Seed42Lab/en-ud-test · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 11 758	label class label 2 classes
And I knew this.	1clean
So when he opened up on that, and she followed through, and told about her husband, you know?	1clean
I really do believe that.	1clean
I don't know how else he could have done it.	1clean
That topples over.	1clean
Um, but he didn't say that.	1clean
He said, I loved your hum- humor, uh, and I love you, but, I am not a political appointee.	1clean
And his eyes were just snapping.	1clean
And I said, Oh? How did you get on the board?	1clean
Well he said, I got a letter from the governor, asking.	1clean
And then I went to Rotus, who's a seasoned politician, if there ever was one.	1clean
And I said, well, I – alright.	1clean
I said, I'll apologize next time, and I'm gon na make hay out of it, don't you worry.	1clean
I wan na know how you birds got on that board, if you're not political appointees.	1clean
I don't have any this year, but I've grown it other years.	1clean
There's no proble-.	1clean
A little bit of frost, it's gone.	1clean
I l- I learned that one time the –	1clean
I learned it just went down.	1clean
Well, I think it was Barbara that has some seeds.	1clean
It comes right up.	1clean
You gave him some kind of herb.	1clean
Did I give him some?	1clean
I gave him a red pepper.	1clean
I think you – I think you gave him some herb of some kind.	1clean
I don't have any this year, I forgot to plant it.	1clean
I have oregano.	1clean
I have a lot of dried or- oregano.	1clean
You smoked it down into the cork, didn't you?	1clean
You smoked it down into the cork.	1clean
No, it chokes me to death.	1clean
But Petitioner did not plead guilty and was not convicted.	1clean
Instead, he raised an insanity defense, claiming that because he was mentally ill at the time he tried to steal the coat he should not be blamed for his act.	1clean
The Government did not contest this claim and the trial court found, after a stipulated trial, that the Petitioner was not guilty by reason of insanity.	1clean
P- Petitioner still remains confined in the hospital on the basis of that commitment, even though more than seven years have now passed since his initial incarceration and more than six years have passed since the time he would have necessarily been released had he been convicted rather than acquitted.	1clean
Petitioner contends that whatever the validity of his kinitial commitment to the hospital, once he had been confined there for longer than he could have been incarcerated upon conviction, his commitment became an indefinite one.	1clean
Mr. Wasserstrom, you're not challenging, as I understand it, the -- the initial commitment.	1clean
Our position is, Your Honor, that he has to be released at that time unless the Government can at that time prove his commitability by the standards required.	1clean
Um, there are arguable justifications for that initial commitment, and we don't discuss one way or another whether those justifications are sufficient to validate that initial commitment and we don't think the Court need reach that question.	1clean
Well, we think the only justifications that could, the only justifications that could, um, that could countenance that initial commitment are punitive in nature, that is, are a kind of punitive rationale.	1clean
Well, Your Honor, I don't think that it's terribly important whether the word "punitive" is used, but I do think that any kinds of justifications which would justify the initial commitment are what I would call backward looking justifications, that is, justifications that do turn on the fact that he, it -- was found to have committed a criminal act beyond a reasonable doubt.	1clean
But hasn't this Court, as well as the United States Court of Appeals in the D.C. Circuit, said there's no rational connection between the possible sentence and the possible length of stay after an acquittal, not guilty by reason of insanity?	1clean
I believe that the law in the United States Court of Appeals in Brown against the United States and in Wade v. Jacobs, in both of those cases the Court suggested that there is a relationship between the sentence that might have been imposed and the length that the commitment can persist without the Government proving, uh, proving commitability under civil commitment standards.	1clean
I don't think that this Court has, has uh, has addressed that question, and I then think this is the first case that raises it.	1clean
Oh, the Court has said expressly that there's no connection, in one case some time ago.	1clean
Does your position depend at all on whether or not the initial crime was a crime of violence?	1clean
In proposition of law number three, we have an ultimate finding of fact which was resolved in favor of Darnell Hurt.	1clean
Darnell Hurt had asked for the provocation mitiger- mitigator to apply to all offenses which he was charged, which includes the felonious assault, and indirectly then he also requested it, um, for the felony murder charge as well.	1clean
We believe that on retrial, collateral estoppel would prevent retrial without regard for the jury's prior finding in Hurt's favor, that ther- that the provocation mitigator existed, that he was acting under serious provocation.	1clean
He was coming in hot and he pulled out his firearm.	1clean
And here comes Melvin Dobson arriving at the scene to the rescue of his daughter.	1clean
And that incenses him, Hurt, to the point where he uses deadly force.	1clean
And then they said, if you apply all the factors, that's voluntary manslaughter.	1clean
The State of Ohio had then directed the jury to find these provocation mitigators, which it did.	1clean
In looking at Green versus United States and the courts, the high court out of the state of Texas and the federal circuits in Kennedy versus Washington on this constitutional issue, I believe that the authority uh exists to find that collateral estoppel would preclude the defendant from having to prove these mitigators a second time to a different jury because he preserved the issue by requesting the jury instruction for the mitigators on all of the applicable counts, and he didn't request that the jury -- or concede to permit the jury to be discharged without considering those mitigators, when the jury didn't consider them and the additional counts, it acted almost as an applied acquittal or an applied um finding towards this affirmative defense.	1clean
The high court in Texas in ex parte Jimmy Dean Watkins agreed with that.	1clean
And it indicated that in any additional trial, once a jury finds those provocation mitigators, that it can't be required to find them again.	1clean
Additionally, in the Kennedy versus Washington uh matter, the Federal Circuit Court stated that the Green versus United States implied acquittal would generally apply in cases where the provocation mitigator was at issue.	1clean
Here the jury made the finding.	1clean
It made a specific finding for the provocation mitigator.	1clean
Um, so where the murderer was already negated by the findings for the -- the mitigators, we believe that it is ripe at this point um prior to new trial, that this court rule on this and preclude um the trial court from requiring that he face the murder charges again.	1clean
President Barack Obama walks away from the lectern with Vice President Joe Biden after making a statement about the mass shooting in Orlando, Fla., June 16, 2016.	1clean
There is a longstanding history of the fear of “the others” turning humans into illogical ruthless weapons, in service to an ideology.	1clean
Demagogues have always used fear for intimidation of the subordinates or enemies, and shepherding the tribe by the leaders.	1clean
We learn fear from tribe mates	1clean
We also learn from observation, such as witnessing a predator attacking another human.	1clean
And, we learn by instructions, such as being told there is a predator nearby.	1clean
We have a tendency to trust our tribe mates and authorities, especially when it comes to danger.	1clean
This way we accumulated knowledge.	1clean
Tribalism has been an inherent part of the human history.	1clean
There has always been competition between groups of humans in different ways and with different faces, from brutal wartime nationalism to a strong loyalty to a football team.	1clean
Evidence from cultural neuroscience shows that our brains even respond differently at an unconscious level simply to the view of faces from other races or cultures.	1clean
On the other hand, we regress to tribalism when afraid.	1clean
It does not have to necessarily be race or nationality, which are used very often.	1clean
The list goes on and on.	1clean
When building tribal boundaries between “us” and “them,” some politicians have managed very well to create virtual groups of people that do not communicate and hate without even knowing each other: This is the human animal in action!	1clean
Very often my patients with phobias start with: “I know it is stupid, but I am afraid of spiders.”	1clean
And I always reply: “It is not stupid, it is illogical.”	1clean
We humans have different functions in the brain, and fear oftentimes bypasses logic.	1clean
There are several reasons.	1clean
Politicians and the media very often use fear to circumvent our logic.	1clean
I always say the U.S. media are disaster pornographers – they work too much on triggering their audiences’ emotions.	1clean
If one undocumented illegal immigrant murders a U.S. citizen, some politicians use fear with the hope that few will ask: “This is terrible, but how many people were murdered in this country by U.S. citizens just today?”	1clean
Or: “I know several murders happen every week in this town, but why am I so scared now that this one is being showcased by the media?”	1clean
We do not ask these questions, because fear bypasses logic.	1clean
There is a reason that the response to fear is called the “fight or flight” response.	1clean
That response has helped us survive the predators and other tribes that have wanted to kill us.	1clean
When ideologies manage to get hold of our fear circuitry, we often regress to illogical, tribal and aggressive human animals, becoming weapons ourselves – weapons that politicians use for their own agenda.	1clean
This essay originally appeared in The Conversation.	1clean
“Everything was a fight,” the head of the union admits.	1clean
“They spent more time on grievances and on things like that than they did on producing cars.	1clean
They had strikes all the time.	1clean
“One of the expressions was, you can buy anything you want in the GM plant in Fremont,” adds Jeffrey Liker, a professor who studied the plant.	1clean
When management tried to punish workers, workers tried to punish them right back: scratching cars, loosening parts in hard-to-reach places, filing union grievances, sometimes even building cars unsafely.	1clean
In 1982, GM finally closed the plant.	1clean
But the very next year, when Toyota was planning to start its first plant in the US, it decided to partner with GM to reopen it, hiring back the same old disastrous workers into the very same jobs.	1clean
And so began the most fascinating experiment in management history.	1clean
Toyota flew this rowdy crew to Japan, to see an entirely different way of working: The Toyota Way.	1clean
At Toyota, labor and management considered themselves on the same team; when workers got stuck, managers did n’t yell at them, but asked how they could help and solicited suggestions.	1clean
“You had union workers—grizzled old folks that had worked on the plant floor for 30 years, and they were hugging their Japanese counterparts, just absolutely in tears,” recalls their Toyota trainer.	1clean

And I knew this.

1clean

So when he opened up on that, and she followed through, and told about her husband, you know?

1clean

I really do believe that.

1clean

I don't know how else he could have done it.

1clean

That topples over.

1clean

Um, but he didn't say that.

1clean

He said, I loved your hum- humor, uh, and I love you, but, I am not a political appointee.

1clean

And his eyes were just snapping.

1clean

And I said, Oh? How did you get on the board?

1clean

Well he said, I got a letter from the governor, asking.

1clean

And then I went to Rotus, who's a seasoned politician, if there ever was one.

1clean

And I said, well, I – alright.

1clean

I said, I'll apologize next time, and I'm gon na make hay out of it, don't you worry.

1clean

I wan na know how you birds got on that board, if you're not political appointees.

1clean

I don't have any this year, but I've grown it other years.

1clean

There's no proble-.

1clean

A little bit of frost, it's gone.

1clean

I l- I learned that one time the –

1clean

I learned it just went down.

1clean

Well, I think it was Barbara that has some seeds.

1clean

It comes right up.

1clean

You gave him some kind of herb.

1clean

Did I give him some?

1clean

I gave him a red pepper.

1clean

I think you – I think you gave him some herb of some kind.

1clean

I don't have any this year, I forgot to plant it.

1clean

I have oregano.

1clean

I have a lot of dried or- oregano.

1clean

You smoked it down into the cork, didn't you?

1clean

You smoked it down into the cork.

1clean

No, it chokes me to death.

1clean

But Petitioner did not plead guilty and was not convicted.

1clean

Instead, he raised an insanity defense, claiming that because he was mentally ill at the time he tried to steal the coat he should not be blamed for his act.

1clean

The Government did not contest this claim and the trial court found, after a stipulated trial, that the Petitioner was not guilty by reason of insanity.

1clean

P- Petitioner still remains confined in the hospital on the basis of that commitment, even though more than seven years have now passed since his initial incarceration and more than six years have passed since the time he would have necessarily been released had he been convicted rather than acquitted.

1clean

Petitioner contends that whatever the validity of his kinitial commitment to the hospital, once he had been confined there for longer than he could have been incarcerated upon conviction, his commitment became an indefinite one.

1clean

Mr. Wasserstrom, you're not challenging, as I understand it, the -- the initial commitment.

1clean

Our position is, Your Honor, that he has to be released at that time unless the Government can at that time prove his commitability by the standards required.

1clean

Um, there are arguable justifications for that initial commitment, and we don't discuss one way or another whether those justifications are sufficient to validate that initial commitment and we don't think the Court need reach that question.

1clean

Well, we think the only justifications that could, the only justifications that could, um, that could countenance that initial commitment are punitive in nature, that is, are a kind of punitive rationale.

1clean

Well, Your Honor, I don't think that it's terribly important whether the word "punitive" is used, but I do think that any kinds of justifications which would justify the initial commitment are what I would call backward looking justifications, that is, justifications that do turn on the fact that he, it -- was found to have committed a criminal act beyond a reasonable doubt.

1clean

But hasn't this Court, as well as the United States Court of Appeals in the D.C. Circuit, said there's no rational connection between the possible sentence and the possible length of stay after an acquittal, not guilty by reason of insanity?

1clean

I believe that the law in the United States Court of Appeals in Brown against the United States and in Wade v. Jacobs, in both of those cases the Court suggested that there is a relationship between the sentence that might have been imposed and the length that the commitment can persist without the Government proving, uh, proving commitability under civil commitment standards.

1clean

I don't think that this Court has, has uh, has addressed that question, and I then think this is the first case that raises it.

1clean

Oh, the Court has said expressly that there's no connection, in one case some time ago.

1clean

Does your position depend at all on whether or not the initial crime was a crime of violence?

1clean

In proposition of law number three, we have an ultimate finding of fact which was resolved in favor of Darnell Hurt.

1clean

Darnell Hurt had asked for the provocation mitiger- mitigator to apply to all offenses which he was charged, which includes the felonious assault, and indirectly then he also requested it, um, for the felony murder charge as well.

1clean

We believe that on retrial, collateral estoppel would prevent retrial without regard for the jury's prior finding in Hurt's favor, that ther- that the provocation mitigator existed, that he was acting under serious provocation.

1clean

He was coming in hot and he pulled out his firearm.

1clean

And here comes Melvin Dobson arriving at the scene to the rescue of his daughter.

1clean

And that incenses him, Hurt, to the point where he uses deadly force.

1clean

And then they said, if you apply all the factors, that's voluntary manslaughter.

1clean

The State of Ohio had then directed the jury to find these provocation mitigators, which it did.

1clean

In looking at Green versus United States and the courts, the high court out of the state of Texas and the federal circuits in Kennedy versus Washington on this constitutional issue, I believe that the authority uh exists to find that collateral estoppel would preclude the defendant from having to prove these mitigators a second time to a different jury because he preserved the issue by requesting the jury instruction for the mitigators on all of the applicable counts, and he didn't request that the jury -- or concede to permit the jury to be discharged without considering those mitigators, when the jury didn't consider them and the additional counts, it acted almost as an applied acquittal or an applied um finding towards this affirmative defense.

1clean

The high court in Texas in ex parte Jimmy Dean Watkins agreed with that.

1clean

And it indicated that in any additional trial, once a jury finds those provocation mitigators, that it can't be required to find them again.

1clean

Additionally, in the Kennedy versus Washington uh matter, the Federal Circuit Court stated that the Green versus United States implied acquittal would generally apply in cases where the provocation mitigator was at issue.

1clean

Here the jury made the finding.

1clean

It made a specific finding for the provocation mitigator.

1clean

Um, so where the murderer was already negated by the findings for the -- the mitigators, we believe that it is ripe at this point um prior to new trial, that this court rule on this and preclude um the trial court from requiring that he face the murder charges again.

1clean

President Barack Obama walks away from the lectern with Vice President Joe Biden after making a statement about the mass shooting in Orlando, Fla., June 16, 2016.

1clean

There is a longstanding history of the fear of “the others” turning humans into illogical ruthless weapons, in service to an ideology.

1clean

Demagogues have always used fear for intimidation of the subordinates or enemies, and shepherding the tribe by the leaders.

1clean

We learn fear from tribe mates

1clean

We also learn from observation, such as witnessing a predator attacking another human.

1clean

And, we learn by instructions, such as being told there is a predator nearby.

1clean

We have a tendency to trust our tribe mates and authorities, especially when it comes to danger.

1clean

This way we accumulated knowledge.

1clean

Tribalism has been an inherent part of the human history.

1clean

There has always been competition between groups of humans in different ways and with different faces, from brutal wartime nationalism to a strong loyalty to a football team.

1clean

Evidence from cultural neuroscience shows that our brains even respond differently at an unconscious level simply to the view of faces from other races or cultures.

1clean

On the other hand, we regress to tribalism when afraid.

1clean

It does not have to necessarily be race or nationality, which are used very often.

1clean

The list goes on and on.

1clean

When building tribal boundaries between “us” and “them,” some politicians have managed very well to create virtual groups of people that do not communicate and hate without even knowing each other: This is the human animal in action!

1clean

Very often my patients with phobias start with: “I know it is stupid, but I am afraid of spiders.”

1clean

And I always reply: “It is not stupid, it is illogical.”

1clean

We humans have different functions in the brain, and fear oftentimes bypasses logic.

1clean

There are several reasons.

1clean

Politicians and the media very often use fear to circumvent our logic.

1clean

I always say the U.S. media are disaster pornographers – they work too much on triggering their audiences’ emotions.

1clean

If one undocumented illegal immigrant murders a U.S. citizen, some politicians use fear with the hope that few will ask: “This is terrible, but how many people were murdered in this country by U.S. citizens just today?”

1clean

Or: “I know several murders happen every week in this town, but why am I so scared now that this one is being showcased by the media?”

1clean

We do not ask these questions, because fear bypasses logic.

1clean

There is a reason that the response to fear is called the “fight or flight” response.

1clean

That response has helped us survive the predators and other tribes that have wanted to kill us.

1clean

When ideologies manage to get hold of our fear circuitry, we often regress to illogical, tribal and aggressive human animals, becoming weapons ourselves – weapons that politicians use for their own agenda.

1clean

This essay originally appeared in The Conversation.

1clean

“Everything was a fight,” the head of the union admits.

1clean

“They spent more time on grievances and on things like that than they did on producing cars.

1clean

They had strikes all the time.

1clean

“One of the expressions was, you can buy anything you want in the GM plant in Fremont,” adds Jeffrey Liker, a professor who studied the plant.

1clean

When management tried to punish workers, workers tried to punish them right back: scratching cars, loosening parts in hard-to-reach places, filing union grievances, sometimes even building cars unsafely.

1clean

In 1982, GM finally closed the plant.

1clean

But the very next year, when Toyota was planning to start its first plant in the US, it decided to partner with GM to reopen it, hiring back the same old disastrous workers into the very same jobs.

1clean

And so began the most fascinating experiment in management history.

1clean

Toyota flew this rowdy crew to Japan, to see an entirely different way of working: The Toyota Way.

1clean

At Toyota, labor and management considered themselves on the same team; when workers got stuck, managers did n’t yell at them, but asked how they could help and solicited suggestions.

1clean

“You had union workers—grizzled old folks that had worked on the plant floor for 30 years, and they were hugging their Japanese counterparts, just absolutely in tears,” recalls their Toyota trainer.

1clean