text:
Our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy have changed.

By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to the new Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

U.S. + International

News > Fortune 500
    SAVE   |   EMAIL   |   PRINT   |   RSS
Merck lawyers attack Vioxx testimony
Medical examiner and Merck scientist give evidence that could hurt drugmaker; Merck shoots back.
July 28, 2005: 4:23 PM EDT
By Aaron Smith, CNN/Money staff writer

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Merck's lawyers attacked potentially damaging testimony from a medical examiner in the first Vioxx lawsuit and filed a motion Thursday to prevent her from testifying before jurors in a Texas courtroom.

Former Texas medical examiner Maria Araneta testified on Tuesday before lawyers and Judge Ben Hardin but not before jurors that Robert Ernst, a 59-year-old triathlete and Vioxx patient, died in 2001 from a blood clot or heart attack, according to a lawyer representing Ernst's widow.

The testimony is potentially damaging to Merck & Co. (up $0.07 to $31.29, Research) The plaintiff in the case, Carol Ernst, blames Vioxx for her husband's death and has sued the company.

Merck's defense team filed a motion requesting that Araneta be blocked from testifying before the jury. The motion says that Araneta "was not timely designated as a person with knowledge of relevant facts or an expert witness in this case. Moreover, because plaintiff waited until the day of trial to identify Dr. Araneta, Merck is not able to evaluate properly and respond fully to her opinions."

Before filing the motion, Merck defense lawyer Jonathan Skidmore said at the trial, "[Araneta's] appearance is surprising, considering she was not on the plaintiff's witness list as required by Texas rules."

Ernst's lawyer, W. Mark Lanier of Houston, said that Araneta's testimony in Texas Superior Court proves that Vioxx caused the death of Robert Ernst. Lanier acknowledged he paid $6,000 to fly Araneta from the United Arab Emirates, where she now works, to testify at the trial in Angleton, Texas.

But Merck defense lawyer Skidmore attacked Araneta's testimony as inconsistent with Ernst's autopsy report.

"In the deposition, the coroner testified she can't remember the autopsy," said Skidmore at the trial, according to his firm. "In the autopsy report, which [Araneta] signed, it states there was no evidence of a myocardial infarction and no clot."

Lanier told CNN/Money that Araneta's testimony "matches her autopsy perfectly" and Merck's lawyers were misrepresenting her.

"Big mistake on Merck's part," said Lanier. "They deliberately misled the jury on what Araneta's autopsy meant, figuring I would not put her on the stand."

Merck has consistently asserted that Vioxx is not the proven cause of Ernst's death and the motion refers to Araneta's autopsy as "arguably one of the most critical pieces of evidence in this case."

The lawsuit by Carol Ernst is just the first of more than 4,100 lawsuits filed against Merck because of Vioxx.

Chris Shibutani, an analyst for J.P. Morgan Securities, recently estimated that Merck's liabilities for Vioxx range from $8 billion to $25 billion, the highest estimate so far. Shibutani rates the company "neutral."

Araneta is not the only weapon in Lanier's arsenal. On Thursday jurors heard testimony from David Egilman, a public health professor at Brown University. Egilman resisted Merck sales reps after Vioxx went on the market in 1999 and refused to prescribe the drug at his former family clinic because he did not believe it was safe, according to Lanier.

In separate testimony on Wednesday, Merck scientist Nancy Santanello acknowledged that her company did not change the Vioxx warning label after a study showed that it escalated the risk of heart attacks, according to Lanier and news reports. Santanello testified that Merck persuaded regulators to move language on Vioxx's potential heart attack risks to a less prominent place on the drug's label.

Merck has consistently denied allegations that it concealed the health hazards of Vioxx, noting that it voluntarily withdrew the drug last Sept. 30 because of health concerns.

"Merck acted responsibly, from researching Vioxx prior to approval in clinical trials involving almost 10,000 patients to monitoring the medicine while it was on the market to voluntarily withdrawing the medicine when it did," said Jarrell, the spokesman for Merck's defense lawyers.

Based in Whitehouse Station, N.J., Merck is one of the largest and oldest drugmakers, with $22.9 billion in 2004 sales.

For more stories on Fortune 500 companies, click here.  Top of page

Merck & Company Incorporated
Manage alerts | What is this?


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Truncated: length

WARC-Type: response

text:
Our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy have changed.

By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to the new Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

The next $1 billion startup

Internet Week festival manager Caroline Waxler says several New York based startups could be the next billion dollar acquisition target.

  • untitled
This video series blends small business and tech to highlight dramatic stories of entrepreneurs and the innovative new practices they are implementing to drive the American economy forward.

warcinfo:
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-31-129-80.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-50
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for November 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf


text:
FREE Classified ads for erotic services in Montreal
#718336 | 2015-06-05
Montréal |
Hi, I'm Fiona, Chinese, 21 yrs old. Call Me.

My name is Fiona, I'm 21 yrs.

I'm Chinese.

Come and find me at Royal Massage.

I'm slim, tight, Perky Cs, small behind, lovely face.

You'll love me for sure, I will guaranteed your happiness.

Find me now.

514 489 6655.

Contact Us
Report this ad
Terms and Conditions     Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2010-2016


text:
Mustered Out on Mertactor

Life in Jump

Life in jump aboard Unguin’s Princess goes pretty well.

Sean and Daria are quite demanding of Autumn’s time wanting special treatment. Autumn is up to the task, however, and manages to keep the pair of them happy. Eneri spends the least amount of time in the common room. He is polite, but a little nervous and rather insular, preferring to spend more time alone in his stateroom than with the others. Conversely, Jasya spends little of her time in her stateroom, only going there to sleep. She proves to be popular with both the other passengers and the crew alone as she has a hard drive with the latest holofilms from the Imperium. Her regular movie evenings prove to be very popular and Autumn is very happy that she doesn’t have to come up with other ways of entertaining everyone.

Jan is a true techie and seeks out Grim wherever possible to talk engines with him. His personal assistant, Valencia, is a very flirtatious cougar. After a few days in jump, Max can be seen emerging from her stateroom in the mornings with a sly grin on his face.

The remainder of the crew don’t have too many draws on their time and so they are able to continue with their training routines in between the odd jobs they need to do in order to make sure that the A2 remains in A1 condition.

Max comes out of Valencia’s room with grim on his face? Grim is shocked.

Oh sure, Max gets Valencia and Grim gets to talk with Jan? Did I mention that Grim’s been feeling very alone, what with being newly single? (Beverly is now a ghost exorcised and Talks with Taeva seem to have broken down over the prenup…}

Grim (but “looking”)/Ian

(please see StellarLove advert at ebox #34343555 for Grim’s particulars…he’s a very witty conversationlist who hates Zhodani telenovellas: they never have surprise endings…)

Once we emerge from jump, en-route to the gas giant, Arvor and Jie go through a live firing exercise to test all weaponry systems. Interested parties watch the proceedings via holoscreen, and Max offers to take wagers on the target practice. In the interests of economy, only 2 missiles are expended – but with spectacular results as they destroy small moonlets in the gas giants’ rings. This gives Will the opportunity to run his spectrometer and interferometer and conduct an analysis of the chemical makeup of the moonlets, and entertain the guests with his erudition for hours, while the tedious business of fuel skimming is conducted.

LOL! Will heartily approves of the use of two valuable missiles in the interest of science. There’s a paper in this!

Sorry – don’t know how to contact anyone when Nick is not online re: google. I cannot join the network – I am getting “network too full” messages on my new laptop, and just timeouts on my netbook which worked in the past.

You’re showing up onmy “hamachi”, can you open the chat window to “moor2011”?

I'm sorry, but we no longer support this web browser. Please upgrade your browser or install Chrome or Firefox to enjoy the full functionality of this site.


text:
Wednesday, August 12, 2009

DALI to be Included on New Anime Compilation in HQ!

Columbia Records in Japan will be releasing a second volume of favorite anime theme songs next month! Our Favorite Anime Songs 2 will be released September 18th, and will be in the HQCD format (no special player required). Included on this release are songs from City Hunter, Dragon Quest, Dragonball, Yawara, and DALI’s rendition of the Sailor Moon theme song, Moonlight Densetsu (Moonlight Legend). Fans may recall that DALI’s rendition was used for the first two seasons. Another person involved with Sailor Moon makes an appearance on this album - Mitsuko Horie's (Sailor Galaxia) performance of a memorable song from Candy Candy is also featured! the entire tracklist is listed below, and fans who are not in Japan can purchase it from their favorite Japanese online retailer.

1. Theme from Lupin the Third – Lupin the 3rd
2. City Hunter - Love doesn't disappear - - City Hunter
3. Miracle Girl - Yawara
4. I’ll Give You Romance - Dragonball
5. Believe in Dreams – Dragon Quest
6. Hello Sadness – Maison Ikkoku
7. Youth - Touch
8. Blazing Kinnikuman - Kinnikuman
9. Galaxy Express 999 Theme – Galaxy Express 999
10. Moonlight Legend – Sailor Moon
11. Riding the Boat of Dreams - Captain Future
12. Light Year Dream - Spaceship Sagittarius
13. 10% Chance of Rain - Miyuki
14. Ro Ro Ro Russian Roulette – Dirty Pair
15. I Caught Mr. Sun in a Bucket - Chie the Brat
16. Genius Bakabon Theme – Genius Bakabon
17. Gatchaman's Song - Gatchaman
18. Tomorrow’s Joe Theme – Tomorrow’s Joe
19. Yuke! Tiger Mask – Tiger Mask
20. Open Road – Dog of Flanders
21. I Love Tomorrow – Mitsuko Horie
22. Babel II Theme – Babel II

No comments:


text:
The Moose 95.1 FM » customer appreciation party Bozeman's Best Rock Thu, 08 Dec 2016 20:31:03 +0000 en-US hourly 1 The Moose 95.1 FM Don't Miss Dee-O-Gee's Customer Appreciation Party Next Thursday, December 6th Wed, 28 Nov 2012 17:14:47 +0000 Continue reading…]]>

Dee-O-Gee's 2012 Customer Appreciation Party is next Thursday evening. Stop by for great discounts, a FREE d-o-g photo session (with donations benefitting Heart of the Valley Animal Shelter), and complimentary beverages and snacks. Details here:

Continue reading…

]]> 0 Photo by Dee-O-Gee/Facebook


text:
Monday, April 30, 2007

Another Shame

After Katrina struck, “Allies offered $854 million in cash and in oil that was to be sold for cash. But only $40 million has been used so far for disaster victims or reconstruction, according to U.S. officials and contractors. Most of the aid went uncollected, including $400 million worth of oil.”

“And while television sets worldwide showed images of New Orleans residents begging to be rescued from rooftops as floodwaters rose, U.S. officials turned down countless offers of allied troops and search-and-rescue teams. The most common responses: "sent letter of thanks" and "will keep offer on hand," the new documents show.”
Washington Post quote

As if we needed more proof that this has to be the most incompetent administration of our life time, maybe ever. All sorts of gifts and offers and yet they still screwed it up and continue to until this day. If you add the lives lost after Katrina to the lives lost in Iraq, both American and Iraqi, that’s a lot of lives. So many lost at the hands of so few.

Blogger sumo said...

Definitely criminal...and I think criminal intent can be proven. They need to turn over all the emails for one. I'm sure there are damning emails for Katrina stuff.

April 30, 2007 2:45 AM
Blogger Coffee Messiah said...

Talking about waste to the nth degree! ; (

Sad and disgusting and life goes on for gw and company, with nary a worry in the world! ; (

April 30, 2007 3:11 AM
Blogger JM said...

The only thing this administration has proven itself good at is saying one thing, and doing another.

April 30, 2007 4:22 AM
Blogger Undeniable Liberal said...

You would think that we are getting to a "last straw" moment, but the remaining 28% of approvers.....well you know.

April 30, 2007 4:31 AM
Blogger niCk (Mem Beth) said...

"As if we needed more proof that this has to be the most incompetent administration of our life time, maybe ever. "

We are reminded everyday of the sham of this administration. How come these criminals are still free? Incompetence, Fraud, Failure, over and over and over again. I cannot think of one positive thing that has been accomplished from this administration.

I can't believe 30% refuse to open their eyes and ears and realize they've been had.

April 30, 2007 5:15 AM
Blogger Peacechick Mary said...

I bet the Rethugs were hoping to steal the money and oil for themselves. They have not intention of helping others unless they can get rich doing it. Very sick group of people - kind of like a gang of terror thieves.

April 30, 2007 5:52 AM
Blogger Donnie McDaniel said...

See, I told you they hate us!

April 30, 2007 6:04 AM
Blogger Women on the Verge said...

I'm past thinking this is incompetence... this is by design... for whatever reason they WANT chaos... they feed on fear and despair like giant red scavengers...

April 30, 2007 7:25 AM
Blogger robin andrea said...

Sometimes I wish I lived closer to Washington DC, just so I could stand in front of the White House with a new protest sign everyday. There is not one thing that this administration has done, not a single policy that benefitted the vast majority of Americans. I often don't know what to do with my rage.

April 30, 2007 7:27 AM
Blogger fallenmonk said...

The good news is that with each new revelation of incompetence and greed this administration and the conservative thugs who run it are building a dossier that we will be able to point to for years and say "See what happens when you let these people into government."

April 30, 2007 8:04 AM
Blogger TomCat said...

I'm glad I don't love closer to Washington. There a fellow could get shot for peeing on a Bush. :-(

Seriously, given the racial makeup of New Orleans at the time, I think Bush viewed Katrina as divine assistance.

April 30, 2007 11:30 AM
Blogger bluegrrrrl said...

this news really makes me physically ill. heartless jackasses.

April 30, 2007 12:26 PM
Blogger LET'S TALK said...

I agree with what nick (Mem Beth) had to say.

One other thing is, how can this man and his base really call themselves Christians and treat people as if they are not part of God's creation.

How can a man say he's President of a country, send his people off to fight a made up war for control over oil for the Oil companies, then allow his citizens to face tragedy in the worse way and not even accept the help that others offer?

What manner of man is this, could Satan have done any better?

April 30, 2007 12:35 PM
Blogger DivaJood said...

This administration's heartless cynicism is criminal. How they could turn away aide from allies is beyond understanding - except they wanted to "bleach" New Orleans. The poorer, Black wards will not be rebuilt.

Over the weekend I saw "Jesus Camp", and the blind support Evangelicals give this administration is chilling. Bush wants us isolated and afraid.

The last lines of One Hundred Years Of Solitude sums up what I fear is happening here:

"...races condemned to one hundred years of solitude did not have a second opportunity on earth.”

April 30, 2007 2:07 PM
Blogger B.T.Bear (esq.) said...

The UK sent lots of food to help, but it was trashed. They said it was because it contained beef. But they destroyed all the non-beef stuff too, just the whole lot.

Hey ho.

April 30, 2007 5:47 PM
Anonymous Jim DeRosa said...

Impeachment should be on the table next to the salt and pepper.

April 30, 2007 10:32 PM
Blogger Sparky Duck said...

I can't believe they are so stupid, but then again its all about being Macho in this administration and a cowboy does not accept help from friendly indians

May 01, 2007 7:28 PM

Post a Comment

<< Home


text:
Frazier Park Estates Vote Is for 557 Homes

Frazier Park Estates Vote Is for 557 Homes

A unanimous vote by the Kern County Board of Supervisors May 11 certified the proposal by Frank Arciero, Jr.’s Fallingstar Homes for the 557-home Frazier Park Estates project in Lebec.

For some who had fought …

Lilac Festival This Weekend

Lilac Festival This Weekend

Lilac Festival is this weekend, May 15- 16. This is our mountain’s favorite rite of spring—the celebration after the snows are finally cleared from the roads and flowers start blooming again without getting frostbite. The …

Over 130 Cats Removed from Cause 4 Cats in Lebec

Over 130 Cats Removed from Cause 4 Cats in Lebec

By Patric Hedlund, Gary Meyer, Chuck Noble and community reporters

A major operation was conducted at the Cause 4 Cats facility in Lebec on May 6. A convoy of vehicles occupied Circle Drive, including Kern …

News and Features

Discovering Bears-And Bear Ears-at the Museum

By Gary Meyer

Who says you can’t touch stuff at the museum? On Saturday, May 8, kids were cutting things, squirting glue, sticking fur on it and generally making quite a mess—all so each could ...

Benefit for Amber Kelch’s Family Was ‘Amazing’

Senior Water Operator for Frazier Park Public Utilities District Cheryl Mackey found love and reunions in the wake of tragedy. At a benefit Saturday, May 8 (to raise funds for the funeral of her daughter, ...

Tragedy Averted in 2 a.m. Home Fire

Are Your Smoke Alarms Working?

An early morning fire at a California Trail house in Frazier Park on Monday, May 12 could have turned deadly, but quick action from a sheriff’s deputy and the Kern ...

PMLC Student Council Collects ‘Pennies for Peace’

By Sarah Robinson

The Pine Mountain Learning Center students are collecting “Pennies for Peace.” Their big push will wrap up at this weekend’s Lilac Festival.

Collection jars have been placed from Pine Mountain to Lebec.


text:
Digitised Image

Evans Bay Marina, Wellington, [Between 1970 and 1976]

Reference Number: PA12-5497-2

View of Evans Bay marina, Wellington, looking north from Hataitai towards Greta Point and Shelly Bay, showing boats at anchor, taken between 1970 and 1976 by Robert E Wells of New Plymouth.

Key terms:
1 image, categorised under Scenic landscapes, related to Evans Bay, Marinas - New Zealand - Wellington Region and Yachting - New Zealand - Wellington Region.

Part of:
Colour transparencies of Wellington city, Tutukaka, Wairarapa, Wanaka, Whangaroa and Lake Macgregor, Reference Number PAColl-2081 (61 digitised items)
Colour transparencies of New Zealand views, Reference Number PAColl-0001-4 (87 digitised items)
Wells, Robert E, 1905-2006 :Photographic negatives, prints and transparencies of the Mokau and other rural North Island districts, and scenic views of New Zealand, Reference Number PAColl-0001 (532 digitised items)

Extent: 1 colour original transparency/iesDye coupler transparency 6 x 9 cm. Horizontal imageSingle transparency

Conditions governing access to original: Not restricted

Usage: You can search, browse, print and download items from this website for research and personal study. You are welcome to reproduce the above image(s) on your blog or another website, but please maintain the integrity of the image (i.e. don't crop, recolour or overprint it), reproduce the image's caption information and link back to here (http://mp.natlib.govt.nz/detail/?id=58319). If you would like to use the above image(s) in a different way (e.g. in a print publication), or use the transcription or translation, permission must be obtained. More information about copyright and usage can be found on the Copyright and Usage page of the NLNZ web site.

External Links:
View Full Descriptive Record in TAPUHI
View and/or order a copy of this image from Timeframes
View Archived Image on NDHA

Leave a comment

This function is coming soon.

Latest comments


text:
Black Women, White Women and the Solidarity Question

L to R: Audre Lorde, Meridel Le Sueur, Adrienne Rich

If [Lily Allen] cannot employ women of color in her obvious attempt to call attention to the system by amplifying its absurdity, and she can’t ever critique women of color in any way via satire with legitimacy or without horizontal hostility presented as feminist criticism, we as feminists have a problem.

So wrote a former student of mine, Joey Lusk, in response to a Facebook conversation that I initiated in which I asked why black women were often invoked in popular culture as the ultimate in “excess”—from the sexual excess of twerking bodies to the violent excess of Rihanna’s bruised face plastered all over TMZ.

I also remember Joey quite well. (She engaged in a provocative, multiracial, spoken-word performance that invoked the powerful words of Audre Lorde, June Jordan, Adrienne Rich and Ntozake Shange, among other feminist poets.) As a white woman, Joey interacted in a powerful performance of interracial solidarity and sister-bonding when she and another black female performer created a dual “talk back” to popular music when they recited Sarah Jones’ satirical “Your Revolution.”

It is because I remember Joey’s commitment to multiracial feminist solidarity that I decided to reflect more deeply on Lily Allen’s music video “Hard Out Here.”

Like several other black women, I took umbrage at Allen’s re-appropriation of the highly sexualized twerking/booty-shaking black female body in her video—meant, no doubt, to mock Miley Cyrus’s own appropriating behavior. Nonetheless, the visuals had the effect of canceling out the intended mockery by reinforcing the white supremacist gaze that went unchallenged by Allen’s own “this is not about race” perspective that reproduced her racial privilege and power.

So, in answer to Joey’s remarks: Yes, we as feminists do have a problem. Because a white female artist who is clearly disturbed by the overly sexualized depictions of women in popular culture should be able to parody the issue (as women artists from Pink to the aforementioned Sarah Jones to so many others have done). But first she would have to recognize black women’s full humanity, their racially coded differences and their own particular struggles with what Moya Bailey calls “misogynoir”—which functions somewhat differently from the general misogyny that non-black women face. Our racially coded bodies matter, and no amount of “this is not about race” disavowals will change that.

How do the twerking bodies of women of color contribute to the fat-shaming pressures Lily Allen faces compared to super-thin white runway models, for instance? And considering that neither “video vixens” nor Allen would ever be chosen for the runaway (in addition to thinness, women of color are still vastly under-represented in the beauty industry—just ask Iman and Naomi Campbell), aren’t these highly sexualized women differently positioned and thereby disruptive of the critique Lily Allen offers about liposuction and fat-shaming? Black women tend to feel pressure to be curvier. To appear lighter. To wear our hair straighter. But these different gendered pressures are not addressed in Allen’s video because, in the end, she is not interested in finding common ground. Black women’s bodies are employed here, not to create solidarity in the struggle against sexism but to heighten racial difference.

And these issues are so much bigger than Allen.This controversy emerged around the same time that I returned from the National Women’s Studies Association (NWSA) conference in early November, where I had witnessed a white feminist scholar appropriate my work—along with the work of other black feminists—without any citation while proceeding to misidentify black historical figures, misinterpret our intersectional experiences with sexuality and misrepresent our sexual images to reinforce the centrality of white female sexuality.  That I and other black feminist scholars present there caused a stir is not indicative of “horizontal hostility;” it’s indicative of feminists who wish to hold each other accountable and to push past imperialist and white supremacist impulses that constantly undermine our liberation from patriarchy.

We as feminists have a problem. Because the subject of solidarity—joining in each other’s struggles, having each other’s backs and building coalition—should not be reduced to a Twitter hashtag.  That Mikki Kendall’s Twitter-trending #SolidarityisforWhiteWomen resonated for so many highlights a continuing frustration that Audre Lorde addressed in 1979 when she told an audience at NWSA: “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” Nearly 35 years later and women of color have questioned the silence of some white feminists when Quvenzhané Wallis was insulted by The Onion, or the ability of a white mother and juror to identify with a batterer like George Zimmerman more than with the mother of Trayvon Martin, or why some white feminists would bristle and “slut-shame” Beyoncé when she graced the cover of Ms. but have no qualms about identifying Miley Cyrus as a “feminist” in spite of her problematic use of the bodies of women of color.

I raise these issues because, whatever the intentions of Kendall, I no longer wish to utter “solidarity is for white women” with sarcasm. We need to seriously reclaim solidarity and redefine the mission of a multiracial feminist movement in which racism is dismantled and our rage is put to better use. When a Renisha McBride can’t seek help after a car accident without getting gunned down because a white man perceives her as a “threat” and not as a vulnerable subject, we need to have meaningful conversations on what solidarity looks like, how it will operate and how it must not serve one sect of privileged women. We are not props or theoretical talking points for white feminism. We have lives that need protecting and valuing. Now, more than ever, solidarity is about saving lives and affirming them.

Of course, I could conclude—like some feminists of color have done—that this is an exercise in futility and a pointless conversation. Some have already disavowed feminism and reclaimed other labels. I could find solace in simply being a “womanist.” But Alice Walker already defined the womanist as “not a separatist, except periodically, for health.”

Once I rest up and find healing in my “sistah circle,” I still have to navigate my way back to the wider circle—where there are no safe spaces and no bright lanterns clearly indicating which front porches and which houses are “safe houses” on the Underground Railroad.  We enter with the hope of solidarity, bracing for betrayal, grateful for genuine alliances and connections when we find them.

Bernice Johnson Reagon once argued that coalition-building is not about “looking for a home.” It’s about struggle. In the quest for solidarity, the struggle continues.

Photo from Wikimedia Commons

hobson_170Janell Hobson is an associate professor of Women’s Studies at the University at Albany, State University of New York. She is the author of Body as Evidence: Mediating Race, Globalizing Gender (SUNY Press, 2012) and Venus in the Dark: Blackness and Beauty in Popular Culture (Routledge, 2005), and a frequent contributor to Ms.

    1. Great article. Sadly, the many elements of the women’s movement have become so racially factionalized & issue myopic that we cannot function effectively as a whole. To have any real concrete effects on social policy & the many dire issues confronting us that demand our attention we have to work as one. The art of coalition building needs to return. The current state of the women’s movt of total paralysis with one faction over another jockeying for more power just isn’t working. This in no way means racial issues within the movt don’t get addressed, but they cannot overshadow & even sometimes sabotage the UNIVERSAL MULTIRACIAL SISTERHOOD that has to love & support each other to GETS SHIT DONE! That must change because we are in a really ugly wave of social rollbacks & the demolition of many of the rights our mothers fought for. The rights of women are being legislatively systematically destroyed state by state. It’s amazing how powerful the right wing has become, and curbing women’s rights is their biggest issue. We’re kind of losing the war so we need to maybe check our own agenda’s at the door for right now (not to forget them, or our individual issues & causes) & look at what we’re facing because it’s really dire.

      • Witchsistah says:

        Your analysis is part of the problem. All your rhetoric amounts to is for women of color to shut up about our issues and simply Mammy our seeing service of the betterment of White women. At least that’s how the “let’s just submerge our differences and work for the greater good” has always panned out.

        I am not “checking my agenda at the door.” I am not going to put my needs and issues second so that Miss Anne can ride high. It’s about time White women just accept that Mammy is dead and gone and try to actually practice real solidarity and not this “me, me, me” crapshoot.

    2. Angela Montgomery says:

      Thank you for this well written article. As a white female who, although raised in the “deep South” was fortunate enough to have a mother who was/is color blind, I realize that no woman will achieve true equality until ALL women, regardless of color, age, sexual orientation, religion, non-religion, upper, middle or poverty class etc. come together and band together as ONE.
      Thank you again and keep fighting the good fight.

      • I think you’re missing how colorblindness is actually really problematic, because it leads to white women denying how we contribute to systemic racism and the oppression/ignoring of Women of Color. If we truly want to support all women, let’s start by listening to and educating ourselves about the issues of women with less privilege, and then start practicing relinquishing power and taking a supporting, instead of a leading, role.

    3. Peggy Smith says:

      Excellent article! We need to have more like this so we can continue to build a sisterhood that is truly powerful!

    4. Thank you for your comments, and Happy Thanksgiving!

    5. Witchsistah says:

      I need for the White women here to quit deliberately missing the point by cloaking this article in some fake solidarity message of “forget about your issues and just work on mine.” I think a great place for White feminists to start is in the service of women of color if they really mean this “solidarity” yarn they are spinning.

    6. Janell Hobson says:

      Is it really so hard to recognize and organize around difference instead of constantly insisting on “sameness”? That’s not what I’m asking for in this article when I talk about solidarity.

    7. Thank you, Janell. I think this is a crucial discussion as clearly the social issues obstructing solidarity are mounting. This brings up many questions regarding identity politics. Allen’s video is a perfect illustration of the issues with which so many of us are struggling. As a white woman (and source of the opening quote) I fully acknowledge that I have the privilege of choosing to struggle with them, as opposed to the existential necessity on the part of women of color. But underlying that privilege is the realization that my social lot as a woman of any color is inextricably tied with the social lots of women who are not white.

      While I would never appropriate the term “womanist”, I too have recurring issues with certain strains of mainstream and characteristically “white” feminism based on more of a Queer Theory critique of humanism and identity politics. The question for me, to which I have no pat answer, is what does solidarity mean for us? Solidarity on issues of race and solidarity as feminists in the face of horizontal hostility seem to be in conflict in this specific larger debate surrounding Allen’s satirical references of black women in the music industry.

      I am increasingly concerned with certain narratives that pit “us v. them”. I’m not dismissing the frustration of women of color, and I own the disheartening contributions of white women to the problem, but I do wonder how I am supposed to ally with women, like commenter Witchsistah, if they increasingly reject me as an individual and lump me in with a larger social phenomenon that encompasses white women who are not feminists and white feminists who are not “doing the work”. As a feminist, I was disturbed to read the following critique by Ayesha A. Siddiqi in Noisey: “Similarly, Lily Allen’s response to sexist industry demands for thinness becomes entirely ineffectual when it lashes out against women who succeed despite those demands. Allen is not savily [sic] critiquing the world of Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines” and Miley Cyrus, she’s resentfully bemoaning not getting to enjoy the same success.” It was in response to Siddiqi’s piece that I decided to join the discussion which was one of the many impetuses for this article.

      However one might want to parse it, she’s not lashing out at women of color. A lack of sensitivity, a failure to fully explicate a point, and a certain obliviousness, all fair criticisms. Lashing out? Bemoaning her lack of success? Allen’s pretty successful. The idea that she is selfishly whining about a purported lack of success as compared to the success of the nameless black dancers in her video (and many others by other artists black and white) seems to be in direct conflict with charges that she’s obscuring black women’s individuality by appropriating their bodies for her videos. When did we become so complacent in the face of blatant horizontal hostility? I implore anyone to take Allen’s work apart at the seams, but I ask that we do it in a fashion consistent with feminist principles (as you have taken the time to do with your own critique), or own the charge of hypocrisy. Many members of both groups seem to be heir to the folly of “forget about your issues and just work on mine” and that is the crux of my concern with solidarity. If it is OK for women of color to take issue with Allen’s work, it must also be fair for women of any color to take issue with horizontal hostility in any form, particularly when it comes from other feminists as part of an overtly feminist critique.

      Because this is the whole point of examining horizontal hostility – how many women of all colors are complicit in the social narratives that contribute to divisiveness and oppression.

    8. Janell Hobson says:

      Thank you, Joey, both for inspiring this article and for your response to this and other comments. I too am very interested in resisting the “us. vs. them” narrative, which is really a barrier to solidarity, although I wish you could say more about what you mean when you use the term “horizontal hostility.” The term “horizontal” implies that the hostility is being exchanged between equal groups, and is that really what’s going on?

      I think it still goes back to the whole notion of organizing around difference, whatever those differences may be (in this case race). How do we create solidarity and, as Bernice Johnson Reagon says, “coalitional politics,” without letting our differences derail us?

    9. Joey Lusk says:

      Janell, I use “horizontal hostility” to indicate aggressive and fallacious rhetoric used by one woman against another, in a manner which reinforces patriarchal narratives and divisions. I’m all for getting into the differences in social locations and privileges and coalition-building, but from one perspective, while white women and women of color have differences, they’re not nearly as great as the differences between women as a gender and the primary beneficiaries of patriarchy, the minuscule number of wealthy, entrenched white men who maintain the vast majority of power positions in commerce and government.

      Do white women and black women hold social locations which are not equal? Yes. But that in no way should excuse feminists of any kind from using that lack of social equality as shield for perpetuating patriarchal divisions within our own ranks. A rich white woman and poor white woman are not equal either, and yet it is still horizontal hostility for a rich white woman to cast aspersions on a poor white woman for being poor white trash with too many kids. No two groups anywhere in this society are equal: there is the rather specific group in charge, and there is every other group. The most significant accretion of patriarchy that keeps everything in place is horizontal hostility – even when it’s the have-a-littles v. the have-little-a-mores.

      If we as feminists ever hope to promote more change, we must accept that women are horizontally hostile, both through intent and habit, across social locations, and we must stand together against it. In my opinion, there is no respecting of difference that will ever accomplish that united position can do. If we cannot respect each other, we’re never going to get any other other group to respect us. Our internal divisions have always worked against us and they always will, as women and feminists. Respect doesn’t mean we always have to agree, one of feminism’s strengths is its hydra-like existence. When we respectfully challenge one another – when we as women decide to set the example by treating each other as equals in our commitment to feminism – that is when we are truly doing our work. Because that is it – respect, dialogue, exchanges of ideas, experiences, and needs, and ultimately, growth.

      We need a strong difference “head” of our hydra to be in constant dialogue with a strong commonality “head” and both of them need to be in constant dialogue with all the other heads it takes to fully encompass the awe-inspiring and interdisciplinary behemoth that is feminism. It’s never one or the other – that binary must die. It is both and all. None of us can ever get it right on our own because it’s not about a single perspective. It’s about the strength we draw from our connections with one another, the support we desire to receive and share.

    10. Black women should have never joined the white feminist movement.

    11. Thank you for this article. I am not a woman of color, and though I pride myself on trying to at least be aware of the ways white privilege effects every type of person every day, it’s just a fact that without discussing things from “both sides of the fence” that it’s impossible to understand each other’s needs. Just like any healthy relationship, communication has to be key to communicate each person’s needs. Before this article I never considered the fact that women of color face a slightly different prejudice of body style than a white runway model might. After reading it, it seems so obvious and I feel ignorant even admitting I did not notice previously. However, what I can take from it is that I have a lot to learn to try and understand other women’s struggles. (I use the term “understand” loosely… I don’t mean to imply I could ever feel someone else’s struggles, just have an awareness OF that difference).
      Thank you again for this article, I have begun to be so much more critical of media as of recent times, and this opened up that topic even more.

    Speak Your Mind


text:
Grand Rapids area apple maturity report – September 11, 2013

Gala harvest is in full swing this week on the Ridge.

General comments

In the Grand Rapids, Mich., area, apple maturity continues to pan out well with our predicted harvest dates, with some variations towards being on the early side of predicted dates. Some much needed rain fell across much of the central Michigan fruit growing regions from the lakeshore to the general Grand Rapids, Mich., areas. This should help tremendously with fruit size in non-irrigated orchards. Growers with irrigation have reported that they have started to discontinue irrigating in many varieties.

Gala harvest started this week and will be in full swing for the next week or so. Honeycrisp are being spot-picked and McIntosh are being harvested in between Galas as growers can get to them. We have noticed that fruits pick very easily from the trees this year, even when they are several weeks from anticipated harvest. This makes us a bit nervous about potential drop if we get any stormy weather with windy conditions. The use of ReTain plus NAA is your best tool for drop prevention.

For the area around Hart/Shelby, Mich., growers can expect harvest dates to be behind Grand Rapids, Mich., area using this guide: along the lakeshore approximately six days behind Grand Rapids; areas inland about four days behind.

Summary of Grand Rapids, Mich., apple maturity samples taken Sept. 10, 2013.

Avg. Ethylene (ppm)

% Fruits with Ethylene over 0.2 ppm

Color % (range)

Firmness lbs pressure (range)

Starch (range)

Brix (range)

91% (80 - 95%)

18.2 (15.8 - 21.5)

6.1 (3 - 8)

13.5 (13 - 14)

78% (45 - 95%)

15.9 (13.3 - 18.6)

2.4 (1 -4)

11.4 (11 - 12)

32% (15 - 40)

14.5 (12.8 - 16.2)

3.4 (1 - 7)

10.7 (10 - 11)

92% (85 - 95)

15.6 (13 - 18)

11.7 (11 - 12.5)

45.5% (15 - 70)

17.7 (16 - 19.8)

2.2 (1 - 3)

10.7 (9.5 - 11)

Early Fuji

45% (30 - 60)

15.2 (13 - 17.8)

3 (1 -3)

11.2 (10 - 13)

96 (90 - 100)

15.8 (13.6 - 19.2)

2.2 (1 - 3)

11.2 (10 - 12)

Size and color are much improved over last week’s samples. Gala are still in a long-term CA storage window, but will move to a mid-term CA window by next week for fruits not treated with harvest management materials. Redder strains are being harvested now with older, less red strains waiting for more color. All maturity sample numbers indicate improvements towards maturity. Our predicted date of Sept. 10 for long-term storage conditions appears to be spot on for Gala this year. This will be a big week for Gala harvest on the Ridge.

There is definite movement towards maturity and some spot-picking can be done in between Gala harvest needs. Ethylene continues to be lower than expected for this time, but is increased compared to last week’s sampling. McIntosh pick quite easily and drop could be a concern with future windy conditions. Pressure readings are very good at 15.9 pounds on average this week compared to 16.9 pounds of pressure last week. Color is excellent and improving every day. Brix level of 11.4 is slightly lower than last week’s 12.4 and is expected to improve in the next week. Harvest for long-term storage of McIntosh can begin at any time color is right. Our predicted harvest date was determined to be Sept. 15 and that appears to be a good estimate for this year.

Some first color picking is underway in central Michigan for Honeycrisp with the major harvest window expected for a week or 10 days from now, exactly as predicted on Sept. 18, which is also the average harvest date from our records. Internal ethylene is still very low for Honeycrisp – they usually exhibit higher ethylene readings than any other varieties and this might be the reason many fruits are still quite immature. Firmness is lower this week at 14.5 pounds compared to 16.7 pounds last week; Brix is improved from 9.7 to 10.7 this week; starch clearing is rated at 3.4 compared to 1.8 last week. All these maturity numbers indicate that, other than that 10 percent of early ripening fruits, Honeycrisp is a week to 10 days away from optimal harvest window for the Grand Rapids, Mich., area.

This is our first week of Cortland sampling and all numbers indicate it is about 10 to 14 days away from the early harvest window for long-term storage. Ethylene is very low with a few fruits being over 0.2 ppm which indicates the beginning of maturity. Color is excellent (Red Cort was our sample) and firmness, starch and brix are all at immature levels this week.

This week’s sampling shows some movement towards early maturity and Empire is at least two weeks away from the window for long-term CA storage. Our predicted harvest date was Sept. 22 and that appears to be a good estimated early harvest date.

Early Fuji strains

There is movement in our readings, but overall early Fuji strains are about two weeks away from the first harvest window. We tested September Wonder and there are some early Fuji strains that are earlier or later than that cultivar.

This was our first sample for Jonathan and they appear to be right on target for our predicted harvest date of Sept. 28 or 29. All fruits are immature at this time.

Looking for more? View Michigan State University Extension’s Apple Maturity Program and Reports resource page for regional reports throughout the state and additional resources.

Related Events

Related Articles

Related Resources


text:
Writing about values can improve your life

A fifteen minute writing exercise on values may help improve academic success, reduce stress and increase prosocial behavior.

Take a minute to think about things in your life that are important to you, the things you really value. Things you value might include your family, your faith, your job, music, art, sports, reading or spending time with loved ones. Pick three things and in just fifteen minutes write a couple of sentences about why they are important to you. It is a simple technique and research has proven this writing exercise can have life changing effects on people.

In one case, Akira Miyake from the University of Colorado used the technique of value affirmation to help close the gender gap between the young women and men in his university physics course. Women who choose to pursue Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) career paths need to contend with a long history of gender stereotypes. If women buy into this stereotype, even a little, it can cost them greatly in lower grades.

Miyake used this writing exercise twice at the beginning of the semester. He randomly chose two groups. One group did the value affirmation writing exercise (what is important to them and why), and another group of students wrote about their least important values and why they thought these values were important to others. At the end of the semester, in the group of students who wrote about their least important values, the men out-performed women on tests by an average of 10 points. However, in the group of students who participate in the value affirmation exercise the gender gap disappeared, with more women getting B’s rather than C’s. The men’s scores stayed the same.

In several other studies conducted by Geoffrey Cohen in 2005 in middle schools, similar results were shown in closing the academic performance gap between African American and Latino students, and Caucasian students. Students were given a value affirmation writing exercise at three critical times: the beginning of the year, before exams and before the winter holiday break (all seen as high-stress times). At the end of the year, the racial academic gap was reduced by 30 percent. In comparison, there was no difference in the academic performance of Caucasian students. This indicates the greatest impact of value affirmations is specific to those under the most “stereotypical threat” or stress.

Students can experience high levels of stress related to social belonging when transitioning from grade school to middle school and then again from high school to college. Young people may benefit from a value affirmation writing exercise during these major academic milestones.

Constant high levels of stress hormones, such as cortisol, can lead to physical and mental health issues. In another study, J.D. Creswell in 2005 demonstrated that having people write about personal values can help lower levels of stress hormones and lead to a healthier life.

Another study done by Sander Thomaes and Brad Bushman in 2011, shows that having young people write about personal values and needs actually helps increase their responsiveness to the needs of others improves their prosaical behaviors. The most dramatic changes were in youth with the most teacher reported antisocial behaviors. Value affirmations can be a promising intervention to help young people adopt more prosocial behaviors. It allows them to write about their own personal values and gives them a stronger sense of self.

Even though it seems like a simple fix, well-timed value affirmations, or writing about what is really important to you and why, can help close gender and racial academic gaps, reduce stress in young people and adults, and help young people develop more positive behaviors. In short, fifteen minutes of writing may lead to a happier, healthier and more productive life.

Related Articles

Related Resources


text:
Dual Enrollment for High School Students

The purpose of this partnership is to provide high school students in the School Districts with the opportunity to earn both high school credit and college credit simultaneously or college credit only in the courses provided by Montana State University-Northern.

High School Counselors and Administrators – Are you interested in getting your students enrolled in dual credit courses, or are you a returning site facilitator getting your students ready to register for next year? If so, follow the steps listed below.

  1. To obtain information contact:
    Holly Haas, Big Sky Pathways
         E-mail: holly.haas@msun.edu
         Phone: 406.265.3723
  2. Review the Spring 2017 Classes
  3. Review the Dual Credit Guidelines

Parents and High School Students - Check with your high school counselor to see if your school has a Dual Enrollment agreement with Montana State University-Northern.

  1. Refer to the checklist and application and have each student complete and return the following forms to a high school counselor or the Admissions office at MSU-Northern.
    1. Dual Enrollment Application,
    2. Review the Spring 2017 Classes
    3. Dual Enrollment Registration
      [Must be signed by high school counselor and parent if student is under 18]
    4. Release Information Authorization
  3. Make appropriate payment or sign Deferred Payment contract located at the bottom of the Dual Enrollment Registration Form. Please contact MSU-Northern Business Services at 406-265-3733 for questions regarding fees and payment information.


text:
Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Rogers

Supreme Court of Montana

August 13, 2013

STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Appellee,
DONALD PAUL ROGERS, Defendant and Appellant.

Submitted on Briefs: June 12, 2013.

District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, In and For the County of Missoula, Cause No. DC 11-180 Honorable Edward P. McLean, Presiding Judge.

For Appellant: Wade Zolynski, Chief Appellate Defender; Eileen A. Larkin, Assistant Appellate Defender; Helena, Montana.

For Appellee: Timothy C. Fox, Montana Attorney General; Tammy K Plubell, Assistant Attorney General; Helena, Montana, Fred R. Van Valkenburg, Missoula County Attorney; Jason Marks, Deputy County Attorney; Missoula, Montana.

BETH BAKER, Justice.

¶1 Following a three-day trial, a Missoula County jury convicted Donald P. Rogers of eight criminal counts, including sexual intercourse without consent, partner or family member assault, unlawful restraint, and violation of a no contact order. The Montana Fourth Judicial District Court subsequently sentenced Rogers to forty years at the Montana State Prison, with twenty years suspended. Rogers appeals his conviction. We reverse and remand for a new trial.

¶2 Rogers raises two issues on appeal:

¶3 1. Did the District Court violate Rogers's constitutional rights by precluding him from cross-examining the victim about her prior acts of violence against him unless he first testified to his defense of justifiable use of force?

¶4 2. Did the District Court err by allowing the State to question Rogers about his prior criminal history once he testified about the victim's prior acts of violence against him?

¶5 Over the course of a four-year period, Rogers and the alleged victim, S.M., engaged in an "on again, off again" romantic relationship that "had some good times and bad times"; it abruptly ended in mid-April 2011. Rogers agreed to meet with S.M. at 1:00 p.m. on April 15 to discuss their relationship as well as money Rogers owed S.M. When Rogers failed to arrive as agreed, S.M. called him and texted him numerous times. Eventually, Rogers told S.M. that he and his brother would have a drink with her at a bar in Missoula. S.M. testified that both Rogers and his brother had been drinking "quite a lot" and they were asked to leave the bar after Rogers's brother made a scene. Rogers told S.M. to go back to her home in Arlee and he "would be there later" after he finished "hanging out with [his] brother." S.M. continued to call and text Rogers throughout the evening of April 15 and into the early-morning hours of April 16.

¶6 S.M. testified that at approximately 3:00 that morning, she heard someone "banging" on her back door. Rogers then called S.M. and asked her to let him into the house. When she refused, Rogers broke into her home and "made it clear that he wanted to have . . . sexual relations[.]" S.M. described Rogers as being "very intoxicated" and testified that he was "slurring his words." S.M. later stated that after she asked Rogers to leave, he "hit [her] in the jaw . . . very hard" and prevented her from calling 911. At that point, S.M. stopped resisting Rogers's advances because she was afraid he would kill her unless she complied.

¶7 Rogers "basically held [S.M.] hostage from 3:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m." He pinned S.M. down on her bed and, after he was unable to obtain an erection, he penetrated her with his fingers and tongue; later that morning he "masturbated over [her] head and chest." Rogers also choked S.M. "several times" during the ordeal and, when he needed to use the bathroom, he "grabbed the back of [her] hair" and "made [her] go into the restroom with him." S.M. tried to get Rogers to stop assaulting her by telling him that her daughter was picking up her dog at the house that morning; instead of stopping, Rogers stated he should stay so he could have sex with S.M.'s daughter as well and then "hurt both of [them]."

¶8 At approximately 7:00 a.m., Rogers left S.M.'s house. Even though S.M. had not reported Rogers for prior instances of abuse, she immediately called 911—in part because Rogers had threatened her daughter. Missoula County Sheriff's Deputies responded to the call and arrested Rogers outside of S.M.'s residence. Deputy Scott King later recalled that S.M. was coherent, but she "had a split lip, and a bruising on her face." She told Deputy King that Rogers had sexually and physically assaulted her that morning; she also reported that Rogers had physically assaulted her in November 2010.

¶9 After his arrest, Rogers was transported to the Missoula County Sheriff's Office, where Deputy William Burt interviewed him. Rogers "adamantly" denied breaking into S.M.'s house and told the deputy that S.M. had consented to having sex with him. Although he initially denied striking S.M., when Burt noticed Rogers had blood on his hand Rogers began to cry and admitted slapping S.M. in the face. Rogers explained that he struck S.M. after she made "comments about his brother's sexual offender status."

¶10 Deputy King then filled out a seventy-two-hour no-contact order and gave it to Rogers at the county jail. Rogers admitted at trial that, even though he understood he was prohibited from contacting S.M., he violated that order several times by calling S.M. from the jail. S.M. testified that he called her five times on the day he was arrested.

¶11 On May 3, 2011, the Missoula County Attorney filed an information with the District Court charging Rogers with sexual intercourse without consent, a felony, in violation of § 45-5-503, MCA; two counts of partner or family member assault, third or subsequent offense, a felony, in violation of § 45-5-206(3)(a)(iv), MCA; unlawful restraint, a misdemeanor, in violation of § 45-5-301, MCA; and four counts of violating a no-contact order by a person charged with partner or family member assault, a misdemeanor, in violation of § 45-5-209, MCA. Rogers pled not guilty before the District Court, which set his trial for the week of November 28, 2011.

¶12 Several months before trial, Rogers gave notice that he would assert a justifiable use of force defense by establishing that S.M. had a violent character. He planned to introduce evidence that the State had charged S.M. with criminal endangerment and partner or family member assault after she allegedly bit Rogers while he was driving. The State subsequently filed a motion in limine requesting that the District Court prohibit Rogers from introducing "testimony or physical evidence related to any alleged prior acts of violence of [S.M.] absent proper foundation." In the motion, the State contended that, pursuant to State v. Daniels, 2011 MT 278, 362 Mont. 426, 265 P.3d 623, Rogers was required to testify about his personal knowledge of S.M.'s past acts of violence prior to any testimony regarding S.M.'s character for violence. Rogers responded that he understood the ruling of Daniels and was confident he could lay the necessary foundation to permit introduction of the victim's violent history with Rogers. Rogers's counsel indicated that he proposed to make an offer of proof outside the presence of the jury "[t]o facilitate the resolution of this issue." The response did not identify any constitutional issues for the court's consideration or offer other legal argument.

¶13 Immediately prior to trial, Rogers's attorney, Chris Daly, presented a proposal for how he intended to satisfy Daniels prior to cross-examining S.M. about her allegedly violent character:

[A]t some point before the alleged victim testifies, we would—out of the presence of the jury—I would put on an offer of proof for the Court to hear what evidence we would, in fact, intend to put forward, and, then, the Court [could] see if that satisfies the requirements of Daniels. And, then, we would be able to proceed with cross-examination of [S.M.].

¶14 The State objected to the proposal, asserting that pursuant to Daniels, Rogers could not cross-examine S.M. about her violent character until he testified before the jury and established that his knowledge of S.M.'s prior acts of violence served as the basis for his decision to defend himself by striking S.M. Daly offered that it would be "more efficient" to proceed with the offer first, "so the Court would know what we[']re going to say, . . . and then do the cross-examination of [S.M.], knowing that Mr. Rogers has already said what he was going to say." The District Court took the issue under advisement and stated it would not issue a ruling until it had read Daniels.

¶15 After the State made its opening statement, the prosecution again requested that the court rule on its outstanding motion in limine. Rogers's attorney reiterated his position: "[W]hat I'd actually like to do with that is to do an offer of proof, so the Court could hear exactly what Mr. Rogers intends to testify, with regard to that, so that there's no surprises or objections at the time of his testimony." The District Court granted the State's motion in limine; it reasoned that the only way Rogers could satisfy the requirements in Daniels was to testify and lay the appropriate foundation in front of the jury. Daly attempted to persuade the court one last time, stating that for the sake of "judicial economy, " he preferred to make an offer of proof establishing what Rogers would later testify to because "otherwise, if we have to wait until Mr. Rogers takes the stand, as part of our case-in-chief, then I would . . . have to recall [S.M.]." The District Court stated it "[didn't] think judicial economy [was] going to carry the day" and agreed that, pursuant to Daniels, the proper procedure was to raise the issue of justifiable use of force through Rogers's testimony, and then to recall S.M. during Rogers's case-in-chief. Daly did not object to the District Court's decision on the ground that Rogers may choose not to testify. S.M. testified during the State's case-in-chief, and Daly cross-examined her, but not about the actions that led the State to charge her with partner or family member assault.

¶16 The next day, during a recess taken just prior to the close of the State's case-in- chief, Daly made an offer of proof to the court detailing what Rogers's testimony would be so that the court could establish what the "ground rules" would be for his self-defense testimony. Daly explained that Rogers "will testify that knowing this [violent] history of [S.M.], that's why he felt he needed to use the force he did." The court then asked whether S.M.'s "violent acts" Rogers would testify about were directed toward Rogers. After learning that they were, the Court ruled it would "allow any evidence of prior violence between the parties by the Defendant, or by the State." The court informed the prosecution that "once the defendant opens the door, you're free to go where you want." The District Court then allowed Daly to confer with Rogers for the remaining four minutes of the recess.

¶17 At the end of the recess, the court stated that it wanted to further clarify its ruling: "I just want to be certain that Mr. Rogers knows that once he [testifies about S.M.'s prior violent acts towards him], his prior criminal history comes into play." Daly asked the court whether that meant his criminal history involving S.M., or his entire criminal history. The District Court responded that it meant any violent acts committed by Rogers: "If you talk about violence, any act of violence that you committed against another person is relevant and admissible."

¶18 Rogers then voiced his objection to this ruling, telling the court that it was "leaving [him] no choice—with no defense—is what [it's] leaving me" because he had an extensive criminal history, even though he asserted that he had been "clean for ten [or] twelve years." Daly then asked Rogers whether, in light of the court's decision, he still wanted to proceed with his justifiable use of force defense and testify about S.M.'s past acts of violence. Rogers responded: "Well, you better stand up, and tell them I'm a piece of shit, and I've been in a lot of trouble in my life because I'm going to tell them the truth. I'm going to tell them how crazy [S.M.] is, and how violent she is."

¶19 Rogers took the stand in his own defense. He explained that S.M. let him into her house and they proceeded to have consensual sexual relations. Rogers denied ever restraining S.M., choking her, or grabbing her by the hair. Rogers also testified that S.M. woke him up in the morning and asked him to leave because her daughter, who "despised" Rogers, was coming to the house. When he refused to leave, Rogers explained, she "blew a gasket" and became "violently upset" and started hitting him and clawing at him. Rogers then stated that he defended himself by slapping S.M. and pushing her away, and that he then ran out of the house in his boxer shorts to escape S.M. Daly then asked Rogers if he ever had experienced this sort of reaction from S.M. Rogers replied by acknowledging that if he answered the question, he would "have to tell you people all about me and my past"; he then discussed previous times that S.M. physically had attacked him.

¶20 On cross-examination, the prosecutor—Jason Marks—asked Rogers a series of questions about his criminal history. Marks began his cross-examination by asking, "when you said you have kind of a checkered past, that didn't quite cover the whole story, did it?" Rogers then asked, "Do you want to prosecute me on my past or this charge?" Marks stated: "You've got two prior partner assaults that you were convicted of?" Rogers admitted that was true, and volunteered a detailed account of the factual circumstances that gave rise to the convictions. Marks proceeded, stating: "I'm assuming those [bar fights] are the misdemeanor assaults on your record?" Rogers answered that was correct. Marks then asked whether Rogers had been convicted of "felony assault and use of a weapon" and Rogers answered that those charges were "dismissed in court, eventually."[1] Marks also questioned Rogers about a 2008 partner or family member assault conviction, but Rogers replied that he had no recollection of such a conviction.

¶21 Marks then asked Rogers: "[A]nd how many women is it you've been charged with raping?" Rogers answered: "Oh, five, ten, twenty—I don't know. You tell me— actually, two—years ago. Fifteen years ago, I was accused of it. I was acquitted of it, and charges were dismissed, and [S.M.'s] . . . ." At that point, Marks interrupted Rogers and stated: "You were convicted at trial, and it went up [and was reversed] on appeal. Let's be clear."[2]

¶22 The jury returned a verdict convicting Rogers of all eight counts charged.

¶23 For questions regarding constitutional law, our review is plenary. Daniels, ¶ 11. A district court's ruling on evidentiary matters generally is reviewed for an abuse of discretion; however, "to the extent the [district] court's ruling is based on an interpretation of an evidentiary rule or statute, the ruling is reviewed de novo." State v. Stewart, 2012 MT 317, ¶ 23, 367 Mont. 503, 291 P.3d 1187; see also Daniels, ¶ 11.

¶24 1. Did the District Court violate Rogers's constitutional rights by precluding him from cross-examining the victim about her prior acts of violence against him unless he first testified to his defense of justifiable use of force?

¶25 Rogers contends that the District Court "erred and violated [his] constitutional rights by precluding him from questioning [S.M.] about her past violence against him unless and until he testified." He argues that the District Court's ruling forced him "into the intolerable position of choosing between his right to present a defense . . . [by cross-examining] the State's principal witness against him, and his right not to testify." This error violated his rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, Rogers argues, as well as his right to cross-examine adverse witnesses found in the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment and Article II, Section 24 of the Montana Constitution.

¶26 The State asserts that Rogers waived his constitutional claim that the District Court's ruling impermissibly required him to testify before cross-examining S.M. about her prior acts of violence. Instead of objecting that he was being forced to choose between competing constitutional rights, the State argues, "Rogers asserted that as a matter of judicial economy, it simply made more sense for Rogers to make an offer of proof about his intended testimony" so that he could cross-examine S.M. about those acts, rather than recalling her during his case in chief. (Emphasis in original.) The State maintains that Rogers always "expressed to the district court a firm intention to testify, and indicated that his offer of proof to lay the proper foundation to introduce character evidence of S.M. would constitute his intended testimony." We agree with the State that Rogers failed to preserve this issue for appeal.

¶27 Generally, a "'defendant must make a timely objection to properly preserve an issue for appeal.'" Daniels, ¶ 31 (quoting State v. Paoni, 2006 MT 26, ¶ 35, 331 Mont. 86, 128 P.3d 1040); see also §§ 46-20-104(2) and -701, MCA. To be timely, the objection "must be made as soon as the grounds for the objection are apparent." Schuff v. Jackson, 2002 MT 215, ¶ 30, 311 Mont. 312, 55 P.3d 387. "Failure to lodge a timely objection constitutes a waiver of the objection and precludes raising the issue on appeal." State v. Sittner, 1999 MT 103, ¶ 13, 294 Mont. 302, 980 P.2d 1053. Our consistent application of the timely-objection rule has been motivated by concerns of judicial economy and fundamental fairness, both of which require alleged errors to be brought to the attention of the district court "so that actual error can be prevented or corrected at the first opportunity." State v. West, 2008 MT 338, ¶ 17, 346 Mont. 244, 194 P.3d 683 (citation omitted).

¶28 The District Court determined on the first day of trial that Rogers would have to testify and establish a foundation for his justifiable use of force defense before he could cross-examine S.M. about her prior violent acts. Rogers did not alert the court to any constitutional concerns in his response to the State's motion in limine, nor did he object on that basis to the court's ruling during trial. The District Court asked Daly if he disagreed with the ruling. Daly stated: "Well I just think, as a matter of—like I say—of judicial economy, we could do it the way I suggested." The court disagreed, stating that "judicial economy [was not] going to carry the day." Furthermore, Daly repeatedly stated that Rogers intended to testify and offered no objection to his doing so, undermining Rogers's argument on appeal that the District Court forced him to choose between exercising his constitutional right to not testify and his right to cross-examine S.M. See Daniels, ¶ 35. Because Rogers failed to timely object to the District Court's ruling and because he did not argue that he could not be compelled to testify prior to asserting a justifiable use of force defense, we decline to consider his constitutional arguments on appeal.

¶29 2. Did the District Court err by allowing the State to question Rogers about his prior criminal history once he testified about S.M.'s prior acts of violence against him?

¶30 Rogers asserts that the District Court "erred and prejudiced [him] by allowing the State to inquire into his past criminal history, including matters that were reversed on appeal." He contends that, in doing so, the District Court violated M. R. Evid. 404(b), which generally prohibits the admission of an individual's criminal history into evidence without justification. Rogers claims that the District Court "erred by going beyond" an examination of his relationship with S.M. and "opening up [his] criminal history to cross-examination." Rogers argues that the error prejudiced his right to a fair trial.

¶ 31 Rule 404(b) does not bar evidence, but prohibits a "theory of admissibility." Stewart, ¶ 61. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts may not be admitted to prove the defendant's character, disposition or propensity in order to show that he acted in conformity with that character at the time of the offense in question. Stewart, ¶ 61. Thus, "'if the necessary logical steps [in the prosecutor's theory of admissibility] include an inference of general character or propensity, or if it seems likely that the proof will be used to support such an inference, ' then the principle of exclusion applies." Stewart, ¶ 61 (quoting Christopher B. Mueller & Laird C. Kirkpatrick, Federal Evidence vol. 1, § 4:28, 746-47 (3d ed., Thomson/West 2007)). As a general rule, evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts must be excluded because "'prior acts or crimes are highly prejudicial to the defendant, and usually irrelevant for purposes of the charged crime.'" State v. Derbyshire, 2009 MT 27, ¶ 51, 349 Mont. 114, 201 P.3d 811 (quoting State v. Croteau, 248 Mont. 403, 407, 812 P.2d 1251, 1253 (1991), and citing State v. Ray, 267 Mont. 128, 133-34, 882 P.2d 1013, 1016 (1994)); see also State v. Lacey, 2010 MT 6, ¶ 31, 335 Mont. 31, 224 P.3d 1247 (citing M. R. Evid 404(b)). Proof that the "accused committed other crimes, even if they were of like nature to that charged, is not admissible to show his depravity or criminal propensities, or the resultant likelihood of his committing the offense charged[.]" State v. Tiedemann, 139 Mont. 237, 242, 362 P.2d 529, 531 (1961). These inquiries are prohibited because of fears that a jury will "prejudge one with a bad general record and deny him a fair opportunity to defend against a particular charge." State v. Gowan, 2000 MT 277, ¶ 19, 302 Mont. 127, 13 P.3d 376 (quoting Michelson v. U.S., 335 U.S. 469, 475-76, 69 S.Ct. 213, 218 (1948)).

¶32 This rule barring proof of other crimes "'should be strictly enforced in all cases where applicable, because of the prejudicial effect and injustice of such evidence, and should not be departed from except under conditions which clearly justify such a departure.'" Derbyshire, ¶ 22 (quoting Tiedemann, 139 Mont. at 242-43, 362 P.2d at 531). We have applied this rule to ensure that a defendant is not convicted "'merely because he is an unsavory person' or on the rationale that because he committed a crime in the past, he has a defect of character that makes him more likely than people generally to have committed the charged offense." Derbyshire, ¶ 22 (quoting Gowan, ¶ 19). "Essentially, Rule 404(b) disallows the inference from bad act to bad person to guilty person." State v. Dist. Ct. of the Eighteenth Jud. Dist., 2010 MT 263, ¶ 47, 358 Mont. 325, 246 P.3d 415.

¶33 The State does not argue in this case that evidence of Rogers's prior crimes properly was admissible for any of the other purposes identified in the rule, "such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident." M. R. Evid. 404(b). Rather, it argues that Rogers did not make a specific objection on 404(b) grounds, that Rogers has not specifically identified which of the prosecutor's questions were objectionable, and that the evidence was admissible for impeachment because Rogers testified that he had not been in trouble for the last twelve years. Finally, the State argues that any error was harmless.

¶34 Initially, we reject the State's impeachment argument, since Rogers only testified about his prior record after the District Court had ruled that the State could offer that evidence once he raised justifiable use of force. We also disagree with the State that Rogers did not object to the court's ruling. As soon as he learned that the prosecution would be allowed to introduce his criminal history if he presented a justifiable use of force defense, he protested, stating: "The Court is leaving me no choice—with no defense—is what they're leaving me." When the State began to question Rogers about his criminal history, Rogers objected once more, asking the prosecutor: "Do you want to prosecute me on my past, or this charge?" These statements were sufficient to put the State and the court on notice that Rogers was objecting to the introduction of his criminal history and to preserve his objection for appeal. See Pumphrey v. Empire Lath & Plaster, 2006 MT 99, ¶ 30, 332 Mont. 116, 135 P.3d 797. Likewise, Rogers's brief on appeal makes clear the basis for his claimed error.

¶35 Neither the District Court in its ruling nor the State, either at trial or on appeal, offered any basis for admissibility of Rogers's entire violent criminal history once he asked S.M. about her past acts of violence. Our review of the record reveals none. We agree with Rogers that the evidence was not admissible under Rule 404(b) as it was likely to be used to support an inference of character or propensity and was not shown to be admissible for another purpose. See Stewart, ¶ 61, Derbyshire, ¶ 55. A cause may not be reversed by reason of any error committed by the trial court, however, "unless the record shows that the error was prejudicial." Section 46-20-701(1), MCA.

¶36 We have adopted a two-step analysis to determine whether an error "prejudiced the criminal defendant's right to a fair trial and is therefore reversible." State v. Van Kirk, 2001 MT 184, ¶ 37, 306 Mont. 215, 32 P.3d 735.

¶37 The first step in this analysis is determining whether the claimed error is categorized as "structural error" or "trial error." Van Kirk, ¶ 37. Structural error "affects the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply an error in the trial process itself." Van Kirk, ¶ 38 (citation omitted). Structural error is "typically of constitutional dimensions, precedes the trial, and undermines the fairness of the entire trial proceeding." Van Kirk, ¶ 38. Trial error, on the other hand, "typically occurs during the presentation of a case to the jury." Van Kirk, ¶ 40. If an error was structural, it is presumptively prejudicial and we automatically reverse the verdict. Van Kirk, ¶¶ 38, 41. If, however, the error is "the more 'typical' trial error, " we do not automatically reverse the conviction; instead, we proceed to the second step of our analysis—determining whether the error was harmless under the circumstances." Van Kirk, ¶ 41. The error Rogers identifies on appeal took place during the presentation of evidence to the jury. As such, it "is amenable to qualitative assessment by a reviewing court for prejudicial impact relative to the other evidence introduced at trial" and is trial error. Van Kirk, ¶ 40; Stewart, ¶ 45.

¶38 When determining whether an error in the admission of evidence was harmless, we apply the "cumulative evidence test." Van Kirk, ¶ 43. This test requires a qualitative analysis of the evidence; thus, it "looks not to the quantitative effect of other admissible evidence, but rather to whether the fact-finder was presented with admissible evidence that proved the same facts as the tainted evidence proved." Van Kirk, ¶ 43 (emphasis omitted). If there was no other admissible evidence proving the same facts that the tainted evidence proved, the analysis turns on whether the tainted evidence went to the proof of an element of the crime charged or, by contrast, to some fact not involving an element of the crime. Van Kirk, ¶ 47. "If there was no cumulative evidence presented as to a fact proving an element of the crime charged, then the error in admitting the tainted evidence which proved that element cannot be considered harmless, the qualitative assessment is never reached, and the court's decision will be reversed." Van Kirk, ¶ 47. Conversely, "[i]f the evidence in question did not prove an element of the crime, then the State must demonstrate that, qualitatively, there is no reasonable possibility that the tainted evidence might have contributed to the defendant's conviction." Van Kirk, ¶ 47; see also State v. McComber, 2007 MT 340, ¶ 26, 340 Mont. 262, 173 P.3d 690 (citing State v. Peplow, 2001 MT 253, ¶¶ 49, 51, 307 Mont. 172, 36 P.3d 922).

¶39 The State contends, and we agree, that its cross-examination of Rogers about his criminal history "clearly was not for the purpose of proving an element of the offense." Nonetheless, the State cites to State v. Stewart in support of its position that the erroneous admission of this evidence was qualitatively harmless. There, we applied the cumulative evidence test where the prosecution had erred by admitting evidence for the purpose of proving an element of the charged offense, "that Stewart knowingly had sexual intercourse or sexual contact with [the victim]." Stewart, ¶ 47. Importantly, we were able to evaluate the tainted evidence against "admissible evidence that proved the same facts." Stewart, ¶ 48. Doing so, we concluded that, qualitatively, "nothing [in the tainted evidence] is any more inflammatory or prejudicial than the other, admissible evidence at trial." Stewart, ¶ 50. That is not the situation here. There was no admissible evidence proving Rogers's entire history of violence; his criminal history was not an admissible fact for the jury's consideration. For this reason, Stewart is not on point.

¶40 Stewart aside, the State stresses—in support of its argument that there is no reasonable possibility that introducing Rogers's criminal history may have contributed to his conviction—that it did not introduce Rogers's criminal history during its case-in-chief, it did not dwell on his criminal history during the cross-examination, and it did not mention his past violent acts in its closing argument. The State also points out that, when the prosecution asked Rogers about his criminal history, it encouraged Rogers to provide "yes" or "no" answers and that Rogers "chose to portray himself in a negative light to the jury by using offensive language"[3] and by offering facts that led to some of his past convictions. These observations do not satisfy the State's burden under Van Kirk.

¶41 When discussing how the State might demonstrate that no reasonable possibility exists that the admission of tainted evidence might have contributed to the defendant's conviction in Van Kirk, we presented two hypothetical scenarios. Van Kirk, ¶ 46. In the first scenario, the State offered evidence during a DUI trial that the defendant was a convicted child molester. Van Kirk, ¶ 46. On appeal, the State would have to demonstrate that there was no reasonable possibility that introducing this evidence led to the defendant's conviction, "a virtually impossible burden to carry, given the highly inflammatory nature of child molestation evidence." Van Kirk, ¶ 46. Conversely, in the second hypothetical, the State erred by offering evidence that the same defendant previously had declared bankruptcy. Van Kirk, ¶ 46. We speculated that, in such a scenario, the State would be able to carry its burden because it is unlikely that an allegation of bankruptcy is the sort of defect in character that would lead a jury to believe that the defendant likely committed the charged offense. Van Kirk, ¶ 46.

¶42 We consistently have applied this framework in subsequent cases. In State v. Derbyshire, the State elicited testimony from its witnesses that they were "probation officers" and that the defendant "was on probation" when he was arrested. Derbyshire, ¶ 55. We held that these statements were "not admissible under Rule 404(b)." Derbyshire, ¶ 55. The defendant's status as a probationer was not an element of the charges against him. We concluded that the State failed to satisfy its burden under Van Kirk because "in terms of quality, the tainted evidence here was highly prejudicial" and there was a reasonable possibility that the jury's knowledge that the defendant had committed past crimes contributed to a guilty verdict. Derbyshire, ¶¶ 51, 53.

¶43 In State v. Peplow, the district court erred by allowing the State to introduce evidence that the defendant had been driving with a suspended license and had no insurance when he was arrested for driving under the influence. Peplow, ¶ 48. The tainted evidence suggested that the defendant had been convicted of similar past crimes and did not prove an element of the charged crime. Peplow, ¶¶ 51, 55. We reversed the defendant's conviction and remanded the case for a new trial because the State was unable to satisfy its burden under Van Kirk. Peplow, ¶ 56. Similarly, in State v. Nolan, the district court erred by allowing the State to introduce evidence that the defendant— who had been charged with bail-jumping—had fathered five children with four different women, none of whom he had married; the State also introduced evidence that the defendant had worked as a pimp. State v. Nolan, 2003 MT 55, ¶¶ 19-20, 314 Mont. 371, 66 P.3d 269. We held that this evidence was "highly inflammatory and prejudicial" and that the State had failed to carry its burden pursuant to Van Kirk. Nolan, ¶¶ 25-26. Consequently, we reversed Nolan's conviction and remanded the case for a new trial. Nolan, ¶ 27.

¶44 In this case, the State introduced "highly inflammatory" evidence that Rogers had a prior rape conviction, which had been reversed on appeal, as well as evidence that he had been convicted of other crimes, in violation of M. R. Evid. 404(b). See Van Kirk, ¶ 46; see also Derbyshire, ¶ 55. Upon our review of the record, we conclude that there is a reasonable possibility the tainted evidence influenced Rogers's conviction. The prosecutor questioned Rogers about two serious felony convictions that later were reversed. In the course of that questioning, the State informed the jury that Rogers previously had been convicted of rape and felony assault with a weapon, and had gotten both convictions set aside. This invited an opportunity for the jury to make sure Rogers would be punished when it deliberated on crimes charged. The law prohibits the State from introducing evidence of past crimes because doing so denies individuals a fair opportunity to defend against the charged crimes. Gowan, ¶ 19. In light of the nature of the evidence presented, the error was not harmless.

¶45 In Van Kirk, we rejected our previous standard that "overwhelming evidence of a defendant's guilt can render harmless a district court's error" because it "invit[es] the State to offer inadmissible yet damaging evidence in a strong case . . . since the worst that can happen is that the error is noted but deemed harmless." Van Kirk, ¶¶ 33-35. Our review of the record in this case "shows [that] the jury was presented with ample admissible evidence" that Rogers had committed the charged crimes. Peplow, ¶ 57. Nonetheless, the State's introduction of Rogers's criminal history, including convictions overturned by an appellate court for legal error, violated Rogers's right to a fair trial.

¶46 The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded to the District Court for a new trial on all charges.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.


text:
Kamiak recognizes April Students of the Month

May 16, 2012
Courtesy of: Bryan Stelling

The following students were selected by Kamiak High School staff as Students of the Month for April 2012, due to their outstanding academics, school and/or community leadership and activities and/or athletics. They recently enjoyed lunch in their honor at “The Pointe” restaurant in Harbour Pointe.

Pictured are: Back row, Ngaio Lace, Deepkiran Singh, Ricardo Perez, Alberto Esparza and Matt Bettencourt. Front row, Mackenzie Gaddy, Christina Nguyen and Sam Wolff.

Comments (0)
If you wish to comment, please login.


text:
When it tastes this good - who needs gluten?
Mulligan's Gluten Free Logo
Our products do not contain any genetically modified ingredients.
Find out how you can have your gluten-free bread supplied for free.

Our gluten free products

Where you can buy our gluten free bread

How you can get gluten free bread for free

Let us know what you think of our gluten free bread

How to get in touch with us

Information on celiac (coeliac) disease

Get gluten free products delivered to your door

Special Offers

Mulligan's Gluten Free Bakery was established in 1996 and has been dedicated to supplying you with the highest quality, fresh, gluten free bread ever since.

We started out making gluten free bread as a result of a request by just one customer in a shop in Dublin. When we started making gluten free bread, we were amazed at the limited choice of gluten free products available to customers. And when we tasted the other gluten free breads in the shops, we just knew that we could make something a lot better. Since then, our gluten free bread has become hugely popular with customers as word spread and more people tried our products.

Today, our range of fresh products are available in many food retailers in Dublin and in all Quinnsworth and Tesco stores in the Republic of Ireland. You can find details of your nearest store by clicking here.

Our two most popular products, Gluten Free Brown Soda and Gluten Free White Soda are now available on prescription and can be obtained from your local pharmacy. Click here for details.

All of our gluten free products are baked fresh 6 days a week, so that you can enjoy real, fresh bread and confectionery everyday and still maintain a gluten free diet.

If you have any questions about our products, or if you have difficulty buying our products, please let us know by clicking here.

And if you would like to be kept informed by email of any product announcements or special offers from Mulligan's, just click here to send us an email. We don't send junk email and we won't pass on your details to anyone else.


text:
Wednesday, July 09, 2014

Check It Out

A cartoon on the meaning of life, at least for 20 year old men.  (Or 40.  Or 60.  Or...)

Reminds me of a  conversation I had with the LMM, when we were first dating.

She:  "I went to Assumption College, but we would sometimes go over to Holy Cross [also in Worcester] to go the library and check out the guys."

Me:  "Wow, that is one full service library!  Just 2 hour reserve, or could you keep them overnight?"

I know, amazing we ever got married.

1 comment:

John said...

Worcester is/was a great place to go to college with 10 different schools there was so much selection to choose from...ah, memories...


text:
Muppet Wiki

31,026pages on
this wiki
Add New Page

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

2007-10b.jpg(302 × 302 pixels, file size: 24 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg)

There is no description yet. Add a description.

Appears on these pages

See full list >

File history

Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.

current03:17, May 10, 2009Thumbnail for version as of 03:17, May 10, 2009302 × 302 (24 KB)Toughpigs (wall | contribs)

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki


text:
Muppet Wiki

31,026pages on
this wiki
Add New Page

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

Full resolution(685 × 528 pixels, file size: 238 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg)

There is no description yet. Add a description.

Appears on these pages

  • Big Bird's Birthday or Let Me Eat Cake

    Big Bird's Birthday or Let Me Eat Cake is a Sesame Street special which aired during the show's...

  • Episode 2244

    Sesame Street Plot Telly the Detective Air date December 11, 1986 Season Season 18 (1986-1987...

  • Episode 2415

    Sesame Street Plot Placido falls for Maria Air date February 5, 1988 Season Season 19...

See full list >

File history

Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.

current18:13, January 13, 2016Thumbnail for version as of 18:13, January 13, 2016685 × 528 (238 KB)Oscarfan (wall | contribs)
15:50, October 19, 2008Thumbnail for version as of 15:50, October 19, 2008634 × 480 (113 KB)MuppetVJ (wall | contribs)

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki


text:
Hello. We use cookies on this website
to help us and our partners improve
your browsing experience. More Info
Manage Cookies Close

Accountants in Norwich, Norfolk.

With over 35 years experience, we at Murrells Chartered Accountants continuously aim to provide a quality accounts service at very competitive prices.

We pride ourselves on providing value to our clients; thereby offering a first class service.

Why should you choose Murrells Chartered Accountants?

  • Over 35 years' experience
  • Quality and value
  • Competitive pricing
  • Individually tailored service
  • Professional and efficient

Useful Websites
Companies House : www.companieshouse.gov.uk
HM Revenue and Customs : www.hmrc.gov.uk

accountancy - Norwich - Murrells Chartered Accountants - Murrells Outside

If you have any enquiries please call Murrells Chartered Accountants now on 01603 617361

© hibu (UK) Limited 2016.  All rights reserved.

Conditions of use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy


text:
Monday, January 22, 2007

Henceforth, you may address me as...

copyright 2007 by Ms. Huis Herself
Please read this at
because that is the REAL site. Thank you!

Tee hee! I got this from Kittenpie at her blog. It's a good Monday cheer-er-up-er!

Henceforth, you may address me as...

Her Eminence the Very Viscountess Ms. Huis the Complex of Brompton Underfoot.

So there.

Get your own peculiar aristocratic title! And then tell us what it is 'cuz it's fun.

Allknowingjen said...

Honourable Lady Allknowingjen the Bewildered of Lower Wombleshire

So fitting! I saw this somewhere else too- but I had forgotten about it- Very funny!

Ang said...

Lady Ang the Bewildered of Bow under Bumpstead

I'm apparently not at all honourable as the Lady AKJ is. Hee :-) But just as bewildered. Under Bumpstead no less. Naughty ;-)

Jaysan said...

Imperial Majesty Jaysan the Haunted of Bampton Underhoop

Yup, quite befitting.

Kashka said...

Her Most Serene Highness Lady Kashka the Villainous of Hardy St Thomas

Serene. High. Villainous. Yep, that covers it.

Anonymous said...

and if you don't like the first one, just keep trying till you get one you like

The Dude said...

Lord The Dude the Facile of Old Throcking in the Hole... hmmm... somehow that makes me feel dirty. :)

Pusher said...

Milady the Right Reverend Pusher the Incontrovertible of New Scagglethorpe

Dude, I agree. Yours sounds a little naughty.

Mine sounds like I should be an intimidating old bird with several chins and the silhouette of a Sherman tank. I approve. :-)


text:
Observation 90814: Dyplolabia afzelii (Ach.) A. Massal.

Proposed Names

28% (1)
Recognized by sight
56% (1)
Recognized by sight: pure white lirellae
Based on chemical features: should be C+ red

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Add Comment
Never noticed the similarity before
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2012-03-25 07:34:39 CEST (+0200)

But in this region, Cryptothecia striata has the better odds. Up close it is unmistakable: it is very soft and fuzzy and thick. The “soredia” are a very weird consistency. There are some close-ups that really show it well in observation 61597.

The second photo,
By: zaca
2012-03-25 00:48:14 CET (+0100)

can be Phlyctis argena (cf. MO68574).

Not many scripts I can guess by site
By: Jason Hollinger (jason)
2012-03-24 19:43:14 CET (+0100)

But this may be one. The white pruina has a very strong C+r reaction (bleach).

The second photo, as you suspected, is another species. It’s Cryptothecia striata. It supposedly has apothecia in there somewhere but they are, well, “cryptic” as the name would suggest! I’ve never noticed them myself.

Lichens of NA is a great book. Standard of excellence for it’s sort of thing. You will not be sorry. It will be of limited help in southern Florida, though. Look for the Fakahatchee Strand paper by Lücking et al. Some really exotic things down there.

By: damon brunette (damonbrunette)
2012-03-24 17:06:38 CET (+0100)

I will pick up he NA lichen book this week so I can have a clue about lichen morphology, as of know I have none. In fact in these two images, I wouldnt know if they were two distinct entities or not. Look forward to using your info in a useful manner.

Created: 2012-03-24 17:00:19 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2012-03-24 19:38:01 CET (+0100)
Viewed: 162 times, last viewed: 2016-08-08 11:11:54 CEST (+0200)
Show Log


text:
Tuesday, July 7, 2009

Review-The Mystery of the Third Lucretia

The Mystery of the Third Lucretia by Susan Runholt

When Kari and Lucas (who is a girl) stumble upon a man acting very suspicious in the art museum that they are visiting
they hatch a plan to figure out what he is doing and why he's being shady. These two young girls are pretty plucky! I like that word and I rarely get
a chance to use it, but this is the perfect time! This book was very cute! I thought that the girls were very smart (even if they didn't always pick the
right thing to do) and well written. The action was fun and the plot was very good. I found myself wishing that this had been around when I was a kid.
I'd say that this would be a good series (there are two books in this series so far) for a young girl around the ages of 10-14. These girls are smart and witty and know how to take care of themselves. They are excellent examples (even if they do get up to a little mischief!)

The next book in the Kari and Lucas series is Rescuing Seneca Crane which I will be review shortly. This book is released in August.

  • Reading level: Young Adult
  • Paperback: 304 pages
  • Publisher: Puffin; Reprint edition (June 25, 2009)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0142413380

  1. I like "plucky" too. Why can I never think of great words like that when I review? LOL
    I think your review made this book sound like a such a fun read that I'm going to have to see if I can talk my librarian into ordering this series.

  2. Seriously, I am having so much fun with these books! I wished I had this series when I was a kid! :)>

Thanks for visiting!


text:
Go to contents

2PM to Return June 1 with New Album Followed by Concerts

Rating Rating more Two Stars

2015.05.08 10:43 CJ E&M enewsWorld Grace Danbi Hong

Did you miss 2PM? Because 2PM is coming back!

On May 8, JYP Entertainment released an invitational teaser photo of 2PM′s upcoming concert, which read, "2PM Concert Invitation. Are You Ready to Party?" The concerts will take place at the Olympic Park Gymnastics Hall on June 27 and 28.

According to JYP Entertainment, the concerts will happen following 2PM′s return with a fifth album on June 1.

2PM to Return June 1 with New Album Followed by Concerts

In 2014, 2PM released its fourth album Go Crazy, which was heavily composed, written, and produced by the 2PM members. It′s most likely that the members will have participated in the upcoming album as well.

With a comeback of all members after nine months, fans in and outside of Korea are showing excitement already.

Photo Credit: JYP Entertainment

2PM 20150508
Any copying, republication or redistribution of enewsWorld's content other than for personal uses is expressly prohibited Without prior permission from enewsWorld. Copyright infringement is subject to criminal and civill penalties.

search news