific During World War II.
With 16 years of experience as the director and owner of Byron Roche Gallery in Chicago, Byron Roche is now available as a
private art dealer. Go to our Artists page to view available work and Artist information. Byron is also happy to work with you as an
Art Consultant, Art Advisor, Curator, and/or public speaker.
His public speaking experience includes presentations to private and corporate organizations about Art Collecting, lectures to University Art classes about career development in the Arts, and discussions with Artist groups about navigating the gallery world.
He has also served as a juror of Visual Arts for various organizations and museums, and has advised Arts professionals on gallery startup and operation.
P.O. Box 267870, Chicago, IL 60626 / Ph 312.654.0144 / firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
Sunday, February 14, 2010
What Does One Wear to Fashion Week?
Besides merely bragging in this post, I'm also wondering: what the hell does one wear to a Fashion Week event? If I were Sarah Jessica Parker, I'd probably throw on a Thakoon design from my closet to show support. Alas, all of my Thakoon pieces are at the cleaners.
I'm thinking something simple like my coral blouse and a pencil skirt or maybe even my polka dot Slenderette dress. Something that will look good when I'm photographed by Page Six. Damn paparazzi!
Also, I'm not into designer bags, but at times like these I wish I were. My current purse is a Barnes & Noble tote bag. Yeah, that's what we call a "statement bag." It's just not the statement I want to make! I'll probably resort to having Jeff carry all my necessities in his pockets.
What say you? What would YOU wear to a Thakoon show?
19 comments:
Last year I went to the Project Runway finale fashion show. Maybe it depends on the event, but if you were at that show and wearing what you're planning to, you'd easily be one of the most fashionable people there, even with the B&N tote! I was surprised attendees were so dressed down but maybe that was just the PR crowd. Anyway, have fun!ReplyDelete
Wow that's really exciting! If I didn't live a couple thousand miles away I'd be a little more jealous. I vote for the polka dot dressReplyDelete
Oooo! That sounds like fun! I also vote for the polka dots, as that is a little bit more dressed up, although the coral blouse/pencil skirt outfit is very classy. No, polka dot. Polka dots get my vote (and that's not only because I get giddy every time I see polka dots!)ReplyDelete
I think you should wear your blue sheath dress with the exposed zipper. It's sharp and elegant and you look fabulous in it!.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousFebruary 14, 2010 at 4:13 PM
Hm. Polka dots. Definitely. And pop it with a red shoe. Classic combo.ReplyDelete
- lorenakittyFebruary 14, 2010 at 4:14 PM
OOh yummy, an intelligant woman's designer! Definitely the black boucle skirt, dangerous heels (suffer we must) and THE coat. Blouse/top should be interesting, vaguely avant garde or simply demonstrate devastating draping or drafting. Hmm - lot's of 'D' words here - just be devine dear.ReplyDelete
I vote for the polkadot dress, some killer red shoes, and your incredible red coat!ReplyDelete
Sweetie, whatever you wear, if you made it, you'll look fabulous.
I vote for the polka dots and you must wear your coat.ReplyDelete
Have fun tonight; you have no idea how much I want to attend one of these shows!!
Just in these photos, you look more confident in the coral, so I would go with that, but you probably know better how the two make you feel. Definitely work the coat!ReplyDelete
- Genesis A.February 14, 2010 at 10:05 PM
The coral blouse/pencil skirt combo is a must! It is so classy and really breaks up the wave of black and white that you're sure to find.ReplyDelete
It looks fabulous on you. Maybe victory roll your hair?
You always look radiant in reds or variations thereof, so I think the coral blouse/pencil skirt would be fantastic. I do like the polka dot dress though...maybe with red shoes?ReplyDelete
Lucky you.ReplyDelete
Wear the polka dots and buy an inexpensive clutch purse. You will look fabulous.
- AnonymousFebruary 15, 2010 at 3:49 AM
I also vote polka-dot, red coat, red shoes. Buy a cheap white clutch on Canal Street. Or a fabulous knock-off!ReplyDelete
So enquiring minds want to know - how was it?????ReplyDelete
I would buy a little clutch purse in black or another solid colour that matches a lot of outfits, and then shove all the excess in my man's suit pockets! As far as outfits go, I'd wear the polka dot dress. You mentioned that the coral blouse rides up, and unless you have found a solution for that you should probably wear an outfit that doesn't ride up... that way you'll be photo-ready at any moment, not excusing yourself to tug your shirt down.ReplyDelete
I'm with the polka dot dress, red coat and shoes brigade. Have a fabulous time.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousFebruary 15, 2010 at 11:31 AM
Either of these is a great choice! If you do the dots, the green shoes or another bright is a fabulous way to go. Have an awesome time, lady.ReplyDelete
I'm probably too late but I say polka dots!ReplyDelete
Also, can I say how much I love that you're not so into the designer bags? And that your current purse is a B&N tote? I love that. I still get weird looks for using uber-utilitarian army surplus style bags for every day use (and grief from my mother, who offers to get me some tricked out contraption).
wow,it is exciting!I'm with the long dress.red coat and shoes brigade.ReplyDelete


text:
Free Beer & Hot Wings: Did This Security Camera Capture a UFO Descending on a Deer? [Video]
A couple in Mississippi believes that they have captured a UFO on their trail camera recently.
In the video below, you can see a series of events that is pretty unexplainable, including strange illuminations and lights.
Watch as the deer in the photos appear to react to lights in the sky.
What do you think it is?
Source: Free Beer & Hot Wings


text: A security company specializing in the Domain Name System has released a Windows version of a tool that encrypts DNS requests, which could be spied on to reveal a user's browsing activity.Last December OpenDNS released its tool, called DNSCrypt, for Apple's OS X operating system. The company has now released a technology preview of the same tool for Windows, wrote David Ulevitch, OpenDNS' founder and CEO.The tool encrypts DNS lookups sent between a person's computer and OpenDNS, which provides a free lookup service. DNS requests are an essential part of the Internet, translating a domain name into an IP address that can be called into a browser. Most ISPs and other large organizations run their own DNS servers. But OpenDNS runs its own DNS lookup service, and someone can use their service by entering the company's DNS servers into their network settings. The service is free, and OpenDNS claims its service is speedier and has better security.DNS requests are unencrypted, meaning that an interloper monitoring a person's internet traffic, such as over an unencrypted public Wi-Fi access point at an airport or cafe, could see the requests and compromise a person's privacy."Anyone who knows what they're doing can eavesdrop on your Internet activity and see exactly which domains you are resolving, and in many cases, what websites you're visiting," Ulevitch wrote. "Worse, sophisticated attackers can modify responses and redirect you to malicious sites."About 10,000 people are using the Mac version of DNSCrypt. Ulevitch cautioned that the Windows version is a "technology preview" and may have some bugs, but it will be improved over time with feedback.Send news tips and comments to firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
Gems of Iceland with Northern Lights
Iceland is a country known for its natural wonders: glaciers, active volcanoes, black-sand beaches, geothermal areas, roaring rivers, majestic waterfalls, and beautiful lakes. On this escorted tour of Iceland, you will start and end in Reykjavik, and you'll witness these natural wonders while enjoying fun and unique experiences. Take an evening excursion by motorcoach to enjoy the once-in-a-lifetime experience of witnessing the Northern Lights (Aurora Borealis) in Iceland's night sky.
Globus has also included some out-of-the-ordinary experiences to make your Iceland vacation special. In Thingvellir, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, walk through the rift valley that marks the separation between two of the world's major tectonic plates. In Geysir, experience the geothermal areas and taste freshly baked bread cooked using the heat from the hot springs. You'll pair it with a glass of Geysir schnapps. Marvel at the Gullfoss waterfall; drive through the national park at Skaftafell; and stop at Lake Jökulsárlón, where some of the most spectacular scenes of the James Bond movie, Die Another Day, were filmed. Join us to experience the exquisite natural beauty that will stay with you for years to come—a guided vacation in Iceland you'll treasure forever.
City Highlights
REYKJAVIK Welcome dinner; orientation; see the Northern Lights; farewell dinner at a local restaurantTHINGVELLIR[LF] Walk through the rift valley that marks the separation between the North American and the European tectonic platesGEYSIR Admire the hot springs; [LF] taste local specialties and drink a glass of schnappsGULLFOSS [LF] Marvel at the waterfallSKAFTAFELLDrive through the national parkLAKE JÖKULSÁRLÓN [LF] See the setting of James Bond's Die Another Day and see the largest glacier in EuropeSKOGAFOSS & SELJALANDSFOSS Admire the WaterfallsHELLISHEIÐARVIRKJUNVisit the geothermal heat and electric power station
Full buffet breakfast daily; 5 three-course dinners, including a dinner at a local restaurant in Reykjavik
Slight changes to the day-by-day itinerary cannot be excluded.Please check visa requirements with your local consulate(s); responsibility for obtaining visas rests with the traveler.Hotels outside of Reykjavik may not always be of the standard usually expected.Certain features are subject to nature's law.
Motorcoach. Free Wi-Fi available on your motorcoach and in most hotel lobbies


text:
Twitter's advertising revenue will reach $150 million in 2011 and $250 million next year, according to digital marketing research company eMarketer.
However, in order to have long-term business success, the microblogging and social networking company will have to work extra hard to ensure that this first wave of marketers gets the expected results from their ad spending, eMarketer said Monday.
"If Twitter can grow its user base and convince marketers of its value as a go-to secondary player to Facebook, it will succeed in gaining revenue," said Debra Aho Williamson, an eMarketer principal analyst, in a statement. "In 2011 it must work overtime to give its early advertisers a positive experience."
Most of Twitter's ad sales this year and in 2012 will come from the U.S., just as they did in 2010, when the company generated $45 million in revenue, according to eMarketer estimates.
By comparison, Facebook closed 2010 with $1.86 billion in revenue, according to eMarketer, which forecasts that the social networking leader will generate $4 billion this year and $5.7 billion in 2012.
Meanwhile, eMarketer sees MySpace's revenue on a downward slide from $288 million in 2010 to $184 million this year and $156 million in 2012. MySpace laid off 500 employees, or about 47 percent of its global staff, earlier this month.


text:
I have been working to bring justice to the Stacy Lynne child abduction case for some time now. It has become crusade with me but for no other reason than I am a parent who would be totally devastated if my child was stolen from my custody because of my political activities against the invasion of Agenda 21 into my community. This mom, with no allegations of wrongdoing, has lost her son in retaliation for fighting for her community. This could happen to anyone of us. Please help me spread the word and make this story go viral. The corrupt legal forces in Larimer County, Colorado are showing signs of buckling just as they were ready to keep Stacy from seeing her son, permanently. For what they do to one of us, they do to all of us. Thanks for helping and God Bless all of you.
‑Dave Hodges
Larimer County, Colorado Agenda 21 Advocates "Steal" Protestor's Child
by Dave Hodges
The Common Sense Show
September 28, 2012
Bad things happen when Agenda 21/ICLEI advocates come to your hometown. Most aware people know that the Agenda 21 advocates are dedicated to the demise of the family and in Larimer County, Colorado, this philosophy is being lived out. Therefore, should it be any surprise that when fully implemented, ICLEI regulations will not only severely limit access to electricity and transportation, deny the common citizenry noninvasive access to beautiful wilderness areas, destroy private business, impose unsustainable tax rates, will arbitrarily seize private property for personal gain, will promote corruption at the highest levels of industry and government, have endorsed and implemented extreme population reduction methods and now ICLEI advocates have added child theft to their list of heinous crimes against humanity which is perpetrated against those who would dare to oppose the fascist, anti-humanity policies.
For the past four years, Stacy Lynne of Larimer County (Ft. Collins), Colorado, through a series of public presentations, has been desperately alerting her community to the Agenda 21/ICLEI form of totalitarianism which has been systematically invading her community for the past 17 years. Now, she finds herself the victim of political retaliation in which her child has been stolen from her for daring to reveal the truth.
As Stacy Lynne began making public presentations regarding the dangers of Agenda 21/ICLEI, she garnered much public support. For example, Lynne opposed the insane plan of "the greening" of downtown Ft. Collins, CO. in which only "eco friendly cars" would be permitted to park in downtown parking spaces. Local businesses estimated that each parking spot was worth $300,000 per year. This reckless Agenda/ICLEI proposal would have bankrupted several local small business owners. However, Lynne was successful in harnessing community opposition and defeated the proposal. Lynne also fought against her local government's attempt to only employ Waste Management, a financial contributor to ICLEI, which would have bankrupted two locally owned trash businesses. Lynne was somewhat successful in defeating this measure as well.
Despite her successes, Lynne was making very powerful enemies including the Colorado "poster child" of Agenda 21/ICLEI, Pat Stryker, whose business interests were intertwined with a group of Agenda 21 engineers, The Brendle Group, as well as Waste Management. This placed Lynne in the crosshairs of Stryker's ICLEI allies, and they came after Lynne with a vengeance.
At this point, it is relevant to note that this is the same Pat Stryker who donated $50,000 for Obama's inauguration and contributed another $87,000 for the event. Stryker also donated $35,800 to the Obama Victory Fund. In return, Stryker's Abound Solar Company, in a scenario reminiscent to the Solyndra solar scandal, in which Stryker's Abound Solar Company was touted by President Obama and subsequently the Department of Energy doled out 400 million dollars to Stryker's energy love child only to have the company go bankrupt only months later. Stryker's business interests told the Department of Energy that the donated taxpayer's money was projected to create 1200 permanent jobs. Yet, as early as last March, Abound Solar had already laid off 280 employees. And by this past summer, only months after receiving a massive amount of taxpayer money, Abound Solar filed for bankruptcy. This was the type of corruption and ineptitude that Stacy Lynne was attempting to fight against in Larimer County, and for daring to exercise her right First Amendment protected free speech rights, the Agenda 21 forces of her community turned her life upside down.
Over nine years ago, Stacy Lynne and Jeff Pappenheim parented Jaden. According to Lynne, the biological father chose to not play a prominent role in his son's life leaving the responsibility for raising the child to his mother. Then, without warning in January of 2011, the biological father filed a court action which sought the sole custody of Jaden.
The triumvirate consisting of former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter, Judge Julie Field and Pat Stryker's ICLEI interests, subsequently became involved in a series of "amazing coincidences", which culminated in the neutralization of Stacy Lynne as their main ICLEI/Agenda 21 opponent in the Fort Collins area. This neutralization was accomplished by the stealing of Lynne's son in one of the biggest miscarriages of justice ever witnessed in a family court. All three parties are inextricably tied to ICLEI/Agenda 21 interests. The conflicts of interests between Ritter, Field, Stryker interests, and ultimately the 8th District Court of Larimer County, in this case, are numerous and a matter of public record. Briefly, Ritter appoints Field to the Bench of the 8th District Court in January of 2011 which was the same month as the custody action filed by Pappenheim. Stryker began a professional relationship with Field in 1987 when her law firm represented Stryker interests. Upon leaving office in January of 2011, and after having appointed the judge who will steal Lynne's child, Ritter goes to work for Stryker interests. The newly appointed Field subsequently conducts a Kangaroo court trial in which Stacy, not accused of any wrongdoing, has her child awarded to Pappenheim with a 100% transfer of custody.
Adding insult to injury, Stacy Lynne and her followers have formally alleged that Pappenheim has not allowed Stacy to see Jaden, as prescribed by the court, in violation of the court order. Judge Field has consistently refused to rule in this matter.
There are so many disturbing aspects of this case that it is hard to know where to begin. However, the issue related to the blatant conflicts of interests which have served to undermine the integrity of the Larimer County Court system seems like a prudent place to begin. Therefore, the documentation used to support the abovementioned allegations against Ritter, Stryker and Fields, is listed below.
On December 21, 2011, Stacy's son was removed from her custody by Field without any explanation and without any evidence presented which proved Lynne was guilty of neglect, abuse or any other parental misbehavior that would warrant such an action by any court. In the trial, Field refused to allow Lynne to call witnesses on her behalf and when the citizens in the court gasped with amazement, Field cleared the courtroom so this miscarriage of justice could continue away from the watchful eye of the public. Field's custody ruling allowed Stacy one supervised visit, every two weeks, with Jaden at the Harmony House, located in Fort Collins, where Pat Stryker's Bohemian Foundation, in a direct conflict of interest, is listed as a financial contributor. In order to see her child at a supervised visit, Lynne must pay hundreds of dollars to visit her child for two hours at the Harmony House and this egregious conflict of interest is ignored by the courts. In my days as a mental health counselor, I have seen more lenient parental rights granted to convicted pedophiles!
Why would Field misuse her judicial authority and judicially abuse a woman whose only "crime" was to oppose the insidious invasion of her community by ICLEI interests? Simple, Field is also an Agenda 21/ICLEI advocate as evidenced by her employment history in which she claims on her judicial application that she was a special consultant to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, from January 2007-December 2009. "Both are institutions in the United Nations system" and are beholding to Agenda 21/ICLEI interests. So not only was Lynne a political opponent of Stryker interests because of her anti-Agenda 21/ICLEI stance, Field was also an Agenda 21/ICLEI foe of Lynne as well. If Field had an ounce of judicial integrity, she would have recused herself from the case. However, it also appears that Field had her own financial interest to protect. Judge Field was serving as both an Attorney Mediator and board member for the Crossroads Safehouse, a refuge for neglected children and battered women. According to the Crossroads website, the Brendle Group is a major contributor to the their institution and is also connected to Stryker business interests. The Brendle Group is a self-admitted collection of "Agenda 21 engineers" who are a driving force behind the Agenda 21/ICLEI projects in Larimer County and across the nation. Judge Field badly needs to explain this blatant conflict of interest.
Field's conflicts of interests are not limited to her ICLEI interests; On page one of Field's Judicial application for the 8th Judicial District, she lists her work address as 123 N. College Avenue, Suite 200, Ft. Collins, Colorado. West Mountain Asset Management, a Pat Stryker company, shows the same address on Federal Corporate Filings and websites, for the same time period. This means that the good Judge was a suitemate of Pat Stryker and since Stacy Lynne was a political opponent of Field's good friend, this judge should have had the integrity to not preside over this judicial travesty.
Just when the conflicts of interest could not get any worse, The Common Sense Show staff discovered Fields' blatant disregard for the need to demonstrate judicial impartiality is further evidenced by the fact that from July 1987 to July 1989, Julie Field worked as a litigation associate with the Nutter, McLennen & Fish, a Boston law firm. The same law firm represented Stryker Biotech, a subsidiary of Stryker Corporation, in a felony trial in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts (United States of America v. Stryker Biotech, LLC, et al., No. 1:09-cr-10330, D. Mass.).
What are the odds that a long-time Stryker ally would become the judge of record of in the Lynne divorce action? Field was appointed to the 8th District by outgoing Colorado Governor Bill Ritter, effective January 1, 2011. When Ritter left the Governor's Office, his new $300,000 position was entitled "Director of the Center for the New Energy Economy" at Colorado State University. As reported by State Bill Colorado , "CSU provided a job description for Ritter's position, which is being financed for three years by foundations, including that belonging to medical-device heiress Patricia Stryker, a Fort Collins resident and a prominent player in Colorado politics". The Denver Business Journal also reported "Ritter said funding for the center and his position will come from private sources: the San Francisco-based Energy Foundation; the Fort Collins-based Bohemian Foundation founded in 2001 by Fort Collins heiress and Democratic Party supporter Pat Stryker; and other donors". Therefore, Bill Ritter, the Governor who appointed Julie Field to a judgeship, now works for Stacy Lynne's political opponent, Pat Stryker, and the public is left to believe that this is all one great big set of coincidences.
Governor Ritter also had an Agenda 21/ICLEI ax to grind against Lynne as Ritter is a board member with Energy Foundation of San Francisco. In 2010- 2011 the Energy Foundation contributed $600,000 to ICLEI. Readers can view the running list of donations to ICLEI here.
It is important to mention, at this point, that the entire legal apparatus and political system in Fort Collins, Colorado, is fully vested in the Agenda 21 policies of ICLEI as evidenced by the removal of Jaden which was the first of a series of heinous and harassing actions perpetrated by the officials located in Fort Collins (Larimer County), Colorado against Stacy Lynne for her political advocacy against Agenda 21.
Immediately following the trial in which Jaden was removed from his mother's custody, Lynne went to a nearby Kinkos/FEDEX to type an injunction against Field's custody order. Shortly thereafter, Lynne was arrested by Larimer County Sheriffs on kidnapping charges and attempted criminal flight with a child even though Jaden was not in her care at the time. When the deputies were asked to produce the arrest warrant and the court order to transfer custody of Jaden, these law enforcement officials replied they did not have to produce either document prior to arresting Lynne (violation of CRS 16–3‑02). Lynne was denied a subsequent Contempt Hearing, nor was she was arrested with probable cause (violation of CRS 16–3‑108). Yet, when Lynne appeared in court following her release, the Larimer County District Attorney's Office stated that no charges were being preferred. If there ever was a case for false imprisonment, this is the text book case. Lynne is suing Larimer County for these and other alleged violations against Larimer County Sheriff's.
Courtesy of the Larimer County Sheriff's brazen disregard for the constitutional rights of its citizens, Stacy Lynne has also become the victim of an illegal wire tap of her cell phone AFTER the loss of her son to Pappenheim. In addition, Stacy Lynne discovered a Larimer County Sheriffs tracking device attached to her SUV on May 3, 2012. The device was confirmed as a tracking device by nearby the Weld County Sheriff's office as belonging to Larimer County Sheriffs. The device was subsequently removed by Weld County officials and returned to Larimer County officials. There is no court order which legally justifies the installation and use of such a surveillance device on Stacy Lynne's vehicle. This makes no sense, unless the Larimer County Sheriff Department is fearful that Lynne may have uncovered and will reveal even more criminal corruption involving the parties mentioned in this article and that the information may subsequently be revealed to journalists such as myself. For the life of me, I cannot imagine another set of motivations which could underlie these repeated and reprehensible violations of the public trust and the people of Larimer County need to be asking questions.
In completing this clean sweep of judicial abuse, Field has ordered that Lynne pay 100% of Pappenheim's $14,000 of attorney fees. Lynne is not employed and does not have the money and subsequently faces a Contempt of Court action for which she will be sent to jail for 120 days if she fails to comply with the payment order by Field. This rookie judge has reinvented the medieval practice of putting debtors in prison. Meanwhile, Stacy has seen her son twice in nearly 5 months and her contempt actions filed with the court, related to this matter have been ignored by this same judge.
On September 13, 2012, Stacy appeared in the kangaroo courtroom of Judge Julie Field where she faced the total termination of her parental rights as well as the enforcement of the order to pay $14,000 in legal fees. Stacy shared with me that she felt that it was entirely possible that the she was going to be sent to jail and she also faced the possibility of never seeing her son again. However, the judicial Gods intervened and Judge Field was not able to act upon these two issues on this particular day. According to several witnesses, Stacy attempted to read an opening statement and have it entered into the court record as she was attempting to get on to the record the outrageous judicial conflicts of interest in this case. In a blatant violation of Lynne's due process rights, Judge Field would not permit Stacy to read her statement. There was an outcry from the overflow crowd in the courtroom in which one man demanded that Judge Field respect Stacy's legal right to present evidence on her behalf. The Judge had the protestor removed from the court but his removal did not totally silence the buzz in the courtroom. In a scene reminiscent of the Keystone Cops, the judge overreacted and pushed the emergency panic button and quickly departed out the backdoor of the courtroom along with Pappenheim and his attorney. Some witnesses reported that the chaos that ensued was both comical and frightening. Fort Collins police were dispatched to the scene and entered the court house with guns drawn. Not everyone saw the officers with guns drawn, but everyone that I spoke with thought it was quite comical that the both the judge and local law enforcement overreacted to a relatively benign situation.
As an interesting side note, I was told by a couple of witnesses, at the latest judicial fiasco, that while they were being herded by local law enforcement into a commons area, they encountered parents who, like Stacy Lynne, were unjustly having their parental right severed as well. In fact, as I am discovering from my investigation, that there exists sufficient evidence to investigate both the entire CPS apparatus and the Larimer County Court system for judicial impropriety when it comes to the removal of children from their parents. Some local residents suspect a more sinister set of motivations which underlies why Larimer County has such a high rate of child removals compared to other counties its size. And given the actions of the Larimer County Sheriff's, it seems reasonable to investigate this law enforcement agency from top to bottom for corruption. It is notable that at this point in time, there is a documentary crew as well as a couple of well-known journalists who have expressed interest in various aspects of this case. It is also notable that this is the same legal apparatus who intentionally framed Timothy Masters for murder by intentionally tampering with evidence. Master's was eventually freed but not until he spent almost a decade in prison for a crime he did not commit.
It should also be noted that one of the reasons that Judge Field is considering a motion to terminate Lynne's rights to visitation with Jaden is because the boy is reportedly "frightened of his mother." This begs the question, how does a boy who has seen his mother twice in five months, in a supervised setting, in a public location, become afraid of his mother, a mother, who up until late December of 2011, was the only custodial parent that this child had ever known? A fair judge and virtuous court system would be seeking alternative answers to this common sense question. However, there is nothing fair and virtuous about the legal system in the People's Republic of Larimer County.
At the end of the day, and setting aside all of the corruption associated in this case, there is a lesson for all Americans with regard to the court-sponsored Stacy Lynne child abduction case. When well-meaning citizens stand up to the insidious forces of Agenda 21, bad things, very bad things can happen to them and to their families. This abuse can only exist in a vacuum of courage and knowledge. And any knowledgeable person knows that Agenda 21 seeks to undermine the authority of the parent and seeks to destroy the family unit. If you are reading these words and you are hearing about Agenda 21 for the first time, you have an obligation to humanity, and for the welfare of your family, to educate yourself and share what you have learned with ignorant persons within your sphere of influence.
For Stacy and Jaden, this tragedy is the poster child case of the horrible things that can happen to people who dare to oppose the forces of ICLEI and Agenda 21. It is safe to say that if Stacy Lynne had not successfully opposed the Agenda 21/ICLEI forces in Larimer County, Stacy would still be Jaden's primary custodial parent in the fall of 2012.
America, you cannot let the Stacy Lynne case fade from the public's attention. For if this injustice is allowed to stand, then none of us are safe. Please help Stacy spread the word about this travesty of justice by making this tragic written account go viral.
Stacy Lynne's supporters have set up a legal relief fund and contributions may be sent to: The Benefit of Stacy Lynne‑P.O. Box 1211 Arvada, Co. 80001–1211.
""…current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable. A shift is necessary which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations…"
-Maurice Strong: Opening speech at the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development
""The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."
-Albert Einstein
Source: http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2012/09/28/larimer-county-co-agenda-21-advocates-steal-protestors-child/


text:
ER25 11/32" Collet
ER25 11/32" Collet
|Key Info
|Collet Size
|Collet Style
|.013mm/.0005in TIR
If for any reason you are not satisfied with your purchase or your purchased item(s) does not fit your application, you may return it in its unused condition and original packaging, within 30 days of receiving your order. Feel free to email or call for an RMA number and please be sure to include why you are returning the item(s) and your contact information.
We will gladly refund you the entire purchase price of your item(s) less shipping and may be subject to a 10% restocking fee.
Please contact us at
For faster communication, click here to chat with us