text:
Weiner v. Bock
Hirmuz v. City of Madison Heights
On December 8, 2003, the plaintiff filed a motion requesting a hearing to address the issue of whether his…
Harris v. Booker
This argument is therefore waived. See Getsy v. Mitchell, 495 F.3d 295, 317 (6th Cir. 2007) (en banc)…
Full title:KEITH DAVIS WEINER, Petitioner, v. BARBARA N. BOCK, Respondent
Court:United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Northern Division
387 F. Supp. 2d 717 (E.D. Mich. 2005)
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Northern Division
No. Case Number 00-10002-BC.
August 29, 2005.
Russell L. Rhynard, Rhynard Farshidmehr, Alpena, MI, Dorean M. Koenig, Thomas M. Cooley Law School, Lansing, MI, for Petitioner.
Janet Van Cleve, Michigan Department of Attorney, General Habeas Corpus Division, Lansing, MI, for Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING IN PART REPORT OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
LAWSON, District Judg.
The petitioner, Keith Davis Weiner, a state inmate currently incarcerated at the Saginaw Correctional Facility in Freeland, Michigan, has filed through counsel a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 alleging that he is in custody in violation of his federal constitutional rights. Weiner was the "wheel man" in an armed robbery that went awry and resulted in the shooting death of the intended robbery victim, Ernest Wallace, who was known, ironically, as "Lucky." Weiner was convicted of first-degree felony murder in 1977 by a Detroit, Michigan Recorders Court jury and sentenced to life in prison. Before trial, Weiner made a statement to police in which he acknowledged his participation in the robbery plan and denied that he intended the victim to be killed or harmed, confirmed that he did not go to the victim's store but rather waited in the getaway van, and asserted that he never touched a firearm during the transaction. All of these assertions were borne out by corroborating evidence. The statement was received in evidence at trial.
The petitioner raised claims in his habeas petition relating to the constitutional invalidity of his confession to the police, the sufficiency of evidence, jury instructions, production of a witness, ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel, and the cumulative effect of these alleged constitutional errors. The State challenged the petition as untimely but failed to address the merits of the petition. The Court denied the respondent's motion to dismiss on statute of limitations grounds and found that the respondent forfeited her right to contest the merits, since she failed to comply with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases in the Federal Courts (requiring that "[t]he answer shall respond to the allegations of the petition") and a previous order to answer the petition. Thereafter, the Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Charles E. Binder for an evidentiary hearing, recommendation, and report. Magistrate Judge Binder completed the hearing, and after the parties filed post-hearing briefs he filed a sixty-nine-page, comprehensive report in which he recommended that the petition be denied. The petitioner's counsel filed timely objections to the report, to which the respondent did not respond, and the matter is now before the Court for a de novo review.
The magistrate judge provided a review of the procedural and substantive facts of the case in his report. Neither party objects to the material facts, and the Court adopts that summary here. This case was tried in 1977 when Michigan's law of felony murder provided that any
murder which was committed during the course of certain enumerated felonies, including robbery, was first-degree murder. Under the felony-murder doctrine in place at the time of petitioner's trial, all parties to an agreement to commit one of the felonies enumerated in the murder statute were liable for a murder committed in furtherance of that planned felony, even though a homicide was not planned.
Harris v. Stovall, 22 F. Supp. 2d 659, 666 (E.D. Mich. 1998) (citing People v. Smith, 33 Mich. App. 336, 189 N.W.2d 833 (1971); People v. Goree, 30 Mich. App. 490, 186 N.W.2d 872 (1971)). That rule changed with the watershed case of People v. Aaron, 409 Mich. 672, 299 N.W.2d 304 (1980), which was decided while the petitioner's case was pending on direct appeal. In Aaron, the Michigan Supreme Court settled a long-brewing controversy over the elements of first-degree felony murder as that crime was defined theretofore in Michigan jurisprudence, and held that participation in a felony alone will not establish culpability for a murder committed during that felony; rather the State must also prove that the participant acted with "malice," that is, the actual intent to kill or cause great bodily harm, or engaging in dangerous conduct that naturally could cause death or serious injury. However, the state supreme court declared that the new rule announced in that case would be prospective only, and therefore the petitioner did not have the benefit of that change in the law. In fact, the state court of appeals had reversed Weiner's conviction on the basis of jury instructions on the elements of the crime, and the supreme court, after holding the appeal in abeyance pending the decision in Aaron, reversed in turn and reinstated the conviction subject to the petitioner's other arguments on direct appeal.
That procedural history sets the stage for the petitioner's first objection: that the magistrate judge improperly considered whether the rule in Aaron was retroactive, an issue that was not raised by the respondent, who had forfeited her right to address the merits of the petition. The petitioner insists that the nonretroactivity of that state court decision is an affirmative defense that must be raised or else it is waived. He cites in support of his contention Schiro v. Farley, 510 U.S. 222 (1994), in which the Supreme Court declined to entertain the State's argument in a habeas proceeding based on the principle that the Court will not announce or apply a new rule of constitutional law in cases on collateral review. The Court held: "Since a State can waive the [nonretroactivity] bar by not raising it . . . and since the propriety of reaching the merits of a dispute is an important consideration in deciding whether or not to grant certiorari, the State's omission of any [nonretroactivity] defense at the petition stage is significant. Although we undoubtedly have the discretion to reach the State's [nonretroactivity] argument, we will not do so in these circumstances." Id. at 788-89 (citations omitted).
The reference to the nonretroactivity defense, however, pertained to the rule announced in Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 301 (1989) (plurality opinion). "Under Teague, new rules [of constitutional law] will not be applied or announced in cases on collateral review unless they fall into one of two exceptions." Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302, 313 (1989), abrogated on other grounds by Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002). The rationale for that rule is found in the nature of habeas corpus itself. Justice O'Connor explained:
"Habeas corpus always has been a collateral remedy, providing an avenue for upsetting judgments that have become otherwise final. It is not designed as a substitute for direct review. The interest in leaving concluded litigation in a state of repose, that is, reducing the controversy to a final judgment not subject to further judicial revision, may quite legitimately be found by those responsible for defining the scope of the writ to outweigh in some, many, or most instances the competing interest in readjudicating convictions according to all legal standards in effect when a habeas petition is filed."
Teague, 489 U.S. at 306 (quoting Mackey v. United States, 401 U.S. 667, 682-83 (1971) (Harlan, J., concurring and dissenting)). The Teague Court then adopted "two exceptions to [Justice Harlan's] general rule of nonretroactivity for cases on collateral review. First, a new rule should be applied retroactively if it places certain kinds of primary, private individual conduct beyond the power of the criminal law-making authority to proscribe. . . . Second, a new rule should be applied retroactively if it requires the observance of those procedures that . . . are implicit in the concept of ordered liberty." Id. at 307, 109 S.Ct. 1060 (internal quotes and citations omitted).
None of these concerns affect the question of Aaron's nonretroactivity discussed by the magistrate judge. The reason he considered the issue at all was to determine whether the State presented sufficient evidence to support the petitioner's conviction. He applied the familiar standard: "whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." RR at 48 (quoting Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 3189 (1979)). Of course, to make that assessment, and to evaluate the petitioner's other claims challenging the jury instructions, the magistrate judge had to determine exactly the elements of first-degree felony murder under Michigan law at the time of the petitioner's trial in 1977. That is where consideration of People v. Aaron became critical, since it was a relevant pronouncement on the State's substantive criminal law that applied in the petitioner's case. The question of its retroactivity vel non had nothing to do with federal constitutional law to be applied on collateral review, and therefore its nonretroactivity was not an affirmative defense that had to be raised by the respondent.
The crux of the petitioner's claims based on sufficiency of evidence, the adequacy of the main jury instructions, and the confusing nature of the supplemental jury instructions, as those arguments have coalesced in the objections to the magistrate judge's report, is whether Michigan allowed conviction of first-degree felony murder based only on proof that a person participated in the commission (or attempted commission) of one of the enumerated felonies in which death resulted, absent a finding by the jury that the participant also intended death or serious injury, or acted in wanton disregard of the likelihood of that occurring. It is certainly well-settled that the Due Process Clause entitles the petitioner to relief unless the State has obtained the conviction by proving all of the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364 (1970). Likewise, jury instructions that relieve the State of that obligation or lessen that burden are constitutionally infirm. Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197, 215 (1977); Sandstrom v. Montana, 442 U.S. 510, 520-21 (1979). This Court is satisfied, as was the state court of appeals, that the supplemental jury instructions allowed the jury to convict the petitioner of first-degree murder upon proof that he participated in a robbery in which the victim was killed, absent any proof of malicious intent on the part of the petitioner with respect to the death itself. However, that observation merely begs the question. The State may define the conduct it intends to punish as criminal and prescribe punishments. See Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 824 (1991) (stating that "[u]nder our constitutional system, the primary responsibility for defining crimes against state law, fixing punishments for the commission of these crimes . . . rests with the States . . . subject to the overriding provisions of the United States Constitution'); see also Whalen v. United States, 445 U.S. 684, 689 (1980) (noting that under "our federal constitutional framework the legislative power, including the power to define criminal offenses and to prescribe the punishments to be imposed upon those found guilty of them, resides wholly with the Congress"). If the State defined first-degree felony murder at the time of the petitioner's 1977 trial without including the element of intent to cause death or serious injury, then no due process violation resulted from the State's failure to offer evidence on that element or the trial judge's failure to instruct on it adequately.
At the center of the petitioner's arguments, then, is whether the State defined felony murder in 1977 absent some form of intent regarding the death itself. A related question — whether the State could constitutionally define a "capital" crime (Michigan does not allow the death penalty; "capital" crimes are punished by life in prison, in petitioner's case without the possibility of parole) without the requirement of personal culpability for death being shown — was not presented to the state courts or in the present habeas petition.
Some of the Michigan intermediate appellate court decisions shed light on the former question. For instance, in People v. Goree, 30 Mich. App. 490, 186 N.W.2d 872, (1971), the court stated: "If, during the `perpetration' of an armed robbery, a killing occurs at the hands of the felon or someone acting in concert with him or in furtherance of a common objective or purpose, all the codefendants are guilty of first-degree murder." Id. at 494-95, 186 N.W.2d at 875. A few months later, the court of appeals affirmed a conviction based on the common law felony murder rule stating that the question of the required intent was insubstantial. People v. Smith, 33 Mich. App. 336, 189 N.W.2d 833 (1971) (per curiam). The court stated:
The single issue on appeal is that the trial court erred in allowing defendant's plea of guilty to stand where defendant told the Court, after the plea of guilty was accepted but before sentencing, that he did not know that his codefendant, who actually shot decedent, was armed and, therefore, that he could not be guilty of any felonious homicide because the shooting was beyond the scope of the agreement of the two men to commit a robbery only. It is manifest that the question presented, on which decision of the cause depends, is so unsubstantial as to need no argument or formal submission. Where two or more persons combine to commit a felony and a murder is committed in furtherance or in the prosecution of that felony, all parties to the agreement to commit the felony are liable for the murder even though a homicide was not planned.
Id. at 337, 189 N.W.2d at 834 (emphasis added).
However, despite these pronouncements, the fact that the felony-murder jurisprudence was in a state of confusion was confirmed by the Michigan Supreme Court's introduction in the Aaron majority opinion:
The existence and scope of the felony-murder doctrine have perplexed generations of law students, commentators and jurists in the United States and England, and have split our own Court of Appeals. In these cases, we must decide whether Michigan has a felony murder rule which allows the element of malice required for murder to be satisfied by the intent to commit the underlying felony or whether malice must be otherwise found by the trier of fact.
Aaron, 409 Mich. at 686-87, 299 N.W.2d at 306. After reviewing the history of the felony-murder rule in England and the United States, and discussing its application by Michigan courts, the state supreme court stated that its understanding of the common law rule "is to recognize the intent to commit the underlying felony, in itself, as a sufficient mens rea for murder." Id. at 717, 299 N.W.2d at 321. The court then determined that this rule was in effect in Michigan at the time. Id. at 722-23, 299 N.W.2d at 324 (stating "[h]owever, our finding that Michigan has never specifically adopted the doctrine which defines malice to include the intent to commit the underlying felony is not the end of our inquiry. In Michigan, the general rule is that the common law prevails except as abrogated by the Constitution, the Legislature or this Court. This Court has not been faced previously with a decision as to whether it should abolish the felony-murder doctrine. Thus, the common-law doctrine remains the law in Michigan"). The court then weighed the competing considerations surrounding the continued viability of the rule and decided to abrogate it. However, the court held that "[t]his decision shall apply to all trials in progress and those occurring after the date of this opinion." Id. at 734, 299 N.W.2d at 329.
The ineluctable conclusion, therefore, is that at the time of the petitioner's trial, the common-law felony-murder rule was in effect, the State was not required to prove that the defendant intended to kill or harm the victim that was killed during the robbery, and the trial court was not required to instruct the jury on the question of malice separate from the intent to commit the underlying felony. This Court must find, therefore, that the magistrate judge was correct when he concluded that no constitutional error occurred in this case with respect to the sufficiency of evidence, the main jury instructions, or the supplemental jury instructions.
A related argument Weiner raises in his objections that does not appear in his petition, and therefore was not addressed by the magistrate judge, is that Weiner's rights under the Equal Protection Clause were violated by the state court's uneven application of Aaron's non-retroactivity pronouncement. He points to Meyers v. Yist, 978 F.2d 417 (9th Cir. 1990), in which the Ninth Circuit held that "[t]he equal protection clause prohibits a state from affording one person (other than the litigant whose case is the vehicle for the promulgation of a new rule) the retroactive benefit of a ruling . . . while denying it to another." Id. at 421. Weiner says that in two cases, People v. Wilder and People v. Butts, the state supreme court conferred the benefit of Aaron's new rule on these defendants even though they were neither awaiting trial for felony-murder nor convicted of that offense after the rule in Aaron was announced. See People v. Wilder, 411 Mich. 328, 308 N.W.2d 112 (1981); People v. Butts, 411 Mich. 1041, 309 N.W.2d 187 (1978).
The Court agrees with the general proposition that "the equal protection clause prohibits de facto as well as explicit, or open, unequal and arbitrary treatment," Meyers, 978 F.2d at 421, and that "once a state has established a rule it must be applied evenhandedly." Ibid. (quoting La Rue v. McCarthy, 833 F.2d 140, 142 (9th Cir. 1987)). However, if a state court applies a prospective ruling differently to separate criminal defendants, it need only have a rational basis for doing so. See City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Centr., 473 U.S. 432, 446 (1985) (holding that the Court applies rational basis review to state action not affecting a fundamental right or implicating a suspect class).
In Wilder, the Michigan Supreme Court explained its rationale for giving the defendant the benefit of Aaron's heightened proof requirement as follows:
Although the instant case was not argued and submitted together with Aaron and its companion cases, leave to appeal was granted on the same day leave was granted in Aaron, the question presented was essentially identical to the question in Aaron and its companions, and the cases were argued at the same session of this Court. Therefore, we treat this case as a companion to People v. Aaron for purposes of applying the rule stated therein.
Wilder, 411 Mich at 337, 308 N.W.2d at 114. The supreme court noted that "Butts was a co-defendant with Ronald Wilder at trial. Accordingly, the same relief afforded to Wilder is extended to Butts." Butts, 411 Mich. at 1041, 309 N.W.2d at 187.
The Court believes that the supreme court's treatment of Wilder and Butts as equally situated with Aaron, thus enjoying the status as "the litigant whose case is the vehicle for the promulgation of a new rule," Meyers, 978 F.2d at 421, constitutes a reasoned explanation for its actions that is sufficient to pass muster under the Equal Protection Clause. The state court's refusal to give the petitioner the benefit of Aaron's prospective ruling does not provide him a basis for habeas corpus relief.
The petitioner's remaining objections focus on the issue for which the Court ordered an evidentiary hearing: whether the defendant's confession was unconstitutionally obtained either because it was involuntary or his right to an attorney as set forth in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), and Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (1981), was violated. The magistrate judge criticized the petitioner for conflating the voluntariness issue with the Miranda/ Edwards violation argument; and he found that the state court decision that the confession was voluntary faithfully applied federal law, the Miranda/Edwards issue was procedurally defaulted, and, to the extent that the petitioner's Sixth Amendment claims were not procedurally defaulted, the petitioner's attorneys were not constitutionally ineffective in dealing with these claims in state court. The petitioner objects to these findings and argues that the respondent waived the procedural default affirmative defense and it should not be raised sua sponte; the factual determination adopting the police officers' version of the station house encounter over the petitioner's version is erroneous because the magistrate judge failed to account for inconsistencies in the police officers' testimony, and there is no reference to the supplemental record, which contains letters endorsing the petitioner's character; and trial counsel in fact was ineffective for failing to pursue the petitioner's Walker hearing testimony that he had asked for a lawyer.
The Court agrees that the respondent has waived the defense of procedural default. A prisoner's procedural default is not a jurisdictional bar to review of claims brought in federal habeas corpus proceedings. See Trest v. Cain, 522 U.S. 87, 89 (1997) (holding that procedural default is a defense "that the State is obligated to raise and preserv[e] if it is not to lose the right to assert the defense thereafter"). The State has not raised that defense in timely fashion in this case. The State's "failure to raise the default may operate as a forfeiture of its right to defend on that ground." Elzy v. United States, 205 F.3d 882, 886 (6th Cir. 2000). Although the Court has discretion to raise the defense on its own, see id. at 886-87, given the serious consequences that have inured to the petitioner and the effort and resources that have been expended pursuing this issue, the Court believes that the proper exercise of discretion requires that this defense not be indulged, particularly in light of the State's conduct in this case. See Sowell v. Bradshaw, 372 F.3d 821, 830 (6th Cir. 2004) (holding that, "[i]n light of the resources that have been expended by the district court and the serious consequences facing Sowell, and because the Warden did not make this argument to the district court, we exercise our discretion not to reach the documentation-default issue").
The Court also agrees with the petitioner that the magistrate judge was in error in concluding that the purpose of the so-called " Walker hearing" in Michigan jurisprudence is solely to determine the voluntariness of a confession. Under federal law, a confession obtained during custodial interrogation may be deemed unconstitutional on at least two grounds: that the confession was involuntary, see Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368, 376-77 (1964); Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 163-65 (1986), and that the detainee was not advised of his rights under Miranda. See Dickerson v. United States, 530 U.S. 428, 440 (2000). Such determinations generally are made before trial, outside the presence of the jury, at a separate hearing. That procedure was initiated in Michigan by the pronouncement in People v. Walker (on reh), 374 Mich. 331, 132 N.W.2d 159 (1965), and such hearings have come to be known as " Walker hearings."
Although the issue raised in Walker itself dealt only with the confession's voluntariness — indeed, Miranda was not decided until a year later — the prevailing practice that has developed in Michigan courts has been to denominate all hearings challenging the constitutional validity of confessions as " Walker hearings." The magistrate judge opined that in Michigan, Walker hearings serve the sole purpose of adjudicating the voluntariness of a confession. However, that is not the case. Walker hearings are held to determine Miranda violations as well as the voluntariness of a confession. See, e.g., People v. Howard, 226 Mich. App. 528, 537, 575 N.W.2d 16, 23 (1997) (noting that the defendant's Miranda issue raised on appeal was abandoned because he "failed to pursue the issue at the Walker hearing that was conducted in this matter"); People v. Gould, 61 Mich. App. 614, 620-21, 233 N.W.2d 109, 113 (1975) (noting that "the sole question raised and litigated by defendant at the Walker hearing in the lower court was whether he had been given his Miranda warnings before or after he made the statements at issue"); People v. Hopper, 21 Mich. App. 276, 279-80, 175 N.W.2d 889, 890 (1970) (holding, where the evidence did not demonstrate that Miranda warnings were given, that the case would be "remand[ed] for a Walker hearing on the question of whether there was a voluntary waiver of right to counsel after being fully informed of his right to have such counsel present at questioning in line with Miranda v. Arizona").
Although the magistrate judge was incorrect in his conception of the purpose of a Walker hearing, he was correct in his observation that there was no discussion of Miranda violations at the petitioner's Walker hearing held in the state court. The focus of that hearing was on the voluntariness of the confession, although the petitioner did mention that he had asked for and been denied an attorney. The magistrate judge properly viewed the two issues as distinct; however, the purpose of the referral for an evidentiary hearing was to develop the Miranda violation issue as well.
The magistrate judge concluded that the state court's holding that the petitioner's confession was voluntary was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 409, 120 S.Ct. 1495, 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000). The Court agrees with and adopts that conclusion. A confession is considered involuntary if (1) the police extorted the confession by means of coercive activity; (2) the coercion in question was sufficient to overbear the will of the accused; and (3) the will of the accused was in fact overborne " because of the coercive police activity in question." McCall v. Dutton, 863 F.2d 454, 459 (6th Cir. 1988). In determining whether a confession is voluntary, the ultimate question is "whether, under the totality of the circumstances, the challenged confession was obtained in a manner compatible with the requirements of the Constitution." Miller v. Fenton, 474 U.S. 104, 112 (1985). Those circumstances include whether there was police coercion (a "crucial element"), the length of interrogation, the location of the interrogation, the continuity of interrogation, the suspect's maturity, his education, his physical condition and mental health, and whether the suspect was advised of his Miranda rights. See Withrow v. Williams, 507 U.S. 680, 693-94 (1993). The state courts properly applied these principles to the facts before it when they found that the confession was voluntary.
The resolution of that issue, however, does not answer the separate and distinct question of whether the petitioner's Miranda rights were violated. Although the magistrate judge determined that the Miranda violation issue was procedurally defaulted, a procedural defense that this Court rejects for the reasons stated earlier, he did discuss the merits of that claim when deciding whether the petitioner established prejudice under the cause-and-prejudice test. In arriving at his decision, the magistrate judge necessarily considered the testimony offered in the state court and before the magistrate judge on the claim that the petitioner's request for an attorney during custodial interrogation was not honored. His findings with respect to that testimony are pertinent here concerning the merits of the claim.
In Edwards v. Arizona, the Supreme Court established a per se rule that once a suspect in custody invokes the right to counsel, law enforcement officers may not further interrogate the suspect until counsel has been made available, unless the accused initiates further communication with the police. 451 U.S. at 484-85. The application of this rule in this case revolves entirely on the fact issue of whether the petitioner asked to speak to an attorney during his custodial interrogation on May 18, 1977.
The testimony at the Walker hearing and its review by the state court of appeals have been set forth by the magistrate judge and need not be repeated here. Detroit police sergeant Thomas Rossler, a homicide detective, interrogated the petitioner. He did not mention at the Walker hearing whether the petitioner asked for an attorney. However, at the evidentiary hearing before the magistrate judge he testified as follows:
Q. Do you remember if while you were interrogating Mr. Weiner, if he requested an attorney?
A. As best to my recollection, no, he never did request to have an attorney.
Q. Okay. What — what was your procedure at that time in questioning criminal suspects — what was your procedure in terms of if the — if the arrested person requested an attorney?
A. If he requested at attorney?
Q. Right.
A. I would have to cease my interrogation and send him back up to the ninth floor holding, and inform my superiors that he wanted a lawyer. At that time I believe that they would take him to court and — on his next appearance and request one for him.
Q. Okay. So I'm understanding your testimony that if an arrested person requested an attorney, you ceased your interrogation.
A. I would cease my interrogation, yes.
Q. And do you know what that practice was based on?
A. I'm sorry?
Q. Do you know what — why — why were you required to cease your interrogation at that time, do you know?
A. No. It was just part of the — my — my procedures.
Q. Okay. And was that the procedure for all officers in the Detroit Police Department at that time?
A. I don't —
Q. Do you know?
A. — I don't believe that that was a standard procedure for most officers at that time. No.
Q. But that was your procedure?
A. That was mine.
Q. Okay. Mr. Rossler, are you an attorney?
Q. Have you ever presented yourself as an attorney?
Q. Did you tell Mr. Weiner that you were an attorney?
Q. Did you tell him that you would act as an attorney towards him?
Q. Did you tell him that you were advising him as an attorney would advise him?
Evid. hrg. tr. at 38-40.
The magistrate judge chose to credit this testimony over the contrary testimony of the petitioner. The petitioner in his objections criticizes the magistrate judge's failure to reconcile, or even discount, inconsistencies in Rossler's testimony with his prior testimony and that of his partner, Richard Riddling. Rossler testified at the hearing before the magistrate judge and in 1977 that he took the petitioner's confession, but the written form was signed by Riddling, and the petitioner insists that Riddling is the one who interrogated him. However, the petitioner also contends that it was Rossler, not Riddling, who told the petitioner that he would speak to the petitioner "as an attorney," and it is logical therefore to conclude that if the petitioner made such a request it would have been directed to Rossler. Moreover, the state trial judge considered factual inconsistencies between the versions of the events given at the Walker hearing by Rossler and the petitioner and concluded that Rossler was more credible. The state court of appeals affirmed that conclusion. The magistrate judge likewise came to that conclusion, observing that the petitioner did not mention on direct examination at the Walker hearing that he asked for an attorney, and the petitioner's testimony in state court was inconsistent with his testimony before the magistrate judge.
The petitioner also tendered several letters from individuals who endorse the petitioner's character as a model prisoner over the past several years, an upright individual who has matured into a responsible individual, and an honest person. This information was received but not discussed by the magistrate judge in his report. The Court has considered the material and accepts it as a good-faith acclamation of the petitioner's present character. However, the Court does not believe that this evidence tips the credibility balance much with respect to the petitioner's assertions around the time the crime was committed, nor does it shed much light on the events of May 1977. The magistrate judge's conclusion that Rossler — who said the petitioner did not request an attorney — was more credible that the petitioner — who said that he did — is sensible, well-documented, and sound. The Court adopts that conclusion here.
The resolution of the credibility issue ordains the result as to the remaining issues in the case. Since the Court finds that the petitioner did not make a timely request for an attorney during custodial interrogation, there is no violation of the per se rule of Edwards v. Arizona. Likewise, the petitioner cannot establish prejudice under the second prong of the ineffective assistance of counsel test set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 694 (1984) (holding that a defendant must show "a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome"). Since the petitioner cannot prevail on that component of the ineffective assistance of counsel test, it is not necessary to assess the quality of trial or appellate counsels' performance. Cyars v. Hofbauer, 383 F.3d 485, 491 (6th Cir. 2004) (citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687) (explaining "[i]f it is easier to dispose of an ineffectiveness claim on the ground of lack of sufficient prejudice . . . that course should be followed").
The Court agrees with and adopts the magistrate judge's findings and conclusions with respect to the remaining claims in the petition.
With the exception of the modifications and corrections outlined above, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, and the Court adopts it here as modified.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the petitioner's objections to the report and recommendation are OVERRULED.
It is further ORDERED that the report is ADOPTED IN PART.
It is further ORDERED that the recommendation is ADOPTED and that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED.


text:
Q: Find marginal distribution of Y while knowing distribution of X and $Y|X$ Assume that X is uniformly distributed on (0, 1) and that the conditional distribution of Y given $X = x$ is a binomial distribution with parameters $(n, x)$. Then we say that Y has a binomial distribution with fixed size n and random probability parameter.
I have to find the marginal distribution of Y.
So I have to use that:
$$P(Y=y)=\sum_{x=y}^{\infty}P(Y=y|X=x)P(X=x)$$
But when we have that X is uniformly distributed I think the sum becomes a integral so we get:
$$P(Y=y) =\int_0^1 \binom{n}{y} x^y(1-x)^{n-y}dx$$
But what to do next? I think maybe take the binomial coefficient out from the integral, but how then using this to find the marginal distribution of Y? Hope anyone can help me? Do I also have to use that Y has a binomial distribution with fixed size n and random probability parameter?

A: Hint Pull out the binomial coefficient, the remaining integral is related to the Beta function. You already used the knowledge about $Y$ being conditionally binomial by writing down the integral.

A: Using the definition of the Beta function and that $n$ and $y$ are integers with $0 \le y \le n$ on the support
$$\int_0^1 \binom{n}{y} x^y(1-x)^{n-y}dx  \\ =\binom{n}{y}\int_0^1 x^y(1-x)^{n-y}dx \\ =\binom{n}{y}\operatorname{B}(y+1,n-y+1) \\= \binom{n}{y}\frac{\Gamma(y+1)\Gamma(n-y+1)}{\Gamma(n+2)} \\= \frac{n!}{y!(n-y)!}\frac{y!(n-y)!}{(n+1)!} \\= \frac1{n+1}$$
So the marginal distribution for $Y$ has $Y$ uniformly distributed on $\{0,1,2,\ldots,n-1,n\}$

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


For Back to School planning as a part of a sponsored post for Collective Bias I made Lime Cilantro Chicken Rice Bowl with a qualifying Tyson Project A+ Program products. I head back to school in a week and we're trying to find as many quick dinners as possible because preparing dinner with a toddler and a newborn can be a bit hectic. Luckily, Tyson offers a vast array of choices. The best part is that many of those choices are part of their Project A+Program. As a teacher in an inner city school district during an economic time when budgets are being cut in school districts, I appreciate programs that give back to your specific school. I know that by purchasing Tyson's Grilled & Ready Southwestern Chicken Strips I'm not only making a fabulous meal with my Lime Cilantro Chicken Rice Bowl, but I'm also providing a donation for my school. It's a win, win!
The process to sign up for Tyson's Project A+ Program is extremely simple. Simply head over to Project A+ and click on the Look Up Your School button, which you see below. Once you're there, you'll use your school's phone number, zip code, or state to see if it is already enrolled. If it's not, it's just four easy clicks to enroll your school and your school will have the opportunity to earn $0.24 for every label collected. That is so much more than other programs offer.
Plus, there are so many products that qualify for the program. All you need to do is find the label on Tyson products with the Program A+ label. I'm not sure about your school, but I know that at my school we are rationed with how much paper we are allowed to use at the beginning of the year. Paper!!! We clearly would benefit from this program and I was happy to see that someone had already enrolled our school when I looked it up.
Now when I need a quick meal I know that I can use my Tyson product and know that it's putting food on the table, but also paper in my students hands. You'll be shocked how easy a meal can become when you have a half meal solution. I used Tyson's Grilled & Ready Southwestern Chicken Strips for my Lime Cilantro Chicken Rice Bowl and the spices on the chicken worked perfectly. My Lime Cilantro dressing definitely tied the rice bowl together into a complete flavorful meal.
A quick and easy rice bowl with Tyson's Grilled & Ready Southwestern Chicken Strips.
Tyson's Grilled & Ready Southwestern Chicken Strips.
Prepare rice based upon product directions.
Combine all ingredients for the Lime Cilantro Dressing and set aside.
Prepare the Grilled & Ready Southwestern Chicken Strips according to the package directions.
Once the rice is done add the rinsed pinto beans, chopped cherry tomatoes and grilled corn.
Add the Sante Fe Chicken to the top and garnish with the Lime Cilantro Dressing.
For more inspiration using Tyson's products follow along on Pinterest, Facebook and Twitter.
I love rice bowls! Especially ones with chicken, beans and corn. Looks fabulous, and I love that Tyson is helping schools. Headed over now to see if ours is enrolled!
I can't wait to try this, Jenny! My kiddos are going to love it! Thanks for sharing.


text:
Q: How to prevent Windows from presenting dialog with "Debug Error! abort() has been called"? We have some code which has been known to crash from time to time, leaving resources in an invalid state. I am writing tests which are designed to ensure that the cleanup code we have will reliably determine if the resources are invalid and, if so, reset them. As far as I can tell there is no way to simulate the state of these resources without actually crashing the program, because the destructors of classes outside of our control close them.
As such, my tests spawn a child process which acquires the resource and calls std::abort. This all seems to be working fine, and tests are passing on Linux and macOS. However, the following dialog keeps popping up on Windows:

I can avoid this by running the tests in Release Mode, but I want to be able to debug them if something goes wrong. Because I'm spawning multiple child processes and timing is very important, the dialog actively gets in the way of debugging. The following is what I have tried. How can I get the call to abort to not result in the dialog appearing, in Debug mode?
#include "Windows.h"
#include "errhandlingapi.h"
#include <cstdlib>

int main()
{
  SetErrorMode(SEM_FAILCRITICALERRORS |
               SEM_NOGPFAULTERRORBOX |
               SEM_NOALIGNMENTFAULTEXCEPT);
  std::abort();
}

A: You can call _set_abort_behavior with parameters _set_abort_behavior(0, _WRITE_ABORT_MESSAGE | _CALL_REPORTFAULT) on program startup to suppress both the "abort() has been called" message (which, in debug,  includes the debug/retry/ignore buttons) and the Watson crash dump generation.  The first parameter clears both flags, and the second is a mask for which flag bits to set.


text:
49ers wins NFC West
SEATTLE — Richard Sherman once again wore the hat of a division champion as he walked out of the locker room in Seattle.
Except this time there was a San Francisco logo beneath the words "NFC West champions."
"It's a great feeling. It's a great feeling to get the one seed, to be NFC West champions," Sherman said. "That's your goal coming into the year. That's the first goal you have to accomplish so that you can get a home game in the playoffs. We've worked hard. It was a tough season, there were a lot of teams playing really well down the stretch. But I'm thankful. I've believed in our team, our team believes in each other and that's what makes it special."
The road to the Super Bowl in the NFC will go through San Francisco for the first time since 1997 — by a matter of inches — after the 49ers beat the Seattle Seahawks 26-21 on Sunday night to clinch the NFC West title. San Francisco has home-field advantage throughout the conference playoffs after winning its first division title since 2012.
And it was another chapter in a growing list of classic, memorable games between the division rivals, with San Francisco earning its first win in Seattle since 2011.
But it took a costly delay-of-game penalty by the Seahawks, a tough tackle by San Francisco rookie linebacker Dre Greenlaw and a tense replay review before the 49ers could start to party.
"It's pretty incredible, especially from the start of the season and the hearsay and everything of our team and what we were going to do, and to come out here and get the one seed, it's a pretty nice feeling," quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo said.
It was nearly Seattle celebrating what would have been an unlikely comeback victory on a night when Seahawks fans showed up hoping for a division title and eager to celebrate the return of running back Marshawn Lynch.
Seattle took possession at its own 27 with 2:27 left down by five. Russell Wilson drove the Seahawks deep into San Francisco territory and on fourth-and-10, Wilson hit John Ursua for 11 yards to the 1. Wilson spiked the ball, but Seattle was called for delay of game on second down with confusion about whether Lynch should enter the game. Backed up to the 6, Wilson was incomplete on two straight passes — including a third-down pass for Jacob Hollister on which Seattle begged unsuccessfully for pass interference against Fred Warner.
NFL senior VP of officiating Al Riveron said the play was looked at in New York but based on the replay there wasn't enough evidence to stop the game for a further look.
"I felt him grabbing me but you don't get every call. I didn't get that call," Hollister said.
On fourth-and-goal, Hollister caught a pass underneath but was immediately knocked down by Greenlaw with less than 10 seconds remaining. Replay confirmed Hollister hit the ground before the ball reached the goal line, and San Francisco's celebration was on.
"I just knew that I had my foot on the goal line. I knew that they had to get into the end zone in order to win the game," Greenlaw said. "So I just made sure that my feet were on the goal line and just played lateral to downhill and just, made a tackle that my coaches and teammates would be proud of. Just happy with how the game ended and happy to be able to make the play."
The 49ers (13-3) are the top seed in the NFC playoffs for the first time in 22 years and will face the conference's lowest remaining seed at home on Saturday, Jan. 11. San Francisco was dominant in the first half and made enough big plays in the second to hold off Seattle's rally from a 13-0 halftime deficit.
Garoppolo directed the entire performance, throwing for 285 yards. He hit his first nine passes, finished 18 of 22 and didn't commit a turnover. Raheem Mostert continued his late-season surge by running for a pair of second-half touchdowns.
Seattle's crowd had the stadium shaking after Lynch scored on a 1-yard TD plunge with 9:55 left to pull the Seahawks to 19-14. Skittles rained down on the field and the Seahawks had all the momentum.
"It felt good. But at the end of the day we play to win," Lynch said.
Those same fans were silenced in barely four minutes. San Francisco marched downfield with more big plays as Garoppolo hit George Kittle and Deebo Samuel. Mostert capped the drive with his second touchdown — a 13-yard run — and a 26-14 lead with 5:51 remaining.
Seattle scored with 3:36 left on a 14-yard touchdown pass from Wilson to DK Metcalf, but Wilson didn't have one last magical moment.
Wilson was 25 of 30 for 233 yards. Lynch had 12 carries for 34 yards in his first game since October of last season.
"That was a wild one. We had several different opportunities," Wilson said. "We came a half-inch short, unfortunately."
Samuel was a nightmare for the Seahawks, scoring on a 30-yard reverse in the first half and finishing with five catches for 102 yards. Kittle, who didn't play in the first meeting between the teams in November, had seven catches for 86 yards. Even fullback Kyle Juszczyk had a huge play with a 49-yard catch immediately after Seattle pulled to 13-7 early in the second half.
"You can't leave the door open, which we did," Kittle said. "Thankfully we were able to answer every time they did and our defence was able to hold onto them and finish the game."
Seattle wide receiver Jaron Brown sustained a knee injury in the first quarter and was out for the game. Brown got hit low on the first series and never returned. Seattle was already thin at wide receiver with Malik Turner out due to a concussion.
Mychal Kendricks left in the third quarter with a right knee injury after losing Juszczyk on a 49-yard reception. Kendricks had been dealing with a hamstring injury for several weeks.
FIRST AND LAST
San Francisco owns a rare bit of NFL history. The 49ers played the first game of the 2010s and the last game of the decade as well.
San Francisco played on Jan. 3, 2010 — Week 17 of that season — and its game against St. Louis was the first to kick off that day.
The Sunday night game in Seattle was the final NFL game to be played in the 2010s.
Penguins' Sullivan: 'No status' on Guentzel after scary crash into boards – Sportsnet.ca
IndyCar walks away from the Pocono Raceway
Senators score 5 times in 3rd period to down free-falling Oilers – CBC Sports
Josh Norris scored a pair of goals and the Senators erased a 3-1 third-period deficit in a 6-4 come-from-behind victory over the Edmonton Oilers.
Adam Gaudette, Alex Formenton, Artem Zub and Zach Sanford also scored for the Senators (11-18-2), who have won two straight and won their first game this season when trailing after the second period.
"It's not really how we drew it up, but that's how hockey goes sometimes," Norris said. "I think it was a lot of fun and the guys enjoyed it. We have to clean some things up, but that's hockey and it's how the way the game goes sometimes. We kind of thrived on that and it was great to get the win."
Gaudette, who also had an assist, said the comeback was a blast.
"It was a lot of fun. Personally it's been a while since I've had that much fun playing hockey," he said. "It's been a tough year and a half or so, so it really feels good to contribute and to help this team win."
WATCH l Senators rally with 3rd period explosion to defeat Oilers:
Senators rally with 3rd period explosion to defeat Oilers
Ottawa scores five goals in the third period for a 6-4 victory over Edmonton who suffers their 6th straight loss. 1:25
Chris Tierney had two assists, while Senators starter Matt Murray stopped 33-of-37 shots.
Zack Kassian, Kailer Yamamoto, Brendan Perlini and Darnell Nurse replied for the Oilers (18-15-2), who are still in a free-fall. They have dropped six straight and are 2-10-2 in their last 14 games.
"That is one we let slip away," Kassian said. "Everybody is pretty upset. We were pretty frustrated with that one. That's a tough way to lose. You are up 3-1 going into the third and you lay a stinker. We are a pretty frustrated group. I think the writing is on the wall."
Edmonton goalie Stuart Skinner made 20 saves in defeat.
The Oilers were once again guilty of allowing the first goal of the game. Ottawa scored a power-play marker midway through the first as Norris was left alone in front to send a shot past Skinner. The Oilers have conceded the game's first goal 22 times in their last 26 games.
Edmonton knotted the game with a power-play goal of its own with just 48 seconds remaining in the opening period as Leon Draisaitl won a board battle and fed it in front to Kassian, who wired a shot past Murray.
The Oilers made it 2-1 with eight minutes left in the middle frame as Yamamoto fought off Erik Brannstrom and slid a backhand shot under Murray while off balance.
The Oilers added to the their lead with two and a half minutes to play in the second as Perlini added some extra weight to a Duncan Keith shot for his third of the season.
Ottawa got one back early in the third on a two-on-one as Gaudette beat Skinner with a high backhander.
WATCH l What do Connor McDavid's comments tell us about hockey culture?:
What do Connor McDavid's comments tell us about hockey culture? | The Breakdown
CBC Sports' Jacqueline Doorey is joined by Shireen Ahmed to get her reactions to McDavid's comments about the Oilers potentially signing Evander Kane and what they say about hockey culture. 7:20
The Senators tied it up five minutes into the third period as Skinner coughed up a puck behind the net, eventually leading to a rebound goal by Formenton.
Ottawa's unlikely comeback saw them regain the lead midway through the third when Zub picked the top corner with a long shot.
However, the Oilers were able to draw even two minutes later as Nurse jumped up to score on a wrist shot.
The Senators came roaring back with another power-play goal as Norris scored his team-leading 16th goal of the season.
Sanford put the game away with Ottawa's fifth third-period goal, scoring on a long seeing-eye empty netter.
The Senators return home to face the Buffalo Sabres on Tuesday, while the Oilers are off until Thursday when they host the Florida Panthers.
Novak Djokovic arrives in Dubai after deportation from Australia – Sportsnet.ca
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Novak Djokovic arrived early Monday in Dubai after his deportation from Australia over its required COVID-19 vaccination ended the No. 1-ranked men's tennis player's hopes of defending his Australian Open title.
Dubai International Airport was quiet early Monday morning as flights from the Australia and Asia began to arrive. Passengers wearing mandatory face masks collected their bags and walked out of the cavernous terminal. The first Muslim call to prayers before the sunrise echoed over the terminal.
It wasn't immediately clear where Djokovic planned to travel next. The Dubai Duty Free tennis tournament, which Djokovic won in 2020, doesn't start until Feb. 14.
Dubai, the commercial capital of the United Arab Emirates, doesn't require travelers to be vaccinated, though they must show a negative PCR test to board a flight.
Djokovic had won nine Australian Open titles, including three in a row, and a total of 20 Grand Slam singles trophies, tied with rivals Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal for the most in the history of men's tennis. Federer is not playing while recovering from injury, and Nadal is the only former Australian Open men's champion in the tournament that began Monday.
Djokovic's visa was initially canceled on Jan. 6 by a border official who decided he didn't qualify for a medical exemption from Australia's rules for unvaccinated visitors. He was exempted from the tournament's vaccine rules because he had been infected with the virus within the previous six months.
Vaccination amid the pandemic was a requirement for anyone at the Australian Open, whether players, their coaches or anyone at the tournament site. More than 95% of all Top 100 men and women in their tours' respective rankings are vaccinated. At least two men — American Tennys Sandgren and Frenchman Pierre-Hugues Herbert — skipped the first major tournament of the year due to the vaccine requirement.
Sonia Ulebor
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has left the door open for Novak Djokovic to compete at next year's Australian Open despite the tennis superstar facing an automatic three-year ban from entering the country.
The world number one player left Australia late on Sunday after the Federal Court upheld a government decision to cancel his visa, capping days of drama over the country's COVID-19 entry rules and his unvaccinated status.
Under immigration law, Djokovic cannot be granted another visa for three years unless Australia's immigration minister accepts there are compelling or compassionate reasons.
"I'm not going to precondition any of that or say anything that would not enable the minister to make the various calls he has to make," Morrison told 2GB radio on Monday as Djokovic was en route to Dubai.
"It does go over a three-year period, but there is the opportunity for (a person) to return in the right circumstances, and that will be considered at the time."
The unanimous ruling by a three-judge Federal Court bench dealt a final blow to Djokovic's hopes of chasing a record 21st Grand Slam win at the Australian Open, which starts on Monday, dismaying his family and supporters.
In a rollercoaster ride, the world's top men's player was first detained by immigration authorities on Jan. 6, ordered released by a court on Jan. 10 and then detained again on Saturday pending Sunday's court hearing.
Djokovic, 34, said he was extremely disappointed by the ruling but he respected the court's decision.
"I am uncomfortable that the focus of the past weeks has been on me and I hope that we can all now focus on the game and the tournament I love," Djokovic said in a statement before flying out of Melbourne.
The player was filmed by Reuters wearing a mask and taking selfies with fans at the arrival gate in Dubai as he waited for his entourage to get off the plane. The group then headed through a security channel for transfer passengers.
The saga caused a row between Canberra and Belgrade, with Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabic calling the court decision "scandalous".
Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne said on Monday that she and Morrison had been in touch with Brnabic during the legal process last week.
"I am absolutely confident that the very positive relationship, bilateral relationship between Australia and Serbia will continue on the strong footing that it currently enjoys," Payne told reporters.
Immigration Minister Alex Hawke had said Djokovic could be a threat to public order because his presence would encourage anti-vaccination sentiment amidst Australia's worst coronavirus outbreak.
The Federal Court judges noted their ruling was based on the lawfulness and legality of the minister's decision, but did not address "the merits or wisdom" of the decision. They have yet to release the full reasoning behind their decision.
POLITICAL TOUCHSTONE
The Serbian tennis player's visa troubles fuelled global debate over the rights of people who decline to get vaccinated as governments take measures to protect people from the two-year pandemic.
Djokovic had been granted a visa to enter Australia, with a COVID-19 infection on Dec. 16 providing the basis for a medical exemption from Australia's requirements that all visitors be vaccinated. The exemption was organised via Tennis Australia and the Victoria state government.
That exemption prompted widespread anger in Australia, which has undergone some of the world's toughest COVID-19 lockdowns and where more than 90% of adults are vaccinated.
The controversy became a political touchstone for Morrison as he prepares for an election due by May, amid wrangling over responsibility between his centre-right federal coalition government and the centre-left Victoria state government.
Morrison on Monday defended his handling of the situation and differentiated Djokovic's case from vaccine sceptics within his own government.
"If you're someone coming from overseas, and there are conditions for you to enter this country, then you have to comply with them," he said. "This is about someone who sought to come to Australia and not comply with the entry rules at our border."
The men's tennis governing body ATP said the decision "marks the end of a deeply regrettable series of events", adding it respected the decision, a comment echoed by Tennis Australia.
On the tennis circuit, fellow players have become impatient for the media circus to end.
"The situation has not been good all round for anyone. It feels everything here happened extremely last minute and that's why it became such a mess," said former world number one Andy Murray.
(Reporting By Jane Wardell; editing by Diane Craft and Michael Perry)
Health43 mins ago
Nova Scotia reports 68 people in hospital because of COVID-19 – CBC.ca
Science46 mins ago
Western scientists study meteorite made famous after crashing into B.C. woman's bedroom – CBC.ca
Back to school in 4 provinces as Omicron spreads – CTV News
5 Year Old Game Also Named Wordle Rides The Wave, Donates Profits To Charity – TheGamer
Science3 hours ago
Roberta Bondar flew into space 30 years ago and never saw Earth the same after that – CBC.ca
Hundreds of U.S.-bound migrants in caravan stuck at Guatemala border

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Ryan's passion for IT is as a means to unleash creative endeavors. He is an open source developer, community evangelist and trend spotter who harnesses his experience in project management, web applications, and interactive design to build markets for businesses, and users for web sites. Ryan's days are spent developing products and designing creative solutions for clients using Drupal, answering questions for Drupal users, building a regional network of creative individuals with practical ambitions, designing web pages and application back-ends, and sharing his knowledge of Drupal as a tool with businesses and individuals.
Ryan has implemented and maintained high-traffic websites such as PopSci.com using Drupal 5 and 6, Wordpress, Zend Framework and Web Services, developed new sites with editorial workflows and user-generated content, consulted on Drupal best practices for custom module development, source control management, eCommerce and website administration. He tutors, consults and runs training programs for Drupal, PHP, Podcasting and Social Media and originally created the DrupalEasy.com blog.
His ability to grok business processes and workflows give him an edge in developing software solutions for users that focus on meeting their expectations and goals. He designs user interface and features for diverse markets and purposes, including pet social networking, national magazines, online communities, and creative networks. His expertise includes customizing and theming in Drupal to specifications (since 4.7), including developing and maintaining custom modules, overseeing security, social media, and search capabilities.
In addition to running a network of podcasts and blogs relating to creative individuals, he also coordinates Florida Creatives, a group that engages artistic innovators to build a foundation of smart, resourceful professionals in Central Florida. He earned his BA in Digital Media: Internet and Interactive Systems for the University of Central Florida.


text:
Carly Findlay
Writer, speaker, appearance activist. Loving life!
Say Hello – my book
What is Ichthyosis?
Ichthyosis + appearance diversity resources
Guest post contribution guidelines
Growing Up Disabled in Australia
Disability slurs in football must be given the same punishment as racial and homophobic slurs.
April 26, 2017 Carly Findlay 6 Comments
This piece contains ableist and racist language. It also contains discussion about football, which is uncharacteristic of me.
Heath Shaw, a Greater Western Sydney footballer, used the R word toward another player as an on-field sledge last Saturday. He apologised almost immediately, and so did commentators.
The AFL and Greater Western Sydney Giants are not issuing a fine. They are satisfied with Shaw's apology.
The R word (and its derivatives) is violent. It hurts. It is scary. It's used against people with disability – it's dehumanising and insulting.
I hope Heath takes the time to talk to disabled people to learn the impact of ableist language. I hope he knows how othering this is, that by using this word, he is implying disabled people (and non disabled people) are lesser.
Football fans with disability are hurting over this. Down syndrome Australia issued a statement, part of which states how ableist language used by footballers impacts on the public perception of people with disability:
"…It is important to understand how damaging the use of such a term by a high-profile athlete is to community attitudes.
"The casual use of the deeply offensive R-word by high profile Australians reinforces stigma and negative attitudes and has a significant impact on how the community views people with a disability", said CEO Down Syndrome Australia Dr Ellen Skladzien."
Catia Malaquias, founder of disability advertising inclusion initiative Starting With Julius, believes Shaw's apology missed the mark.
Bryce Ritchie, who is disabled, has been a football fan for as long as he can remember. He has been a member of the Western Bulldogs for over 30 years and is a part of their cheer squad. He feels very respected and valued by the club and the cheer squad, and says he knows of other people with disability involved in the cheer squad. He is "disappointed and shattered" at the language Heath Shaw used on the field.
"To say [the R word] to a member of the public with a disability and even those without is… the lowest point", Ritchie says.
"Abusing and swearing can be hard to take but when a player has said the R word it's unforgivable incident. Even the commentator I think was thrown by this and apologised live on air.
"These players know that there are microphones hearing in and there is no excuses. The stadiums promote the reporting of spectators using foul and terrible language where the result a fan can be ejected from the ground yet a player gets let of because he is on the field."
However, there is not a standard for all forms of discrimination. While the AFL shows commitment to reducing vilification toward the LGBTIQA+, Aboriginal and multicultural communities, and the National Rugby League asked a player to apologise to his team for a racial slur in 2005, disability is the forgotten part of diversity. This is saddening when individual clubs and the wider AFL support community organisations and initiatives including disability charities. I wonder what the leagues designed for children with disability think of Shaw's slur and the AFL's lack of action?
Football players are taking a stand against racial prejudice, but at a cost toward diversity and inclusion. A 2016 report uncovered that teams are losing Aboriginal and international players because of casual racism.
The police also investigates football fans' racial slurs towards players. A weekend incident involving a fan tell a Brisbane Lions runner to go back to the Chinese takeaway is being investigated by Victoria police. In early April, a Port Adelaide fan was condemned by the club as well as investigated by the police for calling Aboriginal player Eddie Betts an ape.
However, like the lack of punishment for players who use terms like the R word, there's also no such punishment for fans who make disability slurs. Annie Nolan, who is part of the Western Bulldogs family, shared my facebook post about the disability slur on her highly subscribed Facebook page. Many football fans commented that they believe disability slurs at the football is getting worse, with one fan realising she no longer wants to be a part of this crowd culture.
"I went to the Kangaroos V Bulldogs game on Good Friday at Etihad and was seated in a majority of Kangaroos supporters (hubby is a Roo supporter)", Lisa Freestone said.
"I sat through 3 rounds of another Kangaroo supporter swear, yell at other spectators and was being very rude. I texted the number with his seat/row/section and no staff came. The 4th quarter he called one of the footballers a "spastic" and that's when decided that AFL games are not for me any longer. I was disgusted, he thought it was hilarious, I left the stadium then and there."
On Monday's Nova 100 breakfast show, host and former player Jonathan Brown spoke of how disability slurs falls outside the "law of the game", implying the issue of micrphones on the field are a bigger issue than the R word, while his cohosts indicated there needs to be change in the discrimination laws.
Jonathan Brown:
"He's come out and apologised. It's probably inappropriate. But there is the law of the jungle there's the law of the game, and the law of the jungle is that you'll try and put your opponent off however you can."
Sam Pang:
"But back in the day though, that meant racism was fine, and homophobia was fine, Jonathan Brown."
"No I was just about to say, race, religion, colour and sexual orientation – you cannot go there. But outside of that, boys can do whatever they want."
Chrissie Swan:
"Well that's ridiculous things need to be updated.
"No, no no…I'll tell you what. Heath shaw is living by the laws of the land currently. And he went out there and said somethings he would regret. But he was picked up by microphones on the field.these blokes are not walking down the street. They are trying to win a game of football. They do not realise they are going to get picked up too close. I can understand why people cross the line. Now he didn't cross the line as far as the laws of the game go, ok. But it's a good warning for the players."
Brown seems to think there's a double standard – and it's not with the use of the R word – rather players need to be given empathy because there's a microphone. And while "these blokes are not walking down the street", disability slurs on the field have more of an impact as the language is being broadcast into people's living rooms. (Listen to the full podcast here.)
Bryce Ritchie wants to see the AFL reprimand Shaw and other players who use disability slurs.
"[The] AFL needs to brief players and officials that microphones pick up all that is said on the field. If a player used this language the player must take up voluntary work with people with a disability."
Ritchie, pictured below, wants to see players fined heavily – even suspended – to pay for the impacts of their language and for bringing the AFL into disrepute.
If this language is used on the field, it's probably still used in the locker room. And because footballers are seen as superheroes, not disabled, they most likely believe this language is ok – believing the R word doesn't apply to them. (You only need to look at the comments about "sheltered workshops" from the Australian Olympic Committee's John Coates to realise how throway such language is in sport.) Plus, the AFL has excellent women, Aborginal, multicultural and women representatives taking about diversity. They don't have disabled players.
Disability slurs used by high profile sportspeople is a bad example for fans. The AFL is so entrenched in the Australian culture that the use of the R word on the field tells fans it's ok to use it in every day life.
Footballers should be able to have a banter, and sledge if it means putting off their opponent. But if their banter hurts a marginalised group of people, they need to rethink and modify their behaviour. They are more than just sportspeople – they set the tone of how we treat each other off the field.
Rules needs to change to acknowledge disability slurs are as damaging as sexism, racism and homophobia. A fine and mandatory disability training should be a standard for all discriminatory slurs. If not, the AFL is saying disability doesn't matter.
Spread the Word to End the Word
Ableist language by Autistic Hoya
Has this piece of writing helped you or made you think? Will you use it in your workplace or classroom? Please consider buying me a drink to show your appreciation.
Kyle Cogan says
the use of the r word is universal whether on the field or not. kids seem to use the word all the time. I was at the last carols by candlelight in 2016 and I heard somebody come over who was a mate of one of the junior leos who just threw the r word around as a bit of a joke. I wanted to say something but didn't because I've always been taught not to say anything when it's got nothing to do with me so I privately approached someone else about it 3 days later There are people who still use the word "handicap" and each time I try and correct them that it's not appropriate particularly if my mother is with me her words are "don't correct them particularly if they are elderly as some people will use whatever language they wish as they're just set in their ways" so I'm discouraged from actually speaking up so I don't because you never know what people are like they could turn against you or attack you.
"If this language is used on the field, it's probably still used in the locker room". No, he said it in the heat of the moment after nearly having his head ripped off, then immediately released what was a genuine apology.
If you're going to call for someone to be punished for a specific incident, at least describe said incident as it actually occurred, not in a way that suits your own agenda.
Matt Johnson says
The "r" word…. Fuck right off you activist wanna be libtards.
Roseanna says
leticia comentou em 19 de agosto de 2011 às 15:48. julia, amo seus makes!!! tenho 10 anos por isso nao posso fazer alguns, mas amo os cabelos voce esta de parn!eas!b!!
Barry seriously?
You are so full of hate.
Why are you such a mean and nasty bully?
Someone really did a number on you didn't they ?
I am very sad that you are suffering so much that the only way you can feel "big" is to make other people, all people, feel small.
I am sad for you that your life is so tormented, that the only way you can try to feel joy is by belittling anyone who is not like you. A "white man alone". I am sad you are alone.
I am sad you feel lonely.
I am sad for you that you are in so much pain that you need to lash out at other earthlings ( I suspect animals feel the pain of your wrath as well).
I am very sad that the only emotion you seem to feel is "mean".
You're a mean and nasty person and that tells me that you have a belly full of venom – and what saddens me is how that venom got there – THAT is the really worry. Someone really hurt you to make you so vile and I am sad that happened to you.
I hope you find peace…
The R word was one of many I heard during my school years (the worst years of my life!) . Add
the S word and the M word to that and then you get an idea of ableist language. Political correctness has nothing to do with it. Nor is such language "all in good fun." It's about accepting those who are different from the
so-called "norm" and treating them with respect. Unfortunately not everyone will realise that. Until the day comes when they are affected by disability in any way, shape or form. Harsh, but it's the only way they will learn.
View tune.into.radio.carly's profile on Facebook
View @carlyfindlay's profile on Twitter
View carlyfindlay's profile on Instagram
View sqoggle's profile on YouTube
Sign up for some love in your inbox
Archives Select Month January 2020 (1) December 2019 (3) September 2019 (2) July 2019 (2) April 2019 (1) March 2019 (1) February 2019 (1) January 2019 (1) December 2018 (1) October 2018 (1) August 2018 (1) July 2018 (1) May 2018 (3) April 2018 (5) March 2018 (4) February 2018 (3) January 2018 (1) December 2017 (4) November 2017 (4) August 2017 (5) July 2017 (1) June 2017 (7) May 2017 (1) April 2017 (4) March 2017 (5) February 2017 (1) January 2017 (3) December 2016 (12) November 2016 (7) October 2016 (3) September 2016 (6) August 2016 (6) July 2016 (9) June 2016 (6) May 2016 (12) April 2016 (11) March 2016 (5) February 2016 (7) January 2016 (11) December 2015 (9) November 2015 (7) October 2015 (12) September 2015 (10) August 2015 (11) July 2015 (8) June 2015 (10) May 2015 (47) April 2015 (17) March 2015 (15) February 2015 (16) January 2015 (13) December 2014 (11) November 2014 (13) October 2014 (13) September 2014 (11) August 2014 (12) July 2014 (13) June 2014 (10) May 2014 (41) April 2014 (14) March 2014 (8) February 2014 (9) January 2014 (5) December 2013 (11) November 2013 (9) October 2013 (15) September 2013 (18) August 2013 (15) July 2013 (12) June 2013 (16) May 2013 (36) April 2013 (16) March 2013 (18) February 2013 (17) January 2013 (13) December 2012 (18) November 2012 (30) October 2012 (22) September 2012 (21) August 2012 (11) July 2012 (27) June 2012 (9) May 2012 (21) April 2012 (22) March 2012 (13) February 2012 (15) January 2012 (19) December 2011 (12) November 2011 (18) October 2011 (12) September 2011 (8) August 2011 (12) July 2011 (14) June 2011 (24) May 2011 (27) April 2011 (28) March 2011 (35) February 2011 (35) January 2011 (40) December 2010 (32) November 2010 (23) October 2010 (19) September 2010 (23) August 2010 (23) July 2010 (34) June 2010 (33) May 2010 (30) April 2010 (23) March 2010 (34) February 2010 (34) January 2010 (38) December 2009 (13)
What's with the image descriptions on my social media posts?
The death of Offspring's Dr Patrick Reid. The TV death that stopped a nation.
Disability is not a bad thing! - My keynote speech for International Day of People with Disability in Albury Wodonga
What kind of person laughs at a stranger's face?
Book review: Sensitive by Allayne Webster
Miss You Love - an analysis of a beautful Silverchair song
The Greatest Showman - upliftspirational exploitation and the able gaze
On being a fan
The material on Tune into Radio Carly is copyright. The writing in this blog is by Carly Findlay unless otherwise stated. Most photos in this blog are by Carly Findlay unless otherwise stated. Please do not reproduce without permission from Carly Findlay. This blog represents my personal opinions and experiences. It does not reflect those of my employers'. The information I provide about ichthyosis is mostly based on personal experiences. Please seek medical advice or counseling before trying any new treatments I've written about. Where stared, I use affiliate links on this blog. By clicking them, I receive a small percentage of the purchase.


text:
Alice Gorman
Alice Gorman is an internationally recognised leader in the field of space archaeology. She teaches in the International Space University's Southern Hemisphere Space Program in Adelaide, and is a Senior Lecturer in the College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences at Flinders University. Dr Gorman's research focuses on the archaeology and heritage of space exploration, including space junk, planetary landing sites, off-earth mining, rocket launch pads, and antennas. She is a member of the Advisory Council of the Space Industry Association of Australia, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies.
Dr Gorman's writing has been selected four times for the Best Australian Science Writing Anthology, and in 2016 and 2017 she was shortlisted for the Bragg Prize in Science Writing. She tweets as @drspacejunk and blogs at Space Age Archaeology.
SPACE JUNK: Cleaning Up After Ourselves
Follow international initiatives to spring clean space Where humans have gone, rubbish has followed. Now we are leaving our unwanted footprints behind as we venture beyond Earth. 'Space junk', ranging...
SPACE INVADERS: To Infinity and Beyond
Ponder the practical and legal minefields of extra-terrestrial exploration As humanity ponders the viability of interplanetary settlement, the scale of near-Earth commercial and scientific endeavours is set to increase dramatically....


Pure Plates STL – Fresh Healthy Food Planned, Prepared & Delivered – Pure Plates STL Pure Plates is a one-stop healthy meal shop for Healthy Prepared Meal Planning. We handcraft healthy meals to go for pick-up or delivery in St. Louis, MO. Every one of our meals are 100% Gluten Free, under 600 calories, low sodium and low glycemic. Our menu is Keto, Paleo & Diabetic Friendly.
St. Louis Meal Delivery | Fresh n' Lean – Looking for meal delivery in St. Louis? Order from our delicious and healthy menu. fresh and organic meals delivered to your home in St. Louis.


Of course, there is much more to learn -- and you don't need to go it alone.
Want more information about anything you read here? We're happy to set up a free - 30 minute phone consult to answer questions.
To complicate matters further, the amount of goods and services $1 can purchase tends to decline over time. This is called inflation. One measure of inflation looks at changes in the price level of a basket of goods and services purchased by households, known as the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Tuition, fees, books, food, and rent are among the goods and services included in the CPI basket. In the US over the past 50 years, inflation measured by this index has averaged around 4% per year.With 4% inflation over 18 years, the purchasing power of $1 would decline by about 50%. If inflation were lower, say 3%, the purchasing power of $1 would decline by about 40%. If it were higher, say 5%, it would decline by around 60%.
While we do not know what inflation will be in the future, we should expect that the amount of goods and services $1 can purchase will decline over time. Going forward, we also do not know what the cost of attending college will be. But again, we should expect that education costs will likely be higher in the future than they are today. So, what can parents do to prepare for the costs of a college education? How can they plan for and make progress toward affording those costs.
You can successfully set goals and reach them. Start now.
All expressions of opinion are subject to change. This information is intended for educational purposes, and is not to be construed as an offer, solicitation, recommendation, or endorsement of any particular security, products, or services.
The S&P data is provided by Standard & Poor's Index Services Group.


text:
Home Reviews Comic Reviews Quarantine Re-Reads: Harleen
Quarantine Re-Reads: Harleen
Julian Douglas
If I can say anything about the imposed quarantine it's that I have much more time in my day, and nights, to focus on the things I love. In between the all important activity of staring up at my stucco ceiling and lazily stirring my third pot of boiling noodles, I've found myself picking through my shelves of comics and graphic novels. Rarely do I re-read titles already on my shelf after the initial read, but digging through them once again has been an exciting distraction from the ever impending social isolation that may or may not be related to the quarantine (It is…. I promise…. Please believe me). The first title to come off my shelf, and the one I bring to you, is the recently released Harleen by Stjepan Sejic. After flipping through its pages again I found the hours had been chipped away and I couldn't help but bring it as my first suggestion for our Quarantine Re-Read.
Harleen was published through DC's Black Label publications back in September of 2019. With both the writing and art being done by Stjepan Sejic, it brings the classic character of Harley Quinn into the spotlight once again by retelling the slippery slope of her backstory. Since the story was published through Black Label, Harleen includes the same dark content viewed through a much more mature filter. Including unfiltered profanity, mature sexual content, and uncensored violence, this reiteration of Harley Quinn's backstory is less about the character dominating DC's "bad girl" scene and more about the victimized woman that once was Harleen Quinzell.
If you're not already familiar with the story of the sassy anti-hero with the annoying Brooklyn accent this is an excellent introduction. From the bright, but downtrodden, doctoral graduate into the lovelorn and obsessed sidekick of Batman's nemesis, Harleen Quinzell takes wrong turn after wrong turn on a path she herself admits as evil. The overarching theme in each of the three comics (presented as books in the graphic novel) can be boiled down into two ideas, "The road to hell being paved with good intentions" and "The abyss stares back". The first is evident from the series' narrator, Harleen herself, in how she retells the event, highlighting every wrong turn made for the best intention. Each choice gets muddier and muddier. These particular decisions reflect well on the character herself as a beacon of good intention. The second main idea, expressed explicitly by the Dark Knight, is shown brilliantly in the series' depiction of the clown prince of crime himself.
It seems unfair to link the Joker as a pivotal part of Harley Quinn's character. Especially in light of the recent Birds of Prey film which focuses on the explicit intent of Harley to distance herself from the Joker. Despite this, however, the Joker's influence is what makes Harleen Quinzell, Harley Quinn. Stjepan takes the typical maniac, murderer, and psychopathic perspectives, and waters them down to an uncomfortably convincing subtlety. Paying homage to many different iterations of the character, Harleen's Joker seems to stand out as having a genuinely well designed attraction. With each step down the fractured rabbit hole that Harleen takes, the reader takes one right alongside her, skeptically approaching the attractive volatility of the man with the smile. Throughout each scene and each page we're shown a little humanity of the character, one we desperately want to believe is true. Of course, we all know how the story ends, we know what hides behind that smile.
In addition to the depth of character we see portrayed in her budding romance with Joker, we also see the beginnings of Harley's classic character relationships. Many of the rouges gallery make appearances, some brief and some with major story rolls, most notable are Two-Face, Killer Croc, Hugo Strange, and Poison Ivy. The friendship and support Harley receives from Poison Ivy in particular, is shown in its infancy through a handful of heartfelt scenes. While advertised as tertiary to the events of Harleen this relationship is one that is begging to be expanded on in later Black Label titles. Beside Poison Ivy, Harley Quinn's relationship with Killer Croc has seeds planted in animosity and annoyance, leading to a particularly violent encounter later in the series. In addition to these major players, little cameos can be seen from characters including Bane, Penguin, Zsasz, and Victor Freeze. The traditional heroes, however, take a back seat serving only as supportive characters such as Batman and Commissioner Gordon, and brief cameos or offhand mentions such as Robin, Batgirl, and Alfred.
From the first page to the very end, the reader is wrapped up in the city of Gotham, viewed from at first, the hopeful perspective of an everyday citizen. Then watched as the cynicism and mania of its worst villain twists that perspective, creating a dark and wickedly enjoyable story. The amazing visual art and compelling writing brings Harleen to the forefront as one of my favorite DC stories within the last year. Told from the growing Black Label publication, this dedicated Harley Quinn story is one that any true fan shouldn't pass up. During this quarantine I highly recommend picking up all three books or the collected graphic novel, taking a hit of the laughing gas with me, and starting the story of Harleen Quinzell. Oh, and don't forget to smile!
Spoiler Corner!!!
Alright, now is the time I want to touch on a few of my favorite parts of the story. Spoilers will be ahead, so if you haven't had a chance to read Harleen, Batman:Damned, and Batman: White Knight, you may want to check them out before reading further. All of these DC Black Label series feature Harley Quinn iterations in a few issues for some, and as a major character and plot point for others. I wanted to commend the various perspectives found in each one of these series. The heartbroken spinout found in Batman:Damned really highlights the anguish, attachment and dependency issues, and rage Harley has within her. While not particularly pivotal to the story itself, it is a refreshing look that is in direct opposition to the tilted glee frequently seen with the character. Batman:White Knight and Harleen have very similar depictions of the character, but further apart in their stories. White Knight shows the dichotomous nature of her character perfectly by bringing both depictions out as unique characters. One we see more often on the screen, shown as childish and prone to tantrums of rage. The other is seen as lovelorn, intelligent, and capable. The latter has much more in common with the Harleen Quinzell seen here in Harleen, just perhaps a little more dour. Each iteration adds something unique to the character and all are worth experiencing.
As for the specifics of Harleen there were two scenes I found to be strikingly effective. The first scene takes place in Harleen #1. Not yet having met the Joker, Harleen Quinzell is walking in Gotham when she is caught up in the most recent of Joker's schemes. She comes face to face with the Joker for the first time. While this scene itself is enjoyable for its future implications, it is the ensuing battle between Batman and Joker that truly captured my attention. Caught up in a tactical smoke grenade Harleen is consumed by panic and fear watching the battle unfold. This scene shows a typical Bats showdown from the outside all while maintaining a noteworthy sense of tension. It is as enjoyable to watch unfold as if we were viewing the drama from the caped crusader's perspective. The fantastic scene setup was worth spending time admiring even through my subsequent readings.
The second scene that I found particularly gripping was the climax of Harleen #3. Two-Face has broken into Arkham Asylum, the romantic tryst between Harleen and Joker has been sealed (with blood among other things), and Harleen is rushing to find Joker in the chaos of a breakout. After finally catching up with him, Harleen saves him from a revenge seeking guard who has been her only friend during her tenure at the Asylum. She does this by point blank shooting him in the head. Harleen as a narrator claims this to be an accident, but the trauma was inflicted and the line was crossed. While what stood out to me was the visual representation of her psyche shattering with the pull of the trigger, the aftermath has an eerie finality that ties the entire series together exceedingly well. Finally relinquishing her control of her own mind, she immediately latches onto the Joker's near kind words. With that final fracture, the rest of the story is history.
While memorable for most every aspect of it, the gripping cover art for each issue is worth mentioning as well. Each cover showed a sense of emotion mixed with just enough madness to give me hope for the story I have wanted for her for the longest time. I knew from the moment I opened the hardcover graphic novel to the moment I closed it, that that hope was well founded. Stjepan Sejic delivered the story that Harley Quinn deserved and has deserved for a long time.
Julian Douglas has been reading comics and playing video games since he was eight years old. He took film classes during his pursuit of a Software Engineering degree and has enjoyed mixing in his passion for writing. He enjoys macabre and cosmic horror most of all, but enjoys writing about all things geeky.
A laid back review of the DC Black Label release of Harleen. Reviewed off of the Graphic Novel release by Stjepan Sejic.
Previous article10 Reasons You Should Invest in Amazon Prime
Next articleTrick Questions | An Interview with Creator and Star of Magic for Humans, Justin Willman
Mulan | A Beautiful Letdown
"Fantastic Four #1" Comic Review
5 Obscure Fantasy Novels/Series You Shouldn't Miss!
"X-Men #8" Comic Review
Batman and Robin #23.3: Ra's Al Ghul and the League...


Amazing 50ft Garden Design #8 - YEW ENGLISH Taxus Baccata Hedging Plants Trees was published in July 21, 2018 at 8:00 am. If you wish to apply this photo as your PC wallpaper, you should tap the download link beneath or you may just right click on the picture at the top and pick "Save Image As" to download the Amazing 50ft Garden Design #8 - YEW ENGLISH Taxus Baccata Hedging Plants Trees or by tap the "Set Desktop Background As" choice if your internet browser has this option. If you were no able to find the the greatest photo you are awaiting for, you need to go for "Search Column" at top right or browse other image wallpapers whichever you love. This picture has the photo size is 25kB and the dimension of 285x210. Amazing 50ft Garden Design #8 - YEW ENGLISH Taxus Baccata Hedging Plants Trees has been viewed by 27 visitors and it is an attachment from 50ft Garden Design.


The first sight of Waddesdon transports you to France.
Essential works are currently being undertaken inside the House. Unfortunately this means some rooms will not be open between 27 March 2019 and Easter.
Where else can you find a French Renaissance château, inspired by those in the Loire valley, built by a Rothschild in the 19th century, and filled with royal treasures and many objects with an exceptional story to tell?
The marvellous mechanical elephant, whose parts move while it plays, is the favourite of many of our visitors. It captivated Baron Ferdinand's guests including the Shah of Persia, who asked for it to be wound again and again. The mechanism is fragile but you can see it in action on special monthly tours or watch this video.
Baron Ferdinand, who built Waddesdon, was also fascinated by 18th-century France. He used a French architect who created rooms using wall panels taken from Parisian houses of the 1700s. Here in the Green Boudoir they are carved with dragons, butterflies and monkeys imitating humans.
Waddesdon was created to impress. It was only used on summer weekends to entertain Baron Ferdinand's friends and family. The mirrors and marble of the Dining Room evoke a mini Versailles. The richly decorated table is set for a party of 24, just as it was in his day.
The Rothschilds were famous for their hospitality and had many dinner services, like this French one. Over 400 pieces of porcelain to serve 24 people. Even though it was a royal gift from King Louis XV to an Austrian prince in 1766, it was still used by the family until the 1980s.
The house is full of 18th-century French objects, of exceptional quality and history: here a delicate desk made for Queen Marie-Antoinette, another for King Louis XV's daughter and a carpet from the chapel in the palace of Versailles. Above the fireplace is a vase in the shape of a ship made by the royal Sèvres porcelain factory. Only 10 examples exist and Baron Ferdinand owned three of them.
Ferdinand's private sitting room above is exactly as it was in the 1890s, crowded but cosy, with old and new furniture, small treasures, flowers and family photographs. He must have enjoyed catching the eyes of the beautiful women, many of them actresses, hanging on the walls. They were painted by famous British artists of the 1700s, like Reynolds, Gainsborough and Romney.
Male guests enjoyed the Smoking and Billiard Rooms in the Bachelors' Wing. Many visitors are surprised that much of the collection of arms and armour in the corridor was bought by Ferdinand's sister, Alice.
Ferdinand kept his 'Renaissance Museum', his most prized collection of precious objects from the 1500s and 1600s, here. He left it to the British Museum in his will, where it can be seen as The Waddesdon Bequest. Similar pieces collected by other members of the family have taken its place in the Smoking Room.
The sound of clocks ticking and chiming surrounds you in the house. There are 56 in all, at least one in every room. Nearly all are in working order and some even play music as well. It takes over an hour to wind them each week.
Time moves on and Waddesdon still adds to its collections. This chandelier was specially commissioned in 2003 by Lord Rothschild for the Blue Dining Room, with its walls of 18th-century carved panelling. It is made of smashed china and is called Porca Miseria.


text:
Entertainment Sports EPL: Arsenal told to do Aubameyang what they did to Mesut Ozil
EPL: Arsenal told to do Aubameyang what they did to Mesut Ozil
Arsenal legend, Alan Smith has told the club treat striker, Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang the way they did to Mesut Ozil. Aubameyang is facing challenging times at Arsenal after manager Mikel Arteta stripped him of the club's captaincy following a disciplinary breach.
The Gabonese international has missed Arsenal's wins against Southampton and West Ham United.
But Smith, who made 264 appearances for Arsenal and scored 86 goals, believes the only way Arteta will sell Aubameyang in the upcoming transfer window is if the Gunners give the player a 'shed load of money' just like they did to Ozil before he left Emirates for Fenerbahce.
"It looks a difficult road back for Aubameyang at Arsenal," Smith was quoted by Sky Sports as saying.
"When you do what you do to the captain of the club, and from the outside looking in, quite rightly Arteta has done it.
"You wonder what Aubameyang's state of mind will be now. It didn't seem great in the first place in terms of his confidence out on the pitch.
"I still think he is got about 18 months left on his deal and I am sure at this point Arteta would like to sell him, but somebody on £350,000-a-week is going to be virtually impossible to move on unless they do what they did with Mesut Ozil and give him a shed load of money and he would have to accept less money elsewhere.
"It is a problem and a problem Arteta didn't need, but now it is a big challenge for Arsenal to rebuild their attack and it is going to depend on some very clever and inspired recruitment."
Aubameyang will also miss Arsenal's clash with Leeds United on Saturday evening.


text:
Sharp Fall in Amount of Asylum Seekers After Corona Measures Come Into Effect
TOPICS:Asylum seekers
The Norwegian Department of Immigration (UDI). Photo Norway Today Media
Posted By: Peter Holmvik 26. June 2020
The number of asylum seekers in Norway drastically fell after the country went into lockdown in March according to UDI. Between April and May less than a quarter of normal registered.
Many of the asylum seekers who registered after the Corona measures were implemented were already in Norway according to UDI, which on Thursday, clarified how the Corona crisis affected the situation for the refugees and asylum seekers in Norway.
-"Given the situation with the closing of borders in both Norway and the whole of Europe, we are not surprised. This is what was expected and is a natural consequence of what is happening now in Europe." said the Director of UDI, Frode Forfang to NTB.
The expected number of asylum seekers, due to the Corona crisis, has been adjusted from 3000 down to 1200 for this year according to Forfang.
– Will increase again
During April and May, just under 10 were registered every week, in comparison with January and February having over 40 per week in what would otherwise be the normal average.
In June, however, there has been a slight increase in the numbers and UDI expects the numbers to increase in the future.
-"We believe that the numbers will change after things loosen up in Europe, but how quick it will be until the situation returns to normal or until one recieves a pent up need, will be difficult to say. There are only speculations." said Forfang.
The quota for refugees will not be achieved this year
As stated by Forfang, Norway will not be able to reach its quota of 3000 refugees this year. UDI expects there to be a total of around 2000 and 2500 new refugees in Norway in 2020
In addition, the amount of EEA citizens that came to Norway in April and May fell sharply with a reduction of 80 percent in comparison to the same period last year. During these two months a total of 560 people came to Norway compared to last years 3,050.
Moreover, the amount of people applying for family and student visas have been more than halved since the Corona crisis. This too is likely to increase this fall, as suggested by Forfang
UDI lowers estimates of asylum seekers this year
Asylum seekers injured after knife attack at reception centre
More than 5,000 were forced out of Norway in 2018
Four Syrian asylum seekers convicted of violent aggravated assault and rape of a man
Be the first to comment on "Sharp Fall in Amount of Asylum Seekers After Corona Measures Come Into Effect"


Eva Strukelj and Ignacio Lopez Sola, the project leader of the displayed work Chest by Eva Strukelj and Ignacio Lopez Sola illustrates, A wooden chest, made of cherrywood is a reinterpretation of traditional fully-painted chests, once most prominent pieces of furniture in Gorenjska. Contemporary version changes the paint for wood and uses ethnographical elements of heart and carnation flower, both characteristic of the region. The hexagonal composition of the pattern is concise on the upper side and than gradually diminishing in size and disappearing as an image of the old memory, being erased by the pass of time. The pattern is machine-cut, but the finnish- as centuries ago- took long hours of hand-brushing and oiling..