Gov’t Mule Announces Stacked Lineup For Island Exodus 8

first_imgGov’t Mule has revealed plans for their annual island getaway, Island Exodus 8, held in beautiful Runaway Bay, Jamaica at the Jewel Paradise Cove Resort. Set for January 14-18, 2017, Mule has enlisted the services of funk/jazz trio Soulive (x3) as well as singer/songwriter Nicki Bluhm, guitar prodigy Marcus King and renowned saxophone player Ron Holloway to come along for the ride.In total, Gov’t Mule will perform three nights (two sets a night) at Island Exodus 8, including a solo performance by Warren Haynes. The Marcus King Band will get things underway on Friday, January 13th with an “Exodus Eve” show that is not to be missed. Check below for all relevant ticket information.PRE-SALE & ON-SALE INFO:Island Exodus 7 Attendee Pre-Sale: Mon. March 21 @ 10a EDTAll Other Previous Island Exodus Attendees: Tue. March 22 @ 10a EDTGeneral On-Sale: Wed. March 23 @ 10a EDTAll “Repeat Mule-fenders” (previous attendees) will receive an email by the end of the day this coming Thursday 3/17 with a unique code which will allow them access to their corresponding early booking date.Visit Gov’t Mule’s website here for more information on Island Exodus 8.last_img read more

Read more on Gov’t Mule Announces Stacked Lineup For Island Exodus 8

Proposed criminal jury instructions

first_img Proposed criminal jury instructions Proposed criminal jury instructions March 1, 2005 PUBLIC SERVANT Regular Newscenter_img The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases has submitted to the Florida Supreme Court a report proposing revisions to the Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases. The Court invites all interested persons to comment on the committee’s proposed amendments, which are reproduced in full below, as well as online at www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/proposed.shtml. An original and nine paper copies of all comments must be filed with the court on or before April 1, with a certificate of service verifying that a copy has been served on the committee chair, Judge Dedee S. Costello, Bay County Courthouse, P.O. Box 1089, Panama City 32402-1089, as well as a separate request for oral argument if the person filing the comment wishes to participate in oral argument, which may be scheduled in this case. Electronic copies of all comments also must be filed in accordance with the Court’s Administrative Order In Re: Mandatory Submission of Electronic Copies of Documents, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC04-84 (Sept. 13, 2004). Please label envelope to avoid erasure. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES (NO. 2004-1), CASE NO. SC04-2481 Proposal 1. Revised instruction for justifiable use of deadly force 3.6(f) JUSTIFIABLE USE OF DEADLY FORCE Because there are many defenses applicable to self-defense, give only those parts of the instructions that are required by the evidence. Read in all cases An issue in this case is whether the defendant acted in self defense. It is a defense to the offense with which (defendant) is charged if the [death of] [injury to] (victim) resulted from the justifiable use of deadly forcelikely to cause death or great bodily harm . “Deadly force” is defined as force likely to cause death or great bodily harm. ­ Give if applicable § 782.02, Fla. Stat. The use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm is justifiable only if the defendant reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] while resisting: 1. another’s attempt to murder [him] [her], or 2. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon [him] [her], or 3. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon any dwelling house occupied by [him] [her], or 4. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) in any dwelling house occupied by [him] [her]. Insert and define appli­cable felony that defendant alleges victim attempted to commit Give if applicable §§ 776.012, 776.031, Fla.Stat. A person is justified in using deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another. Insert and define appli­cable forcible felony that defendant alleges victim was about to commit Aggressor § 776.041, Fla.Stat. However, the use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm is not justifiable if you find: Give if applicable ­ 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony) ; or Define applicable forcible felony. Define after paragraph 2 if both paragraphs 1 and 2 are given. 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm to (assailant) . b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and indicated clearly to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm , but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force. Force in resisting arrest § 776.051(1), Fla.Stat. A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer who is known to be, or reasonably appears to be a law enforcement officer. Give if appli­cable However, if an officer uses excessive force to make an arrest, then a person is justified in the use of reasonable force to defend [himself] [herself] (or another) , but only to the extent [he] [she] reasonably believes such force is necessary. See § 776.012, Fla.Stat.; Ivester v. State, 398 So.2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Jackson v. State, 463 So.2d 372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). In some instances, the instructions applicable to §§ 776.012, 776.031, or 776.041, Fla.Stat., may need to be given in connection with this instruction. Read in all cases ­ In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm , you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm , the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real. Necessity to avoid use of deadly force. Read in all cases The defendant cannot justify the use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless [he] [she] used every reasonable means within [his] [her] power and consistent with [his] [her] own safety to avoid the danger before resorting to that force. Retreat. Read in all cases The fact that the defendant was wrongfully attacked cannot justify [his] [her] use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if by retreating [he] [she] could have avoided the need to use that force. However, if the defendant was placed in a position of imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and it would have increased [his] [her] own danger to retreat, then [his] [her] use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm was justifiable. Defense of home. Give if applicable If the defendant was attacked in [his] [her] own home or on [his] [her] own premises, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the lawful right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, even to the extent of using deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if it was necessary to prevent: [death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another].] [the commission of a forcible felony.] Define felony Defense of home against co-occupant ­ If the defendant was attacked in [his] [her] own home or on [his] [her] own premises by [a co-occupant] [any person who was lawfully on the premises], the defendant had a duty to retreat within the residence to the extent reasonably possible without increasing [his] [her] own danger of death or great bodily harm. However, the defendant was not required to flee [his] [her] home and had the lawful right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, even to the extent of using deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if it was necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself]. Prior threats. Give if applicable If you find that the defendant who because of threats or prior difficulties with (victim) had reasonable grounds to believe that [he] [she] was in danger of death or great bodily harm at the hands of (victim) , then the defendant had the right to arm [himself] [herself]. However, the defendant cannot justify the use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm , if after arming [himself] [herself] [he] [she] renewed [his] [her] difficulty with (victim) when [he] [she] could have avoided the difficulty. Reputation of victim. Give if applicable If you find that (victim) had a reputation of being a violent and dangerous person and that [his] [her] reputation was known to the defendant, you may consider this fact in determining whether the actions of the defendant were those of a reasonable person in dealing with an individual of that reputation. Physical abilities. Read in all cases In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim) . Read in all cases If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm , you should find the defendant not guilty. ­ However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force likely to cause death or great bodily harm , you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved. Proposal 2. Revised instruction for justifiable use of nondeadly force 3.6(g) JUSTIFIABLE USE OF NONDEADLY FORCE Because there are many defenses applicable to self-defense, give only those parts of the instructions that are required by the evidence. Read in all cases An issue in this case is whether the defendant acted in self-defense. It is a defense to the offense with which (defendant) is charged if the [death of] [injury to] (victim) resulted from the justifiable use of nondeadly force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm . Nondeadly force is defined as force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm. In defense of person § 776.012, Fla.Stat. (Defendant) would be justified in using nondeadly force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm against (victim) if the following two facts are proved: Give if applicable 1. (Defendant) must have reasonably believed that such conduct was necessary to defend [himself] [herself] [another] against (victim’s) imminent use of unlawful forceagainst the [defendant] [other person]. 2. The use of unlawful force by (victim) must have appeared to (defendant) ready to take place. In defense of property § 776.031, Fla.Stat. (Defendant) would be justified in using nondeadly force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm against (victim) if the following three facts are proved: ­ Give if applicable 1. (Victim) must have been trespassing or otherwise wrongfully interfering with land or personal property. 2. The land or personal property must have lawfully been in (defendant’s) possession, or in the possession of a member of [his] [her] immediate family or household, or in the possession of some person whose property [he] [she] was under a legal duty to protect. 3. (Defendant) must have reasonably believed that [his] [her] use of force was necessary to prevent or terminate (victim’s) wrongful behavior. Aggressor § 776.041, Fla.Stat. The use of nondeadly force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm is not justifiable if you find: Give if applicable 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of a (applicable forcible felony) . Define applicable forcible felony 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using nondeadly force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm to (assailant) . b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and indicated clearly to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of nondeadly force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm , but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force. ­ Force in resisting arrest § 776.051(1), Fla.Stat. A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer who is known to be or reasonably appears to be a law enforcement officer. Give the following instruction if applicable However, if an officer uses excessive force to make an arrest, then a person is justified in the use of reasonable force to defend [himself] [herself] [another], but only to the extent [he] [she] reasonably believes such force is necessary. See § 776.012, Fla.Stat.; Ivester v. State, 398 So.2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Jackson v. State, 463 So.2d 372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). In some instances, the instructions applicable to § § 776.012, 776.031, or 776.041, Fla.Stat., may need to be given in connection with this instruction. Read in all cases In deciding whether the defendant was justified in the use of nondeadly force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm , you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of nondeadly force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm , the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real. Reputation of victim. Give if applicable If you find that (victim) had a reputation of being a violent and dangerous person and that [his] [her] reputation was known to the defendant, you may consider this fact in determining whether the actions of the defendant were those of a reasonable person in dealing with an individual of that reputation. Physical abilities. Read in all cases In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim) . ­ Read in all cases If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of nondeadly force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm , you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of nondeadly force not likely to cause death or great bodily harm , then you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved. Proposal 3. Revised instruction for rules for deliberation 3.10 RULES FOR DELIBERATION These are some general rules that apply to your discussion. You must follow these rules in order to return a lawful verdict: 1. You must follow the law as it is set out in these instructions. If you fail to follow the law, your verdict will be a miscarriage of justice. There is no reason for failing to follow the law in this case. All of us are depending upon you to make a wise and legal decision in this matter. 2. This case must be decided only upon the evi­dence that you have heard from the testimony of the witnesses [and have seen in the form of the exhibits in evidence] and these instruc­tions. 3. This case must not be decided for or against anyone because you feel sorry for anyone, or are angry at anyone. 4. Remember, the lawyers are not on trial. Your feelings about them should not influence your decision in this case. When the jury is to be involved in a penalty phase, omit the second sentence of paragraph 5. 5. Your duty is to determine if the defendant has been proven guilty or not, in accord with the law. It is the judge’s job to determine a prop­er sentence if the defendant is found guilty. ­ 6. Whatever verdict you render must be unani­mous, that is, each juror must agree to the same verdict. Give 7 if applicable 7. It is entirely proper for a lawyer to talk to a witness about what testimony the witness would give if called to the courtroom. The witness should not be discredited by talking to a lawyer about [his] [her] testimony. 8. Your verdict should not be influenced by feel­ings of prejudice, bias or sympathy. Your verdict must be based on the evidence, and on the law contained in these instructions. Proposal 4. Revised instruction for aggravated child abuse 16.1 AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE § 827.03(2), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of aggravated child abuse Aggravated Child Abuse , the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) Give as applicable a. committed aggravated battery upon (victim) . b. willfully tortured (victim) . c. maliciously punished (victim) . d. willfully and unlawfully caged (victim) . e. knowingly or willfully committed child abuse upon (victim) and in so doing caused great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement. 2. (Victim) was under the age of 18 years. ­ Definitions: Give as applicable In order to prove that an aggravated battery was committed, the state State must prove the following: 1. (Defendant) intentionally Give as applicable a. touched or struck (victim) against the will of (victim) . b. caused bodily harm to (victim) . 2. In so doing, (defendant) intentionally or knowingly caused [great bodily harm] [permanent disability] [permanent disfigurement] or [used a deadly weapon]. A weapon is a “deadly weapon” if it is used or threatened to be used in a way likely to produce death or great bodily harm. “ Willfully” means knowingly, intentionally, and purposely. “ Maliciously” means done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent wrongfully, intentionally, and without legal justification or excuse. Maliciousness may be established by circumstances from which one could conclude that a reasonable parent would not have engaged in the damaging acts toward the child for any valid reason and that the primary purpose of the acts was to cause the victim unjustifiable pain or injury . Give in all cases if 1(e) is alleged “Child Abuse” means [the intentional infliction of physical or mental injury upon a child] [an intentional act that could reasonably be expected to result in physical or mental injury to a child] [active encouragement of any person to commit an act that results or could reasonably be expected to result in physical or mental injury to a child]. ­ Proposal 5. Revised instructions for bribery offenses 19.1 BRIBERY OF PUBLIC SERVANT § 838.015(1), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of Bribery of a Public Servant, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Person bribed) was a (office of person bribed) . 2. (Defendant) [gave] [offered] [promised] to (person bribed) the thing described in the charge in this case as (read from charge) . 3. The (read from charge) was something of value, benefit, or advantage to [ (person bribed) ] [a person in whose welfare (person bribed) was interested] not authorized by law . 4. The [gift] [offer] [promise] was made for the purpose of corruptly influencing (person bribed) in the performance of some act or omission that Give 4a or 4b as applicable a. [ (defendant) believed to be [within the official discretion of (person bribed) ] . ] . [in violation of a public duty of (person bribed) ] . ] . [in performance of a public duty of (person bribed) ] . ] . b. [ (person bribed) represented as being [within [his] [her] official discretion ] . ] . [in violation of [his] [her] public duty ] . ] . [in performance of [his] [her] public duty ] . ] . ­ Definition § 838.014(6), Fla.Stat “Corruptly” means acting knowingly and dishonestly for a wrongful purpose done with a wrongful intent and for the purpose of compensating or paying for any benefit resulting from some act or omission of a public servant that is inconsistent with the proper performance of the [his] [her] public duties. The court now instructs you that a (office of person bribed) is a public servant. § 838.015(2), Fla.Stat. In order for the defendant to be guilty, it is not necessary that the act with respect to which the bribe was [given] [offered] [promised] was properly pending before (person bribed) , or that by law it might be properly brought before [him] [her], or that [he] [she] was qualified to act in the desired way, or that [he] [she] had jurisdiction over the matter, or that [his] [her] official action was necessary to achieve the purpose of the defendant. Give if applicable § 838.014(4), Fla.Stat. For the purpose of the laws against bribery, any person who has been elected or appointed to, or who is a candidate for election or appointment to, any public office is regarded as already being in that office with respect to any transaction relating to an act to be done if and when [he] [she] actually assumes office. 19.2 BRIBERY BY PUBLIC SERVANT § 838.015(1), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of Bribery by a Public Servant, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) was a (office of defendant) . 2. (Defendant) [requested] [solicited] [accepted] [agreed to accept] from (person making bribe) the thing described in the charge in this case as ( read from charge) . ­3. The (read from charge) was something of value, benefit or advantage to [ (defendant) ] [a person in whose welfare (defendant) was interested] not authorized by law . 4. The [request] [solicitation] [acceptance] [agreement to accept] was made with intent of corruptly being influenced in the performance of some act or omission that Give 4a or 4b as applicable a. [ (person making bribe) believed to be [within the official discretion of (defendant) ] . ] . [in violation of a public duty of (defendant) ] . ] . [in performance of a public duty of (defendant) ] . ] . b. [(defendant) represented as being [within [his] [her] official discretion ] . ] . [in violation [his] [her] public duty ] . ] . [in performance of [his] [her] public duty ] . ] . Definition § 838.014(6), Fla.Stat. “Corruptly” means acting knowingly and dishonestly for a wrongful purpose done with a wrongful intent and for the purpose of obtaining or receiving compensation for any benefit resulting from some act or omission of a public servant that is inconsistent with the proper performance of the public servant’s public duties . The court now instructs you that a (office of defendant) is a public servant. § 838.015(2), Fla.Stat. ­ In order for the defendant to be guilty, it is not necessary that the act with respect to which [the bribe was [requested] [solicited] [accepted]] [an agreement was reached for the bribe] was properly pending before the defendant, or that by law it might be properly brought before [him] [her], or that [he] [she] was qualified to act in the desired way, or that [he] [she] had jurisdiction over the matter, or that [his] [her] official action was necessary to achieve the purpose of the person making the bribe. Give if applicable § 838.014(4), Fla.Stat. For the purpose of the laws against bribery, any person who has been elected or appointed to, or who is a candidate for election or appointment to, any public office is regarded as already being in that office with respect to any transaction relating to an act to be done if and when [he] [she] actually assumes office. 19.3 BRIBERY UNLAWFUL COMPENSATION OR REWARD OF PUBLIC SERVANT § 838.016(1), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of Bribery Unlawful Compensation or Reward of a Public Servant, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Person bribed) was a (office of person bribed) . 2. (Defendant) [gave] [offered] [promised] to (person bribed) the thing described in the charge in this case as (read from charge) . 3. The (read from charge) was something of value, benefit, or advantage to [ (person bribed) ] [a person in whose welfare (person bribed) was interested] not authorized by law . 4. The [gift] [offer] [promise] was corruptly made for the past, present, or future performance, nonperformance, or violation of any act or omission of (person bribed) that Give 4a or 4b as applicable a. [ (defendant) believed to be [within the official discretion of (person bribed) ] . ] . ­[in violation of a public duty of (person bribed) ] . ] . [in performance of a public duty of (person bribed) ] . ] . b. [ (person bribed) represented as being [within [his] [her] official discretion] . ] . [in violation of [his] [her] public duty] . ] . [in performance of [his] [her] public duty].] Definition § 838.014(6) Fla.Stat “Corruptly” means acting knowingly and dishonestly for a wrongful purpose done with a wrongful intent and for the purpose of compensating or paying for any benefit resulting from some act or omission of a public servant that is inconsistent with the proper performance of [his] [her] public duties . The court now instructs you that a (office of person bribed) is a public servant. § 838.016(3), Fla.Stat. In order for the defendant to be guilty, it is not necessary that the exercise of official discretion or violation of a public duty or performance of a public duty for which the bribe was [given] [offered] [promised] was accomplished or was within the official discretion or public duty of the public servant whose action or omission was sought to be rewarded or compensated. Give if applicable § 838.014(4), Fla.Stat. For the purpose of the laws against bribery, any person who has been elected or appointed to, or who is a candidate for election or appointment to, any public office is regarded as already being in that office with respect to any transaction relating to an act to be done if and when [he] [she] actually assumes office. § 838.016(1), Fla.Stat. ­ There is no prohibition against a public servant accepting a reward for services performed in apprehending a criminal. Therefore, if the evidence presents a factual issue on this point, an appropriate instruction should be given. 19.4 BRIBERY UNLAWFUL COMPENSATION OR REWARD BY PUBLIC SERVANT § 838.016(1), Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of Bribery by a Public Servant, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) was a (office of defendant) . 2. (Defendant) [requested] [solicited] [accepted] [agreed to accept] from (person making bribe) the thing described in the charge in this case as (read from charge) . 3. The (read from charge) was something of value, benefit or advantage to [ (defendant) ] [a person in whose welfare (defendant) was interested] not authorized by law . 4. The [request] [solicitation] [acceptance] [agreement to accept] was corruptly made for the past, present, or future performance, nonperformance or violation of any act or omission of (defendant) that Give 4a or 4b as applicable a. [ (person making bribe) believed to be [within the official discretion of (defendant) ] . ] . [in violation of a public duty of (defendant) ] . ] . [in performance of a public duty of (defendant) ] . ] . b. [ (defendant) represented as being [within [his] [her] official discretion] . ] . ­[in violation of [his] [her] public duty] . ] . [in performance of [his] [her] public duty] . ] . Definition § 838.014(6), Fla.Stat. “Corruptly” means acting knowingly and dishonestly for a wrongful purpose done with a wrongful intent and for the purpose of obtaining or receiving compensation for any benefit resulting from some act or omission of a public servant that is inconsistent with the proper performance of [his] [her] the public servant’s public duties . The court now instructs you that a (office of defendant) is a public servant. § 838.016(3), Fla.Stat. In order for the defendant to be guilty, it is not necessary that the exercise of official discretion or violation of a public duty or performance of a public duty for which the bribe was requested or solicited was accomplished or was within the official discretion or public duty of the defendant. Give if applicable § 838.014(4), Fla.Stat. For the purpose of the laws against bribery, any person who has been elected or appointed to, or who is a candidate for election or appointment to, any public office is regarded as already being in that office with respect to any transaction relating to an act to be done if and when [he] [she] actually assumes office. § 838.016(1), Fla.Stat. There is no prohibition against a public servant accepting a reward for services performed in apprehending a criminal. Therefore, if the evidence presents a factual issue on this point, an appropriate instruction should be given. 19.5 BRIBERY UNLAWFUL COMPENSATION OR REWARD OF PUBLIC SERVANT § 838.016(2), Fla.Stat. ­ To prove the crime of Bribery Unlawful Compensation or Reward of a Public Servant, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Person bribed) was a (office of person bribed) . 2. (Defendant) [gave] [offered] [promised] to (person bribed) the thing described in the charge in this case as (read from charge) . 3. The (read from charge) was something of value, benefit, or advantage to [ (person bribed) ] [a person in whose welfare (person bribed) was interested] not authorized by law . 4. The [gift] [offer] [promise] was corruptly made for the past, present, or future exertion of any influence upon or with (person sought to be influenced) regarding any act or omission that Give 4a or 4b as applicable a. [ (defendant) believed to be [within the official discretion of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . [in violation of a public duty of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . [in performance of a public duty of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . b. [was represented to (defendant) as being [within the official discretion of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . [in violation of the public duty of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . [in performance of the public duty of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . ­ Definition § 838.014(6), Fla.Stat. “Corruptly” means acting knowingly and dishonestly for a wrongful purpose done with a wrongful intent and for the purpose of compensating or paying for any benefit resulting from some act or omission of a public servant that is inconsistent with the proper performance of [his] [her] public duties . The court now instructs you that a (office of person bribed) is a public servant and that a (office of person sought to be influenced) is a public servant. § 838.016(3), Fla.Stat. In order for the defendant to be guilty, it is not necessary that the exercise of influence for which the bribe was [given] [offered] [promised] was accomplished or was within the influence of the public servant whose action or omission was sought to be rewarded or compensated. Give if applicable § 838.014(4), Fla.Stat. For the purpose of the laws against bribery, any person who has been elected or appointed to, or who is a candidate for election or appointment to, any public office is regarded as already being in that office with respect to any transaction relating to an act to be done if and when [he] [she] actually assumes office. 19.6 BRIBERY UNLAWFUL COMPENSATION OR REWARD BY PUBLIC SERVANT § 838.016(2), Fla.Stat To prove the crime of Bribery Unlawful Compensation or Reward by a Public Servant, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Person bribed) was a (office of person bribed) . 2. (Defendant) [requested] [solicited] [accepted] [agreed to accept] from (person making bribe) the thing described in the charge in this case as (read from charge) . ­3. The (read from charge) was something of value, benefit, or advantage to [ (defendant) ] [a person in whose welfare (defendant) was interested] not authorized by law . 4. The [request] [solicitation] [acceptance] [agreement to accept] was corruptly made for the past, present, or future exertion of any influence upon or with (person sought to be influenced) regarding any act or omission which Give 4a or 4b as applicable a. [ (Person making bribe) believed to be [within the official discretion of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . [in violation of a public duty of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . [in performance of a public duty of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . b. [was represented to (person making bribe) as being [within the official discretion of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . [in violation of the public duty of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . [in performance of the public duty of (person sought to be influenced) ] . ] . Definition § 838.014(6), Fla.Stat. “Corruptly” means acting knowingly and dishonestly for a wrongful purpose done with a wrongful intent and for the purpose of obtaining or receiving compensation for any benefit resulting from some act or omission of a public servant that is inconsistent with the proper performance of [his] [her] public duties . ­The court now instructs you that a (office of person bribed) is a public servant and that a (office of person sought to be influenced) is a public servant. § 838.016(3), Fla.Stat. In order for the defendant to be guilty, it is not necessary that the exercise of influence for which the bribe was [given] [offered] [promised] was accomplished or was within the influence of the public servant whose action or omission was sought to be rewarded or compensated. Give if applicable § 838.014(4), Fla.Stat. For the purpose of the laws against bribery, any person who has been elected or appointed to, or who is a candidate for election or appointment to, any public office is regarded as already being in that office with respect to any transaction relating to an act to be done if and when [he] [she] actually assumes office. Proposal 6. Revised instruction for theft offenses 14.1 THEFT § 812.014, Fla.Stat. To prove the crime of Theft, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. (Defendant) knowingly and unlawfully [obtained] [used] [endeavored to obtain] [endeavored to use] the (property alleged) of (victim) . 2. [He] [She] did so with intent to, either temporarily or permanently, [deprive (victim) of [his] [her] right to the property or any benefit from it.] [appropriate the property of (victim) to [his] [her] own use or to the use of any person not entitled to it.] Degrees; give if property is of monetary value up to extent of charge If you find the defendant guilty of theft, you must determine by your verdict whether: ­a. [The value of the property taken was $100,000 or more.] b. [The property taken was cargo valued at $50,000 or more that has entered the stream of commerce from the shipper’s loading platform to the consignee’s receiving dock.] c. [The property taken was cargo valued at less than $50,000 that has entered the stream of commerce from the shipper’s loading platform to the consignee’s receiving dock.] d. [The property taken was emergency medical equipment valued at $300 or more that was taken from a licenced facility or from an emergency medical aircraft or vehicle.] e. [The value of the property taken was $20,000 or more but less than $100,000.] f. [The value of the property taken was $300 or more but less than $20,000.] g. [The value of the property taken was less than $300.] Give if applicable h. [The property was [a will, codicil, or other testamentary instrument.] [a firearm.] [a motor vehicle.] [a commercially farmed animal.] [an aquaculture species raised at a permitted aquaculture facility.] [a fire extinguisher.] [2,000 or more pieces of fruit.] [taken from a posted construction site.] [a stop sign.] [anhydrous ammonia.] ] I. [The value of the property taken was $100 or more but less then $300, and was taken from [a dwelling] [the enclosed curtilage of a dwelling].] Inferences; give if applicable § 812.022(1), Fla.Stat. ­ Proof that a person presented false identification not current in respect to name, address, place of employment, or other material aspect in connection with the leasing of personal property, or failed to return leased property within 72 hours of the termination of the leasing agreement, unless satisfactorily explained, gives rise to an inference that the property was obtained or is now used with unlawful intent to commit theft. Inferences; give if applicable § 812.022(2), Fla.Stat. Proof of possession of recently stolen property, unless satisfactorily explained, gives rise to an inference that the person in possession of the property knew or should have known that the property had been stolen. Definitions; give if applicable § 812.012(1), Fla.Stat. “Cargo” means partial or entire shipments, containers, or cartons of property which are contained in or on a trailer, motortruck, aircraft, vessel, warehouse, freight station, freight consolidation facility, or air navigation facility. § 812.014(2)(b)3, Fla.Stat. “Emergency medical equipment” means mechanical or electronic apparatus used to provide emergency service and care or to treat medical emergencies. § 395.002(10), Fla. Stat. “Emergency service and care” means medical screening, examination, and evaluation by a physician, or other medically appropriate personnel under the supervision of a physician, to determine if an emergency medical condition exists, and if it does, the care, treatment or surgery by a physician necessary to relieve or eliminate the emergency medical condition, within the service capability of the facility. § 395.002(17), Fla.Stat. “Licensed facility” means a hospital, ambulatory surgical center, or mobile surgical facility licensed by the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration. See Chapter 395, Fla.Stat. § 812.014(2)(b)3, Fla.Stat. “Emergency medical aircraft or vehicle” means any aircraft, ambulance or other vehicle used as an emergency medical service vehicle that has been issued a permit in accordance with Florida law. § 812.012(3), Fla.Stat. “Obtains or uses” means any manner of ­ (a) Taking or exercising control over property. (b) Making any unauthorized use, disposition, or transfer of property. (c) Obtaining property by fraud, willful misrepresentation of a future act, or false promise. (d) (1) Conduct previously known as stealing; larceny; purloining; abstracting; embezzlement; mis­application; misappropriation; conversion; or obtaining money or property by false pretenses, fraud, deception; or (2) Other conduct similar in nature. “ Endeavor” means to attempt or try. § 812.012(4), Fla.Stat. “Property” means anything of value, and includes: real property, including things growing on, affixed to and found in land; tangible or intangible personal property, including rights, privileges, interests, and claims; and services. § 812.012(6), Fla.Stat. “Services” means anything of value resulting from a person’s physical or mental labor or skill, or from the use, possession, or presence of property, and includes: repairs or improvements to property; professional services; private, public or government communication, transportation, power, water, or sanitation services; ­ lodging accommodations; and admissions to places of exhibition or entertainment. § 812.012(10), Fla.Stat. “Value” means: The market value of the property at the time and place of the offense, or if that value cannot be satisfactorily ascertained, the cost of replacement of the property within a reasonable time after the offense. In the case of a written instrument that does not have a readily ascertainable market value, such as a check, draft, or promissory note, the value is the amount due or collectible. In the case of any other instrument that creates, releases, discharges or otherwise affects any valuable legal right, privilege, or obligation, the value is the greatest amount of economic loss that the owner of the instrument might reasonably suffer by virtue of the loss of the instrument. The value of a trade secret that does not have a readily ascertainable market value is any reasonable value representing the damage to the owner suffered by reason of losing an advantage over those who do not know of or use the trade secret. If the exact value of the property cannot be ascertained, you should attempt to determine a minimum value. If you cannot determine the minimum value, you must find the value is less than $300. Amounts of value of separate properties, involved in thefts committed pursuant to one scheme or course of conduct, whether the thefts are from the same person or several persons, may be totaled in determining the grade of the offense. Proposal 7. Revised grand jury handbook and grand jury instructions 30 GRAND JURY HANDBOOK INTRODUCTION (No Change) WHAT IS A GRAND JURY (No Change) TERM OF THE GRAND JURY (No Change) WHO ARE GRAND JURORS Grand jurors are United States citizens and Florida legal residents of this state and their respective counties who are at least 18 years of age and who possess a driver’s license or identification card issued by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, or who execute an affidavit indicating a desire to serve as a juror. All jurors are selected at random and their names are taken from lists prepared by the clerk of the circuit court. The process of selecting jurors is done in most counties by the county commissioners and in some counties by a specially constituted jury commission. The process of selecting the statewide grand jury is handled by the State Court Administrator for the Florida Supreme Court. When making up the jury list, the officers compiling it are required to select only citizens they believe to be law-abiding, and of proven integrity, good character, sound judgment and intelligence, and who are neither physically nor mentally infirm. DISQUALIFICATION TO SERVE AS A GRAND OR PETIT JUROR Any person who has been convicted of a felony or bribery , forgery, perjury, or larceny is disqualified to sit as a juror, unless his or her civil rights have been restored. A person under prosecution for any crime is disqualified. Most government officials are disqualified to serve on a jury. An elected public official is not eligible to be a grand juror. FREQUENTLY USED WORDS AND PHRASES (No Change) GRAND JURY AND PETIT JURY DISTINGUISHED There are two kind of juries: grand juries and petit juries. The grand jury consists of up to 23 not fewer than 15 nor more than 21 (or 18 for statewide grand jury) members. A petit jury, depending upon the type of trial, consists of either 6 or 12 members. The grand jury and the petit jury have entirely different purposes and functions. A petit jury actually tries a case and renders a verdict of guilty or not guilty after hearing both sides. A grand jury does not try a case on the issue of guilt or innocence. The grand jury rarely hears both sides. Its function is simply to hear witnesses as to a charge of crime, by the State, and to determine whether the person, or persons, so charged should be brought to trial. The grand jury has been called both a sword and shield of justice — a sword because it is a terror to criminals, a shield because it is protection of the innocent against unjust prosecution. The tremendous power of the grand jury obviously creates grave and solemn responsibilities to see that these powers are not perverted or abused. A grand jury, being possessed with these tremendous powers and unless motivated by the highest sense of justice, might find indictments not warranted by the evidence and thus become a source of oppression to the citizenry. Conversely, a misguided grand jury might dismiss charges against those who should be prosecuted. The importance of the grand jury’s power is emphasized by the fact that it is one of the most independent bodies known to the law. HISTORY OF THE GRAND JURY (No Change) THE GRAND JURY AS AN ACCUSING AND INVESTIGATIVE BODY (No Change) OFFICERS OF THE GRAND JURY ­The judge who presided over the empaneling of the grand jury in the “charge to the grand jury” advised you formally and in great detail as to how the grand jury is organized and functions. In summary, the grand jury consists of 18 or, in some places, of 23 15 but not more than 21 members. Its officers are the foreperson, who will preside over the grand jury deliberations to make sure they are carried on in an orderly fashion including overseeing the examination of the witnesses; a vice-foreperson, who will preside in the absence of the foreperson or if for any reason the foreperson is not able to carry out his or her duty; and the clerk, who will keep a record of the proceedings had before the grand jury and formally make return of these records to the clerk of the circuit court (or clerk of the Supreme Court in the case of the statewide grand jury) for safekeeping. The foreperson and vice-foreperson are appointed by the judge and the clerk is appointed by the foreperson (or in the case of the statewide grand jury, may be selected by the group). The state attorney (or the statewide prosecutor) or assistant state attorneys (or assistant statewide prosecutors) will act as the legal advisers to the grand jury. The grand jury also will be provided an official court reporter or recorder to record the testimony before the grand jury. If the grand jury has its own budget, a treasurer of the grand jury may also be appointed to keep account of all receipts and disbursements made to or from the grand jury budget. If any question should arise concerning how the grand jury shall operate or function, you may apply to the judge, who will advise you. PROCEDURES Not less than 18 15 members of a 23 member grand jury , and 15 of an 18-member statewide grand jury must always be present to constitute a quorum. If less than a quorum exists, the proceedings of the grand jury must be halted until a quorum is present. Grand jurors, who, because of an emergency, find that they will be unable to attend a grand jury session should advise the grand jury clerk or foreperson immediately. An affirmative vote of at least 12 members of the grand jury is necessary to the return of a true bill or indictment. Therefore, even though a quorum is present it still requires at least 12 votes of individual members, rather than a mere majority of those present, in order to return a true bill. PROCEEDINGS OF THE GRAND JURY (No Change) DETERMINATION WHETHER TO RETURN AN INDICTMENT OR A NO TRUE BILL When the grand jury has heard all necessary or available witnesses and is prepared to deliberate on the issue whether to indict or return a no true bill, the foreperson must compel all persons to leave the grand jury room except the members of the grand jury themselves. No other person is permitted in the grand jury room during its deliberations, even including the state attorney (or the statewide prosecutor), court reporter and interpreter. When the question of whether to indict or return a no true bill is presented, all grand jurors have the right to comment on the evidence and to express their views of the matter. Only when all members of the grand jury have expressed themselves and each has been given the opportunity to be heard should a vote be taken. A vote to return an indictment can be found only upon the affirmative vote of at least 12 members of the grand jury. Similar proceedings should be taken when the matter to be discussed is not a criminal charge or indictment but a presentment, as noted above. If all persons, except the grand jurors, are not removed from the grand jury room during its deliberations, any indictment or presentment would be nullified. THE STATE ATTORNEY (OR THE STATEWIDE PROSECUTOR) AS LEGAL ADVISOR TO THE GRAND JURY (No Change) SECRECY OF GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS (No Change) PROTECTION AND IMMUNITY OF GRAND JURORS (No Change) ON BEING A GRAND JUROR — SOME PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS (No Change) CONCLUSION (No Change) 31 FLORIDA GRAND JURY INSTRUCTIONS 1 PRELIMINARY STATEMENTS (No Change) ­ 2 INSTRUCTIONS ON CRIMINAL MATTERS 2.1 – 2.2 (No Change) 2.3 The guilt or innocence of a person indicted by the grand jury is determined by a trial jury that will be specially impanelled empaneled to try the case. The trial jury hears all the evidence, on both sides, in an adversary proceeding under the supervision of a trial judge. Upon the trial based upon the indictment the accused is entitled to be present and have the assistance of counsel and a verdict is rendered only after the accused has had an opportunity to see and hear the witnesses, examine the evidence and have the case argued by counsel. The trial jury will be charged by the trial judge on the law applicable to the case. These safeguards are designed to protect and preserve the constitutional rights of an accused. 2.4 – 2.10 (No Change) 3 CIVIL INSTRUCTIONS (No Change) 4 PROCEDURE 4.1 – 4.3 (No Change) 4.4 Every grand jury shall consist of not less than ____ 15 nor more than ____ 21 persons. At least ____ 15 of the jury must be present at all times when the jury is functioning. A favorable vote of not less than ____ 12 of those present is necessary to the finding of any Atrue bill,@ presentment or report. (The Statewide Grand Jury shall be composed of 18 members of which 15 members shall constitute a quorum.) 4.5 – 4.10 (No Change) 5 – 11 (No Change)last_img read more

Read more on Proposed criminal jury instructions

Darwin’s Tree of Life is a Tangled Bramble Bush

first_imgResearchers at Vanderbilt University are tied up in knots trying to locate Darwin’s branching tree in contradictory data.A press release from Vanderbilt University summarizes a paper in Nature this week:These days, phylogeneticists – experts who painstakingly map the complex branches of the tree of life – suffer from an embarrassment of riches. The genomics revolution has given them mountains of DNA data that they can sift through to reconstruct the evolutionary history that connects all living beings. But the unprecedented quantity has also caused a serious problem: The trees produced by a number of well-supported studies have come to contradictory conclusions.Salichos and Rokas, in their Nature paper, had to resort to postulating rapid periods of diversification and long periods of stasis to keep Darwin’s vision intact against the onslaught of data.  The press release continues,In a study published online May 8 by the journal Nature, Rokas and graduate student Leonidas Salichos analyze the reasons for these differences and propose a suite of novel techniques that can resolve the contradictions and provide greater accuracy in deciphering the deep branches of life’s tree….“The study by Salichos and Rokas comes at a critical time when scientists are grappling with how best to detect the signature of evolutionary history from a deluge of genetic data. These authors provide intriguing insights into our standard analytical toolbox, and suggest it may be time to abandon some of our most trusted tools when it comes to the analysis of big data sets. This significant work will certainly challenge the community of evolutionary biologists to rethink how best to reconstruct phylogeny,” said Michael F. Whiting, program director of systematics and biodiversity science at the National Science Foundation, which funded the study.Problem is, the data looks more like a bush than a tree.  The record is punctuated by rapid, sudden appearances of organisms.  The authors acknowledged the problem of the Cambrian explosion:In broad terms, Rokas and Salichos found that genetic data is less reliable during periods of rapid radiation, when new species were formed rapidly. A case in point is the Cambrian explosion, the sudden appearance about 540 million years ago of a remarkable diversity of animal species, without apparent predecessors. Before about 580 million years ago, most organisms were very simple, consisting of single cells occasionally organized into colonies.“A lot of the debate on the differences in the trees has been between studies concerning the ‘bushy’ branches that took place in these ‘radiations’,” Rokas said.Calling this a “paradox,” the researchers found that even within yeast species a thousand genes did not match up to phylogenetic trees generated by standard software methods.  The same conflicts were found in larger data sets involving vertebrates and metazoans.  In response, they claimed that genetic dating becomes as unreliable as radiometric dating the farther back in time one searches, creating “considerable challenges to existing algorithms to resolve radiations” congruent with Darwin’s presumed ancestral tree.One whole subsection in the paper is titled, “All gene trees differ from species phylogeny.”  Another is titled, “Standard practices do not reduce incongruence.”  A third, “Standard practices can mislead.”  One of their major findings was “extensive conflict in certain internodes.”The authors not only advised throwing out some standard practices of tree-building, but (amazingly) proposed evolutionists throw out the “uninformative” conflicting data and only use data that seems to support the Darwinian tree:  “the subset of genes with strong phylogenetic signal is more informative than the full set of genes, suggesting that phylogenomic analyses using conditional combination approaches, rather than approaches based on total evidence, may be more powerful.”In conclusion, they had no solid answers for the conflicts.  They called on other evolutionists to “to develop novel phylogenomic approaches and markers to more accurately decipher the most challenging ancient branches of life’s genealogy from the DNA record.”This is scandalous!  It’s also old news.  Evolutionists have been concocting Darwin trees in spite of the evidence ever since Darwin acknowledged the Cambrian explosion as a real problem that lodged a valid objection to his theory (get the new book Darwin’s Doubt for details, and the film Darwin’s Dilemma).Darwinism is a classic case of Finagle’s Rule #3, “Draw your curves, then plot your data.”  Guru Charlie drew his little tree sketch by faith, then sent his disciples out on a hopeless quest to find evidence to support it.  Now, here it is May 15, 2013, and these guys are still telling us the tree vision is in conflict with the data!  They have to finagle their methods (“novel approaches”) to try to force a match with the uncooperative genes.And here, we saw they are even willing to lie, tossing out “uninformative” data sets and only using data that appear to support their foreordained conclusion.  Were you told this in biology class?  Did your textbook mention this?  No; but you hear it here on CEH all the time, because we bring out into the open the dirty deals evolutionists whisper to themselves in the journals. (Visited 162 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Read more on Darwin’s Tree of Life is a Tangled Bramble Bush

Hiland FFA takes part in urban soils contest

first_imgShare Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest On a rainy day, the Hiland FFA Urban Soils Team participated in the District Soils Contests. The District Soil Contest consisted of three pits, and two written test which was a soil survey test and a general knowledge test. The purpose of the urban soil contest is to see if the land can be used for nonfarm uses, buildings, or work sites. The members had to figure out the different soil types such as coarse, moderately coarse, medium, moderately fine, and fine. For horizon of the pit the students had to find soil layers like topsoil (soil near the top), subsoil (soil in the middle of the pit) or substratum (soil near the bottom of the pit). Also, the contestants had to find the slope by using the slope boards at one stake with another stake. There were 56 students who participated in this event as a district. The Hiland Urban Soils Team placed 3rd at contest. Diane Yoder got 2nd place, Cheryl Yoder got 10th place, Hayleigh Scheufler got 17th place, Parker Stutzman got 21st place, and Sheila Troyer got 25th place. The top five teams moved onto state.On a windy day in southern Ohio, the State Soils Contest was held. The contestants had to judge four pits, and two written tests about soil. They were put into 20 different groups split between urban, soil that buildings can be built on, and rural, open land. The students were led to different stations, and then going in a rotation until everyone had gone to each station. The Hiland FFA Urban Soils Team place 39 out 43 teams at State. Diane Yoder placed 101 out of 156 individuals, Cheryl Yoder placed 144 out of 156 individuals, Parker Stutzman placed 151 out of 156 individuals, and Hayleigh Scheufler placed 152 out of 156 individuals. All of the contests had a lot of fun judging soil, and are excited for next years soil contests.last_img read more

Read more on Hiland FFA takes part in urban soils contest

Ramachandra Guha slams MS Dhoni’s Grade ‘A’ contract, questions superstar culture in Indian cricket

first_imgRamchandra Guha on Thursday resigned from the Committee of Administrators (CoA) appointed by the Supreme Court to implement recommendations of Lodha Committee in the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), citing personal reasons.On Friday, Guha issued a seven-point letter to his former colleagues at the CoA and slammed the superstar culture which exists in Indian cricket and said BCCI were the biggies of conflict of interest.Historian Guha, along with former captain of the women’s cricket team Diana Edulji and Managing Director and CEO of IDFC Limited Vikram Limaye, was a part of four-member CoA, which is headed by former Comptroller and Auditor General Vinod Rai to run the BCCI. Watch Full Video hereGuha tore into MS Dhoni’s Grade ‘A’ contract and wondered how he was retained in the top tier despire retiring from Test cricket in 2014.”Unfortunately, this superstar syndrome has also distorted the system of Indian team contracts,” Guha wrote in his letter. As you will recall, I had pointed out that awarding MS Dhoni an ‘A’ contract when he had explicitly ruled himself out from all Test matches was indefensible on cricketing grounds, and sends absolutely the wrong message.”Guha also questioned the superstar culture in the BCCI and said it was still prevalent under the CoA. He also raised other serious issues and said the IPL divided the attention of national coaches, who are busy with the T20 extravaganza for two months instead of focusing on their jobs with the Indian team.advertisementGuha has also backed Anil Kumble’s extension as India coach and said his record has been outstanding. There are reports that Virat Kohli is not impressed with Kumble’s overbearing attitude in the dressing-room.The BCCI issued an advertisement for the coach’s job and the likes of Virender Sehwag, Tom Moody, Richard Pybus among others threw their hats in the ring. Kumble, whose contract expires on June 20, 2017, has also reapplied.Here is the full letter Guha wrote to CoA chief Vinod Rai after resigning from the Supreme Court-appointed committee: Dear Vinod,It has been a pleasure working with Diana, Vikram and you in the Supreme Court Committee of Administrators. It has been an educative experience, spending long hours with three top-flight professionals from whom I have learned a lot in these past few months. However, it has been clear for some time now that my thoughts and views are adjacent to, and sometimes at odds with, the direction the Committee is taking as a whole. That is why I eventually decided to request the Supreme Court to relieve me of the responsibility, and submitted my letter of resignation to the Court on the morning of the 1st of June.For the record, and in the interests of transparency, I am here listing the major points of divergence as I see it:1. The question of conflict of interest, which had lain unaddressed ever since the Committee began its work, and which I have been repeatedly flagging since I joined. For instance, the BCCI has accorded preferential treatment to some national coaches, by giving them ten month contracts for national duty, thus allowing them to work as IPL coaches/mentors for the remaining two months. This was done in an adhoc and arbitrary manner; the more famous the former player-turned-coach, the more likely was the BCCI to allow him to draft his own contract that left loopholes that he exploited to dodge the conflict of interest issue.I have repeatedly pointed out that it is contrary to the spirit of the Lodha Committee for coaches or the support staff of the Indian senior or junior team, or for staff at the National Cricket Academy, to have contracts in the Indian Premier League. One cannot have dual loyalties of this kind and do proper justice to both. National duty must take precedence over club affiliation.I had first raised this issue to my COA colleagues in an email of 1st February, and have raised it several times since. I had urged that coaches and support staff for national teams be paid an enhanced compensation, but that this conflict of interest be stopped. When, on the 11th of March, I was told that that there was a camp scheduled for young players at the National Cricket Academy but at least one national coach was likely to be away on IPL work and might not attend the camp, I wrote to you:No person under contract with an India team, or with the NCA, should be allowed to moonlight for an IPL team too.BCCI in its carelessness (or otherwise) might have drafted coaching/support staff contracts to allow this dual loyalty business, but while it might be narrowly legal as per existing contracts, it is unethical, and antithetical to team spirit, leading to much jealousy and heart-burn among the coaching staff as a whole. This practice is plainly wrong, as well as antithetical to the interests of Indian cricket.advertisementI would like an explicit and early assurance from the BCCI management that such manifestly inequitous loopholes in coaching/support staff contracts will be plugged. Yet no assurance was given, and no action was taken. The BCCI management and office-bearers have, in the absence of explicit directions from the COA, allowed the status quo to continue.2. I have also repeatedly pointed to the anomaly whereby BCCI-contracted commentators simultaneously act as player agents. In a mail of 19th March to the COA I wrote:Dear Colleagues,Please have a look at this news report: http://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/pmg-signs-up-shikhar-dhawan-for-3-years-2776329/Sunil Gavaskar is head of a company which represents Indian cricketers while commenting on those crickters as part of the BCCI TV commentary panel. This is a clear conflict of interest. Either he must step down/withdraw himself from PMG completely or stop being a commentator for BCCI.I think prompt and swift action on this matter is both just and necessary. COA’s credibility and effectiveness hinges on our being able to take bold and correct decisions on such matters. The ‘superstar’ culture that afflicts the BCCI means that the more famous the player (former or present) the more leeway he is allowed in violating norms and procedures. (Dhoni was captain of the Indian team while holding a stake in a firm that represented some current India players.) This must stop – and only we can stop it.Yet, despite my warnings, no action has been initiated in the several months that the Committee has been in operation. As the mail quoted above noted, one reasons the conflict of interest issue has lingered unaddressed is that several of the game’s superstars, past and present, have been guilty of it. The BCCI management is too much in awe of these superstars to question their violation of norms and procedures. For their part, BCCI office-bearers like to enjoy discretionary powers, so that the coaches or commentrators they favour are indebted to them and do not ever question their own mistakes or malpractices. But surely a Supreme Court appointed body should not be intimidated by the past or present achievements of a cricketer, and instead seek to strive to be fair and just.Conflict of interest is rampant in the State Associations as well. One famous former cricketer is contracted by media houses to comment on active players while serving as President of his State Association. Others have served as office-bearers in one Association and simultaneously as coaches or managers in another. The awarding of business contracts to friends and relatives by office-bearers is reported to be fairly widespread.Had we been more proactive in stopping conflict of interest within the BCCI (as per Lodha Committee recommendations, endorsed by the Court), this would surely have had a ripple effect downwards, putting pressure on State Assocations to clean up their act as well.advertisement3. Unfortunately, this superstar syndrome has also distorted the system of Indian team contracts. As you will recall, I had pointed out that awarding MS Dhoni an ‘A’ contract when he had explicitly ruled himself out from all Test matches was indefensible on cricketing grounds, and sends absolutely the wrong message.4. The way in which the contract of Anil Kumble, the current Head Coach of the senior team, has been handled. The Indian team’s record this past season has been excellent; and even if the players garner the bulk of the credit, surely the Head Coach and his support staff also get some. In a system based on justice and merit, the Head Coach’s term would have been extended. Instead, Kumble was left hanging, and then told the post would be re-advertised afresh.Clearly, the issue has been handled in an extremely insensitive and unprofessional manner by the BCCI CEO and the BCCI office-bearers, with the COA, by its silence and inaction, unfortunately being complicit in this regard. (Recall that the Court Order of 30 January had expressly mandated us to supervise the management of BCCI.) In case due process had to be followed since Kumble’s original appointment was only for one year, why was this not done during April and May, when the IPL was on? If indeed the captain and the Head Coach were not getting along, why was this not attended to as soon as the Australia series was over in late March? Why was it left until the last minute, when a major international tournament was imminent, and when the uncertainty would undermine the morale and ability to focus of the coach, the captain and the team? And surely giving senior players the impression that they may have a veto power over the coach is another example of superstar culture gone berserk? Such a veto power is not permitted to any other top level professional team in any other sport in any other country. Already, in a dismaying departure from international norms, current Indian players enjoy a veto power on who can be the members of the commentary team. If it is to be coaches next, then perhaps the selectors and even office-bearers will follow?5. Ever since the Supreme Court announced the formation of the COA, we have been inundated, individually and collectively, by hundreds of mails asking us to address various ills that afflict Indian cricket and its administration. While many of these issues were trivial or clearly beyond our purview, there was one concern that we should have done far more to address. This concerns the callous treatment to domestic cricket and cricketers, namely, those who represent their state in the Ranji Trophy, the Mushtaq Ali Trophy, and other inter-state tournaments. The IPL may be Indian cricket’s showpiece; but surely the enormous revenues it generates should be used to make our domestic players more financially secure? There are many more Indian cricketers who make their living via the Ranji Trophy than via IPL; besides, for us to have a consistently strong Test team (especially overseas) we need a robust inter-state competition and therefore must seek to compensate domestic players better.And yet, shockingly, Ranji match fees have remained at a very low level (a mere Rs 30,000 odd for each day of play); moreover, cheques for match fees sent by the BCCI are sometimes not passed on by the state associations to the players. We need to learn from best practices in other countries, where domestic players are awarded annual contracts like those in the national team, while their match fees are reasonably competitive too.Several months ago, the experienced cricket administrator Amrit Mathur prepared an excellent note on the need for better and fairer treatment of domestic players. Both Diana and I have repeatedly urged action, but this has not happened.6. I believe it was a mistake for the COA to have stayed silent and inactive when the Supreme Court judgment was being so flagrantly violated by people clearly disqualified to serve as office bearers of state and even BCCI run cricket bodies. The disqualified men were openly attending BCCI meetings, claiming to represent their state association, and indeed played a leading role in the concerted (if fortunately in the end aborted) attempt to get the Indian team to boycott the Champions Trophy. All these illegalities were widely reported in the press; yet the COA did not bring them to the notice of the Court, and did not issue clear directions asking the offenders to desist either.7. I believe that the lack of attention to these (and other such issues) is in part due to the absence of a senior and respected male cricketer on our Committee. Allow me to quote from a mail I wrote on 1 February 2017, before our first full meeting:Dear fellow members,I much look forward to meeting you all later today. I know Vikram already and greatly admire both Vinod and Diana for their remarkable work in their chosen fields, and am truly honoured to be working with them as well.I presume apart from discussing IPL, etc, with the BCCI representative we will get some time to discuss the way forward separately. I have several ideas which I wish to share with you about our collective responsibility, and wanted in this mail to flag what is most important of these. This is that we must incorporate into our committee of administrators, either as a full member or as a special invitee, a senior male cricketer with the distinction and integrity that Diana has. That will greatly enhance both our credibility and our ability to make informed decisions.The absence of a respected male cricketer in the COA has attracted a great deal of criticism already, much of it from important stakeholders in Indian cricket. It must be addressed and remedied. The amicus curae had suggested two outstanding names, Venkat and Bedi, both of whom were rejected because they were over seventy. However, there are some cricketers of the right age and experience who fit the bill. Based on my knowledge of the subject, I would say Javagal Srinath would be an excellent choice. He is a world-class cricketer, was a successful and scandal-free Secretary of the Karnataka State Cricket Association and is an ICC match referee, and comes from an educated technical background to boot. I strongly urge the Chairman and the other members to consider approaching him in this regard. He would complement Diana perfectly, and the combination of these two respected and top class former cricketers would enhance our credibility and effectiveness enormously.While Srinath is in my view the best choice, there are other alternative names too. I hope we can set aside some time at our meeting to discuss and resolve the issue.With regardsRamp.s. Needless to say, I have not discussed this with Srinath or with anyone else.I raised this issue in a formal meeting of the COA as well, but unfortunately my proposal to invite a senior male cricketer to join the committee was not acted upon. We should have approached the Court to take necessary action, or else incorporated a senior, respected, male cricketer as a special invitee. With such a person on board the COA would have gained in experience, knowledge, understanding, and, not least, credibility. Indeed, had we such a person on board, the BCCI management and the office-bearers would have been compelled to be far more proactive in implementing the Lodha Committee recommendations than they have been thus far. As the only cricketers on the COA, Diana’s contributions have been invaluable; on many issues of administration and the rights of players she has brought a perspective based on a first-hand experience that the rest of us lacked. A male counterpart would have complemented and further enriched her contributions; but perhaps it is not too late to make amends.8. While all our meetings were held in a cordial atmosphere, between meetings perhaps there was not adequate consultation, and there were several crucial decisions made where all the COA members were not brought into the loop. For instance, a capable, non-political Senior Counsel representing the COA and the BCCI in the Supreme Court was abruptly replaced by another Senior Counsel who is a party politician. Surely other COA members should have been consulted by email or by phone before this important change was made.I have taken too much of your time already, but permit me to make one last suggestion. This is that the place vacated by me on the Committee of Administrators be filled by a senior, respected, male cricketer with administrative experience.Let me in conclusion thank you for your courtesy and civility these past few months, and wish you and the Committee all the best in your future endevours.With best wishesRamachandra Guhalast_img read more

Read more on Ramachandra Guha slams MS Dhoni’s Grade ‘A’ contract, questions superstar culture in Indian cricket

Video: ESPN’s Jon Gruden Tells Marcus Mariota He Rooted Against Oregon Because Of The Ducks’ Uniforms

first_imgJon Gruden appearing on ESPN.ESPN’s Jon Gruden is apparently not a fan of Oregon’s brightly-colored uniforms. On Monday, ESPN aired Gruden’s QB Camp with former Ducks’ quarterback Marcus Mariota, who is expected to be a top-10 pick in the NFL Draft. During Mariota’s session with Gruden, the NFL analyst expressed some distaste for Oregon’s fluorescent yellow uniforms, saying he rooted against the Ducks when they wore them. Jon Gruden trashes @Univ_Of_Oregon fluorescent yellow unis to Marcus Mariota while wearing a fluorescent yellow polo pic.twitter.com/Ul6Ya9uSg6— Chris Law (@ChrisLaw) March 17, 2015Gruden, of course, said all of this while wearing a neon-yellow polo. We’re guessing a man of his intelligence realizes the irony in his comments.last_img read more

Read more on Video: ESPN’s Jon Gruden Tells Marcus Mariota He Rooted Against Oregon Because Of The Ducks’ Uniforms

Scottsdale Ariz is synonymous with luxury This

first_imgScottsdale, Ariz. is synonymous with luxury. This world-class travel destination evokes images of high-end resorts, rejuvenating spas and championship golf courses with the majestic Sonoran Desert as the backdrop. Visitors come to Scottsdale to get a taste of the Southwest but wish for only the best. Whether the sophisticated traveler wants to learn to be a cowboy, be pampered in a desert-inspired spa, experience an adrenaline rush by soaring over the Grand Canyon or get away from it all in a mountainous hideaway, Scottsdale possesses what they desire.The Scottsdale Convention & Visitors Bureau is satisfying these travelers with the one-of-a-kind experiences they seek with the debut of Scottsdale Classics, seven extraordinary vacation packages ranging from $4,600-25,000 and selected to introduce travelers to the treasures of Scottsdale and Arizona in the style and luxury they deserve. The following is a sampling of the unique travel experiences:-Exclusive vault tour at Molina Fine Jewelers Private jet to the Grand Canyon including a helicopter tour below the rim and champagne reception along the Colorado River-Luxury accommodations at world-class resorts like Four Seasons Resort Scottsdale, Sanctuary on Camelback Mountain Resort and The Boulders Resort-Interactive culinary demonstration and dinner with nationally known chefs-Flying adventure at Turf Soaring School with private instructor-Private “vortex tour” in Sedona , Ariz.-Stargazing with a professional astronomer-Couples massage in Sanctum, a private stone-walled hideaway that boasts a vitality pool and deluge shower-Hot air balloon flight over the Sonoran Desert at sunset-Use of private automobile (choice of Porsche, Jaguar, Aston Martin and more) www.ScottsdaleClassics.comlast_img read more

Read more on Scottsdale Ariz is synonymous with luxury This

In This Issue   Gold begins 2014 in turnaroun

first_imgIn This Issue. *  Gold begins 2014 in turn-around mode. *  Thinly traded markets cause wild swings. *  Some great data on China. *  Is Fisher a Pfennig Reader? And, Now, Today’s Pfennig For Your Thoughts! So, What Really Ails Us? Good Day!  And a Happy Friday to one and all! Burrrrrrr, it’s cold outside. But baby it’s cold outside. You know, 100’s of duets sang that song over the years, but my fave version was with Ann Margaret and Al Hirt .  Or another song about the cold. Little Jack Frost Get Lost. I loved the Marjorie Hughes, Frankie Carle version.  I know there are folks that just love the cold, but I’m not one of them! Well, it appears that Gold has given the cold shoulder to the dollar to start the year. Yesterday, Gold hiked up $25 on the day, and today it’s up another $7 as I write. And imagine this, the guys that write about Gold think it’s all about demand from Asia. They are surprised by this demand. Are you kidding me? How could anyone, unless you’ve been living under a rock, (recall the Geico commercial? )  not already know that demand drives up price, and that the demand from Asia has been strong for a few years now? Well, OK, let me rethink that. I guess these “guys” don’t read the Pfennig, for if they did, they wouldn’t have been surprised! And speaking of demand. Did you see the numbers from the Perth Mint? If you didn’t then get a load of this. The Perth Mint, said that sales of Gold coins and bars totaled 754,635 ounces in 2013, VS 533,333 ounces in 2012!  And the same for Silver coins and bars, which totaled 8.6 million ounces in 2013, VS 6.5 million ounces in 2012! All the while the price of Gold and Silver plummeted in 2013. Doesn’t that smell fishy to you? It sure does to me! And it’s not Tilapia, or Grouper, Snapper, or Yellow Tail, or even Redfish or Flounder that smells. That fishy smell is call manipulation. The currencies were mixed bag yesterday, with the euro losing ground VS the dollar, and that brought the European currencies down too. The Antipodean currencies of Australia and New Zealand were up and down all day, like a yo-yo in action. And Japanese yen, of all currencies to rally. rallied. Huh? Anyhoo. The Antipodean currencies are much stronger in overnight trading, along with yen. There wasn’t any news, data, or jawboning to make these moves overnight, so I’ll have to put it down to the fact that the markets are still thinly traded, and any large trades could move the market one way or the other, due to the lack of volume. OK. You might see someone making some noise about how Central Banks really ramped up their diversification in the 3rd QTR of 2013. But don’t be confused (in my best Steve Mizerany voice) They didn’t ramp up their diversification into alternative currencies to own instead of dollars. Go back in time to the 3rd QTR last year, and we had the dollar on the ropes doing the old rope-a-dope, so that meant the values of the alternative currencies that the Central Banks held rose in value. That makes it look like they increased their holdings, but they really didn’t folks, the value of what they did hold increased, that’s all. That’s not to say that Central Banks around the world hadn’t already done some heavy lifting in the diversification arena, and they’ll continue to do more, but not at the levels the IMF reported for the 3rd QTR. OK. One of our EverBank Infinity gurus, Peter Mason, sent along a link to a story on currencies yesterday, and from that story I came across some very interesting data.  So, let me lay the groundwork for you on this. Long time readers will recall me ranting and raving about how U.S. leaders kept harping about how China’s currency manipulation was the answer to all that ails us as a country. And how I kept saying HOGWASH!  Well, now I have some real data to back up my thoughts. In 2004, the bilateral trade deficit the U.S. posted with China was $162 Billion. Now, it’s important to remember a couple of things before I go on. 1. China’s currency was pegged to the dollar in 2004, the peg wasn’t broken until July 2005. and 2. The U.S. went through a nasty depression that’s still going on between 2004 and 2013. Now, after an increase in the renminbi of around 36% since the drop of the peg, (recall I told you that yesterday) this year, the bilateral trade deficit the U.S. will run with China will be $325 Billion. What-What? (as the kids say).  How can that be? The U.S. leaders told us if China allowed their currency increase in value that our problems would be solved.  What happened? Well, it’s obvious that our leaders didn’t know what ailed us, because China has allowed a 36% gain in their currency VS the dollar, and yet the Trade Deficit with them doubled!!!!  And yet, we continue to hear calls from our leaders about how China needs to allow more appreciation in the renminbi! That gets me to the real nut behind our leaders claiming foul on China’s currency.  As I’ve always told you, our leaders need for the dollar to be weaker, to allow them to pay our debt servicing (bond interest) with cheaper dollars.  So, what better way to achieve this than to claim a foul on China, and point to them and say their currency weakness is a problem and will cure what ails us, knowing all the while that what they really want is a cheaper dollar, for if the Chinese currency continues to appreciate, as it has for 8 years now, (they actually held the renminbi steady during the financial meltdown, so there was no appreciation during that time) the dollar will continue to lose value.  The leaders get what they want, a cheaper dollar, and no one knows what’s really going on. Except me. and you dear reader! There’s not much news from the overseas markets today, and like I said the other day, I don’t expect trading to get back to normal volumes and liquidity until Monday, Jan 6.  Long time readers are now getting comfortable in their chairs and making sure they have a full cup of java for they know all too well that when there’s not much going on in the markets, that Chuck gets on his soapbox and begins to rant and wail about something. So. I guess the pressure is on me now to come up with something that will keep with tradition! HA! I could talk about how Dallas Fed Head Richard Fisher, must be a Pfennig Reader, for in an interview last month, he talked about how Bernanke had “painted the Fed into a corner”. OK, I know that the Big Boss Frank Trotter, and the little boss Chuck, are the only people that have talked about this. Frank in presentations, and Chuck in the Pfennig and the  Review & Focus. So, OK, maybe he came up with that on his own, and doesn’t read the Pfennig, but, it sure is suspicious, eh? And I did like something else Fisher had to say about all the excess reserves piling up in the U.S. banking system, calling the reserves “potential tinder” for inflation. This interview with Fisher took place on December 2nd. So why did it take so long for the masses to hear what he had to say? Now, I don’t know if this is what happened, but it sure makes sense to me. And that’s the interview was too harsh toward Big Ben Bernanke, and his policies, and the interview got put under the rug for a short period of time so that when it did appear it flew under the radar?  OK. maybe that doesn’t have anything to do with what I’m supposed to be talking about, but Hey! There are times you have to take a detour and find out what’s going on elsewhere! In keeping with the general theme that I began talking about a couple of years ago now, the relative calm in the Eurozone. Did you see that Spain paid back the bailout of their banks, and now start 2014 without Eurozone support for its banks? I find this news sort of incredible, don’t you? I mean a year ago, the pundits were still saying that Spain would collapse or leave the euro.  But the Eurozone’s European Stability Mechanism (ESM) smoothed out the wrinkles for Spain, and now a year later,  the banks are once again on sound footing.  Unfortunately, this news hasn’t carried over to any euro strength, the euro has lost about 1/4 of a cent this morning, after posting a near 1-cent loss yesterday.  Once again, the euro is getting kicked, but if things go as I see them going this year, this will only prove to have been a buying opportunity to buy at cheaper levels. And if they don’t go the way I see them, then I’ll have egg all over my face.  Not to worry. I’ve had egg all over my face before, I know all too well how that feels. Before I head to the Big Finish today, I wanted to talk about this news that I came across yesterday in the 5 Minute Forecast. I’ve told you about the 5 Minute Forecast before, as it’s a must-read for me Monday – Friday.  Let me have Dave Gonigam over at the “5” tell you. “The Bank of Canada is about to melt down 200,000 century old coins to balance their books. “ Chuck again. reminds me of the late 90’s when the European Central Banks were selling their Gold to make their books look better and to meet the Maastricht Treaty requirements. I think the European Central Bankers rue the day they sold their Gold. and I suspect that eventually the Bank of Canada will too. For What It’s Worth. It’s all Chuck today folks. Shoot Rudy, things are so desolate out there in News land that I have to resort to doing my own FWIW. OK. last week, the long term unemployment benefits stopped for 1.3 million jobless workers. And by the time we reach Christmas 2014, there will be another 4.9  million jobless workers who see their benefits stopped.  So. get ready for the Spin Doctors, and not the ones that sang Little Miss Can’t Be Wrong, to attempt to make some lemonade out of these lemons. You see, once these benefits stop, the U.S. in all their mental genius, will count these people as “no longer looking for work” and no longer count these people as unemployed. And thus we’ll see the Unemployment Rate drop, which is what the Fed Heads want, it’s what the Gov’t wants, and it’s what the markets will get all lathered up about. But it doesn’t really mean anything any longer, folks. The unemployed which is really around 23%, and not the 7% the Gov’t claims it to be. To recap. The markets are thinly traded and with little liquidity as everyone is not back to work yet, Japan remains closed, and so on. So, wild swings in the currencies can and will be found. Yesterday saw a huge $25 gain in Gold, and the shiny metal is up another $7 this morning. The Perth Mint says demand for Gold & Silver bars and coins soared in 2013. in a year where both Gold & Silver saw huge losses in value. Hmmm. Currencies today 1/3/14. American Style: A$ .8990, kiwi .8295, C$ .9410, euro 1.3650, sterling 1.6430, Swiss $1.1095, . European Style: rand 10.5920, krone 6.1260, SEK 6.4920, forint 218.75, zloty 3.0525, koruna 20.1525, RUB 33.10, yen 104.50, sing 1.2650, HKD 7.7550, INR 62.15, China 6.1039, pesos 13.08, BRL 2.3765, Dollar Index 80.55, Oil $95.40, 10-year 2.98%, Silver $20.20, Platinum $1,408.99, Palladium $729.65, and Gold. $1,230.99  And in 2014, I’ll only bug you to look at the U.S. Debt Clock every once in a while. That’s it for today. Well, Jan 3 is finally here, which means my beloved Missouri Tigers finally play their bowl game tonight. They’ll play in the Cotton Bowl, against Oklahoma St. The recent history of games between these two teams doesn’t bode well for my Tigers, so maybe they can turn the tables on that history! Well, Alex will be attending St. Louis University for the next 6 years (hopefully) as he was accepted into their program for Physical Therapy and sports medicine or something like that. So, for Christmas we all received St. Louis University (SLU) shirts and sweatshirts. That color blue will be difficult for me to get used to, given that the only colors I really know are Black & Gold (Missouri) or Red & White (Cardinals). But the SLU Billikens Basketball team is good, so that should be fun!  I’ll be heading over to a friends’ house for a tail-gate before the football game tonight. I think the tail-gate will be inside though, due to the bitter cold outside. And with that, I thank you for reading the Pfennig, and I hope you have a Fantastico Friday! Chuck Butler President EverBank World Markets 1-800-926-4922 1-314-647-3837last_img read more

Read more on In This Issue   Gold begins 2014 in turnaroun