LI Re: Bill's badge; A cruel hoax?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: On Wed, 6 May 1998 21:40:44 EDT DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've done with this discussion. I've stated my opinions, and see no need to restate them interminably. Next topic? Doc Hi Doc, Where's my badge? I hope that wasn't a cruel hoax. :) Bill _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Vince Foster murdered? A cruel hoax.
Leonard Booth [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill Interesting how the facts get all twisted around, isn't it? It was really the bullet that they never found and they (RWW's), tried to make something out of. Talk about grasping for straws. Len At 11:24 AM 5/7/98 EDT, William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: On Wed, 6 May 1998 14:16:11 -0700 "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: in spite of the results of four separate investigations concluding he committed suicide. Bill How do you shoot yourself and nobody ever finds the gun near the body, Bill ? HI Ron, Obviously you are not familiar with the real facts in this case. You need to read the conclusions of the four investigating groups that all determined he committed suicide. There is so much propaganda spewed forth by the American Spectator and other right wing fanatics that the facts have been distoted beyond recognition. The gun WAS found near the body, in a spot that corresponded with what one would expect considering the recoil and the physical reaction of the person shooting himself. BTW, guess who one of the investigators was whose group concluded that Foster's death was a suicide? Yep.your very own Kenneth Starr. :) Bill _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Bill's badge; A cruel hoax?
DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-05-07 12:15:47 EDT, you write: Hi Doc, Where's my badge? I hope that wasn't a cruel hoax. :) Bill Comin right atcha, baby! Just stand there at attention and try not to wiggle, OK? Doc Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Bill's badge; A cruel hoax?
Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hey Bill you haven't got your eye on my seat in Doc's lap have you, we might just end up starting a flame war over that onelol. Steve : ) -Original Message- From: DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, May 07, 1998 8:06 PM Subject: Re: LI Re: Bill's badge; A cruel hoax? DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-05-07 12:15:47 EDT, you write: Hi Doc, Where's my badge? I hope that wasn't a cruel hoax. :) Bill Comin right atcha, baby! Just stand there at attention and try not to wiggle, OK? Doc Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Bill's badge; A cruel hoax?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Steve, Not to worry, old chap, I have a feeling that upon being pinned I won't be inclined to stay in one place for very long. Oooh, I get the chills just thinking about it. Her lap will still be available to you. :) Bill On Thu, 7 May 1998 20:49:59 +0100 Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hey Bill you haven't got your eye on my seat in Doc's lap have you, we might just end up starting a flame war over that onelol. Steve : ) _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Laws - what good are they?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: On Thu, 7 May 1998 15:03:53 EDT DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-05-07 11:28:47 EDT, you write: There's a big difference between what the law dictates and what people actually do. A ten minute drive on the interstate will illustrate that fact quite effectively. Bill There you go, Bill, messing with my perfectly good delusional system! Next you'll be telling me that people don't always pay taxes because they love the country, or something. Doc HI Doc, Gasp! I usually just call the IRS and ask them how much they need. :) Bill _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: The Mother Ship Returns Home
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Vi, No problem. I have a lot of fun here, as you know. ;) Bill On Tue, 5 May 1998 19:27:29 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: Hi Freakin' Bill, You know d--- well I didn't see the planet! I saw the mother ship take off on its way back to the mother planet or some other starry destination. Glad to hear you are just kidding around! Be my guest, anytuime. :) Vi _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Topic Change: baseball, way off topic
DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-05-06 22:11:13 EDT, you write: Hi Doc: I think you can go to bed early on that one. :( Sue And unfortunately it's not the Orioles! I'm watching their game right now -- would you believe it's 14-3 Cleveland in the eighth? Doc What, and leave my team to do it without me? Never happen! (anyway, how much longer can it be?) Of course you're quite right, especially since tomorrow is my long work day, but I just don't seem to be able to do that. It's still early where you are, isn't it? Sometimes I miss being in that time zone. And if I live to be 100 I'll never get used to the ocean being on the wrong side! Doc Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Topic Change: baseball, way off topic
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yep it's still early. :30. I have often wondered what it would be like to have the ocean on the other side. And more so what it would be like not to have an ocean at all. It would really be weird, IMO. Can't get over how the Padre's are doing. They usually don't. It's early though. What, and leave my team to do it without me? Never happen! (anyway, how much longer can it be?) Of course you're quite right, especially since tomorrow is my long work day, but I just don't seem to be able to do that. It's still early where you are, isn't it? Sometimes I miss being in that time zone. And if I live to be 100 I'll never get used to the ocean being on the wrong side! Doc -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Topic Change: baseball, way off topic
DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-05-06 22:21:05 EDT, you write: Yep it's still early. :30. I have often wondered what it would be like to have the ocean on the other side. And more so what it would be like not to have an ocean at all. I hated having no ocean at all. Can;t live without an expanse of water. Is :30 the same as 7:30? Doc Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Topic Change: baseball, way off topic
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yep I put it in code so no one would know BG Didn't you feel kinda lost without an ocean around. I don't think even a lake like one of the Great Lakes would be the same. Don't know though never been away from the ocean. I hated having no ocean at all. Can;t live without an expanse of water. Is :30 the same as 7:30? Doc -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Vi, Psst...latent homosexuality ain't the answer. VBG I've seen people theorizing that the Holocaust never happened. Yes, I think there IS a reason to get freaked out over certain types of "theorizing". If people don't get freaked out by some kinds of theorizing then those theories tend to be accepted as fact by others. And that can be a very bad thing for our society. Freakin' Bill G On Mon, 4 May 1998 19:52:21 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: Hi Sue, Good common sense answer! It may or may not entirely hit the mark, but is there any reason to get freaked out by theorizing as to possibie causes? (You didn't, BTW :)).. And to those who say they don't give a s---, two young people paid with their lives for Simpson's kind of insane coercion. It would be helpful to understand the dynamics underpinning such acts. Vi "What the world needs more of is not love, but justice." Anon. __ You Wrote: I would say that a lot of it may have to do with the fact that he has never had to take responsibility for any and everything that he has ever done, with people falling all over themselves to please and placate him. He has always called the shots. He has always controlled everyone and everything around him.. . . _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: Freakin' Bill, Freak out all you want. If people are so bird-brained that they take every word I say as gospel without reading and considering opposite and other points of view, then they have a real problem! But it's THEIR problem. It's not your problem and it sure isn't mine. Vi "What the world needs more of is not love, but justice." Anon. __ . . . If people don't get freaked out by some kinds of theorizing then those theories tend to be accepted as fact by others. And that can be a very bad thing for our society. _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Steve: LMAO Goes to show you what the different meanings of a word can do. LOL Sue Marge Simpson has always done if for me lol, Oh that blue hair, I wonder how many fag buts there are in there bg (Opps just thought I might add that a fag in England isn't a fag its a cigarette) phew nearly caused an international incident with that one lol. Steve ^ ^ )o( -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marge Simpson has always done if for me lol, Oh that blue hair, I wonder how many fag buts there are in there bg (Opps just thought I might add that a fag in England isn't a fag its a cigarette) phew nearly caused an international incident with that one lol. Steve ^ ^ )o( Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: Hi Freakin' Bill, You know d--- well I didn't see the planet! I saw the mother ship take off on its way back to the mother planet or some other starry destination. Glad to hear you are just kidding around! Be my guest, anytuime. :) Vi "What the world needs more of is not love, but justice." Anon. __ You wrote: . . .Anyway, don't pay any attention to what I say. Only a bird brain would treat it as gospel. I'm just kidding around with you. Honest. BG _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Vi, Oh, you're more than welcome to speculate about anything. That is certainly your right. As I said, I fall into the "who gives a shit" group when it comes to anyone's sexual orientation. I find it irrelevant to the type of person they are and I can certainly find other hang ups that are more interesting to me. BG BTW, I've heard that the rumors about Simpson's father being a closet homosexual were also part of a mis-information campaign and have become an urban myth. I don't know if this is true or not, however. Like I said, I don't give a shit. :) I DID hear that Simpson may have latent Negro tendencies however, and I plan to investigate that one. Bill On Mon, 4 May 1998 10:23:55 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: Hi Bill, Just because a psychological condition cannot be "scientifically" measured does not mean that we discard it, throwing out the baby with the bathwater. As laymen, we are free to speculate and apply the knowledge left us concerning whatever some scientists have spent their entire lives studying and classifying. What was said here about Simpson's possibly homesexual tendencies was not said to "piss him off" It was mere speculation about what caused him to be so abusive of Nicole and what exactly led him to finally butcher her and her friend, Any time there is an effect, there is a cause. I always want to know the probable cause of a vicious murder.and to seek all possible explanations, even if they may seem a little out in left field.. Not that it had any bearing on Simpson's sexual orientation, but his dad was a closet homosexual until he left left OJ's mother to live a different lifestyle. Vi "What the world needs more of is not love, but justice." Anon. __ You wrote: Hi Bill, Just because a psychological condition cannot be scientifically measured does not mean that we throw out the baby with the bath water. We are free to speculate based on whatever some scientists have spent their entire lives studying and classifying. What was said here about Simpson's possibly homesexual tendencies was not said to "piss him off" It was mere speculation about what caused him to be so abusive of Nicole and what exactly led him to finally butcher her and her friend, Any time there is an effect, there is a cause. I always want to know the probable cause of a vicious murder.and to seek all possible explanations, even if they may seem a little out in left field.. Not that it had any bearing on Simpson's sexual orientation, but his dad was a closet homosexual until he left left OJ's mother to live a different lifestyle. As for who may have helped S. after the crimes, I nominate Jason. Vi "What the world needs more of is not love, but justice." Anon. __ You wrote: IMO, the only reason the subject of latent homosexuality ever came up with respect to Simpson is because people thought this would be a way to really get to him and cause him much anger and distress. Many experts in this field refer to this as psycho-babble. As you, Terry and others have pointed out, something like this is impossible to define, impossible to measure and impossible to prove under true scientific conditions. It also falls under the "who gives a shit" category. _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: Hi Sue, I certainly appreciate your point of view and do not disagree with all that you have said. however, there remains a question: Why was it so important to him to control her and don't tell me it's because he's a mean,egotistical SB. He's all of that, but I'd appreciate having a scientific explanation, or as close to it as you can get based on your knowledge and what you have read of human behavior and its motivations. Vi "What the world needs more of is not love, but justice." Anon. __ You wrote: Simpson may or may not be gay. IMO, it really doesn't matter. What he did to Nicole though was about power. It had nothing to do with sexual orientation, IMO. He wanted to control her. _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Vi: I have to leave that answer up to the psychiatrists and psychologists. I am not at all knowledgeable in that science. I have read just about everything that has come out about Simpson in the past few years, and just guessing I would say that a lot of it may have to do with the fact that he has never had to take responsibility for anything that he has done in his whole life. He also has been the king in everything that he has ever done, with people falling all over themselves to please and placate him. He has always called the shots. He has always controlled everyone and everything around him. But whether this has anything to do with his control over Nicole I don't know. I tend to stick with my original dx, he is a SOB who thought of Nicole as another possession that he owned. I'm sorry I can't answer your question. Actually you know more about this than I do. :) Sue Sue Hi Sue, I certainly appreciate your point of view and do not disagree with all that you have said. however, there remains a question: Why was it so important to him to control her and don't tell me it's because he's a mean,egotistical SB. He's all of that, but I'd appreciate having a scientific explanation, or as close to it as you can get based on your knowledge and what you have read of human behavior and its motivations. Vi -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Yvonne:
What is even more interesting to me than Simpson, which I know you know
how I feel about him, is why these people stayed with him after the way
he treated them.
I'm not only referring to his wives, I also mean men and women who still
held him in the highest regard throughout his life before the murders,
and some that still do. They will not even face the truth that he
killed these two people and would fight to the death even now for him.
Paula kept coming back and even lied to protect him at the end.
And his lawyers didn't even get paid, yet they still hang around.
Bailey still goes to bat for him, and they fought for him in the civil
trial.
Look how he treated his own family after the criminal trial and during
the civil trial. They were no longer needed so send them back to where
they belong. Without jobs or other such things to survive, now that
they had given this all up to help him.
It sure is an interesting thing. I bet a psychologist would have a
field day with this bunch.
Sue
"Urban myths," by definition, are decades old canards keyed into a
culture's fears. As such, a family's catastrophe (the senior Mr Simpson's
homosexuality and ultimate death from AIDS) doesn't even enter into the
realm of "urban myths."
More to the point, the fact is that Simpson's father was a haphazard entity
in his son's early life and interesting shadow figure in creating what
matured into his son. Added to that is "Ms Eunice's" role at head of the
family and how she attempted to raise her second son.
Any out-of-kilter family modalities can and are used to analyze why a kid
grows up to beat up women. Why Orenthal grew up to lord it over his
sisters and his former (living) wife.
Shut off a person's prologue for politically correct sentiments
("homophobia," current cultural mores) and you miss all the fun of solving
the puzzle. Unless, of course, some of you out there think that his
baterring, abuse, beating and kicking of wives is not all that important.
--
Two rules in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
2.
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Simpson's Sexuality
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: Hi Sue, Good common sense answer! It may or may not entirely hit the mark, but is there any reason to get freaked out by theorizing as to possibie causes? (You didn't, BTW :)).. And to those who say they don't give a s---, two young people paid with their lives for Simpson's kind of insane coercion. It would be helpful to understand the dynamics underpinning such acts. Vi "What the world needs more of is not love, but justice." Anon. __ You Wrote: I would say that a lot of it may have to do with the fact that he has never had to take responsibility for any and everything that he has ever done, with people falling all over themselves to please and placate him. He has always called the shots. He has always controlled everyone and everything around him.. . . _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: D.P.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, I tend to think that there might be an explanation on the physical side rather than the environmental side. Chemical imbalance perhaps. Genetic flaw. Or maybe a combination of those and an environmental factor. Whatever it is, it certainly is not seen that often thank goodness. Of course, once is too often for this kind of stuff. Bill On Wed, 29 Apr 1998 16:11:37 -0700 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi BIll: Makes me wonder what in the world could go so wrong in the life of a child that young to make him do such things, and laugh about it afterwards. The parents didn't seem like the type who would abuse him, but then one never knows I guess. He did tell his mother that he wanted to hurt/kill someone a few days before it happened. Sue HI Sue, IMO, for anyone to do something like this they must have very serious mental problems. So I don't expect them to show the emotions that we might expect in a normal person. And his attorney is going to say anything that might garner some sympathy in the court of public opinion. So I don't put much weight onto his statements. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI RE: OOPs--forgot the citation
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue Here is the citation: Neuropsychiatric, Psychoeducational, and Family Characteristics of 14 Juveniles Condemned to Death in the United States," American Journal of Psychiatry 145 (May 1988), 584-589; Alsion Bass, "Head Injuries Found in Young Killers," Boston Globe, June 20, 1988, pp. 53, 55. This was in Conklin's Criminology 6th ed., 1998. jackief -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Attachment Disorder was
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: It even seems more cruel to me for people to bring them into this country from the horrible things that they have to contend with, and then when they can't handle the problems dump them. There has to be another way, but I sure don't have any idea what it could be. :( Sue Hi Sue The sad thing is that you are probably right about them being lost--such a sad thing to admit though. Not understanding the problem is a big part of the problem--how do you assist someone when you really don't know what to do, except trial and error. jackief. -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi BIll: Makes me wonder what in the world could go so wrong in the life of a child that young to make him do such things, and laugh about it afterwards. The parents didn't seem like the type who would abuse him, but then one never knows I guess. He did tell his mother that he wanted to hurt/kill someone a few days before it happened. Sue HI Sue, IMO, for anyone to do something like this they must have very serious mental problems. So I don't expect them to show the emotions that we might expect in a normal person. And his attorney is going to say anything that might garner some sympathy in the court of public opinion. So I don't put much weight onto his statements. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: D.P.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, I don't think that these kids even formulate an idea of what the consequences might be. Too bad there are so many guns around that they never seem to have a problem getting their hands on one or two of them. I don't think that executing kids is the answer to the problem. Bill On Sat, 25 Apr 1998 11:42:15 -0700 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: Well, we now have another 14 year old in Penn who shot and killed a teacher. This is really getting out of hand. Even one is bad, but geeze, everyday we are reading about a new one. 14 seems to be the popular age for doing this. Wonder if that is because they know that nothing horrible is going to happen to them? Sue Hi Sue, I agree, and I certainly would not suggest that any kid get off lightly for committing murder. I just don't think the current methods are appropriate. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: This last kidis unreal. They showed them taking him away in the back of the squad car and he was laughing and smiling to beat the band. Then his lawyer comes out and says that the kid is devestated. There have been psychologists on all the local television stations all weekend trying to explain this, and telling parents what to look for. They seem to blame it a lot on copy cat personality. Also they are saying that we shouldn't be at all surprised that teens are reacting this way. They have been left to take care of themselves for such a long time, that this is the result of it. I dunno about this last statement though. Sue HI Sue, I don't think that these kids even formulate an idea of what the consequences might be. Too bad there are so many guns around that they never seem to have a problem getting their hands on one or two of them. I don't think that executing kids is the answer to the problem. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Joan: As a teacher I am sure you can understand my apprehensions regarding my husband. At least my son had a weapon to protect himself in the gulf. TIC I'm all for lowering and strengthening the sentencing laws for these "kids". I don't know if I could go so far as the DP, but I certainly think that more severe and longer punishments are in order. Sue Hello Sue, I understand your point. However, there is now some movement to lower the age for more severe sentencing even to the extent of the DP. Our hands do not have to be tied. Joan -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: 4-year-old shoots and kills 6-year-old playmate in North Carolina
"Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This four year old did not kill the six year old! This comes as close to a good example that guns kill! Ron GREENSBORO, N.C. (April 26, 1998 00:49 a.m. EDT http://www.nando.net) -- A North Carolina boy was fatally shot Saturday on his sixth birthday by a 4-year-old who fired a handgun the boys found in a purse, police said. Police and rescue personnel discovered the body of Carlos Gilmer in his house around 10 a.m. Witnesses said the 4-year-old was playing outside shortly after the shooting. Neighbors said it appeared the children had been playing their usual game of pretend gunplay when it took a deadly turn. "They always used to come up to me going, 'Pow! Pow!' He probably went up to Carlos and did the same thing," said 12-year-old neighbor Tabatha White. "A fake gun looks just like a real gun. " Police say the 4-year-old playmate shot Carlos in the neck. The victim's godmother, Beulah Lindsay, who neighbors said was his main caretaker, was upstairs at the time preparing for Carlos' party. Neighbors said she had hung a "Happy Birthday" banner on the wall. Police would not say who owned the gun but are considering charging its owner under a state law that prohibits leaving guns accessible to minors. 99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
"Joan Moyer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello Sue, I understand the fear of teachers and their families with the wave of murderous attacks by students. I think more and more districts are putting in weapon detectors. However, as was mentioned in an earlier post, more and better gun control would help. Of course, as always, if parents were more responsible the guns would not be so readily available. Joan -- From: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LI Re: D.P. Date: Sunday, April 26, 1998 12:20 AM Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Joan: As a teacher I am sure you can understand my apprehensions regarding my husband. At least my son had a weapon to protect himself in the gulf. TIC I'm all for lowering and strengthening the sentencing laws for these "kids". I don't know if I could go so far as the DP, but I certainly think that more severe and longer punishments are in order. Sue Hello Sue, I understand your point. However, there is now some movement to lower the age for more severe sentencing even to the extent of the DP. Our hands do not have to be tied. Joan -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: 4-year-old shoots and kills 6-year-old playmate in North Carolina
Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Why would anyone think it's necessary to take a gun to a child's birthday party? Ronald Helm wrote: "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This four year old did not kill the six year old! This comes as close to a good example that guns kill! Ron GREENSBORO, N.C. (April 26, 1998 00:49 a.m. EDT http://www.nando.net) -- A North Carolina boy was fatally shot Saturday on his sixth birthday by -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: 55 yr. Old Woman Gives Multiple Births
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: Hi Sue, Exactly! And among other considerations (such as old women bringing mongoloids and such into an overcrowded, hopelessly problematic world), it isn't fair to the child who will probably become parentless by the time of adulthood. Vi You wrote: . . .I guess I really don't have any problem with a 55 year old woman getting pregnant, if that is what she wants. But multiple births like this is nuts. And to have the taxpayers pay for the bill is wrong. IMO _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: 55 yr. Old Woman Gives Multiple Births
"Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I didn't even take into consideration Down's Syndrome and things like that. :( I guess that the mother would elect to abort though if and when the test came back positive for that. This woman was post-menopausal and the eggs were from a young donor. Very little chance of Down's Syndrome as that is related to the age of the eggs, not the age of the uterus :-) Ron 99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: 55 yr. Old Woman Gives Multiple Births
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Ron: Wasn't thinking. There are still so many deformities, etc that could be brought into this, not to mention just what has happened. Too much of a risk for me. Not to mention the work, if everything went well. Sue This woman was post-menopausal and the eggs were from a young donor. Very little chance of Down's Syndrome as that is related to the age of the eggs, not the age of the uterus :-) Ron -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: Well, we now have another 14 year old in Penn who shot and killed a teacher. This is really getting out of hand. Even one is bad, but geeze, everyday we are reading about a new one. 14 seems to be the popular age for doing this. Wonder if that is because they know that nothing horrible is going to happen to them? Sue Hi Sue, I agree, and I certainly would not suggest that any kid get off lightly for committing murder. I just don't think the current methods are appropriate. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
"Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, we now have another 14 year old in Penn who shot and killed a teacher. This is really getting out of hand. Even one is bad, but geeze, everyday we are reading about a new one. Punish the little bastards, do some good for the victims and their families for a change. Ron 99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ronald Helm wrote: "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, we now have another 14 year old in Penn who shot and killed a teacher. This is really getting out of hand. Even one is bad, but geeze, everyday we are reading about a new one. Punish the little bastards, do some good for the victims and their families for a change. Ron Hi Ron: I agree, something has to be done. But what. These kids have our hands tied. And they know it. Sue -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
"Joan Moyer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello Ron, Has there been any mention as yet what his defense is or will be? I've read nothing about the case thus far. Joan -- From: Ronald Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LI Re: D.P. Date: Saturday, April 25, 1998 2:44 PM "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, we now have another 14 year old in Penn who shot and killed a teacher. This is really getting out of hand. Even one is bad, but geeze, everyday we are reading about a new one. Punish the little bastards, do some good for the victims and their families for a change. Ron 99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
"Joan Moyer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hello Sue, What is the cause of our hands being tied? Joan -- From: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LI Re: D.P. Date: Saturday, April 25, 1998 3:02 PM Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ronald Helm wrote: "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, we now have another 14 year old in Penn who shot and killed a teacher. This is really getting out of hand. Even one is bad, but geeze, everyday we are reading about a new one. Punish the little bastards, do some good for the victims and their families for a change. Ron Hi Ron: I agree, something has to be done. But what. These kids have our hands tied. And they know it. Sue -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Joan: Because of their ages. They are juveniles. Sue Hello Sue, What is the cause of our hands being tied? Joan -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I can't speak for Ron, but admit I take satisfaction in the execution of adults If I feel they are guilty of the crime. I take no pleasure and experience great sadness when innocent people are slaughtered by some deranged nut. Who probably can blame it all on his upbringing or better yet can't be convicted because they didn't Merandize him. Sody Go right ahead and speak for me as you speaketh the truth. Too often the anti-DP faction completely ignores the victims of these crimes, and feels sorry for the killer. Victims have many fewer rights than the criminals in this country. Ron Killing is indeed fun but not all families of victims wish to see more killing. You are quite correct, Ron, nobody cares much about the feelings of victims. Best, Terry "Lawyer - one trained to circumvent the law" - The Devil's Dictionary Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: D.P.
"Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I can't speak for Ron, but admit I take satisfaction in the execution of adults If I feel they are guilty of the crime. I take no pleasure and experience great sadness when innocent people are slaughtered by some deranged nut. Who probably can blame it all on his upbringing or better yet can't be convicted because they didn't Merandize him. Sody Go right ahead and speak for me as you speaketh the truth. Too often the anti-DP faction completely ignores the victims of these crimes, and feels sorry for the killer. Victims have many fewer rights than the criminals in this country. Ron 99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: [Fwd: a little mind exercise]
Robert Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Worth doing quickly... Just follow the instructions below: DON'T scroll down too fast -- do it slowly, and follow the instructions below exactly, and do the math in your head as fast as you can. FOLLOW these instructions one at a time and as QUICKLY as you can! What is: 2+2? 4+4? 8+8? 16+16? Quick! Pick a number between 12 and 5. Got it? Now scroll down... The number you picked was 7 right? Isn't that weird??? Another one... What is: 1+5 ? 2+4 ? 3+3 ? 4+2 ? 5+1 ? Now repeat saying the number 6 to yourself as fast as you can for 15 seconds. then page down QUICK!!! THINK OF A VEGETABLE! Then page down. You're thinking of a carrot right? If not, you're among the 2% of the population whose minds are warped think of something else. 98% of people will answer with carrot when given this exercise. ANOTHER ONE: Magic trick follow directions DO THIS BY THE RULES Try this and you will be amazed! Don't look ahead! Just do it step by step SLOWLY. DO NOT SKIP AHEAD.Read this message ONE LINE AT A TIME and just do what it says. You will be glad you did. If not, you'll feel like an idiot and wish you had listened. *** 1) pick a number from 1-9 2) subtract 5 3) multiply by 3 4) square the number (multiply by the same number -- not a square root) 5) add the digits until you get only one digit i.e. 64=6+4= 10=1+0=1) 6) if the number is less than 5, add five. Otherwise subtract 4. 7) multiply by 2 8) subtract 6 9) map the digit to a letter in the alphabet 1=A, 2=B, 3=C, etc... 10) pick a name of a country that begins with that letter 11) take the second letter in the country name and think of a mammal that begins with that letter 12) think of the color of that mammal (keep scrolling) DO NOT SCROLL DOWN UNTIL YOU HAVE DONE ALL OF THE ABOVE Here it comes, NO CHEATING or you'll be sorry. You have a grey elephant from Denmark. -- I dont suffer from stress.I'M a carrier.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Fwd: FW: The Little Fire Engine (**1/2)
Robert Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Subject: FW: The Little Fire Engine (**1/2) Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 15:38:24 -0500 A little boy, wearing a big red fire hat, was riding a toy fire truck down the street. The truck was being pulled by a beautiful Labrador Retriever. Unfortunately, the rope was tied around the dog's privates, and as a consequence, the truck was going very slowly. A man walking down the street noticed how slowly the boy was being pulled and gently said to him, "You know, son, that truck would go a lot faster if the rope was tied around your dog's neck." The boy nodded in agreement and said, "But then there wouldn't be a siren." I dont suffer from stress.I'M a carrier.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Microsoft Targets 'Year 2000' Flaws
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Microsoft Targets 'Year 2000' Flaws SEATTLE (AP) -- Microsoft Corp. said Wednesday that two dozen of its products have problems with the ``Year 2000'' software glitch, including the Windows 95 and Windows NT operating systems. Although it characterized most problems as ``minor issues,'' Microsoft said three older software programs had serious flaws. Microsoft, whose software is found on nearly every personal computer, launched a new Internet site with information on how its products will handle the year 2000 changes, and how companies and individuals can avoid end-of-the-century sorrow. Microsoft's centerpiece product, the Windows operating system that runs on about 90 percent of all personal computers, is generally OK, or ``year 2000 compliant,'' said Jason Matusow, manager of Microsoft's year 2000 compliance program. Windows 98, the upgrade due out June 25, fully meets year 2000 requirements, while Windows 95 and Windows NT are compliant except for minor issues, he said. Microsoft is in the process of testing its older Windows 3.1 version. Among other programs with minor problems that will need to be fixed are some versions of Internet Explorer, Microsoft's Web browser, and Office 95, Microsoft's suite of business programs. By ``minor issues,'' Microsoft means peripheral functions that don't interfere with the software's main job. For example, on some versions of Windows 95, setting the program to recognize Feb. 29 in a leap year after 2000 can be done on the keyboard, but not with a mouse, Matusow said. The year 2000 problem is simple. In older software, programmers saved space by referring to years only by their last two digits. That's fine until 2000, when computers and other devices running such software might read ``00'' as earlier than ``99.'' That could be a huge worry for anyone who files data by date, including nearly every business and personal computer user. For example, accounting software might read all accounts receivable in 2000 as earlier than 1999, and thus overdue. The real worry, Matusow said, is many businesses, especially small ones, don't know what impact the software flaws might have, and time is growing short. ``As you start moving into smaller organizations, the awareness is lower and lower,'' he said. Matusow gave no figure on how much Microsoft is spending on the year 2000 problem, but said hundreds of people are working on it. Microsoft says just three of its products will cause major errors when 2000 rolls around. All are older versions that have long since been updated. The most serious is Word 5.0 for DOS, which was Microsoft's premier word processor when issued in 1989, before the introduction of Windows. If it creates a file dated after Jan. 1, 2000, the computer can freeze up, Matusow said. Access 2.0, Microsoft's database program released in April 1994, reads two-digit year dates as 20th century. That can be avoided by always writing years with four digits, but not everyone might remember to do that. Office Professional Edition versions 4.0-4.3, a suite of business software which included Access 2.0, has the same two-digit year problem. Microsoft recommends users of those programs upgrade to later editions. For most products with minor compliance issues, it will offer free software patches to fix the problems. Web address is www.microsoft.com/year2000/ -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Easter Greeting Cards and Messages
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Viola Provenzano) writes: To One and All, Thank you for the thoughtful Easter greetings. They added a lot to the enjoyment of the season. Vi _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kathy E wrote: Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Very Funny Mac! LOL Y'all are giving TX a bad name, btw if you look Florida is the one that has been "chair" happy lately, not TX. Mornin' Kathy, Yeah but Texas is darn right next door! Could save the taxpayers a few pennies. ...Mac Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill Can't work on that allegation. I am too busy working on my case, with my expert witness's help, against Clinton. After all, he overlooked me. Like the woman on tv said, ole' Bill has had more women coming forward to claim having sex with him than anyone could imagine. So I thought I would come forward and claim extreme emotional stress for having been missed. So I guess, I can't now claim emotional distress because someone caused me to lose faith G I wonder what I lost faith in anyway?? jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, Oh, I'm so relieved to hear that you were not emotionally damaged by that nasty person questioning your faith. LMAOsome people certainly have a high and delerious opinion of themselves, don't they? It takes all kinds I guess. Bill On Wed, 08 Apr 1998 18:23:35 -0500 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jeez, Bill You will turn my head!! I just was so excited about all the stuff I got in the mail yesterday I wanted to share it with you all. Even though my week started out pretty awful, the last two days have made up for it. Good stuff in the mail yesterday and our trip to watch the state supreme court hearing oral arguments today. Made up for Monday's Psychology test nightmare. jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Jackie, Wow, what a wealth of information you've included in this post. Thanks for posting it! I wonder if the Supreme Court had any of that information when they refused to prohibit the banning of lie detector results in court. This is a classic example of needing to get ALL the information available before coming to a knee jerk opinion of the overall validity of lie detector tests with respect to determining whether a subject is telling the truth. My only comment about your numbers concerning those on death row is that it seems to prove the DP is not a deterrent to others. If it were, then the numbers of people on death row should decrease instead of increase. Once again, you've become the star of the day on the law list. :) Bill On Tue, 07 Apr 1998 19:50:29 -0500 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill Just received the journal article written by Iacono and Lykken from the APA. Pretty interesting stuff for those interested in the polygraph controversy and interested in whether the methodology was flawed. One interesting thing I found is that they had put their survey together based on the recommendations of Dillman and his colleagues. Dillman is "the expert" in survey construction, especially main surveys. I spent many agonizing hours over his material--every research class I had included Dillman. Iacono and Lykken covered everything that could be covered, IMO--the respondents' appraisal of the validity of the CGT polygraph being administered under adversarial conditions by the police vrs being administered through a defense attorney, as an example. The other very interesting thing is the response rates of the Gallup Poll, The Amato survey, and this survey. The Gallup Organization did not provide information on the response rate to their survey and was conducted in 1984; the Amato survey had a response rate of only 30% and Iacono Lykken had a response rate of 91% of the 214 deliverable surveys to psychophysiologists and of the 226 deliverable surveys of APA Fellows there was a 74% retured usuable questionaires. The original number of surveys to SPR were 216--2 returned as nondeliverable. For APA Fellows, 249 were mailed--9 were nondeliverable, and 14 were either now deceased or unable to respond for health reason. They violated radnomness to the extent of excluding from the SPR sample themselves, member of their department, and Raskin, et al. For APA, the only ones excluded were from their department. Nothing unethical in this exclusion that I can think of. Also received in the mail (guess it was my lucky day) the latest Bureau of Justice Bulleting on Capital Punishment in 1996. I was surprised to learn that at yearend, 1996, there were 3,219 prisoners under sentence of death--5% more than at yearend 1995. Yep, Sue, California had the largest number (454). There were 48 women under sentence of death in 1996. Among persons (data available), average age at time of arrest was 28 On Dec. 31, 1996, 70% were age 25 to 44, the youngest was 17 (1); the oldest, 81. From 1977 to 1996, there have been 5,154 persons entering prison under sentence of death. During these years, 358 have been executed, and 1,957 were removed from under a death sentence by
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: Like Doc said, "said". :) Just seems funny that it wouldn't come up at all until now, not even when he was accused of sexual problems with his half sister. Wonder why it didn't come out then? I guess everything will come out sooner or later. Sue Hi all Just on the news this morning. Said he was abused repetitively by a relative of the day care center he was in when 6 and/or 7. That's is really all I heard--imagine there will be more. jackief -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ronald Helm wrote: "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Mac, I was wondering that myself. If I read the story correctly they are saying the kid never told anyone about this until after the murders. Doesn't that seem a bit odd? Bill Incredible, now even little criminals are aware that the "abuse excuse" can work to your benefit in a defense! Ron Evenin' Ron, I think this is something that the lawyer cooked up. The father has been on t.v. everyday and said nothing about this. Supposedly the kid told some other relatives about this but they didn't inform the parents. Nice relatives! It wasn't until the lawyer "confirmed" it with the same caring family members that he felt he should inform the jury pool of the tragedy this poor child has suffered. I think they should move the venue to Texas. ...Mac Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Doc Agree it is "said" not collaborated. Quite a bit of commentary by locals was included, as the town is so small and it would be very quickly known here where he went to daycare. So don't know what more is going to be shown here. jackief DocCec wrote: DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-04-07 07:06:12 EDT, you write: Just on the news this morning. Said he was abused repetitively by a relative of the day care center he was in when 6 and/or 7. That's is really all I heard--imagine there will be more. jackief At this point, without some corroboration, I think the operative word is "said." Doc Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: There should be a semi adult place for these kids, with lots and lots of counseling and help. They shouldn't be put into the adult prison system, nor do I think that juvenile hall is appropriate either. 4 years for the murder of 5 people is nothing. And he isn't going to learn anything in juvenile detention either. :( Sue Hi Mac, Oh, I agree. I just think it's odd that this should come out only after the murders. It almost sounds like a defense attorney asking leading questions and the kid figuring out what the right answers are. It DOES make a difference, IMO, that these kids are only 11 and 13 years old. I can't see throwing them into a prison with hard cases who are adults. But I don't think they should be turned back into society for a long, long time. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: It's that agriculture border check. They don't seem to be interested in anything other than fruits and veggies. Drugs and guns they don't care about. Heaven help us that we would get another fruit fly or something like that. Seriously, I guess that is immportant, but I can't see why the stupid fly couldn't just fly over the border on it's own, why would it need a car to transport it. Sue HI Sue, There's a border check going from Arizona into California?? I guess I never realized that. But now that you mention it, I DO remember a trip to California when I was 18 where we were stopped somewhere and questioned about plants, fruits and vegetables we had in the car. I guess it makes sense when you consider the damage that could be done if some disease were to be unleashed on the crops there in California. But it still seems obvious that bringing guns into California is not a major task. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, Oh, I'm so relieved to hear that you were not emotionally damaged by that nasty person questioning your faith. LMAOsome people certainly have a high and delerious opinion of themselves, don't they? It takes all kinds I guess. Bill On Wed, 08 Apr 1998 18:23:35 -0500 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jeez, Bill You will turn my head!! I just was so excited about all the stuff I got in the mail yesterday I wanted to share it with you all. Even though my week started out pretty awful, the last two days have made up for it. Good stuff in the mail yesterday and our trip to watch the state supreme court hearing oral arguments today. Made up for Monday's Psychology test nightmare. jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Jackie, Wow, what a wealth of information you've included in this post. Thanks for posting it! I wonder if the Supreme Court had any of that information when they refused to prohibit the banning of lie detector results in court. This is a classic example of needing to get ALL the information available before coming to a knee jerk opinion of the overall validity of lie detector tests with respect to determining whether a subject is telling the truth. My only comment about your numbers concerning those on death row is that it seems to prove the DP is not a deterrent to others. If it were, then the numbers of people on death row should decrease instead of increase. Once again, you've become the star of the day on the law list. :) Bill On Tue, 07 Apr 1998 19:50:29 -0500 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill Just received the journal article written by Iacono and Lykken from the APA. Pretty interesting stuff for those interested in the polygraph controversy and interested in whether the methodology was flawed. One interesting thing I found is that they had put their survey together based on the recommendations of Dillman and his colleagues. Dillman is "the expert" in survey construction, especially main surveys. I spent many agonizing hours over his material--every research class I had included Dillman. Iacono and Lykken covered everything that could be covered, IMO--the respondents' appraisal of the validity of the CGT polygraph being administered under adversarial conditions by the police vrs being administered through a defense attorney, as an example. The other very interesting thing is the response rates of the Gallup Poll, The Amato survey, and this survey. The Gallup Organization did not provide information on the response rate to their survey and was conducted in 1984; the Amato survey had a response rate of only 30% and Iacono Lykken had a response rate of 91% of the 214 deliverable surveys to psychophysiologists and of the 226 deliverable surveys of APA Fellows there was a 74% retured usuable questionaires. The original number of surveys to SPR were 216--2 returned as nondeliverable. For APA Fellows, 249 were mailed--9 were nondeliverable, and 14 were either now deceased or unable to respond for health reason. They violated radnomness to the extent of excluding from the SPR sample themselves, member of their department, and Raskin, et al. For APA, the only ones excluded were from their department. Nothing unethical in this exclusion that I can think of. Also received in the mail (guess it was my lucky day) the latest Bureau of Justice Bulleting on Capital Punishment in 1996. I was surprised to learn that at yearend, 1996, there were 3,219 prisoners under sentence of death--5% more than at yearend 1995. Yep, Sue, California had the largest number (454). There were 48 women under sentence of death in 1996. Among persons (data available), average age at time of arrest was 28 On Dec. 31, 1996, 70% were age 25 to 44, the youngest was 17 (1); the oldest, 81. From 1977 to 1996, there have been 5,154 persons entering prison under sentence of death. During these years, 358 have been executed, and 1,957 were removed from under a death sentence by appellate court decisions and reviews, commutations, or death. More than you ever wanted to know about capital punishment prisoners and hadn't asked. : ) jackief . William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: On Mon, 06 Apr 1998 15:43:40 -0500 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill I don't think anyone was discounting the polygraph if used under strict procedures and with the knowledge that many other extraneous things can affect the readings. However, putting blind faith into these things is not "my cup of tea" simply because there is still too much
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I found out something when Stacey and Eric came out here last week from Arizona. Arizona has a weapons law that allows them to carry them. Stacey said that if a person wants to strap on a gun and carry it there is nothing stopping them. Anyway when they came through the border check, into California, they were asked if they had any guns, and if so they would have to leave them in Arizona. Of course they said no, and they were waved through after being handed a map of California. The last time though they had a potted plant on the back seat, and that was confiscated right on the spot. And they were asked to open the trunk to make sure there were no others. Shows you where the priorities are at. Take the plants, but ignore the guns under the seat. LOL Sue HI Sue, I think the only effective legislation must come at the federal level, for the simple reason that travel between the states is so easy and does not require any checks as is required when travelling between countries. So just because California has a tough gun law does not mean that people from other states with weak gun laws cannot bring guns to California. I do see some progress being made in this area. But it is painfully slow and so far ineffective. Perhaps some day we'll wake up to this problem. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: On Tue, 07 Apr 1998 15:19:03 -0400 moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mornin' jackie, I'm surprised it took this long for the defense to put this story out. ...Mac Hi Mac, I was wondering that myself. If I read the story correctly they are saying the kid never told anyone about this until after the murders. Doesn't that seem a bit odd? Bill Afternoon Bill, I don't think it's odd at all. It seems pretty standard to try and place blame elsewhere and put that blame into play before a jury is picked. This child knew enough about guns and the results of pulling the trigger. Even if he was molested it dosen't excuse his actions on that day. It was a premeditated strike and he, IMO, knew exactly what he was doing. ...Mac Hi Mac, Oh, I agree. I just think it's odd that this should come out only after the murders. It almost sounds like a defense attorney asking leading questions and the kid figuring out what the right answers are. It DOES make a difference, IMO, that these kids are only 11 and 13 years old. I can't see throwing them into a prison with hard cases who are adults. But I don't think they should be turned back into society for a long, long time. Bill _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I honestly don't think we need more laws, I think we need to enforce the laws that we have now. And make them all a little more uniform across the country. Sue HI Sue, I agree, a total ban on gun ownership would be unfeasible no matter what anyone thinks about the issue. But I DO think that a gun owner who fails to take ANY precautions against guns being stolen should be prosecuted for a crime when the guns ARE stolen and used in a crime or become involved in an accidental shooting. The problem is in enforcing a law that makes exceptions for those who DO try to safeguard their guns from being stolen. Your feelings about using a gun for protection are very well founded. Except for a few anecdotal stories about the good guy defending against the bad guy, many more cases of the good guy getttng injured or killed, or injuring/killing an innocent person can be found. I was glad to see Clinton expand the ban on imports of assault weapons. The importers had been modifying them to appear as "sport" weapons to slip through a loophole in the ban. And I still think more has to be done to curtail the number of guns in our society. While a total ban would not be feasible I still think stricter controls and heavier sentences for crimes committed with guns would help. Also, what would be wrong with destroying a gun used in a crime after the criminal has been convicted and sentenced? Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Sue Yes, it seems strange. I am wondering how it is going to go over in the town of Grand Meadow. This is a really small town, so I would imagine any daycare provider, if the boy was there, would immediately be known by the residents. Haven't seen Tom to ask him. Maybe tomorrow--the state Supreme Court is holding court here in Austin and my classes and I have reserved seats. The case under appeal is a hearing on Miranda rights. The state is wanting the lower court's decision to suppress the confession because Miranda rights weren't given at the beginning of the interview with the suspect, but about 15 minutes into the videotaped interview. Will be interesting I am sure. We have to go through a metal detector, cannot take book bags, etc. in as it will slow down the search process, etc. We will listen the oral arguments and then the judges will answer questions from the audience. jackief Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: Like Doc said, "said". :) Just seems funny that it wouldn't come up at all until now, not even when he was accused of sexual problems with his half sister. Wonder why it didn't come out then? I guess everything will come out sooner or later. Sue Hi all Just on the news this morning. Said he was abused repetitively by a relative of the day care center he was in when 6 and/or 7. That's is really all I heard--imagine there will be more. jackief -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Iacono survey death penalty was Re: LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill Just received the journal article written by Iacono and Lykken from the APA. Pretty interesting stuff for those interested in the polygraph controversy and interested in whether the methodology was flawed. One interesting thing I found is that they had put their survey together based on the recommendations of Dillman and his colleagues. Dillman is "the expert" in survey construction, especially main surveys. I spent many agonizing hours over his material--every research class I had included Dillman. Iacono and Lykken covered everything that could be covered, IMO--the respondents' appraisal of the validity of the CGT polygraph being administered under adversarial conditions by the police vrs being administered through a defense attorney, as an example. The other very interesting thing is the response rates of the Gallup Poll, The Amato survey, and this survey. The Gallup Organization did not provide information on the response rate to their survey and was conducted in 1984; the Amato survey had a response rate of only 30% and Iacono Lykken had a response rate of 91% of the 214 deliverable surveys to psychophysiologists and of the 226 deliverable surveys of APA Fellows there was a 74% retured usuable questionaires. The original number of surveys to SPR were 216--2 returned as nondeliverable. For APA Fellows, 249 were mailed--9 were nondeliverable, and 14 were either now deceased or unable to respond for health reason. They violated radnomness to the extent of excluding from the SPR sample themselves, member of their department, and Raskin, et al. For APA, the only ones excluded were from their department. Nothing unethical in this exclusion that I can think of. Also received in the mail (guess it was my lucky day) the latest Bureau of Justice Bulleting on Capital Punishment in 1996. I was surprised to learn that at yearend, 1996, there were 3,219 prisoners under sentence of death--5% more than at yearend 1995. Yep, Sue, California had the largest number (454). There were 48 women under sentence of death in 1996. Among persons (data available), average age at time of arrest was 28 On Dec. 31, 1996, 70% were age 25 to 44, the youngest was 17 (1); the oldest, 81. From 1977 to 1996, there have been 5,154 persons entering prison under sentence of death. During these years, 358 have been executed, and 1,957 were removed from under a death sentence by appellate court decisions and reviews, commutations, or death. More than you ever wanted to know about capital punishment prisoners and hadn't asked. : ) jackief . William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: On Mon, 06 Apr 1998 15:43:40 -0500 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill I don't think anyone was discounting the polygraph if used under strict procedures and with the knowledge that many other extraneous things can affect the readings. However, putting blind faith into these things is not "my cup of tea" simply because there is still too much controversy about them. Honts, even although implicitly, verified that in he realized as a lie detector he needed more education to really be able to use them properly. This was after he had had education in administering the polygraph after training in local law enforcement and with the FBI. And, most examiners do not have the FBI training, let alone the other more advanced training. I wonder if the experts would have enough time to get on the list for a period of time?? But, it is worth asking them if I get a chance to meet them. Mentioned I had wrote to Iacono to some of the other psychology teachers here and they said "Not the, Iacono!" I was happy that he took the time to answer our questions. Well, better get off for a little bit--don't want the red glare to get too much for your eyes : ) We have another minor "court problem" now in this area--whether the hearing impaired are receiving the assistance in court they need by having a skilled signer to interpret for them. Our poor court system is taking a beating--first the release of the preadjudication records, now this. jackief HI Jackie, I think you've put the lie detector discussion in it's complete and correct context. I agree about the experts probably not having time to spend on computer discussion groups. OTOH, if they have written books they can use the opportunity to hype them. :) I think it's good that courts are constantly challenged to provide a fair venue for everyone, no matter what their disability may be. Bill _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DocCec wrote: DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-04-07 21:32:22 EDT, you write: The case under appeal is a hearing on Miranda rights. The state is wanting the lower court's decision to suppress the confession because Miranda rights weren't given at the beginning of the interview with the suspect, but about 15 minutes into the videotaped interview Be sure to let us know the outcome of that one, jackief. Doc Hi Doc I can hardly wait to hear the decision they make. It is under advisement now. It was a great experience. I was really glad I had my students go, and most of them appeared to really be impressed and excited about hearing a real case. I think when we meet again there will be lots of discussion. It was a sociologist's dream though above and beyond the cj aspect of it. The communication styles of the women justices compared to the men justices was great to watch, especially as they didn't know they were being watched. Alan Paige, a pro football player that really did something after retiring from the Vikings, is one of the justices. The questioning was interesting. I think they will uphold the lower courts on this one. I sort of chuckled when one justice asked the lawyer for the state, if there was a way that the police were able to turn a switch on and off to determine when the victim was being asked questions as a potential victim/witness and a suspect. This was a real bonus for the students and for me. jackief Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jeez, Bill You will turn my head!! I just was so excited about all the stuff I got in the mail yesterday I wanted to share it with you all. Even though my week started out pretty awful, the last two days have made up for it. Good stuff in the mail yesterday and our trip to watch the state supreme court hearing oral arguments today. Made up for Monday's Psychology test nightmare. jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Jackie, Wow, what a wealth of information you've included in this post. Thanks for posting it! I wonder if the Supreme Court had any of that information when they refused to prohibit the banning of lie detector results in court. This is a classic example of needing to get ALL the information available before coming to a knee jerk opinion of the overall validity of lie detector tests with respect to determining whether a subject is telling the truth. My only comment about your numbers concerning those on death row is that it seems to prove the DP is not a deterrent to others. If it were, then the numbers of people on death row should decrease instead of increase. Once again, you've become the star of the day on the law list. :) Bill On Tue, 07 Apr 1998 19:50:29 -0500 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill Just received the journal article written by Iacono and Lykken from the APA. Pretty interesting stuff for those interested in the polygraph controversy and interested in whether the methodology was flawed. One interesting thing I found is that they had put their survey together based on the recommendations of Dillman and his colleagues. Dillman is "the expert" in survey construction, especially main surveys. I spent many agonizing hours over his material--every research class I had included Dillman. Iacono and Lykken covered everything that could be covered, IMO--the respondents' appraisal of the validity of the CGT polygraph being administered under adversarial conditions by the police vrs being administered through a defense attorney, as an example. The other very interesting thing is the response rates of the Gallup Poll, The Amato survey, and this survey. The Gallup Organization did not provide information on the response rate to their survey and was conducted in 1984; the Amato survey had a response rate of only 30% and Iacono Lykken had a response rate of 91% of the 214 deliverable surveys to psychophysiologists and of the 226 deliverable surveys of APA Fellows there was a 74% retured usuable questionaires. The original number of surveys to SPR were 216--2 returned as nondeliverable. For APA Fellows, 249 were mailed--9 were nondeliverable, and 14 were either now deceased or unable to respond for health reason. They violated radnomness to the extent of excluding from the SPR sample themselves, member of their department, and Raskin, et al. For APA, the only ones excluded were from their department. Nothing unethical in this exclusion that I can think of. Also received in the mail (guess it was my lucky day) the latest Bureau of Justice Bulleting on Capital Punishment in 1996. I was surprised to learn that at yearend, 1996, there were 3,219 prisoners under sentence of death--5% more than at yearend 1995. Yep, Sue, California had the largest number (454). There were 48 women under sentence of death in 1996. Among persons (data available), average age at time of arrest was 28 On Dec. 31, 1996, 70% were age 25 to 44, the youngest was 17 (1); the oldest, 81. From 1977 to 1996, there have been 5,154 persons entering prison under sentence of death. During these years, 358 have been executed, and 1,957 were removed from under a death sentence by appellate court decisions and reviews, commutations, or death. More than you ever wanted to know about capital punishment prisoners and hadn't asked. : ) jackief . William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: On Mon, 06 Apr 1998 15:43:40 -0500 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill I don't think anyone was discounting the polygraph if used under strict procedures and with the knowledge that many other extraneous things can affect the readings. However, putting blind faith into these things is not "my cup of tea" simply because there is still too much controversy about them. Honts, even although implicitly, verified that in he realized as a lie detector he needed more education to really be able to use them properly. This was after he had had education in administering the polygraph after training in local law enforcement and with the FBI. And, most examiners do not have the FBI training, let alone the other more advanced training.
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, Because the fruit fly or any other pest needs the fruit/vegetable/plant in order to live and reproduce. If there are no target crops between point A and point B then the pest will not make it to point B. BUT, if someone has a target crop in a car and it is infested with something and they carry it to Point B where it gets into the crop in that location it will not take long for it to infest all of Point B's crop. The potato famine in Ireland was caused by a fungus brought to that country in ships from the US. The fungus got into the air and was carried into the potato fields by the misty fog that was so prevalant in Ireland. Bill On Wed, 08 Apr 1998 20:27:58 -0700 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: It's that agriculture border check. They don't seem to be interested in anything other than fruits and veggies. Drugs and guns they don't care about. Heaven help us that we would get another fruit fly or something like that. Seriously, I guess that is immportant, but I can't see why the stupid fly couldn't just fly over the border on it's own, why would it need a car to transport it. Sue HI Sue, There's a border check going from Arizona into California?? I guess I never realized that. But now that you mention it, I DO remember a trip to California when I was 18 where we were stopped somewhere and questioned about plants, fruits and vegetables we had in the car. I guess it makes sense when you consider the damage that could be done if some disease were to be unleashed on the crops there in California. But it still seems obvious that bringing guns into California is not a major task. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: Makes sense. There certainly isn't anything out there except catus, so I guess the fly wouldn't survive to get to it's host if it tried to fly in. I can see what could happen to the California economy if it did get in. :( Still think that since they have these cars stopped anyway they could also look for guns and narcotics. But I guess they have their reasons why they don't. At least they do ask. :) Sue HI Sue, Because the fruit fly or any other pest needs the fruit/vegetable/plant in order to live and reproduce. If there are no target crops between point A and point B then the pest will not make it to point B. BUT, if someone has a target crop in a car and it is infested with something and they carry it to Point B where it gets into the crop in that location it will not take long for it to infest all of Point B's crop. The potato famine in Ireland was caused by a fungus brought to that country in ships from the US. The fungus got into the air and was carried into the potato fields by the misty fog that was so prevalant in Ireland. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Kathy, LOL...not only do you drag me into a discussion where I'm not commenting about anything you misstate the facts. I never said anything about "that's still a lot of executions." You must be thinking of someone else. As I've stated before, my biggest objection to the death penalty is that it is inevitable that innocent people will be executed over the course of many years. And if even only ONE innocent person is executed it is sufficient to ban the death penalty, IMO. Another good argument against it is that, in spite of what people want to say, it is administered in a very discriminatory manner. Since it has been proven not to be a deterrent it only makes sense that there are better ways to decrease capital crimes. The death penalty does not do one thing to decrease capital crimes. If it did then the number of people on death row would decrease instead of increase. Bill On Thu, 09 Apr 1998 00:02:08 -0400 Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Very Funny Mac! LOL Y'all are giving TX a bad name, btw if you look Florida is the one that has been "chair" happy lately, not TX. Yet in the publics eye it's TX that is the number one state for executions even though the true facts show it isn't. CA sentences more people to death than any state and Florida executes more than any other state, TX beat FL once because we didn't execute any for one year while looking at the DP in Texas, after some revisions were done they did execute those who were supposed to be executed the prior year and the current year, and yea I know Bill your going to say like you did last time well that still makes for a LOT of executions no it didn't Bill. The simple fact is the murders and killers, kill a LOT more than any state does. But lets not let facts get in the way of emotional arguments. Of course the easiest way to stop the DP is to stop people from killing others. Yet again people don't like to look at that, it's easier to attack the punishment than to attack the criminal and what they did and how to keep them from doing it. It's the same old merry go round. moonshine wrote: Evenin' Ron, I think this is something that the lawyer cooked up. The father has been on t.v. everyday and said nothing about this. Supposedly the kid told some other relatives about this but they didn't inform the parents. Nice relatives! It wasn't until the lawyer "confirmed" it with the same caring family members that he felt he should inform the jury pool of the tragedy this poor child has suffered. I think they should move the venue to Texas. ...Mac -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Doc: Yes it could be that, I guess. But do they need probable cause to search a car at a border check? Sue "Probable cause" maybe? I think that would be required. Doc -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-04-09 15:55:03 EDT, you write: Yes it could be that, I guess. But do they need probable cause to search a car at a border check? I don't know. Ed??? Doc Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: On Thu, 9 Apr 1998 15:38:49 EDT DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-04-08 22:21:19 EDT, you write: It takes all kinds I guess. I've heard that before, Bill. Has anyone ever explained why? Doc Yes, all kinds of people have offered all kinds of explanations. :) Bill _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, For one thing the USDA probably doesn't have any authority when it comes to guns and/or narcotics. But more importantly I don't think the states or the feds want to set up a precedent that could develop into something that would be like border checkpoints between the states. Bill On Thu, 09 Apr 1998 11:59:25 -0700 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: Makes sense. There certainly isn't anything out there except catus, so I guess the fly wouldn't survive to get to it's host if it tried to fly in. I can see what could happen to the California economy if it did get in. :( Still think that since they have these cars stopped anyway they could also look for guns and narcotics. But I guess they have their reasons why they don't. At least they do ask. :) Sue HI Sue, Because the fruit fly or any other pest needs the fruit/vegetable/plant in order to live and reproduce. If there are no target crops between point A and point B then the pest will not make it to point B. BUT, if someone has a target crop in a car and it is infested with something and they carry it to Point B where it gets into the crop in that location it will not take long for it to infest all of Point B's crop. The potato famine in Ireland was caused by a fungus brought to that country in ships from the US. The fungus got into the air and was carried into the potato fields by the misty fog that was so prevalant in Ireland. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-04-07 21:32:22 EDT, you write: The case under appeal is a hearing on Miranda rights. The state is wanting the lower court's decision to suppress the confession because Miranda rights weren't given at the beginning of the interview with the suspect, but about 15 minutes into the videotaped interview Be sure to let us know the outcome of that one, jackief. Doc Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Deadline Nears for Whitewater Panel
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Deadline Nears for Whitewater Panel LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) -- The federal grand jury investigating President Clinton's dealings in Arkansas reconvenes Tuesday with the deadline for its term running out for Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr. Starr suggested two weeks ago that he might not need another grand jury here. The panel, set to expire May 7, was empaneled two years ago to continue the work of the original Whitewater panel seated in 1994. The Whitewater investigation has produced charges against 17 people, leading to 15 convictions including former Gov. Jim Guy Tucker and James and Susan McDougal, Clinton's former Whitewater business partners. The current grand jury has produced no indictments. Recent grand jury witnesses have signaled prosecutors' focus on legal work that first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton did in the mid 1980s related to a failed real estate development south of Little Rock called Castle Grande -- the brainchild of McDougal. The investigation had cost taxpayers $35 million by the end of September, according to an audit of the independent counsel's expenses by the General Accounting Office. Starr would not say Monday whether he would ask for another grand jury or whether he was winding down his operations in Arkansas. ``We're just continuing with our work. The assessment process is under way,'' Starr said outside his Little Rock headquarters. Tucker, who is cooperating with prosecutors after pleading guilty to charges unrelated to his 1996 Whitewater conviction, spent six hours before the grand jury last month and said he would be back. Sources familiar with the case say Tucker, whose dealings with McDougal led to their convictions on bank fraud and conspiracy charges, may have information about Mrs. Clinton's involvement in the project. Mrs. Clinton has said in sworn statements she recalls almost nothing about her work on the project. Little Rock businessman Seth Ward and McDougal owned the Castle Grande development, which failed at a cost to taxpayers of nearly $4 million. The development was financed almost entirely with loans from McDougal's savings and loan. -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows wrote: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all Just on the news this morning. Said he was abused repetitively by a relative of the day care center he was in when 6 and/or 7. That's is really all I heard--imagine there will be more. jackief Mornin' jackie, I'm surprised it took this long for the defense to put this story out. ...Mac Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-04-07 07:06:12 EDT, you write: Just on the news this morning. Said he was abused repetitively by a relative of the day care center he was in when 6 and/or 7. That's is really all I heard--imagine there will be more. jackief At this point, without some corroboration, I think the operative word is "said." Doc Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 98-04-07 01:35:20 EDT, you write: California has the strongest gun laws in the whole country, and we still have one of the highest gun related crime rates. :( I don't know what can be done to stop it. Perhaps *enforcing* the gun laws would help? All the laws in the world won't work if they are not enforced. Doc Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, I think the only effective legislation must come at the federal level, for the simple reason that travel between the states is so easy and does not require any checks as is required when travelling between countries. So just because California has a tough gun law does not mean that people from other states with weak gun laws cannot bring guns to California. I do see some progress being made in this area. But it is painfully slow and so far ineffective. Perhaps some day we'll wake up to this problem. Bill On Mon, 06 Apr 1998 22:42:13 -0700 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: California has the strongest gun laws in the whole country, and we still have one of the highest gun related crime rates. :( I don't know what can be done to stop it. But I do know that there has to be some sort of responsibility on the part of gun owners. Since Ca enacted the law that if someone is shot or killed with a gun that is in the hands of a minor, the owner can be held liable, the rate of children being hurt or killed has gone down a lot. So maybe we are on the right track. I hope so anyway. Sue HI Sue, The original meaning in the Bill of Rights was so that the states could have their own militia, but your interpretation is correct. Since the revolution was directed against the tyranny of a big government there was a strong fear against any big government telling the individual states what to do. And, of course, slavery was a big issue. You're right, today it is meaningless with respect to private citizens taking up arms to oppose or defend against the US government, in spite of what the militia groups say. I don't think it would be feasible or possible to ban all private gun ownership, nor do I think it would eliminate crime. But I DO think we have a serious gun problem in this country and that there ARE things that can and need to be done. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: On Mon, 06 Apr 1998 15:43:40 -0500 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill I don't think anyone was discounting the polygraph if used under strict procedures and with the knowledge that many other extraneous things can affect the readings. However, putting blind faith into these things is not "my cup of tea" simply because there is still too much controversy about them. Honts, even although implicitly, verified that in he realized as a lie detector he needed more education to really be able to use them properly. This was after he had had education in administering the polygraph after training in local law enforcement and with the FBI. And, most examiners do not have the FBI training, let alone the other more advanced training. I wonder if the experts would have enough time to get on the list for a period of time?? But, it is worth asking them if I get a chance to meet them. Mentioned I had wrote to Iacono to some of the other psychology teachers here and they said "Not the, Iacono!" I was happy that he took the time to answer our questions. Well, better get off for a little bit--don't want the red glare to get too much for your eyes : ) We have another minor "court problem" now in this area--whether the hearing impaired are receiving the assistance in court they need by having a skilled signer to interpret for them. Our poor court system is taking a beating--first the release of the preadjudication records, now this. jackief HI Jackie, I think you've put the lie detector discussion in it's complete and correct context. I agree about the experts probably not having time to spend on computer discussion groups. OTOH, if they have written books they can use the opportunity to hype them. :) I think it's good that courts are constantly challenged to provide a fair venue for everyone, no matter what their disability may be. Bill _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mornin' jackie, I'm surprised it took this long for the defense to put this story out. ...Mac Hi Mac, I was wondering that myself. If I read the story correctly they are saying the kid never told anyone about this until after the murders. Doesn't that seem a bit odd? Bill Afternoon Bill, I don't think it's odd at all. It seems pretty standard to try and place blame elsewhere and put that blame into play before a jury is picked. This child knew enough about guns and the results of pulling the trigger. Even if he was molested it dosen't excuse his actions on that day. It was a premeditated strike and he, IMO, knew exactly what he was doing. ...Mac Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Mitchell Johnson--victim of sexual abuse
"Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Mac, I was wondering that myself. If I read the story correctly they are saying the kid never told anyone about this until after the murders. Doesn't that seem a bit odd? Bill Incredible, now even little criminals are aware that the "abuse excuse" can work to your benefit in a defense! Ron Jury - Twelve people who determine which client has the better lawyer. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, I agree, a total ban on gun ownership would be unfeasible no matter what anyone thinks about the issue. But I DO think that a gun owner who fails to take ANY precautions against guns being stolen should be prosecuted for a crime when the guns ARE stolen and used in a crime or become involved in an accidental shooting. The problem is in enforcing a law that makes exceptions for those who DO try to safeguard their guns from being stolen. Your feelings about using a gun for protection are very well founded. Except for a few anecdotal stories about the good guy defending against the bad guy, many more cases of the good guy getttng injured or killed, or injuring/killing an innocent person can be found. I was glad to see Clinton expand the ban on imports of assault weapons. The importers had been modifying them to appear as "sport" weapons to slip through a loophole in the ban. And I still think more has to be done to curtail the number of guns in our society. While a total ban would not be feasible I still think stricter controls and heavier sentences for crimes committed with guns would help. Also, what would be wrong with destroying a gun used in a crime after the criminal has been convicted and sentenced? Bill On Sun, 05 Apr 1998 13:54:43 -0700 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I don't think getting a gun stolen would come under irresponsible ownership. But I do think that they should make it some kind of a fine or something along those lines if your gun is stolen and it wasn't registered. That way at least there would be a chance of identifying it if it was found. Personally I have no use for firearms. I do know how to use them but would be afraid that if I had one the bad guy might get it away from me, and use it on me himself. Or I might mistake one of the kids or someone who came in late, unexpectedly, and shoot them, or one of my grandchildren might get it, etc. What would probably happen is that I would end up shooting myself in the foot or something. We have guns here, but it isn't because I want them here. :( Actually I feel quite safe with my dog and a cell phone by the bed at night. And both can travel around in the car with me without any chance of getting into trouble for having a concealed weapon or something like that. BG If they outlawed guns, like I told Jackie, it wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit. But that is both unrealistic and unlikely to ever happen. And I do support any gun laws that are on the books. Unfortunately the laws don't seem to pertain to the bad guys though. TIC But they can slow them down a little, sometimes. Sue HI Sue, I think there should be a general crime of "irresponsible gun ownership" that would cover a variety of cases when someone's gun is either used for a crime or involved in an accidental shooting. The severity of the crime should be commensurate with the event involving the gun. And, IMO, getting one's gun stolen is an example of irresponsible ownership. After all, if the purpose of a gun is to protect oneself from being robbed, then it seems ludicrous to get robbed of that gun. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, The original meaning in the Bill of Rights was so that the states could have their own militia, but your interpretation is correct. Since the revolution was directed against the tyranny of a big government there was a strong fear against any big government telling the individual states what to do. And, of course, slavery was a big issue. You're right, today it is meaningless with respect to private citizens taking up arms to oppose or defend against the US government, in spite of what the militia groups say. I don't think it would be feasible or possible to ban all private gun ownership, nor do I think it would eliminate crime. But I DO think we have a serious gun problem in this country and that there ARE things that can and need to be done. Bill On Sun, 05 Apr 1998 15:52:31 -0700 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I think it would be next to impossible to get rid of guns in the United States now. Japan and England both have never allowed guns to begin with, so therefore they didn't have the problem of getting their citizens approval to rid their country of them. Our country was founded on the idea that the citizens should be allowed to have guns. The original meaning being so that the government couldn't take over the country. That idea now is ridiculous because if the government wanted to take over the country there is no way we could stop it. However, people are not going to let those guns go. The crime rate in Japan is starting to pick up now though. The economy is shot to hell and homelessness is now a part of the landscape. :( Yoko was telling me that only a few years ago there was no such thing as a homeless person in Japan. Now it is getting more and more common. So the lack of guns doesn't necessarily mean that there would be no crime. But I bet there are fewer murders and such. Sue Hi Jackie, I agree in principle, but when you have such a disparity between the US and most other countries with respect to numbers of people who are injured or killed via gun shots I think it is imperative to look for as many ways as possible to reduce these numbers. I know one can make the same analogy with respect to automobiles but this becomes apples and oranges when one considers the cost/benefit and the need for an automobile vs the need to own a gun. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill I don't think anyone was discounting the polygraph if used under strict procedures and with the knowledge that many other extraneous things can affect the readings. However, putting blind faith into these things is not "my cup of tea" simply because there is still too much controversy about them. Honts, even although implicitly, verified that in he realized as a lie detector he needed more education to really be able to use them properly. This was after he had had education in administering the polygraph after training in local law enforcement and with the FBI. And, most examiners do not have the FBI training, let alone the other more advanced training. I wonder if the experts would have enough time to get on the list for a period of time?? But, it is worth asking them if I get a chance to meet them. Mentioned I had wrote to Iacono to some of the other psychology teachers here and they said "Not the, Iacono!" I was happy that he took the time to answer our questions. Well, better get off for a little bit--don't want the red glare to get too much for your eyes : ) We have another minor "court problem" now in this area--whether the hearing impaired are receiving the assistance in court they need by having a skilled signer to interpret for them. Our poor court system is taking a beating--first the release of the preadjudication records, now this. jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, Well it is really interesting to read the actual words of these scientists who are involved in this research. I was never discounting the value of lie detector tests with respect to their role in the judicial process as well as security clearances/job application/ et al. My question was why should we be expected to rely on the results of a single study based on a amicus curiae brief that showed lie detector tests to be accurate more than 90% of the time. Certainly there is a lot of research done in this area and the more we know about and hear from those doing the research the more we'll be able to assess how lie detector tests may fit into the overall scheme of things. You know what would really be interesting? To convince some of your contacts to spend a week on the law list to answer questions and lend their expertise to enlighten us. Perhaps you and Kathy could work something out along these lines. I bet a lot of people would be interested. I'll have to go now. That red glare is starting to blind me. :) Bill On Sun, 05 Apr 1998 13:06:41 -0500 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill You have me blushing over here (and that means the whole body as you know what I wear computing VVBG. I guess being in the academic field does have its advantages at time. When I wrote to him, I relied on the professional network. I think I am going to try and get Lykken's book on antisocial personalities. Lukken and Iacono are truly amazing--they are psychophysiologists and clinical psychologists--what a combination. In addition, both are involved in that huge twin study being carried on at the U of MN. Lykken is the PI of the study.I like their attitude about the nature vrs. nurture controversy. They term it "nature via nurture" I think that is how they phrase it. I am thinking of trying to get in direct contact with them if I can the next time I attend conferences, workshops or continuing education at the U. I may get to spend a week there on campus attending a great course on population, environment and ? (something else) this summer so that would be a good opportunity I think if they are around. Will have to forgo the immigration one they offer, darn, but Seattle sounds nicer. jackief _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie, Prof. Iacono claims that his survey and the Gallup survey had nearly identical results while Honts' survey was significantly different, probably because of a poor response. Yet the Gallup survey found confidence in polygraph results among the best-informed respondents. But Iacono claims to have found the exact reverse: results "were not significantly different from those of less well informed respondents for almost all of the questions, including the one about which of the 4 statements 'best describes your own opinion of polygraph test interpretations' that was asked on all three surveys." Prof. Iacono did not say the Gallup survey misrepresented the findings or that Honts misrepresented the Gallup survey. It appears Prof. Honts would have found that OJ passed his polygraph. I find it strange that Prof. Iacono lays down conditions for sharing his research data that includes requiring that Honts go through a committee at the university. Was he afraid his data would be stolen? Since he had the original it could not be misrepresented for long. No one can argue that leaving Honts off his survey would have an appreciable effect on the accuracy of the survey but that is the only statement that Prof. Iacono makes that is not very questionable. Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all I promise to let you know what Iacono replied if he did. Here it is verbatim, I copied it and insert his reply. (Aren't you proud of me Kathy). Happy reading!! jackief William G. Iacono wrote: Thanks for sending me the info on Honts criticisms of our work. The criticisms are without merit and hardly deserve acknowledgement, and I don't have time to point out why all of them are off base. But consider the following... In the published account of the survey (Journal of Applied Psychology, 1997), we point out that because the survey was prepared for a book chapter that Raskin, Honts and Kircher as well as Iacono and Lykken were contributing to, we eliminated ourselves as well as them from the survey pool (presumably our opinions were well represented in our contributions to this book). Since there were almost 200 hundred respondents to the survey, it is not possible for the elimination of ourselves or them to have had any significant effect on the outcome. Second, we agreed to share the data with Honts and Amato provided certain conditions were met, such as there having their request reviewed by their university IRB (the Board that approves research with humans as meeting ethical standards). Apparently they didn't like the conditions. Third, when we examined the results of our survey for just well informed respondents, the results were not significantly different from those of less well informed respondents for almost all of the questions, including the one about which of the 4 statements "best describes your own opinion of polygraph test interpretations" that was asked on all three surveys. In the Gallup survey, comparing more informed to less informed respondents also produced no significant differences as a result of how informed respondents were. Only the Amato and Honts survey, to which only a third of those polled responded, found a difference between more and less informed respondents. This response anomaly is most likely due to their having a sample that is not comparable to those in the other two surveys because it is not representative. I hope this information is useful to you. -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Best, Terry "Lawyer - one trained to circumvent the law" - The Devil's Dictionary Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Steve/Law site
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, I think the word is common throughout the US. But I laugh when I remember the first time I heard it. I was about 19 years old and was in a company bowling league where my boss was the chairman for the bowling banquet. He told me we were going to have a smorgasbord and for some reason my mind translated that into schiskabob. I remember thinking what a dumb idea that was because most banquets do quite well with a buffet. Duh! Glad I never said anything to him. :) Bill On Sat, 04 Apr 1998 18:20:10 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Steve Oops! It is a dinner where there are a variety of dishes you can choose any or all from--buffet maybe in England. It is a Scandanavian word, I think. I live in a state that has lots of Norweigans, Swedes and Danes so I hear the word all the time. jackief _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, At the risk of showing admiration I wanted to congratulate you on getting this kind of first hand information for us. Even though you had effectively blown the other side out of the water with your other references, this really puts the icing on the cake. Good job! Your admirer, Bill On Sat, 04 Apr 1998 18:39:20 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all I promise to let you know what Iacono replied if he did. Here it is verbatim, I copied it and insert his reply. (Aren't you proud of me Kathy). Happy reading!! jackief William G. Iacono wrote: Thanks for sending me the info on Honts criticisms of our work. The criticisms are without merit and hardly deserve acknowledgement, and I don't have time to point out why all of them are off base. But consider the following... In the published account of the survey (Journal of Applied Psychology, 1997), we point out that because the survey was prepared for a book chapter that Raskin, Honts and Kircher as well as Iacono and Lykken were contributing to, we eliminated ourselves as well as them from the survey pool (presumably our opinions were well represented in our contributions to this book). Since there were almost 200 hundred respondents to the survey, it is not possible for the elimination of ourselves or them to have had any significant effect on the outcome. Second, we agreed to share the data with Honts and Amato provided certain conditions were met, such as there having their request reviewed by their university IRB (the Board that approves research with humans as meeting ethical standards). Apparently they didn't like the conditions. Third, when we examined the results of our survey for just well informed respondents, the results were not significantly different from those of less well informed respondents for almost all of the questions, including the one about which of the 4 statements "best describes your own opinion of polygraph test interpretations" that was asked on all three surveys. In the Gallup survey, comparing more informed to less informed respondents also produced no significant differences as a result of how informed respondents were. Only the Amato and Honts survey, to which only a third of those polled responded, found a difference between more and less informed respondents. This response anomaly is most likely due to their having a sample that is not comparable to those in the other two surveys because it is not representative. I hope this information is useful to you. -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, I agree in principle, but when you have such a disparity between the US and most other countries with respect to numbers of people who are injured or killed via gun shots I think it is imperative to look for as many ways as possible to reduce these numbers. I know one can make the same analogy with respect to automobiles but this becomes apples and oranges when one considers the cost/benefit and the need for an automobile vs the need to own a gun. Bill On Sat, 04 Apr 1998 19:02:19 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill The one big problem I see with not allowing responsible people to make that choice is that if you do that, what will be the next thing outlawed. Also, once it is illegal, then the black market thrives and we start seeing many, more problems. Also, they wouldn't be licensed--I know our target guns are so that we are legal when we transport them. Even if outlawed, you will always find that people will be shot, IMO. There was an excellent program on today about a new lockup system that would keep guns away from children, I think. But you have to be a responsible person and unload, tear down, and lock them up. jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, The biggest problem with the gun ownership is the large number of people who are irresponsible and shouldn't even own an air rifle. If the laws were strengthened to punish irresponsible gun owners and if these people went to jail for actions leading to death or injury via one of their guns, then perhaps we'd see some decrease in the deaths and injuries attributed to guns. But even this would cause problems because we've all see the person who had been very responsible and safety conscious make that one fatal mistake. A friend of mine was quite lucky. He had bagged a huge buck and was so excited that he dragged it to his truck, put his rifle in the case and threw it in the back of the truck along side the deer. On the way home he hit a bump and the rifle (which he failed to unload) went off. The bullet hit something and split into several pieces. He caught a few pieces in the butt. It could have been a lot worse. Bill -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thank you so much Terry for you expert analysis and interpretation of what Dr. Iacono wrote. As an expert in the field, why don't you just point this stuff out to Dr. Iacono. I do not feel like being a go-between by forwarding the info you present to him and then relaying it back to you All I know is that Dr. Lyyken and Dr. Iacono are reputable scientists so I hardly think they would do something to jeopradize their careers. I do know that Dr. Honts is an "expert witness" and is paid for his testimony. I also know that when he cites Amato and another researcher--not Raskin--that they were both students of his so I would expect they would have the same focus. I do not know the same for Lyyken and Iacono. I also know that Honts focuses on this area to the exclusion of any other area. This is not true of Lykken and Iacono. In fact, Lykken is considered one of the leading experts on antisocial personality, so I guess if he says countermeasures are successful at time, I prefer to go by his evidence. Also, as Honts points out--with training 1/4 to 1/2 of the subjects can beat the lie detector. Of course, he did mention that they could only beat it with *his* training. So, I prefer to keep my options open and you are free to keep the opinion that you have about this subject. I am no longer interested in debating this subject with you, as you negate everything that flies in the face of your argument that the majority of the scientific community agree on the validity and reliability of the polygraph. It just ain't so, but believe what you want. jackief [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie, Prof. Iacono claims that his survey and the Gallup survey had nearly identical results while Honts' survey was significantly different, probably because of a poor response. Yet the Gallup survey found confidence in polygraph results among the best-informed respondents. But Iacono claims to have found the exact reverse: results "were not significantly different from those of less well informed respondents for almost all of the questions, including the one about which of the 4 statements 'best describes your own opinion of polygraph test interpretations' that was asked on all three surveys." Prof. Iacono did not say the Gallup survey misrepresented the findings or that Honts misrepresented the Gallup survey. It appears Prof. Honts would have found that OJ passed his polygraph. I find it strange that Prof. Iacono lays down conditions for sharing his research data that includes requiring that Honts go through a committee at the university. Was he afraid his data would be stolen? Since he had the original it could not be misrepresented for long. No one can argue that leaving Honts off his survey would have an appreciable effect on the accuracy of the survey but that is the only statement that Prof. Iacono makes that is not very questionable. Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all I promise to let you know what Iacono replied if he did. Here it is verbatim, I copied it and insert his reply. (Aren't you proud of me Kathy). Happy reading!! jackief William G. Iacono wrote: Thanks for sending me the info on Honts criticisms of our work. The criticisms are without merit and hardly deserve acknowledgement, and I don't have time to point out why all of them are off base. But consider the following... In the published account of the survey (Journal of Applied Psychology, 1997), we point out that because the survey was prepared for a book chapter that Raskin, Honts and Kircher as well as Iacono and Lykken were contributing to, we eliminated ourselves as well as them from the survey pool (presumably our opinions were well represented in our contributions to this book). Since there were almost 200 hundred respondents to the survey, it is not possible for the elimination of ourselves or them to have had any significant effect on the outcome. Second, we agreed to share the data with Honts and Amato provided certain conditions were met, such as there having their request reviewed by their university IRB (the Board that approves research with humans as meeting ethical standards). Apparently they didn't like the conditions. Third, when we examined the results of our survey for just well informed respondents, the results were not significantly different from those of less well informed respondents for almost all of the questions, including the one about which of the 4 statements "best describes your own opinion of polygraph test interpretations" that was asked on all three surveys. In the Gallup survey, comparing more informed to less informed respondents also produced no significant differences as a result of how informed respondents were. Only the Amato and Honts survey, to which only a third of those polled responded, found a difference
Re: LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill You have me blushing over here (and that means the whole body as you know what I wear computing VVBG. I guess being in the academic field does have its advantages at time. When I wrote to him, I relied on the professional network. I think I am going to try and get Lykken's book on antisocial personalities. Lukken and Iacono are truly amazing--they are psychophysiologists and clinical psychologists--what a combination. In addition, both are involved in that huge twin study being carried on at the U of MN. Lykken is the PI of the study.I like their attitude about the nature vrs. nurture controversy. They term it "nature via nurture" I think that is how they phrase it. I am thinking of trying to get in direct contact with them if I can the next time I attend conferences, workshops or continuing education at the U. I may get to spend a week there on campus attending a great course on population, environment and ? (something else) this summer so that would be a good opportunity I think if they are around. Will have to forgo the immigration one they offer, darn, but Seattle sounds nicer. jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, At the risk of showing admiration I wanted to congratulate you on getting this kind of first hand information for us. Even though you had effectively blown the other side out of the water with your other references, this really puts the icing on the cake. Good job! Your admirer, Bill On Sat, 04 Apr 1998 18:39:20 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all I promise to let you know what Iacono replied if he did. Here it is verbatim, I copied it and insert his reply. (Aren't you proud of me Kathy). Happy reading!! jackief William G. Iacono wrote: Thanks for sending me the info on Honts criticisms of our work. The criticisms are without merit and hardly deserve acknowledgement, and I don't have time to point out why all of them are off base. But consider the following... In the published account of the survey (Journal of Applied Psychology, 1997), we point out that because the survey was prepared for a book chapter that Raskin, Honts and Kircher as well as Iacono and Lykken were contributing to, we eliminated ourselves as well as them from the survey pool (presumably our opinions were well represented in our contributions to this book). Since there were almost 200 hundred respondents to the survey, it is not possible for the elimination of ourselves or them to have had any significant effect on the outcome. Second, we agreed to share the data with Honts and Amato provided certain conditions were met, such as there having their request reviewed by their university IRB (the Board that approves research with humans as meeting ethical standards). Apparently they didn't like the conditions. Third, when we examined the results of our survey for just well informed respondents, the results were not significantly different from those of less well informed respondents for almost all of the questions, including the one about which of the 4 statements "best describes your own opinion of polygraph test interpretations" that was asked on all three surveys. In the Gallup survey, comparing more informed to less informed respondents also produced no significant differences as a result of how informed respondents were. Only the Amato and Honts survey, to which only a third of those polled responded, found a difference between more and less informed respondents. This response anomaly is most likely due to their having a sample that is not comparable to those in the other two surveys because it is not representative. I hope this information is useful to you. -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I don't think getting a gun stolen would come under irresponsible ownership. But I do think that they should make it some kind of a fine or something along those lines if your gun is stolen and it wasn't registered. That way at least there would be a chance of identifying it if it was found. Personally I have no use for firearms. I do know how to use them but would be afraid that if I had one the bad guy might get it away from me, and use it on me himself. Or I might mistake one of the kids or someone who came in late, unexpectedly, and shoot them, or one of my grandchildren might get it, etc. What would probably happen is that I would end up shooting myself in the foot or something. We have guns here, but it isn't because I want them here. :( Actually I feel quite safe with my dog and a cell phone by the bed at night. And both can travel around in the car with me without any chance of getting into trouble for having a concealed weapon or something like that. BG If they outlawed guns, like I told Jackie, it wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit. But that is both unrealistic and unlikely to ever happen. And I do support any gun laws that are on the books. Unfortunately the laws don't seem to pertain to the bad guys though. TIC But they can slow them down a little, sometimes. Sue HI Sue, I think there should be a general crime of "irresponsible gun ownership" that would cover a variety of cases when someone's gun is either used for a crime or involved in an accidental shooting. The severity of the crime should be commensurate with the event involving the gun. And, IMO, getting one's gun stolen is an example of irresponsible ownership. After all, if the purpose of a gun is to protect oneself from being robbed, then it seems ludicrous to get robbed of that gun. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I think it would be next to impossible to get rid of guns in the United States now. Japan and England both have never allowed guns to begin with, so therefore they didn't have the problem of getting their citizens approval to rid their country of them. Our country was founded on the idea that the citizens should be allowed to have guns. The original meaning being so that the government couldn't take over the country. That idea now is ridiculous because if the government wanted to take over the country there is no way we could stop it. However, people are not going to let those guns go. The crime rate in Japan is starting to pick up now though. The economy is shot to hell and homelessness is now a part of the landscape. :( Yoko was telling me that only a few years ago there was no such thing as a homeless person in Japan. Now it is getting more and more common. So the lack of guns doesn't necessarily mean that there would be no crime. But I bet there are fewer murders and such. Sue Hi Jackie, I agree in principle, but when you have such a disparity between the US and most other countries with respect to numbers of people who are injured or killed via gun shots I think it is imperative to look for as many ways as possible to reduce these numbers. I know one can make the same analogy with respect to automobiles but this becomes apples and oranges when one considers the cost/benefit and the need for an automobile vs the need to own a gun. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Jackie: As far as I know there is no legit reason for assault weapons. Certainly not for hunting. In LA the sergeants (cops) had to get special permission to carry M-16 A2 Service rifles because they were outgunned by the bad guys. There is also a special unit of the SWAT team that has these, but can only use them with permission from higher ups. Of course a lot of the bad guys already have them, and no permission is needed for them to use them. TIC Sue Hi Sue I couldn't think of any legitimate reason for them to be made either--except war I guess. I do know that obtaining a gun legitimately here is not an easy task to do. They do have the time to run a thorough background check, which unfortunately may not be feasible in a large city. Gosh, when we moved here, we had to have the background check redone in order to have the target pistols. BTW--finished the book and will try and get it off next week. Did you want it sent to you or someone else?? I truly enjoyed the book. Thanks a million., jackief Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Steve/Law site
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Steve Thanks for the site. I found it quite interesting. Really has a smorgasbord. jackief -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Steve/Law site
Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hey Jackie whats a smorgasbord? Steve W -Original Message- From: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, April 04, 1998 6:21 PM Subject: LI Re: Steve/Law site Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Steve Thanks for the site. I found it quite interesting. Really has a smorgasbord. jackief -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: The Odd Couple (Not Jackie and Bill)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, Wow, I bet that's a great story! You danced for your students? How did that come about. Got any pictures? Mathau and Lemon are a classic team. I thought Tony Randall and Jack Klugman did a nice job with the TV version of The Odd Couple, but they couldn't touch Mathau and Lemon, IMO. Bill On Fri, 03 Apr 1998 16:45:27 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill LOL...it must be because I still think I am playing baseball instead of basketball. You are really keeping me in great athletic shape, you know. G. Or maybe it is those early hours catching up with me (teehee). I'll have to try and catch that movie, sounds good. I want to see the Odd Couple II one. Those two really make my day usually. Of course, we call Freud "Grouchy ole' man" or "Walter Matheau" sometimes. I caught an interview of them this morning and, whether an act or not, they act so much like their characters that I went to work in a great mood--even danced for the students in their lounge. jackief _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Bill: The law here is that if you own a gun and a kid gets a hold of that gun and either hurts himself or someone else with it, you are held liable. But if your gun is stolen, I don't think that they hold you liable for any crimes that are committed with it. I don't see how they could unless may it would be because you may have had that gun illegally, such as not registered or something. Or maybe not reported it stolen. Sue HI Sue, I think there should be a general crime of "irresponsible gun ownership" that would cover a variety of cases when someone's gun is either used for a crime or involved in an accidental shooting. The severity of the crime should be commensurate with the event involving the gun. And, IMO, getting one's gun stolen is an example of irresponsible ownership. After all, if the purpose of a gun is to protect oneself from being robbed, then it seems ludicrous to get robbed of that gun. Bill _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, The biggest problem with the gun ownership is the large number of people who are irresponsible and shouldn't even own an air rifle. If the laws were strengthened to punish irresponsible gun owners and if these people went to jail for actions leading to death or injury via one of their guns, then perhaps we'd see some decrease in the deaths and injuries attributed to guns. But even this would cause problems because we've all see the person who had been very responsible and safety conscious make that one fatal mistake. A friend of mine was quite lucky. He had bagged a huge buck and was so excited that he dragged it to his truck, put his rifle in the case and threw it in the back of the truck along side the deer. On the way home he hit a bump and the rifle (which he failed to unload) went off. The bullet hit something and split into several pieces. He caught a few pieces in the butt. It could have been a lot worse. Bill On Fri, 03 Apr 1998 16:35:04 -0600 Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill I know that there are good arguments on both sides of the camp on this issue. I grew up with guns in the house all my life and my girls were taught gun safety and the whole works. I shoot although not the greatest and Ed is a target shooter. Of course, we do not have children in the house and our dobes are a pretty good protection system against them getting stolen. We have a number of LE friends who Ed shoots with and I enjoy the outings. So it would be difficult for me, personally, to support the banning of guns even though I see they do have some valid points and see how often guns are so readily available for those who shouldn't have guns. The assault weapons are something else entirely though--this IMO should not even be manufactured. jackief _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Steve/Law site
"Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since I see no one else answering your question, albeit to Jackie about "what is a smorgasbord, I will give it a try. Its initial meaning was that of Scandinavian origin, meaning a feast, a buffet, where the eaters have a large array of food items from which to select (including lutefisk :-( ) This meaning has now been extended to include anything with many choices, for example a smorgasbord of ideas, a potpourri. BTW there are many Scandihoovians in Jackie's neck of the woods, Minnesota. Ron Women have their faults. Men have only two. Everything they say. Everything they do. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, April 04, 1998 9:29 AM Subject: Re: LI Re: Steve/Law site Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hey Jackie whats a smorgasbord? Steve W -Original Message- From: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, April 04, 1998 6:21 PM Subject: LI Re: Steve/Law site Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Steve Thanks for the site. I found it quite interesting. Really has a smorgasbord. jackief -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Steve/Law site
"Steve Wright" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Cool was that an invitation? -Original Message- From: Ronald Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sunday, April 05, 1998 12:32 AM Subject: Re: LI Re: Steve/Law site "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since I see no one else answering your question, albeit to Jackie about "what is a smorgasbord, I will give it a try. Its initial meaning was that of Scandinavian origin, meaning a feast, a buffet, where the eaters have a large array of food items from which to select (including lutefisk :-( ) This meaning has now been extended to include anything with many choices, for example a smorgasbord of ideas, a potpourri. BTW there are many Scandihoovians in Jackie's neck of the woods, Minnesota. Ron Women have their faults. Men have only two. Everything they say. Everything they do. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, April 04, 1998 9:29 AM Subject: Re: LI Re: Steve/Law site Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hey Jackie whats a smorgasbord? Steve W -Original Message- From: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, April 04, 1998 6:21 PM Subject: LI Re: Steve/Law site Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Steve Thanks for the site. I found it quite interesting. Really has a smorgasbord. jackief -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
LI Re: Reply from Iacono on the polygraph survey
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all I promise to let you know what Iacono replied if he did. Here it is verbatim, I copied it and insert his reply. (Aren't you proud of me Kathy). Happy reading!! jackief William G. Iacono wrote: Thanks for sending me the info on Honts criticisms of our work. The criticisms are without merit and hardly deserve acknowledgement, and I don't have time to point out why all of them are off base. But consider the following... In the published account of the survey (Journal of Applied Psychology, 1997), we point out that because the survey was prepared for a book chapter that Raskin, Honts and Kircher as well as Iacono and Lykken were contributing to, we eliminated ourselves as well as them from the survey pool (presumably our opinions were well represented in our contributions to this book). Since there were almost 200 hundred respondents to the survey, it is not possible for the elimination of ourselves or them to have had any significant effect on the outcome. Second, we agreed to share the data with Honts and Amato provided certain conditions were met, such as there having their request reviewed by their university IRB (the Board that approves research with humans as meeting ethical standards). Apparently they didn't like the conditions. Third, when we examined the results of our survey for just well informed respondents, the results were not significantly different from those of less well informed respondents for almost all of the questions, including the one about which of the 4 statements "best describes your own opinion of polygraph test interpretations" that was asked on all three surveys. In the Gallup survey, comparing more informed to less informed respondents also produced no significant differences as a result of how informed respondents were. Only the Amato and Honts survey, to which only a third of those polled responded, found a difference between more and less informed respondents. This response anomaly is most likely due to their having a sample that is not comparable to those in the other two surveys because it is not representative. I hope this information is useful to you. -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: Dancing in the Lounge was LI Re: The Odd Couple (Not Jackie and Bill)
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, Wow, I bet that's a great story! You danced for your students? How did that come about. Got any pictures? Mathau and Lemon are a classic team. I thought Tony Randall and Jack Klugman did a nice job with the TV version of The Odd Couple, but they couldn't touch Mathau and Lemon, IMO. Bill Hi Bill I guess I am like Rodney Dangerfield--no respect from "all my children" (teehee). It was one of those near collisions and I simply stepped back and asked the students if they were trying to dance with me. Then I simply started doing one of the new dances (arm motions and all) and the students cracked up. They are used to me though and haven't yet called the "men in white" VBG. No pictures, I don't think. Oh lord, I had better check the school paper when it comes out : ) jackief _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re Guns, guns and more guns.
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill The one big problem I see with not allowing responsible people to make that choice is that if you do that, what will be the next thing outlawed. Also, once it is illegal, then the black market thrives and we start seeing many, more problems. Also, they wouldn't be licensed--I know our target guns are so that we are legal when we transport them. Even if outlawed, you will always find that people will be shot, IMO. There was an excellent program on today about a new lockup system that would keep guns away from children, I think. But you have to be a responsible person and unload, tear down, and lock them up. jackief William J. Foristal wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Jackie, The biggest problem with the gun ownership is the large number of people who are irresponsible and shouldn't even own an air rifle. If the laws were strengthened to punish irresponsible gun owners and if these people went to jail for actions leading to death or injury via one of their guns, then perhaps we'd see some decrease in the deaths and injuries attributed to guns. But even this would cause problems because we've all see the person who had been very responsible and safety conscious make that one fatal mistake. A friend of mine was quite lucky. He had bagged a huge buck and was so excited that he dragged it to his truck, put his rifle in the case and threw it in the back of the truck along side the deer. On the way home he hit a bump and the rifle (which he failed to unload) went off. The bullet hit something and split into several pieces. He caught a few pieces in the butt. It could have been a lot worse. Bill -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Re: Steve/Law site
Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Excellent job, Ron Yep, when you are around a lot of Scandanavians, you use the word a lot. But you don't have to eat lutefisk : ) jackief Ronald Helm wrote: "Ronald Helm" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since I see no one else answering your question, albeit to Jackie about "what is a smorgasbord, I will give it a try. Its initial meaning was that of Scandinavian origin, meaning a feast, a buffet, where the eaters have a large array of food items from which to select (including lutefisk :-( ) This meaning has now been extended to include anything with many choices, for example a smorgasbord of ideas, a potpourri. BTW there are many Scandihoovians in Jackie's neck of the woods, Minnesota. Ron Women have their faults. Men have only two. Everything they say. Everything they do. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, April 04, 1998 9:29 AM Subject: Re: LI Re: Steve/Law site Steve Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hey Jackie whats a smorgasbord? Steve W -Original Message- From: Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, April 04, 1998 6:21 PM Subject: LI Re: Steve/Law site Jackie Fellows [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Steve Thanks for the site. I found it quite interesting. Really has a smorgasbord. jackief -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- In the sociology room the children learn that even dreams are colored by your perspective I toss and turn all night.Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room" Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
