text:
Reporter decries "highly invasive groping and probing of my private areas"
Steve Watson
A prominent journalist of over 20 years has written a scathing piece describing her treatment at the hands of the TSA last week, saying she feels "violated and raped".
Karen Kaplan, the current Assistant Editor at the prominent science journal Nature, documented a run in with the TSA that occurred at Norfolk International Airport on November 25.
In the article written for The Day news website, Kaplan, a reporter with more than two decades of experience in the publishing industry, says she was subjected to "an arbitrary, unnecessary and appallingly invasive" TSA patdown, "…which more appropriately can be called a sexual assault."
Kaplan describes how she did not trigger any alarms at the checkpoint, but was pulled aside by two TSA agents and selected for a patdown because she was wearing a long skirt.
"The search involved highly invasive groping and probing of my private areas." Kaplan writes. "As part of the procedure, which took five to six minutes, the TSA agent reached into my skirt, exploring front to back."
Kaplan notes that she asked for the patdown to be conducted in private, however it was only because she knew the guidelines and raised it as an issue that this request was granted by the TSA.
"I am horrified and disgusted by the experience – a clear example of absolute abuse of absolute power." Kaplan states.
"I feel violated and raped. TSA agents who subject passengers to this odious, invasive and abusive "patdown" – a screamingly laughable euphemism if ever there was one – are operating under the same psychological principle that prompts prison guards to abuse and torture inmates – they do it because they can."
"As a white American female over 40, a law-abiding citizen with nary so much as a traffic violation in my history, and an editor of an eminent international science journal, I hardly fit the profile of a terrorist," Kaplan notes, describing the actions of the TSA as "pure and unadulterated security theater".
"The TSA, a worthless and money-sucking artifact of the George W. Bush administration, must be disbanded, or, at least, stripped of the power it now holds to commit such assaults." Kaplan concludes.
"They are wholly ineffective – not once since their implementation have they actually thwarted a potential act of terrorism – and they violate our personal, constitutional, civil and legal rights. They must end now." she adds.
Kaplan joins a host of other reporters who have spoken out against TSA procedures.
Back in May, Fox News host Geraldo Rivera described how he was "manually raped" by a TSA agent who touched his "junk".
In November 2010, we reported the story of how radio host Owen JJ Stone was told by a TSA screener that his pat down would include the screener putting his hands down Stone's pants. The TSA worker directly patted down his testicles, penis and backside while his hand was inside Stone's pants.
Also in November 2010, blogger Erin Chase went public to reveal how she literally had her vagina groped by a TSA screener, who touched both her labia as well as her buttocks and breasts during a pat down.
The TSA has a history of threatening journalists who have reported negatively on experiences at the hands of the agency. CNN reporter Drew Griffin was put on a TSA watch list immediately after he filed reports critical of the organization back in 2008. Conservative radio host and Breitbart Editor Dana Loesch has alleged that she is targeted for punishment in the form of a rough invasive patdown almost every time she flies.
In August, independent Journalists documenting the level of security theatre surrounding the Republican National Convention in Tampa were threatened with being "detained for 72 hours" by Homeland Security agents, after they filmed TSA employees occupying a Greyhound bus station close to the security perimeter.
In March, two mainstream media reporters revealed that the TSA "strongly cautioned" them not to cover the story of an engineer revealing major flaws in the agency's $1 billion dollar body scanner program.
Columnist and talk radio host Amy Alkon related a recent incident at JFK airport, during which she was threatened with arrest by a TSA supervisor who also refused to identify himself. In 2011, the radio host was threatened with a defamation suit by TSA's lawyers after she alleged that an agent at LAX physically penetrated her vagina with her hand four times during an aggressive patdown. Alkon described the incident as rape on her blog and identified the TSA agent in question. Her attempts to file charges of sexual assault were shot down.
Rape counselors have warned that people who have been sexually assaulted face treatment metered out by TSA screeners that can be "extremely re-traumatizing to someone who has already experienced an invasion of their privacy and their body." Such incidents involving the TSA regularly occur, unsurprisingly, given that an estimated one in six women in the United States have been the victim of an attempted or completed rape.


text:
While Video has become ubiquitous thanks mostly to smartphones it doesn't mean you want to actually watch all of it.
Carnegie Mellon University computer scientists say they have invented a video highlighting technique called LiveLight that can automatically pick out action in videos shot by smartphones, GoPro cameras or Google Glass users.
+More on Network World: +
LiveLight constantly evaluates action in a video, looking for visual novelty and ignoring repetitive or eventless sequences, to create a summary that enables a viewer to get the gist of what happened. What it produces is a miniature video trailer. Although not yet comparable to a professionally edited video, it can help people quickly review a long video of an event, a security camera feed, or video from a police cruiser's windshield camera, according to Carnegie researchers.
"A particularly cool application is using LiveLight to automatically digest videos from, say, GoPro or Google Glass, and quickly upload thumbnail trailers to social media. The summarization process thus avoids generating costly Internet data charges and tedious manual editing on long videos. This application, along with the surveillance camera auto-summarization, is now being developed for the retail market by PanOptus Inc., a startup founded by the inventors of LiveLight," the researchers stated.
The LiveLight video summary occurs in "quasi-real-time," with just a single pass through the video. It's not instantaneous, but it doesn't take long — LiveLight might take 1-2 hours to process one hour of raw video and can do so on a conventional laptop. With a more powerful backend computing facility, production time can be shortened to mere minutes, according to the researchers.
Calling it the "ultimate unmanned tool for unlocking video data" the Carnegie researcher said LiveLight's algorithm processes the video and compiles a dictionary of its content. The algorithm then uses the learned dictionary to decide in a very efficient way if a newly seen segment is similar to previously observed events, such as routine traffic on a highway. Segments thus identified as trivial recurrences or eventless are excluded from the summary. Novel sequences not appearing in the learned dictionary, such as an erratic car, or a traffic accident, would be included in the summary, the researchers stated.
+More on Network World: +
Though LiveLight can produce these summaries automatically, people also can be included in the loop for compiling the summary. In that instance, LiveLight provides a ranked list of novel sequences for a human editor to consider for the final video. In addition to selecting the sequences, a human editor might choose to restore some of the footage deemed worthless to provide context or visual transitions before and after the sequences of interest.
The ability to detect unusual behaviors within long stretches of tedious video could also be a boon to security firms that monitor and review surveillance camera video, the researchers said.
Follow Michael Cooney on Twitter: nwwlayer8 and on Facebook
Check out these other hot stories:
100Mb/sec Ethernet coming to a car near you?
US intelligence agency wants brain-like algorithms for complex information processing
NASA bolsters Pluto-bound spacecraft for 2015 visit
FTC taking robocall death hunt to DEFCON
Mobile phone bill crammers get stuffed with $10 million property forfeiture
NASA forming $3M satellite communication, propulsion competition

subset: commoncrawl


text:
BBC Global News is the home of the BBC's award-winning international news, sport and features content, which reaches 121 million people around the world on TV, online, apps and social media each week.
As the world's most trusted international news broadcaster, we offer accurate, impartial news via our 24 hour news channel - BBC World News - and BBC.com, along with a broad range of insightful and in-depth features across BBC Worklife, BBC Culture, BBC Future, BBC Reel and BBC Travel.
As a commercial arm of the BBC, we work with brands to create partnerships which connect them with our curious and globally-minded audience through bespoke branded content, sponsorship and advertising opportunities.
With journalists in more countries than any other international news provider, BBC World News brings unrivalled depth and insight to TV news from around the world.
BBC World News television is available in more than 200 countries and territories worldwide, and over 454 million households and 3 million hotel rooms. The channel's content is also available on 178 cruise ships, 53 airlines, including 13 distributing the channel live inflight, and 23 mobile phone networks.
BBC.com offers up-to-the-minute international news, in-depth analysis and feature content across our website portfolio. We reach over 151 million unique browsers each month across PCs, tablets and mobile devices.
Our websites include the BBC homepage, BBC News, BBC Sport, BBC Worklife, BBC Culture, BBC Future, BBC Travel and our premium video destination BBC Reel.
The BBC News app gives you the best of BBC News wherever you are. Our stories and headlines are updated in real time, with breaking news alerts delivered to your device as they happen. You can personalise your feed with a choice of thousands of topics - so you get the news that matters most to you.
The BBC Sport app offers the latest sports news, fixtures and results. It's the best way to follow your favourite sport, with expert analysis and live text commentary. You can personalised your sports news alerts, to receive live results as they happen.


text:
The mobile payments space is about to get more crowded: CurrentC, a platform backed by some of the country's biggest retailers, will launch in the next few months and give Apple, Google, and Samsung added competition.
Few details are known about the service, but it is expected to merge payments and loyalty benefits and will give retailers additional insight into the spending habits of customers who are members. Less is known about the benefits it may offer consumers.
A small -scale trial began last year and CurrentC is currently being tested in several undisclosed markets around the U.S. However, its use is restricted to employees of member retailers, which include Walmart, 7-Eleven, Dunkin Donuts, Sears, Best Buy, Exxon Mobil, and Gap.
Merchant Content Exchange (MCX), the operator of the service, plans to make it available to the public in mid 2015, but in a single market at first.
The location "will be determined based on a number of factors, including retail support, infrastructure and consumer population," the company said in a statement to IDG News Service.
CurrentC got a higher profile in October last year when pharmacy chains CVS and Rite Aid, both MCX members, stopped accepting Apple Pay a week after it launched. At the time it was widely interpreted as an attempt to block the rival service while CurrentC was getting off the ground.
At the time many questioned CurrentC's potential for success based on its reliance on barcodes rather than NFC short-range wireless communications used by Apple and competitors.
With CurrentC, a user points their phone camera at a one-time barcode displayed on a retailer terminal to trigger payment. The payment takes place using a previously registered bank account, so no payment information is exchanged or transmitted in stores.
That's not perhaps as easy as NFC payments, which can be accomplished by bringing a phone near a reader, but MCX argues that barcodes are more widely supported than NFC in smartphones.
MCX said it's open to using other technologies and that appears to be happening. A version based on Bluetooth is also being tested and there are "more to come," it said.
Details of the system were expected to be announced at last week's Transact 15 payments expo in San Francisco, where MCX CEO Dekkers Davidson was scheduled to deliver a keynote address, but that was canceled shortly before the event began.
In recent weeks, the company has been recruiting computer security engineers to work at its Dallas offices and run its security engineering and incident response programs.


text:
It looks like Mozilla has released a new beta of Firefox 3.5 (formerly 3.1):
Firefox 3.5 Beta 4 is a public preview release intended for developer testing and community feedback. It includes many new features as well as improvements to performance, web compatibility, and speed. We recommend that you read the release notes and known issues before installing this beta.
Firefox 3.5 (formerly known as Firefox 3.1) Beta 4 is now available for download. This milestone is focused on testing the core functionality provided by many new features and changes to the platform scheduled for Firefox 3.5.
New features and changes in this milestone that require feedback include:
- This beta is now available in 70 languages - get your local version.
- Improved tools for controlling your private data, including a Private Browsing Mode.
- Better performance and stability with the new TraceMonkey JavaScript engine.
- The ability to provide Location Aware Browsing using web standards for geolocation.
- Support for native JSON, and web worker threads.
- Improvements to the Gecko layout engine, including speculative parsing for faster content rendering.
- Support for new web technologies such as: HTML5
Thanks to Brett H. for the tip.
Hide comments


text:
Click the button below to download our Marketing Toolkit, which provides an outreach checklist, tips and templates to guide you through a four step process to success: Educate, Communicate, Motivate and, finally, Celebrate!
Use our informational guide to educate yourself and your staff about the opportunity to raise funds as the selected non-profit in the Give Back Bag Program.
Spread the word! Use our email templates, social media posts and press release draft to blast the news out to your community.
Bags Sold = Donations Raised! It's GO time! Send your supporters to the store to purchase the bag and start raising funds for your organization!
Approximately 8 weeks after the conclusion of your month in the program you will receive a check in the mail for the funds you have raised.


text:
DENVER, N.C., April 7 (UPI) -- Two young children died Sunday evening when dirt collapsed on them at a house construction site in western North Carolina, authorities said.
One of the children's fathers placed an emergency call shortly before 6 p.m. EDT, triggering a rescue effort at the Lincoln County accident scene, but 3 hours later a firefighter said it had become a "recovery" effort, meaning the unidentified children had died, the Denver, N.C. newspaper News@norman reported.
The victims were a 6-year-old girl and a 7-year-old boy, the newspaper said.
Dion Burleson of Lincoln County Emergency Management said despite rescuers' efforts they were "not able to make a difference this time."
News@norman reported it appeared an earthen wall, perhaps part of a basement under construction, collapsed on the children, trapping them under as much as 20 feet of dirt.


text:
WASHINGTON — Saudi Arabia cut travel to Islam's holiest sites, South Korea toughened penalties for those breaking quarantines and airports across Latin America looked for signs of sick passengers as a new virus troubled places around the globe.
With the number of sick and dead rising, the crisis gave way to political and diplomatic rows and a sense that no part of the world was immune.
The global count of those sickened by the virus exceeds 82,000, with China still by far the hardest-hit. Its daily increases, however, are continuing a downward trend.
As of Friday morning, China reported 327 new cases and 44 deaths from the new COVID-19 illness.
The National Health Commission's updated figures bring mainland China's total number of cases to 78,824 and deaths to 2,788. More than 3,600 infections with the new type of coronavirus have been reported in other places as the epidemic spreads to dozens of countries.
In recent days, the number of new cases outside China has eclipsed the number confirmed inside the country. Of the newly reported figures, 313 cases and 28 new deaths were in Wuhan, the city worst hit by the epidemic.
Health officials said on Wednesday a new coronavirus case in California could be the first in the U.S. that has no known connection to travel abroad or another known case, a possible sign the virus is spreading in a community.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported the case Wednesday night.
California officials said the person is a resident of Solano County and is getting medical care in Sacramento County. An email from UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento said the patient arrived last week but the CDC waited four days before testing for the virus.
"Community spread means spread of an illness for which the source of infection is unknown. It's also possible, however, that the patient may have been exposed to a returned traveler who was infected," the CDC said in a statement.
The new case in the United States came the same day President Donald Trump announced he was putting Vice President Mike Pence in charge of the U.S. response to the virus.
Trump said at a press conference that the U.S. is "very, very ready" for whatever the new coronavirus threat brings, even as health authorities warn Americans that more infections are coming.
The president has been pushing back against criticism that his administration isn't doing enough to meet the coronavirus threat. On Capitol Hill, lawmakers are calling for much more money than the $2.5 billion the White House has requested.
INTERACTIVE: Johns Hopkins map of COVID-19 cases worldwide
The World Health Organization on Wednesday reported that the number of new cases reported outside China exceeded the number of new cases in China for the first time.
Here is a look at the latest information from the virus' spread around the world:
Japan cancels school through March
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe says he asked all elementary, middle and high schools to remain closed until spring holidays begin in late March in an effort to stop the spread of the virus.
The measure comes amid growing concern about the rise in the number of untraceable cases in northern Japan and elsewhere.
Japan now has more than 890 cases, including 705 from a quarantined cruise ship
Iran vice president has virus
A state-owned newspaper in Iran says Masoumeh Ebtekar, a vice president in the Islamic Republic and a spokeswoman for the 1979 hostage-takers, has the new coronavirus.
The report Thursday came from the English-language IRAN daily newspaper via its Twitter account.
Ebtekar was known during the hostage crisis as "Mary." The report comes as other top officials in Iran's Shiite theocracy have caught the virus.
Virus reaches Latin America, first case in Brazil
Latin America saw its first confirmed case of the new coronavirus spreading worldwide when Brazil's government announced that a 61-year-old man who traveled to Italy this month had the virus.
The Health Ministry said Wednesday that the Brazilian man had spent two weeks in northern Italy's Lombardy region on a work trip, where he contracted the contagious virus.
Hardest-hit China, South Korea count 938 new virus cases
South Korea reported 505 more cases Thursday, bringing its total to 1,766. Most were in the country's fourth-biggest city, Daegu, where the outbreak has hit hardest. But there are signs the virus is spreading with dozens of cases in Seoul and Busan.
China reported 433 new cases along with 29 additional deaths. Thursday's updates bring mainland China's totals to 78,497 cases, and 2,744 deaths.
South Korea, US postpone annual military drills
The South Korean and U.S. militaries postponed their annual joint drills out of concerns over the outbreak that has infected soldiers in both countries' armed forces, put many troops in quarantine and closed base facilities.
Twenty South Korean soldiers and one American service member in South Korea have tested positive for the new coronavirus.
South Korea has already suspended some unilateral field training, placed 9,570 troops under quarantine and banned most of its enlisted soldiers from leaving their bases. The U.S. military closed some amenities at several bases and was urging its personnel to avoid handshakes and large gatherings if possible.
Italy seeks to calm fears in Europe as cases, deaths rise
Italy is seeking international support for its virus containment efforts as its caseload grew to 447 and people linked to Italy got sick elsewhere in Europe and the world.
Italy's health minister held a crisis meeting with European Union and World Health Organization representatives in Rome. Twelve people have died in Italy since two case clusters emerged in the country's north. Greece, North Macedonia and Romania reported their first virus cases Wednesday, all linked to Italy's afflicted regions.
New cases in France and Germany raised concern about additional clusters possibly forming in Europe. Germany's health minister said he had asked state health officials to review their emergency plans for pandemics.
Saudi Arabia halts travel to Islam's holiest site
Saudi Arabia has halted travel to Islam's holiest sites over fears over the outbreak months ahead of the hajj pilgrimage. The extraordinary decision stops foreigners from reaching the holy city of Mecca and Prophet Muhammad's mosque in Medina.
The decision showed the worry about the outbreak potentially spreading into Saudi Arabia, whose oil-rich monarchy stakes its legitimacy on protecting Islam's holy sites.
Meanwhile, experts are concerned Iran may be underreporting cases and deaths, given the illness' rapid spread from the Islamic Republic across the Persian Gulf. Iran announced Thursday 22 deaths among 144 confirmed cases of the virus.
Whistleblower: Feds helping evacuees lacked virus protection
A government whistleblower has filed a complaint alleging that federal workers did not have the necessary protective gear or training when they were deployed to help victims of the coronavirus evacuated from China.
The complaint deals with Health and Human Services Department employees sent to Travis and March Air Force bases in California to assist evacuees from China. The Office of Special Counsel, a federal agency that investigates personnel issues, confirmed Thursday it has received the complaint and is investigating.
Dominican Republic turns back cruise ship amid virus fears
Officials in the Dominican Republic have turned away a cruise ship that was heading there to disembark hundreds of passengers following a 14-day tour.
Officials say that eight of those aboard the Braemar showed potential symptoms of the COVID-19 illness caused by the coronavirus, and say they include four Filipinos, two British citizens and two U.S. citizens.
But Fred Olsen Cruise Lines says the symptoms aren't consistent with the new coronavirus. It describes them as ïnfluenza-like cases."
The company says it's consulting with local officials on what to do. The ship had been scheduled to pick up a new load of passengers on Thursday.
Associated Press reporters ROBERT JABLON, MIKE STOBBE, NICOLE WINFIELD, MARCELO DE SOUSA, MAURICIO SAVARESE, JON GAMBRELL, HYUNG-JIN KIM, AAMER MADHANI, JONATHAN LEMIRE, ZEKE MILLER, KIM TONG-HYUNG and MATT SEDENSKY contributed to this report.


text:
Snow Mobile
Your snowmobile is your ticket to enjoying the fresh mountain air and exhilarating scenery of the countryside, and while you are out there in the thick of it all, contemplating whether you have the right insurance should be the last thing on your mind.
Gaulin Insurance Agency offers specialized Snowmobile Insurance at affordable rates, with benefits tailored to meet your specific insurance needs. Whether you are a beginner or a seasoned veteran, we offer the following protection and more:
- Collision Coverage – to cover damage to your snowmobile from a collision with another vehicle
- Comprehensive Coverage – as coverage for loss or damage from theft, fire, or vandalism
- Property Damage – to pay for damage to another person's property for which you are liable
- Bodily Injury Liability – for paying the medical expenses of others if you are at fault in an accident
- Uninsured Motorist Protection – to insure damage caused by an uninsured driver
Additional Snowmobile Insurance coverage is also available for custom equipment that you have added to your snowmobile.
Discounts may also be available for completing rider safety courses or by being a member of certain riding association memberships. A representative from Gaulin Insurance Agency will review your insurance needs and work with you to design the right policy for you and determine your discount eligibility.
Products underwritten by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company and Affiliated Companies. Subject to underwriting guidelines, review and approval. Products and discounts not available to all persons in all states.


text:
Live Procedure Demonstrations III
February 24, 2017 • 0 Comment
Professional Conference Organizer:
Conferre S.A. - "The Art of Bringing People Together".
Phone: +30 26510 68610
Fax: +30 26510 68611
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Symposium compliant
as per Med Tech Europe
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking "Accept", you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.


text:
If you haven't already done so, please read the Home page
Truth in
Evidence vs. Federal Standards
Revised 4-9-08
Exclusion of Evidence, In a
In criminal courts nationwide, including your local traffic court, Federal standards allow a judge to exclude pieces of the prosecution's evidence from consideration only if the method by which the police obtained that evidence "shocks the conscience," offends "a sense of justice" or runs counter to the "decencies of civilized conduct." (From the Rochin case, below.)
In California criminal
(and traffic courts), Federal standards and State
standards apply.
However, our State standards offer very little
additional protection for the defendant. Under
California State
standards, the fact that the police
violated a law (such as VC 21455.5) does not by
itself permit a judge
to exclude the prosecution's evidence unless, (a) that law was passed by a
2/3 vote in
both houses of the
legislature (21455.5 was
passed by more than 2/3) and (b)
that law explicitly states that evidence shall be
excluded if the
authorities haven't followed the procedures specified
therein (21455.5
is not
explicit about the
exclusion of evidence).
(For more info about VC 21455.5, which was enacted by AB 1022 of 2003, see the discussion of AB 1022 on the Action page. An example of a traffic law that is explicit about the exclusion of evidence is VC 40803, part of California's Speed Trap Law.)
So, for a
California red light camera ticket, the Federal
standards are your main
Evidence, In Detail
Apparently, prior to late September/October 2002, no defendants in Culver City or West Hollywood had brought up, and proved, that the yellows were shorter than required by VC 21455.7 and the CalTrans table. Once defendants began proving it up, the pattern emerged that when presented with the fact that the yellow time was too short, the (three different) judges agreed that indeed it was too short, but found the defendant guilty anyway (see the Sept. 26 and Nov. 7, 2002 entries in the Culver City Chronology on the Cameras Page). The judges ruled that the tickets would stand because of two California propositions (see below) that say, essentially, that evidence in criminal cases may not be thrown out because of a minor or inadvertent mistake by the police.
(Was Culver City's "mistake" really an
"inadvertent" one? See Culver
there was widespread concern that some vicious criminals
were avoiding
conviction by using technicalities to get the
prosecution's evidence
excluded. In response,
California voters passed Proposition 8, which amended
the California
Constitution to read:
"Right to
Except as provided by statute hereafter enacted by a
two-thirds vote of
the membership in each house of the Legislature,
relevant evidence
not be excluded in any criminal proceeding, including
pretrial and post
conviction motions and hearings, or in any trial or
hearing of a
juvenile for a criminal offense, whether heard in
juvenile or adult
court. Nothing in this section shall affect any existing
statutory rule
of evidence relating to privilege or hearsay, or
Evidence Code,
352, 782 or 1103. Nothing in this section shall affect
any existing
statutory or constitutional right of the press."
Then, in 1990, we passed Proposition
which amended the California Constitution to read, in
Propositions left us criminal defendants (in
California, red light
camera tickets are a criminal offense) with only the
afforded by the U.S. Constitution.
The Culver City/WeHo judges added that our Federal Constitutional protections would not exclude the evidence (the camera photos) either, as the behavior of the police didn't meet the Federal tests of "shock[ing] the conscience," "seem[ing] to be facially unjust," or "offend[ing] one's sense of justice." Those tests come from Rochin v. California, a U.S. Supreme Court case, excerpted below.
counter the judges' tendency to excuse a city's
mis-timing of the
signals or the city's illegal contract, you could argue
that for the
city's contractor and the police red light camera staff,
all of whom do
but deal with red light cameras and should therefore be
and competent in the field, the applicable laws (VC
21455.5) should have been
impossible to miss and very easy-to-apply.
And, if your Late Time was less than
greater than the timing error by the City, you could
argue that it was
not a minor error, as the ticket would not have been
issued had the
timing been correct.
To further deal with the "inadvertent
mistake" excuse, you could paraphrase - but not cite - a
portion of the
ruling from the 2001 City of San Diego case where
the judge threw out hundreds of tickets. The judge
wrote, quoting
another 2001 case:
The reason it cannot be cited is that in July 2002, People vs. Williams, the appellate case from which that quote was taken, was partially rejected by the State Supreme Court (28 Cal.4th 408). However, it could be argued that the issue in Williams, which was whether the CHP's failure to calibrate and test a blood alcohol meter at the prescribed intervals would require the exclusion of a reading from the meter, is different from our situation for a variety of reasons, including that the mis-setting of signals actually can affect driver behavior, including the important decision to stop, or not.
Using the San Diego decision, you could argue that the mis-setting of half of all the cameras in town, and the issuing of thousands of tickets costing the motoring public several million dollars, hardly fits the definition of an anomaly or occasional error, and does shock the conscience, seem facially unjust, and is offensive to one's sense of justice (the Federal tests from above). Especially considering that the city made that "error" during a period of time when, due to the San Diego case, there was a tremendous focus on exactly the issue of the length of the yellow. You may want to use part or all of Justice Black's concurrence in Rochin v. California, and the ACLU's remarks about the exclusionary rule, both below.
Excerpt from Rochin v.
"Having "some information" that petitioner was selling narcotics, three state officers entered his home and forced their way into the bedroom occupied by him and his wife. When asked about two capsules lying on a bedside table, petitioner put them in his mouth. After an unsuccessful struggle to extract them by force, the officers took petitioner to a hospital, where an emetic was forced into his stomach against his will. He vomited two capsules which were found to contain morphine. These were admitted in evidence over his objection and he was convicted in a state court of violating a state law forbidding possession of morphine. Held: The conviction is reversed, because it was obtained by methods violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."
Justice Black, concurring:
**More information about the 14th
Amendment, from FindLaw.
(Truth in Evidence is also discussed on this page.)
Excerpts from ACLU Site,
Exclusionary Rule
"The Exclusionary Rule Is an Effective Deterrent to Police Misconduct "
"The primary purpose of the Exclusionary
in the words of the Supreme Court, "is to deter--to compel
respect for the constitutional guarantee in the only
available way--by removing the incentive to disregard it."
the Rule was announced by a unanimous (and very
conservative) Court in
1914, it was a well-considered and very deliberate
response to
the lawlessness of federal law enforcement agents who
circumvented constitutional requirements by executing
searches and
seizures without a warrant. As the Court said in Weeks v.
U.S.: "The
tendency of those who execute the criminal laws of the
country to
conviction by means of unlawful seizures... should find no
sanction in
the judgments of the courts, which are charged at all
times with
the support of the Constitution, and to which people of
conditions have a right to appeal for the maintenance of
fundamental rights."
U.S. Supreme Court
ROCHIN v. CALIFORNIA, 342 U.S. 165 (1952)342 U.S. 165
ROCHIN v. CALIFORNIA.
Having "some information" that petitioner was selling narcotics, three state officers entered his home and forced their way into the bedroom occupied by him and his wife. When asked about two capsules lying on a bedside table, petitioner put them in his mouth. After an unsuccessful struggle to extract them by force, the officers took petitioner to a hospital, where an emetic was forced into his stomach against his will. He vomited two capsules which were found to contain morphine. These were admitted in evidence over his objection and he was convicted in a state court of violating a state law forbidding possession of morphine. Held: The conviction is reversed, because it was obtained by methods violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 166-174.
101 Cal. App. 2d 140, 225 P.2d 1, reversed.
In a California state court, petitioner was convicted of violating a state law forbidding the possession of morphine. The District Court of Appeal affirmed. 101 Cal. App. 2d 140, 225 P.2d 1. The State Supreme Court denied a review. This Court granted certiorari. 341 U.S. 939 . Reversed, p. 174.
Dolly Lee Butler and A. L. Wirin argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner.
Howard S. Goldin, Deputy Attorney General of California, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Edmund G. Brown, Attorney General, Clarence A. Linn, Assistant Attorney General, and Frank W. Richards, Deputy Attorney General.
Fred Okrand, A. L. Wirin, Edward J. Ennis, Morris L. Ernst, Osmond K. Fraenkel, Arthur Garfield Hays, Herbert M. Levy and Clore Warne filed a brief for the American Civil Liberties Union, as amicus curiae, urging reversal.
MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of the Court.
Having "some information that [the petitioner here] was selling narcotics," three deputy sheriffs of the County of Los Angeles, on the morning of July 1, 1949, made for the two-story dwelling house in which Rochin lived with his mother, common-law wife, brothers and sisters. Finding the outside door open, they entered and then forced open the door to Rochin's room on the second floor. Inside they found petitioner sitting partly dressed on the side of the bed, upon which his wife was lying. On a "night stand" beside the bed the deputies spied two capsules. When asked "Whose stuff is this?" Rochin seized the capsules and put them in his mouth. A struggle ensued, in the course of which the three officers "jumped upon him" and attempted to extract the capsules. The force they applied proved unavailing against Rochin's resistance. He was handcuffed and taken to a hospital. At the direction of one of the officers a doctor forced an emetic solution through a tube into Rochin's stomach against his will. This "stomach pumping" produced vomiting. In the vomited matter were found two capsules which proved to contain morphine.
Rochin was brought to trial before a California Superior Court, sitting without a jury, on the charge of possessing "a preparation of morphine" in violation of the California Health and Safety Code, 1947, 11,500. Rochin was convicted and sentenced to sixty days' imprisonment. The chief evidence against him was the two capsules. They were admitted over petitioner's objection, although the means of obtaining them was frankly set forth in the testimony by one of the deputies, substantially as here narrated.
On appeal, the District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, despite the finding that the officers "were guilty of unlawfully breaking into and entering defendant's room and were guilty of unlawfully assaulting and battering defendant while in the room," and "were guilty of unlawfully assaulting, battering, torturing and falsely imprisoning the defendant at the alleged hospital." 101 Cal. App. 2d 140, 143, 225 P.2d 1, 3. One of the three judges, while finding that "the record in this case reveals a shocking series of violations of constitutional rights," concurred only because he felt bound by decisions of his Supreme Court. These, he asserted, "have been looked upon by law enforcement officers as an encouragement, if not an invitation, to the commission of such lawless acts." Ibid. The Supreme Court of California denied without opinion Rochin's petition for a hearing. [Fn.1] Two justices dissented from this denial, and in doing so expressed themselves thus: ". . . a conviction which rests upon evidence of incriminating objects obtained from the body of the accused by physical abuse is as invalid as a conviction which rests upon a verbal confession extracted from him by such abuse. . . . Had the evidence forced from the defendant's lips consisted of an oral confession that he illegally possessed a drug . . . he would have the protection of the rule of law which excludes coerced confessions from evidence. But because the evidence forced from his lips consisted of real objects the People of this state are permitted to base a conviction upon it. [We] find no valid ground of distinction between a verbal confession extracted by physical abuse and a confession wrested from defendant's body by physical abuse." 101 Cal. App. 2d 143, 149-150, 225 P.2d 913, 917-918.
This Court granted certiorari, 341 U.S. 939 , because a serious question is raised as to the limitations which the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment imposes on the conduct of criminal proceedings by the States.
In our federal system the administration of criminal justice is predominantly committed to the care of the States. The power to define crimes belongs to Congress only as an appropriate means of carrying into execution its limited grant of legislative powers. U.S. Const., Art. I, 8, cl. 18. Broadly speaking, crimes in the United States are what the laws of the individual States make them, subject to the limitations of Art. I, 10, cl. 1, in the original Constitution, prohibiting bills of attainder and ex post facto laws, and of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments.
These limitations, in the main, concern not restrictions upon the powers of the States to define crime, except in the restricted area where federal authority has preempted the field, but restrictions upon the manner in which the States may enforce their penal codes. Accordingly, in reviewing a State criminal conviction under a claim of right guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, from which is derived the most far-reaching and most frequent federal basis of challenging State criminal justice, "we must be deeply mindful of the responsibilities of the States for the enforcement of criminal laws, and exercise with due humility our merely negative function in subjecting convictions from state courts to the very narrow scrutiny which the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment authorizes." Malinski v. New York, 324 U.S. 401, 412 , 418. Due process of law, "itself a historical product," Jackman v. Rosenbaum Co., 260 U.S. 22, 31 , is not to be turned into a destructive dogma against the States in the administration of their systems of criminal justice.
However, this Court too has its responsibility. Regard for the requirements of the Due Process Clause "inescapably imposes upon this Court an exercise of judgment upon the whole course of the proceedings [resulting in a conviction] in order to ascertain whether they offend those canons of decency and fairness which express the notions of justice of English-speaking peoples even toward those charged with the most heinous offenses." Malinski v. New York, supra, at 416-417. These standards of justice are not authoritatively formulated anywhere as though they were specifics. Due process of law is a summarized constitutional guarantee of respect for those personal immunities which, as Mr. Justice Cardozo twice wrote for the Court, are "so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental," Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97, 105 , or are "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty." Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319, 325 . [Fn. 2]
The Court's function in the observance of this settled conception of the Due Process Clause does not leave us without adequate guides in subjecting State criminal procedures to constitutional judgment. In dealing not with the machinery of government but with human rights, the absence of formal exactitude, or want of fixity of meaning, is not an unusual or even regrettable attribute of constitutional provisions. Words being symbols do not speak without a gloss. On the one hand the gloss may be the deposit of history, whereby a term gains technical content. Thus the requirements of the Sixth and Seventh Amendments for trial by jury in the federal courts have a rigid meaning. No changes or chances can alter the content of the verbal symbol of "jury" - a body of twelve men who must reach a unanimous conclusion if the verdict is to go against the defendant. [Fn. 3] On the other hand, the gloss of some of the verbal symbols of the Constitution does not give them a fixed technical content. It exacts a continuing process of application.
When the gloss has thus not been fixed but is a function of the process of judgment, the judgment is bound to fall differently at different times and differently at the same time through different judges. Even more specific provisions, such as the guaranty of freedom of speech and the detailed protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, have inevitably evoked as sharp divisions in this Court as the least specific and most comprehensive protection of liberties, the Due Process Clause.
The vague contours of the Due Process Clause do not leave judges at large. [Fn. 4] We may not draw on our merely personal and private notions and disregard the limits that bind judges in their judicial function. Even though the concept of due process of law is not final and fixed, these limits are derived from considerations that are fused in the whole nature of our judicial process. See Cardozo, The Nature of the Judicial Process; The Growth of the Law; The Paradoxes of Legal Science. These are considerations deeply rooted in reason and in the compelling traditions of the legal profession. The Due Process Clause places upon this Court the duty of exercising a judgment, within the narrow confines of judicial power in reviewing State convictions, upon interests of society pushing in opposite directions.
Due process of law thus conceived is not to be derided as resort to a revival of "natural law." [Fn. 5] To believe that this judicial exercise of judgment could be avoided by freezing "due process of law" at some fixed stage of time or thought is to suggest that the most important aspect of constitutional adjudication is a function for inanimate machines and not for judges, for whom the independence safeguarded by Article III of the Constitution was designed and who are presumably guided by established standards of judicial behavior. Even cybernetics has not yet made that haughty claim. To practice the requisite detachment and to achieve sufficient objectivity no doubt demands of judges the habit of self-discipline and self-criticism, incertitude that one's own views are incontestable and alert tolerance toward views not shared. But these are precisely the presuppositions of our judicial process. They are precisely the qualities society has a right to expect from those entrusted with ultimate judicial power.
Restraints on our jurisdiction are self-imposed only in the sense that there is from our decisions no immediate appeal short of impeachment or constitutional amendment. But that does not make due process of law a matter of judicial caprice. The faculties of the Due Process Clause may be indefinite and vague, but the mode of their ascertainment is not self-willed. In each case "due process of law" requires an evaluation based on a disinterested inquiry pursued in the spirit of science, on a balanced order of facts exactly and fairly stated, on the detached consideration of conflicting claims, see Hudson County Water Co. v. McCarter, 209 U.S. 349, 355 , on a judgment not ad hoc and episodic but duly mindful of reconciling the needs both of continuity and of change in a progressive society.
Applying these general considerations to the circumstances of the present case, we are compelled to conclude that the proceedings by which this conviction was obtained do more than offend some fastidious squeamishness or private sentimentalism about combatting crime too energetically. This is conduct that shocks the conscience. Illegally breaking into the privacy of the petitioner, the struggle to open his mouth and remove what was there, the forcible extraction of his stomach's contents - this course of proceeding by agents of government to obtain evidence is bound to offend even hardened sensibilities. They are methods too close to the rack and the screw to permit of constitutional differentiation.
It has long since ceased to be true that due process of law is heedless of the means by which otherwise relevant and credible evidence is obtained. This was not true even before the series of recent cases enforced the constitutional principle that the States may not base convictions upon confessions, however much verified, obtained by coercion. These decisions are not arbitrary exceptions to the comprehensive right of States to fashion their own rules of evidence for criminal trials. They are not sports in our constitutional law but applications of a general principle. They are only instances of the general requirement that States in their prosecutions respect certain decencies of civilized conduct. Due process of law, as a historic and generative principle, precludes defining, and thereby confining, these standards of conduct more precisely than to say that convictions cannot be brought about by methods that offend "a sense of justice." See Mr. Chief Justice Hughes, speaking for a unanimous Court in Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278, 285 -286. It would be a stultification of the responsibility which the course of constitutional history has cast upon this Court to hold that in order to convict a man the police cannot extract by force what is in his mind but can extract what is in his stomach. [Fn. 6]
To attempt in this case to distinguish what lawyers call "real evidence" from verbal evidence is to ignore the reasons for excluding coerced confessions. Use of involuntary verbal confessions in State criminal trials is constitutionally obnoxious not only because of their unreliability. They are inadmissible under the Due Process Clause even though statements contained in them may be independently established as true. Coerced confessions offend the community's sense of fair play and decency. So here, to sanction the brutal conduct which naturally enough was condemned by the court whose judgment is before us, would be to afford brutality the cloak of law. Nothing would be more calculated to discredit law and thereby to brutalize the temper of a society.
In deciding this case we do not heedlessly bring into question decisions in many States dealing with essentially different, even if related, problems. We therefore put to one side cases which have arisen in the State courts through use of modern methods and devices for discovering wrongdoers and bringing them to book. It does not fairly represent these decisions to suggest that they legalize force so brutal and so offensive to human dignity in securing evidence from a suspect as is revealed by this record. Indeed the California Supreme Court has not sanctioned this mode of securing a conviction. It merely exercised its discretion to decline a review of the conviction. All the California judges who have expressed themselves in this case have condemned the conduct in the strongest language.
We are not unmindful that hypothetical situations can be conjured up, shading imperceptibly from the circumstances of this case and by gradations producing practical differences despite seemingly logical extensions. But the Constitution is "intended to preserve practical and substantial rights, not to maintain theories." Davis v. Mills, 194 U.S. 451, 457 .
On the facts of this case the conviction of the petitioner has been obtained by methods that offend the Due Process Clause. The judgment below must be
Footnotes[ Footnote 1 ] The petition for a hearing is addressed to the discretion of the California Supreme Court and a denial has apparently the same significance as the denial of certiorari in this Court. Cal. Const., Art. VI, 4, 4c; "Rules on Appeal," Rules 28, 29, 36 Cal. 2d 24-25 (1951). See 3 Stan. L. Rev. 243-269 (1951).
[ Footnote 2 ] What is here summarized was deemed by a majority of the Court, in Malinski v. New York, 324 U.S. 401, 412 and 438, to be "the controlling principles upon which this Court reviews on constitutional grounds a state court conviction for crime." They have been applied by this Court many times, long before and since the Malinski case.
[ Footnote 3 ] This is the federal jury required constitutionally although England and at least half of the States have in some civil cases juries which are composed of less than 12 or whose verdict may be less than unanimous. See County Courts Act, 1934, 24 & 25 Geo. V, c. 53, 93; Arizona State Legislative Bureau, Legislative Briefs No. 4, Grand and Petit Juries in the United States, v-vi (Feb. 15, 1940); The Council of State Governments, The Book of the States, 1950-1951, 515.
[ Footnote 4 ] Burke's observations on the method of ascertaining law by judges are pertinent:
[ Footnote 5 ] Morris R. Cohen, "Jus Naturale Redivivum," 25 Philosophical Review 761 (1916), and "Natural Rights and Positive Law," Reason and Nature (1931), 401-426; F. Pollock, "The History of the Law of Nature," Essays in the law (1922), 31-79.
[ Footnote 6 ] As to the difference between the privilege against self-crimination protected, in federal prosecutions, under the Fifth Amendment, and the limitations which the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment imposes upon the States against the use of coerced confessions, see Brown v. Mississippi, supra, at 285.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK, concurring.
Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46, 68 -123, sets out reasons for my belief that state as well as federal courts and law enforcement officers must obey the Fifth Amendment's command that "No person . . . shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." I think a person is compelled to be a witness against himself not only when he is compelled to testify, but also when as here, incriminating evidence is forcibly taken from him by a contrivance of modern science. Cf. Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 ; Counselman v. Hitchcock, 142 U.S. 547, 562 ; Bram v. United States, 168 U.S. 532 ; Chambers v. Florida, 309 U.S. 227 . California convicted this petitioner by using against him evidence obtained in this manner, and I agree with MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS that the case should be reversed on this ground.
In the view of a majority of the Court, however, the Fifth Amendment imposes no restraint of any kind on the states. They nevertheless hold that California's use of this evidence violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Since they hold as I do in this case, I regret my inability to accept their interpretation without protest. But I believe that faithful adherence to the specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights insures a more permanent protection of individual liberty than that which can be afforded by the nebulous standards stated by the majority.
What the majority hold is that the Due Process Clause empowers this Court to nullify any state law if its application "shocks the conscience," offends "a sense of justice" or runs counter to the "decencies of civilized conduct." The majority emphasize that these statements do not refer to their own consciences or to their senses of justice and decency. For we are told that "we may not draw on our merely personal and private notions"; our judgment must be grounded on "considerations deeply rooted in reason and in the compelling traditions of the legal profession." We are further admonished to measure the validity of state practices, not by our reason, or by the traditions of the legal profession, but by "the community's sense of fair play and decency"; by the "traditions and conscience of our people"; or by "those canons of decency and fairness which express the notions of justice of English-speaking peoples." These canons are made necessary, it is said, because of "interests of society pushing in opposite directions."
If the Due Process Clause does vest this Court with such unlimited power to invalidate laws, I am still in doubt as to why we should consider only the notions of English-speaking peoples to determine what are immutable and fundamental principles of justice. Moreover, one may well ask what avenues of investigation are open to discover "canons" of conduct so universally favored that this Court should write them into the Constitution? All we are told is that the discovery must be made by an "evaluation based on a disinterested inquiry pursued in the spirit of science, on a balanced order of facts."
Some constitutional provisions are stated in absolute and unqualified language such, for illustration, as the First Amendment stating that no law shall be passed prohibiting the free exercise of religion or abridging the freedom of speech or press. Other constitutional provisions do require courts to choose between competing policies, such as the Fourth Amendment which, by its terms, necessitates a judicial decision as to what is an "unreasonable" search or seizure. There is, however, no express constitutional language granting judicial power to invalidate every state law of every kind deemed "unreasonable" or contrary to the Court's notion of civilized decencies; yet the constitutional philosophy used by the majority has, in the past, been used to deny a state the right to fix the price of gasoline, Williams v. Standard Oil Co., 278 U.S. 235 ; and even the right to prevent bakers from palming off smaller for larger loaves of bread, Jay Burns Baking Co. v. Bryan, 264 U.S. 504 . These cases, and other, [Fn.1] show the extent to which the evanescent standards of the majority's philosophy have been used to nullify state legislative programs passed to suppress evil economic practices. What paralyzing role this same philosophy will play in the future economic affairs of this country is impossible to predict. Of even graver concern, however, is the use of the philosophy to nullify the Bill of Rights. I long ago concluded that the accordion-like qualities of this philosophy must inevitably imperil all the individual liberty safeguards specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights. [Fn. 2] Reflection and recent decisions [Fn. 3] of this Court sanctioning abridgment of the freedom of speech and press have strengthened this conclusion.
[ Footnote 1 ] See n. 12 of dissenting opinion, Adamson v. California, supra, at p. 83.
[ Footnote 2 ] E. g., Adamson v. California, supra, and cases cited in the dissent.
[ Footnote 3 ] American Communications Assn. v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382 ; Feiner v. New York, 340 U.S. 315 ; Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494 .
MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, concurring.
The evidence obtained from this accused's stomach would be admissible in the majority of states where the question has been raised. [Fn. 1] So far as the reported cases reveal, the only states which would probably exclude the evidence would be Arkansas, Iowa, Michigan, and Missouri. [Fn. 2] Yet the Court now says that the rule which the majority of the states have fashioned violates the "decencies of civilized conduct." To that I cannot agree. It is a rule formulated by responsible courts with judges as sensitive as we are to the proper standards for law administration.
As an original matter it might be debatable whether the provision in the Fifth Amendment that no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself" serves the ends of justice. Not all civilized legal procedures recognize it. [Fn. 3] But the choice was made by the Framers, a choice which sets a standard for legal trials in this country. The Framers made it a standard of due process for prosecutions by the Federal Government. If it is a requirement of due process for a trial in the federal courthouse, it is impossible for me to say it is not a requirement of due process for a trial in the state courthouse. That was the issue recently surveyed in Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46 . The Court rejected the view that compelled testimony should be excluded and held in substance that the accused in a state trial can be forced to testify against himself. I disagree. Of course an accused can be compelled to be present at the trial, to stand, to sit, to turn this way or that, and to try on a cap or a coat. See Holt v. United States, 218 U.S. 245, 252 -253. But I think that words taken from his lips, capsules taken from his stomach, blood taken from his veins are all inadmissible provided they are taken from him without his consent. They are inadmissible because of the command of the Fifth Amendment.
That is an unequivocal, definite and workable rule of evidence for state and federal courts. But we cannot in fairness free the state courts from that command and yet excoriate them for flouting the "decencies of civilized conduct" when they admit the evidence. That is to make the rule turn not on the Constitution but on the idiosyncrasies of the judges who sit here.
The damage of the view sponsored by the Court in this case may not be conspicuous here. But it is part of the same philosophy that produced Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455 , denying counsel to an accused in a state trial against the command of the Sixth Amendment, and Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25 , allowing evidence obtained as a result of a search and seizure that is illegal under the Fourth Amendment to be introduced in a state trial. It is part of the process of erosion of civil rights of the citizen in recent years.
[ Footnote 1 ] See People v. One 1941 Mercury Sedan, 74 Cal. App. 2d 199, 168 P.2d 443 (pumping of accused's stomach to recover swallowed narcotic); Rochin v. California, 101 Cal. App. 2d 140, 225 P.2d 1 (pumping of accused's stomach to recover swallowed narcotic); People v. Tucker, 88 Cal. App. 2d 333, 198 P.2d 941 (blood test to determine intoxication); State v. Ayres, 70 Idaho 18, 211 P.2d 142 (blood test to determine intoxication); Davis v. State, 189 Md. 640, 57 A. 2d 289 (blood typing to link accused with murder); Skidmore v. State, 59 Nev. 320, 92 P.2d 979 (examination of accused for venereal disease); State v. Sturtevant, 96 N. H. 99, 70 A. 2d 909 (blood test to determine intoxication); State v. Alexander, 7 N. J. 585, 83 A. 2d 441 (blood typing to establish guilt); State v. Gatton, 60 Ohio App. 192, 20 N. E. 2d 265 (commenting on refusal to submit to blood test or urinalysis to determine intoxication); State v. Nutt, 78 Ohio App. 336, 65 N. E. 2d 675 (commenting on refusal to submit to urinalysis to determine intoxication); but cf. Booker v. Cincinnati, 1 Ohio Supp. 152 (examination and urinalysis to determine intoxication); State v. Cram, 176 Ore. 577, 160 P.2d 283, 164 A. L. R. 952, 967 (blood test to determine intoxication); Commonwealth v. Statti, 166 Pa. Super. 577, 73 A. 2d 688 (blood typing linking accused to assault).
[ Footnote 2 ] Bethel v. State, 178 Ark. 277, 10 S.W.2d 370 (examination for venereal disease); State v. Height, 117 Iowa 650, 91 N. W. 935 (examination for venereal disease); State v. Weltha, 228 Iowa 519, 292 N. W. 148 (blood test to determine intoxication, limiting rules on search and seizure); but cf. State v. Benson, 230 Iowa 1168, 300 N. W. 275 (comment on refusal to submit to blood test to determine intoxication); People v. Corder, 244 Mich. 274, 221 N. W. 309 (examination for venereal disease); but see People v. Placido, 310 Mich. 404, 408, 17 N. W. 2d 230, 232; State v. Newcomb, 220 Mo. 54, 119 S. W. 405 (examination for venereal disease); State v. Matsinger, 180 S. W. 856 (examination for venereal disease).
[ Footnote 3 ] See Ploscowe, The Investigating Magistrate in European Criminal Procedure, 33 Mich. L. Rev. 1010 (1935).


text:
Rule #1 - Be Patient - Rule #2 - Don't ask when, if you don't contribute - Rule #3 - You have coding skills - LinuxMCE's small brother is available: http://www.agocontrol.com
HeyI just want to find out if LinuxMCE is going to upgrade to MythTV 0.23?I have been using the defaults on LinuxMCE and it was using avenard repo that was setup when I installed. But as I understand avenard is dropping support for 8.10. Would LinuxMCE still be supporting this?MythTV 0.23 will fix a lot of tv problems I am having here in NZ.C
Out of interest what problems are you having? I'm also in NZ.
HiWell All my MD's uses the new ION nvidia. and they all have that problem.. I think maybe cause the homerun is a network device it put bit more resources on the process. I hope Mandingo can let us know when we can test it.I would love to get my hands on it soon.C
One of the limitations of the Ion GPU is that it does not do full h.264 acceleration...so h.264 will always use more processor than when using other more capable nVidia GPU's.Andrew
Quote from: totallymaxed on May 14, 2010, 11:44:49 amOne of the limitations of the Ion GPU is that it does not do full h.264 acceleration...so h.264 will always use more processor than when using other more capable nVidia GPU's.AndrewHi Andrewthat is alright, I am hoping that the Myth upgrade would make it a bit of a better experience as what it is currently. The 330 ION that I have is cool and they only do this so I should be ok. Now I just need to get my hand on this upgrades..any ideas where I can get the packages?C
If Avenard has dropped support then I think you either need to wait for the 0.23 to be packaged for 0810 or you will have to build your own from sources.Andrew


text:
How to use The JNS Meeeting Planner
If you wish to take advantage of the Itinerary functions, you must create an account by entering your e-mail address. After logging in using your registered e-mail address, you can select presentations of your interest by clicking the "Add to list" or "Add all" buttons. To remove them, use " from the list, please use "Remove from list" or "Remove all" buttons.
Create a new account (Login ID)
If you wish to take advantage of the Itinerary functions of the Meeting Planner, you must create an account. Go to the Top page and find the New Registration section.
Type in your e-mail address, read the Terms of Use, check "agree" box, and click the "Register" button.
From next time, you can login in using your registered e-mail address.
Note that if you simply use the search engine, you do not need an account.
After registration, log in with your registered e-mail address to retrieve your previous search results and your meeting plan.
To browse the programs according to the timetable, click the "Timetable" tab.
Click the date tab to show all sessions on the day. By clicking each session in the table, detailed information about the session will pop up.
Browse per session
You can also browse each session by clicking the "Browse per session" tab.
Click the date tab to find the sessions of the day.
Click the title of the session or the "Session information" button to read the abstract.
From the abstract page, you can use the print function.
You can also find the session using "Search for sessions".
You can perform detailed search from the "Search" menu.
At the "Refine your search" menu, provide full or partial information about "Presenter", "Session title", "Subject", " Affiliation", "Session type", "Day" and/or "Place".
Free text search in the Abstract is also available.
Add to list / Remove from list
After login, you will find "Add to list" button in each session/presentation.
To create your own meeting plan, select titles of your choice by clicking the "Add to list" buttons.
The "Remove from list" buttons will appear in the titles already added to your list.
Titles are deselected when you click the "Remove from list" buttons.
Note that you need to register and log in to create your meeting plan.
Use "Add all" or "Remove all" buttons to add or remove all titles in the session.
To confirm and print your itinerary, click "Meeting Planner" tab.
Schedule conflict
If there is any overlap of events in your schedule, the Planner will automatically highlight the overlapping time periods in pink.
The overlapping program will appear when you place your mouse pointer on the highlighted text.


text:
"Lesson 12: The Father's Responsibilities for the Welfare of His Family," Duties and Blessings of the Priesthood: Basic Manual for Priesthood Holders, Part A (2000), 86–92
"Lesson 12: The Father's Responsibilities for the Welfare of His Family," Duties and Blessings of the Priesthood: Basic Manual for Priesthood Holders, Part A, 86–92
Lesson 12
The Father's Responsibilities for the Welfare of His Family
The purpose of this lesson is to help us understand the responsibility the father has to plan and provide for the needs of his family.
A prophet of the Lord said: "The family is the most important organization in time or in eternity. Our purpose in life is to create for ourselves eternal family units" (Joseph Fielding Smith, in Conference Report, Apr. 1972, 13; or Ensign, July 1972, 27).
The Father Is to Provide for the Needs of His Family
Prophets and Apostles have taught that "by divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families" ("The Family: A Proclamation to the World," Ensign, Nov. 1995, 102). This sacred obligation, given to us by the Lord, is the most important work a father will ever perform. President David O. McKay stated that "no other success can compensate for failure in the home" (quoting J. E. McCulloch, Home: The Savior of Civilization [1924], 42, in Conference Report, Apr. 1935, 116).
It is in the family that children should be cared for and taught eternal principles. "The most important of the Lord's work will be that which we do within our own homes," said President Harold B. Lee (Regional Representatives Seminar Report, Apr. 1972, 2). No other teacher can affect our children as much as we can as parents. For this reason, we must teach our children both by our example and our words. We are promised that if we and our wives and children are sealed together in the temple and faithfully live the principles of the gospel, we can live together as eternal families in the celestial kingdom (see chapter 47, "Exaltation," in the Gospel Principles manual).
Providing for the Physical Needs of the Family
As fathers, we are expected to provide for the physical needs of our families. To meet the physical necessities of our family we should:
Work at an honest job.
Budget family resources in cooperation with our wife.
Teach our children to work.
Direct a program of home production and storage.
Modern scriptures teach that those who could work but do not "shall not eat the bread nor wear the garments of the laborer" (D&C 42:42). The Lord has said that unless the idler changes his ways, he will not receive the blessings that those who work will receive. He may not even keep his place in the Church (see D&C 75:29). Of course, it does not matter what work we do as long as it is honest and satisfying work.
With his wife, a husband should organize a family budget. The income he acquires is not his alone—it belongs to the entire family. He is responsible to see that the financial needs of every family member are being met, not just his own. When he puts forth his best efforts to provide for the physical needs of his family, the Lord will bless him, and his wife and children can carry out their proper tasks in the family.
Show visual 12-a, "Families who work together are blessed both temporally and spiritually."
Children should be encouraged and allowed to receive as much education as possible to make sure they are prepared for their life's work. As far as possible, they should not be taken from school in order to work. This does not mean our children should not have work to do in the home. President Harold B. Lee instructed parents to give special chores to children to keep them from boredom and allow them to develop mature work habits (see "Preparing Our Youth," Ensign, Mar. 1971, 3).
One duty children could be given is to care for a family garden. We have been counseled to plant family gardens to produce some of our own food needs and then to store as much food as possible. President Spencer W. Kimball counseled each family to "grow all the food that you feasibly can on your own property. … Develop your skills in your home preservation and storage. We reaffirm the previous counsel the Church has always given, to acquire and maintain a year's supply" (in Conference Report, Apr. 1976, 170–71; or Ensign, May 1976, 124).
What are some tasks we can do as a family to teach our children to work? When we are unable to provide for the physical needs of our families, where can we obtain help? (We should always seek help first from family members and relatives who may be in a position to help. If they can't help us, we should turn to the Church and contact our quorum leaders. Government welfare agencies should be contacted only if the Church is unable to help us in the ways we need help.)
Providing for the Spiritual Needs of the Family
To meet the spiritual needs of our family we can:
Teach the gospel to our wife and children.
Have daily family prayer.
Make our home a place that invites the Spirit of the Lord to abide with us.
Pay tithes and offerings to the Lord.
Hold worthwhile family home evenings.
These are all sacred responsibilities. The Doctrine and Covenants points out the importance of one of these duties in particular.
Have class members read Doctrine and Covenants 68:25, 28. What has the Lord commanded us to teach our children?
A father must make sure that his family is taught the gospel in the home. One of the best ways to begin this teaching is in family home evening. This provides a regular time for us to talk with and instruct our families. The First Presidency has urged all parents "to meet regularly with their families on Monday evenings, there to teach them the scriptures … and to bear testimony to them. Parents should take these opportunities to get close to their children, to listen to their problems and [goals], and to give them the personal direction that they need so much" ("Message from the First Presidency," Family Home Evening manual, 1976–77, 3).
For a father to properly teach his children, he must organize his time to be home with his family often. He also needs to show the joy of living the gospel in his own life by faithfully paying tithes and offerings to the Church, accepting and fulfilling Church callings, and keeping the other commandments.
How can the Church help us teach our children?
Blessings to Fathers and Families
Show visual 12-b, "King Benjamin provided for both the physical and the spiritual needs of his family."
The Book of Mormon teaches us about a great prophet-king and father, King Benjamin (see Mosiah 2:12, 14). Even though he was a king and a prophet, he worked with his own hands to provide for his family. He did not expect others to support him. As fathers, we should follow his example and provide for our families.
Abraham is another father we can pattern our lives after. Because of his faithfulness, he was promised a righteous family and a great posterity (see Genesis 17:3–8). Abraham was blessed for his diligence in following the Lord and properly providing for his family. We can have these same blessings as we take care of the spiritual and temporal needs of our families. In addition, love will increase in our homes, and our families will progress spiritually.
The following story tells how blessings came to a father and his family as he accepted and lived the gospel:
Before Joseph Garcia joined the Church, he enjoyed drinking with his friends and spent little time at home. As a result, his wife often had to take small cleaning jobs to earn money to help support the family. His children barely knew him. They feared him more than they respected or loved him.
One day, however, he was introduced to some missionaries of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. After six months of meetings with the missionaries, his life completely changed. He quit keeping company with his friends in the bars and soon joined the Church. He began spending time with his children, holding family home evenings and enjoying outings with them and his wife. He planned a careful family budget which allowed his wife to quit working and spend all of her time at home.
He quickly found that he enjoyed his home and the time he spent with his wife more than he ever enjoyed his former friends. His children learned to love him and today are trying to follow his example of righteous living.
Evaluate how well you are doing in meeting the spiritual and physical needs of your family.
Commit yourself to fulfilling the needs of your family.
Work out a plan with your wife and children to bring your lives in line with the scriptures and the counsel of Church leaders.
Additional Scriptures
1 Timothy 5:8 (fathers must provide for their families)
Mosiah 27:14, 22–24 (the Lord hears the prayers of fathers for their children)
Doctrine and Covenants 68:30–31 (the children of idlers grow up in wickedness)
Doctrine and Covenants 75:28–29 (fathers to provide for family members)
Teacher Preparation
Before presenting this lesson:
Read Gospel Principles chapters 27, "Work and Personal Responsibility," and 36 "The Family Can Be Eternal."
Assign class members to present any stories, scriptures, or quotations you wish.


text:
Carolina Live - Artists
Alisa Weilerstein
ALISA WEILERSTEIN (cello) has, at a young age, established herself as a dedicated chamber musician, performed with the nation's top orchestras, given recitals throughout the United States and Europe, and appeared at prestigious festivals. She makes her debuts this season with the Boston and Chicago symphony orchestras, also performing with The Cleveland Orchestra, Dallas and National symphony orchestras and the New York Philharmonic, among other engagements. Abroad, she will appear as a guest soloist with the Hamburg Philharmonic, the Hallé Orchestra, Gulbenkian Orchestra and Slovenia Philharmonic, and will give several recital tours in Italy. Alisa Weilerstein was awarded Lincoln Center's Martin E. Segal prize in 2008 and the Leonard Bernstein Award in 2006, and was the recipient of an Avery Fisher Career Grant in 2000. She is a graduate of Cleveland Institute of Music's Young Artist Program and earned a degree in Russian History at Columbia University. In November 2009 she was invited to take part in a classical music workshop and concert at the White House. Weilerstein, who was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes when she was nine, is a Celebrity Advocate for the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. This is her seventh season at Spoleto Festival USA.
Social sharing
Add to Delicious
Digg this
Add to Reddit
Add to StumbleUpon
Add to Facebook
Add to MySpace
Add to Technorati
back to top