Tuesday - June 16, 2009
School bananas ban ‘over the top. Ain’t this god-awful silly. England is SillyLand. Think not? Read
Now this is really over the top in Moonbat thinking. I find however that it’s typical for how they approach things here.
Some many years ago for example, a few people had problems with Halcion, someone may have even overdosed. So what’s their solution?
Easy. Ban Halcion. Never mind that a kazillion other ppl had taken it with no ill effects. Let one get sick and the boom gets lowered.
There are some doctors in the USA that don’t like Halcion and give Ambien instead. Of course, that drug is (or was five yrs ago) VERY expensive. But it didn’t mean you could never get the other, which was cheap and worked. Anyway, this is how they do things here and it really is stupid.
With regard to this article, apparently a teacher had an allergy to bananas. Does that mean just being in the same room was enough to cause a problem? Was one of the kids trying to poison the teacher? This just seemed so darn silly I thought it deserved some space here.
A council leader has said a banana ban enforced at a primary school for two years was “over the top”.
Children at Stoke Damerel Primary School, in Plymouth, have been unable to include the popular snack in their packed lunches since 2007, as one of its staff members has a life-threatening allergy to them.But after only just learning of the banana boycott, Vivien Pengelly, leader of Plymouth City Council, said she would ask officers to investigate.
Councillor Pengelly said: “This is the first I have heard about this and it does sound a bit over the top to me.“It’s my experience as a headteacher that when there are allergies in a school we encourage children to manage the risk around them. I shall be asking officers to look at this particular case again to see whether anything else might be done.”
A spokeswoman for Plymouth City Council said it could not reveal the identity of the staff member involved, due to medical confidentiality.
She said: “A member of the school community has a severe life-threatening allergy to bananas and on the advice of the council, the school has asked pupils not to bring them in.“These are very unusual circumstances but the school community has been supportive and understanding over the last two years.”
But the spokeswoman added the individual involved would be leaving the school in September - when bananas will be welcomed back to the facility.She went on: “We cannot comment on specific individuals because of medical confidentiality. Most people know that individuals can have allergic reactions to substances, with nut allergies being particularly well-known.”
medical confidentiality? FOR BANANAS?
Posted by peiper
on 06/16/2009 at 07:12 AM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Health and Safety • UK •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - June 15, 2009
Got Moat?
No, I’m not having an extra security system installed here at Castle Drew. It’s just another chapter in the never ending condo association saga of Where Does The Water Go? They built this entire village as quickly and cheaply as possible. Water lines run through the dirt and under the slab foundations. Over the years the buildings settle a bit, and leaks begin. With nearly 400 units in this condo village, those leaks add up to something like a half million gallons a month. Wasted water.
So they send the guys around with the leak testers, and the pipe sniffers, and all that do-dah. And every couple of months somebody’s unit springs a leak and they have to get their garage floor dug up, or their pipes rerouted through the ceiling space, or whatever. This time, for our building, it was deteremined that the leak was out in the street. So they came and dug it up. And today I’ve got a 6 foot wide, 6 foot deep, 80 foot long open trench across the front of my whole building. With a plank bridge across the gap.
It’s a moat. All it needs is a few hundred thousand gallons of water ... and it’s looking like rain. Again. It’s rained 11 of the past 13 days.
Naturally no one can use their garages right now. I’m just hoping like mad that they actually keep working on this issue. The last time we had a project, it was the siding. Ours was the first building to have the siding torn away, but one of the last buildings to get it all done. They stopped work on our building to go and work on all the other buildings. Duh, much?
I don’t care about putting my car in the garage. The Drewmobile lives outside (it’s the red Saturn SC2 in the top picture); plastic cars don’t rust. But my reloading stuff is in the garage, and I want to make more ammo.
That’s my reaction to politics - go load some ammo. It helps clear my mind. I did get quite a bit of dry fire practice in this afternoon, while Teh One was going on about how he’s going to nationalize repair the health care system. So, yeah, I want to “refresh” some empties.
[ Plus I might be able to swing a bit of a deal and get some free bullets. I’ll get back to you on that in a couple days. ]
If you think this is a mess, you should see what’s going on next door to Peiper. I gather his neighbors were zoned for a cottage but instead built a castle. But I’ll let him post on that.
Posted by Drew458
on 06/15/2009 at 07:16 PM
Filed Under: • Daily Life •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • New gween plan for recycling. Bigger fine for those who don’t, then for those who shoplift.
New gween plan for recycling. Bigger fine for those who don’t, then for those who shoplift.
Hey ... this is the UK and, logic rules?
Just how many containers will households have to keep track of and store?
Here’s what’ll happen I predict. More people who have the room in their back gardens (and some who don’t) will be making greater use of bonfires. Which btw is legal here. Can be a bother too when the wind gets in the right (wrong from your pov if you’re in the path) direction and the fumes come indoors. It’s happened to us here more then once. I think more folks will be doing that. Then too I think the idiots who already do, will flytip to a greater degree.
That is, dumping rubbish on the roadsides or in out of the way but still public places.
Recycle your waste or face a £100 fine, says Government
By Steve DoughtyEvery household will be forced to recycle their rubbish under new Government plans.
Those who fail to comply are likely to face £100 on-the-spot fines - rising to £1,000 for persistently flouting the law.
Under the scheme, everyone will have to keep a kitchen slopbucket to hold their food waste and scraps.
Glass, cans, wood and paper will be banned from wheelie bins to force people to separate them in recycling boxes.
The idea of councils charging bin taxes was killed off earlier this year by then Waste Minister Jane Kennedy.
But within hours of her resignation from Government yesterday, Environment Minister Hilary Benn announced a consultation on compulsory recycling.
He said: ‘It’s time for a new war on waste.’The scheme follows four years of controversy over fortnightly collections, bin taxes and other Government efforts to enforce recycling and reduce the amount of refuse sent to landfill sites.
Under the system, food waste will have to be kept in a caddie in the home until collection by binmen.
Ideally this should be weekly, but many cash-strapped councils will only commit to fortnightly collections.Once collected by binmen, the waste will be taken to central ‘anaerobic digestion’ plants and used to generate energy.
The process, however, has never been used profitably in past years.Mr Benn said: ‘Take food, glass, aluminium or wood - why would you want to put any of them into landfill when they can be recycled, or used to make energy? What sort of a society would throw away aluminium cans worth £500 a ton when producers are crying out for the raw material?’
A consultation paper on compulsory recycling will be published this year, followed by a detailed consultation next year.Compulsory recycling has been tried out in four London boroughs. The schemes, which require householders to put certain materials in specified bins, apply only to those living in houses, not flat dwellers.
In one borough, householders failing to comply face £100 on-the-spot fines. This compares with £80 fines for shoplifters who steal goods worth under £200.
In other areas, fines of up to £1,000 are imposed by courts on those who persist in breaking the rules. Doretta Cocks, of the Campaign for Weekly Waste Collections, said: ‘They just are not getting the message.
‘Who is going to police this system? It means bigger and bigger rubbish-police forces. ‘How else are they going to work out if someone has put vegetable peelings in their wheelie bin? ‘Taxpayers and council tax payers will be footing the bill. It’s ridiculous.’
(of course it’s ridiculous. it’s labour, int it?)
Tory communities spokesman Caroline Spelman said: ‘More needs to be done to increase recycling.
‘But Labour ministers’ heavyhanded approach is all about forcing councils to cut rubbish collections, sneak in bin taxes and hit families with unfair fines.’
‘Under the Government’s plans, a convicted shoplifter will receive a smaller fine than a family home for making a minor mistake in putting out their household rubbish.
‘Hard-pressed council taxpayers deserve much better than that.’
Posted by peiper
on 06/15/2009 at 01:46 PM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Environment • Government • UK •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Muslim waitress wins £3,000 compensation for wearing ‘indecent’ dress, shows more on facebook
Gee, if any woman belongs in a burka this slag sure does. Use the link to see her ugly photo. (Well I think she’s ugly. Opinions may differ.)
So, what’s a good muslim lady doing working in a bar anyway? And don’t women get hit on all the time in this sort of environment? How come her male master allowed her out?
What a scam. And NOT cos she’s muslim. Or so she claims. Just plain dishonest and got away with it. For now anyway.
Revealed: Risqué Facebook picture of Muslim waitress who won £3,000 compensation for wearing ‘indecent’ dress
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
Last updated at 3:30 PM on 15th June 2009A Muslim cocktail waitress who won £3,000 for sexual harassment after refusing to wear an ‘indecent’ dress for work has posted pictures of herself wearing a low-cut top on the internet.
Fata Lemes, 33, told a tribunal that she was ‘not used to wearing sexually attractive clothes’ and that the bright red dress made her feel ‘she might as well be naked.’
But today she appeared to contradict herself by posting pictures of herself on the social networking website Facebook, in which she is wearing a revealing top.
The tribunal concluded the Bosnian Muslim ‘holds views about modesty and decency which some might think unusual in Britain in the 21st century’ but rejected her claim that the dress, which she was asked to wear at the Rocket bar in London’s Mayfair was ‘sexually revealing and indecent.’
However it accepted that Miss Lemes genuinely believed that the short, low-cut dress was ‘disgusting’ and made her look ‘like a prostitute’.
Her bosses should have made allowance for her feelings and their insistence that she wear the dress amounted to sexual harassment, the tribunal ruled.
The panel at Central London Employment Tribunal found that Miss Lemes overstated her trauma at being asked to wear the sleeveless dress that was open at the back.
It also rejected Miss Lemes’ claim that she was left with no choice but to walk out of her job after just eight days.
It branded her compensation claim of £20,000 including £17,500 for hurt feelings as ‘manifestly absurd’.
But it awarded her £2,919.95 for hurt feelings and loss of earnings..
In its judgment, the panel ruled that restaurant group Spring & Greene, which owns the Rocket chain, must ‘take their victim as they find her’.
It said of the dress: ‘It is eye-catching, not only because of its colour but also because of its cut and lines. It is clearly a garment for a girl or young woman. It is intended to, and does, show the curves of the body.
‘It seeks to make the wearer attractive. It might be seen as a party dress or something to wear at an informal celebration.’
But the panel ruled that wearing the dress could not amount to ‘conduct of a sexual nature’.
It added: ‘We would see the matter otherwise if we considered the dress genuinely indecent or if the wearing of it was, or could reasonably be seen as, tantamount to signalling availability for sexual favours.
‘But the facts do not put this case into that category. We appreciate that Miss Lemes takes a different view.’
Miss Lemes claimed she was pestered for sex by customers at the bar shortly after starting work in May last year.
She also alleged that bosses ran Rocket ‘like a sex club’ and that clients treated waitresses like prostitutes.
The panel ruled: ‘Her perception was that wearing the dress would make her feel as if she was on show, as if she was being presented as one of the attractions which the Rocket Bar was offering its customers.
‘In our view that perception was legitimate and not unreasonable. In our judgment, the effect of requiring her to wear the dress was to violate her dignity.
‘We further consider that it created for her an environment which was degrading, humiliating and offensive.’
But the tribunal rejected Miss Lemes’ claim of constructive dismissal. It ruled: ‘It seems to us that the proper interpretation of events is that the employment ended by mutual consent once it became clear that there was no prospect of the differences over the dress being resolved.
‘Miss Lemes holds views about modesty and decency which some might think unusual in Britain in the 21st century but this implies no criticism of her. In any event, the bar discriminated against her and they must take their victim as they find her.’
Giving evidence, Miss Lemes, of Camden, north-west London, told the tribunal she had worked as a waitress for 14 years and was experienced in silver service.
She took the job at Rocket, earning £5.52 an hour plus a share of service charge and tips, to supplement her income as a photographer.
Miss Lemes said that on only her second shift two guests told her they were looking for a blonde ‘for one or more nights’.
She said: ‘On my second shift, I was approached by two guests explaining that they were looking for a blonde Scandinavian or Swedish girl for one or more nights.
‘It was obvious that they thought that I was Scandinavian. I politely refused the offer.
‘I was offended by that offer. I considered the company must be indicating to guests that the bar was the type of bar where they could make sexual offers to staff.’
She initially wore a loose-fitting black linen shirt and trousers but a week into the job, she was given the new outfit, which she considered ‘physically revealing and openly sexual’.
She said: ‘Waitresses told me, looking worried, that the company had brought dresses for us to wear that they thought I would not like.
‘It was a bright red dress that was clinging and revealing of the body. It was clearly designed to be attractive to men sexually.
‘It was indecent. If you put this dress on, you might as well be naked. Everything finishes in the middle at the chest. It is open at the front and back. I did not want men looking at my body.
‘I was particularly concerned that clients, who already had made sexual proposals while I was wearing loose black clothing, would regard me as a sexual object or a prostitute.’
At the tribunal, the restaurant group produced photos of another waitress, Amanda Bjursten, wearing the dress in the bar and she modelled it at the tribunal hearing.
Ms Bjursten, from Sweden, said she was ‘completely comfortable’ wearing the dress.
The bar’s manager Luca Scanu denied the dress was designed to boost custom and tips from male clients by being ‘sexually inviting’.
Miss Lemes’ lawyer Joe Sykes asked the restaurant’s general manager Danila Bodei: ‘The reason for choosing the colour red was to indicate that the waitresses were sexually available, wasn’t it?’
She replied: ‘No, it was just the colour to match the bar.’
Posted by peiper
on 06/15/2009 at 10:58 AM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Corruption and Greed • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • UK •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Friday - June 12, 2009
Judge in racial slur storm . Naughty, naughty judge hasn’t yet learned PC Speak.
I did a post yesterday and in the comments were the following from GrumpyOldFart and Drew.
Grumpy said:
Hmmm… I can’t say “The ‘N’ Word"(tm) and other racial slurs cos that’s basically projecting my own ignorance onto you, using my own wilful ignorance as an excuse and justification for my insults. Okay, I get that part. Now you can’t insult a German the way another German would cos that’s somehow racially insensitive as well.
Does anyone sell scorecards for this kinda stuff? How do you keep track without one?
And Drew said:
This is only the beginning. The wurst is yet to come.
Well Sir Drew, it came sooner then we thought. Grumpy will keep score.
Get an eyeful of this.
Judge in racial slur storm for telling fraudster he ‘gypped’ eBay customers in online scam
By DAILY MAIL REPORTERA judge has been accused of using a ‘racial slur’ against gipsies when sentencing a conman.
Judge Christopher Elwen told the fraudster he had ‘gypped’ a student out of money on the eBay website.
The slang verb ‘to gyp’ means to defraud or steal. Experts suggested there is ‘scholarly consensus’ that it is derived from the word gipsy.
Romany gipsies also claimed the word began life as ‘gypsied’ and is an insult.
But the judge insisted there is ‘no evidence to connect it to any racial group’.
Judge Elwen used the word at Truro Crown Court while sentencing bogus eBay electrical goods trader Lee Scott-Major to three years’ jail.
He said that the harm the conman had done was not reflected in the sums involved, whether in the case of those ripped off for thousands of pounds or ‘the young student who was gypped out of £169’.
Travellers Times editor Jake Bowers said: ‘Gypped is an offensive word.
‘It is derived from gipsy and it is being used in the same context as a person might once have said they “jewed” somebody if they did an underhand business transaction.
‘Basically what Judge Elwen has done is ascribed thievery to an entire ethnic group.
‘Of course there are criminals in the gipsy community, but there’s no evidence there is a higher level of criminality than in any other community.
‘I’d say his comment reflects the amount of ignorance that there is, from the bottom of society to its top in the judiciary, about gipsies, and the idea that it’s okay to have a go at the gipsy or traveller community without thinking about it.
Romany activist Maggie Bendell-Smith said: ‘I would have been right up on my feet if I’d heard that in court, asking the judge to justify his choice of words.
‘It is derogatory and I think an apology is called for.’
A spokesman for the Judicial Communications Office defended the judge’s choice of words, saying: ‘Gyp is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as an act of cheating, nothing more.
‘There is no evidence to connect this term to any ethnic group and this is certainly not how it was used in court.’
The OED defines gyp as a late-19th century verb of unknown origin that means to cheat or swindle someone.
Its principal etymologist Dr Philip Durkin said: ‘The consensus of most people who have looked at this word recently is that it does indeed derive from “gyp: thief”, which itself derives (as a racial slur) from gypsy.’
But he added: ‘The main problem with the “gyp: thief” explanation is that there seems to be very little evidence for this use of gyp as a noun, either in the 19th century or later.’
It is not the first time Judge Elwen, recently appointed presiding judge in Truro, Cornwall, has come to attention for outspoken comments related to nationality.
Last year the judge said Britain had ‘lost control of its borders for the first time in 1066.’
He made the remark while sentencing asylum seekers who rioted at Harmsworth Detention Centre.
His latest gaffe came as he was sentencing cocaine-addicted conman Scott-Major for a six figure EBay swindle in which unlucky punters were duped into buying non-existent phones, hoovers and other items from ‘Cornwall Electrics’.
The 29-year-old’s two-year con was run from his two-bedroom flat in Penzance while he was still serving probation.
Judge Elwen told Scott-Major: ‘Whether the sum was £100,000 or £200,000 does not reflect the harm done to your victims, whether that be Mr and Mrs Andrewartha, Mr Kingshott, or the young student who was gypped out of £169.
He then sentenced him to a three year jail term.
The row over the judge’s latest comments may only finally be resolved with the next edition of the Oxford English Dictionary.
Etymologist Dr Durkin said: ‘One other suggestion - given by the Dictionary in an entry published in 1972 - is that it derives from “gyp” “pain” (as in to “give someone gyp").
Posted by peiper
on 06/12/2009 at 12:08 PM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Racism and race relations • UK •
• Comments (6)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Ho-Hum. What’s New? Oh, nothin’ much. Another stabbing. Really? Yawn. Yeah. Mental defective. Again?
Of course it is. Not that they’re the only ones who run around stabbing people here. That’s understood. Thing that bothers me I guess is that when authorities know of someone like that, why aren’t they monitored better? Or better yet, euthanized.
If they already knew this creep was violence prone, and they did, then why wasn’t the higher security mentioned in this article already in place?
Don’t ya love the terms used in cases like these? The old standby. “Learning Disabilities.” What’s that? An excuse for easy time in a hosp. mental ward.
BMEWS readers will recall my post from a day or two ago wherein a young woman 7 months pregnant was stabbed on a busy street here, by a nutcase who should never have been on the streets. He probably had learning disabilities too. I don’t much care. The woman and baby are dead. I care nothing for the killer nor do I feel anything even approaching compassion for these sub-humans. Once they show any sort of sign of violent behaviour, if they can not be put away somewhere at family expense, then they should be put down. Sure, the family will jump up and down and bellow about rights, but guess what? Society is safer by one.
If you think I’m overreacting, it’s only because this story keeps repeating itself over and over and over again! New victims, same story.
Boy, 6, stabbed in the stomach by man as he played outside his house
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
Last updated at 1:45 PM on 12th June 2009A mentally ill knifeman randomly stabbed a six-year-old boy in the stomach as he played in the street with friends.
Joseph Hutton, 19, of Leeds, is today beginning an indefinite detention under the Mental Health Act after stabbing Jack Stott outside the boy’s home with a kitchen knife he pulled from his sock.
Neighbour Hutton, who had previously been treated for psychiatric illness, admitted the stabbing and told police he was angry after claiming Jack and a friend had called him names on November 9 last year, Leeds Crown Court heard.
Hutton told police he had found the knife in a field and said: ‘I just stabbed him with it, that’s it - on his belly, just once, not lots of times.
‘It wasn’t that bad - I didn’t kill him or nowt. I didn’t mean to do it, I won’t do it again.’
The court heard how Jack’s mother June Stott, 44, had told police: ‘Jack came into the house holding his stomach with both hands saying, “I’ve been stabbed with a knife.” He was very upset, crying and said he felt sick.’
The housewife said: ‘He came in bleeding and screaming and crying. I couldn’t believe what had happened.’
By sheer chance the knife wound had left Jack’s internal organs undamaged and just needed stitches at St James’s Hospital, Leeds.
The mental scars would take far longer to fade for Jack, now seven, who has ‘constant nightmares’, Mrs Stott said.
After one dream he ran to the door and was wrenching on the handle to get out.
‘He was screaming, “He’s coming to get me, he’s coming to get me.” We had to lock the door to keep him in. I watch him 24/7 and I daren’t let him off the street.’
The mother-of-two said her unemployed husband Thomas, 45, was also profoundly affected by the attack.
Hutton, who suffers from a learning disability, was deemed unfit to plead to charges of wounding and possessing an offensive weapon but a jury ruled that he did wound Jack with the knife.
A report to the court from consultant psychiatrist May Badee said Hutton posed a serious risk to the public.
He had been involved in a number of previous incidents of unprovoked random violence using weapons and no amount of therapy or medication would improve his condition, she said.
‘He has a serious mental disorder and moderate learning disability. He doesn’t learn from his experiences. It is a chronic condition.
(A chronic condition? Fine. Then gas the bastard and put him out of the public’s misery. )‘He has a long history of compulsive and aggressive behaviour. He presents a high risk of serious harm to the general public.
‘He will need a higher level of security than he has had in the past.’
The court heard that Hutton repeatedly absconded from hospital, his parents and grandparents, and found this amusing rather than inappropriate.
Recorder Graham Hyland QC made a hospital order and ruled yesterday that Hutton should be detained indefinitely under the Mental Health Act.
He said: ‘I’m satisfied this defendant presents a high risk of serious harm to the general public.’
Mrs Stott said after the case: ‘I’m relieved he’s off the streets. Now he’s locked up he can’t do it to anybody else.
‘I do feel safer now he had been put away, but it is worrying to think that people with serious mental disorders are free to roam our streets... The authorities knew about this man and still he managed to stab my son.
‘Luckily Jack was not hurt so much physically, but it could have been much worse. I get shudders down my spine when I think about what could have happened.’
Posted by peiper
on 06/12/2009 at 08:34 AM
Filed Under: • Crime • Daily Life • UK •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Student left permanently disabled in drunken fall sues school for £300,000. (naturally. what e
Yeah I’m a mean spirited cold hearted SOB because really, I do not feel sorry for her.
Yes I was once 16. Yes I got pie eyed once or 2wice, but nothing like this. Wasn’t that I was smarter or anything, just that once I recognized I was having trouble remembering my own name I thought, whoops. Enough! Another time I embarrassed the family at a gathering. Old enough to have known better but never had Champaign and, well ... you can imagine. So ok. I’m not pure as the driven snow. That’ll surprise everyone.
Thing of it is, 16 may be very yootfull but. You are no longer a baby and frankly I would think girls, of all ppl, would be or should be wary given the hormones of young boys in that situation. But girls here btw have caught up to the guys according to the papers, and are raising glass for glass with the guys. And getting just as stoned in public at all age levels.
Blaming the school which, if you look at the photo at the link, is a very old building. Perhaps nobody thought a different window could be fitted. No matter.
She got blind drunk and fell. BUT ... it’s the fault of the school.
I will say that if I were the teacher who found her drunk to begin with, I might have contacted her family and asked that they come and get her.
Short of that, I am not certain if they could have legally (the school that is) locked her up somewhere safe. But who would have thought she’d decide to lean out a window that “opened too far” and fall out?
Her daddy is a millionaire and so perhaps she sees this as her own starting stake in life. Who knows.
Personal responsibility has flown the coop long ago.
I think I’ll sue Tesco because I have overeaten and I think I may have gained a pant size. It’s not my fault. The market is to blame. All that yummy food and all that variety and ALL THAT CHOCOLATE and the pasta (not together) well, how can a body resist? We aren’t supposed to resist and so on those grounds I think I’ll sue them. I might sue myself as well.
Student left permanently disabled in drunken fall sues school for £300,000
By ANDREW LEVY
Last updated at 8:07 AM on 12th June 2009A Cambridge student is suing a top boarding school for £300,000 after a drunken fall from a window left her permanently disabled.
Amy St Johnston was a 16-year-old pupil at Oundle School when she got drunk at a Valentine’s Ball and plunged from her first-floor room.
Miss St Johnston, now 20, claims the accident happened because teachers allowed a ‘drinking culture’ to form among senior pupils at the £22,800-a-year school.
Documents lodged at the High Court also state that the window she fell from failed to meet building regulations because it was able to open twelve inches - three times the legal limit of four inches.
The accident took place on February 26, 2005, when Miss St Johnston was in the lower sixth at the mixed independent school in Peterborough, Cambridgeshire.
She claims she started drinking a ‘combination of alcoholic drinks’ with other pupils at 6pm as they prepared for the Valentine’s Ball.
She continued to drink after returning to her boarding house, Wyatt House, after supper, before going out at 8pm.
A male teacher at the ball, who noticed Amy was ‘under the influence of alcohol’, said in an email two days later: ‘As Amy went to the toilet she was bouncing off an architrave and didn’t look totally in control of her body movements.’
He made her sit in a room for 20 minutes to ‘cool off’ but the writ alleges she returned to the ball as soon as he had left the room.
The same teacher is later claimed to have sent her back to her room under the supervision of another female pupil.
Miss St Johnston was given a breathalyser test by house mistress Sheila Hipple, which confirmed she had been drinking, and taken to her room.
At some point in the next ten minutes, the writ continues, she ‘leaned so far out of the window that she fell out’, plunging 15ft to the ground below.
Her spinal cord was damaged in the fall. She now suffers from partial paraplegia, which can lead to loss of limb movement and other complications.
Following the accident, Miss St Johnston, who walks with the help of crutches, left the 1,090-pupil school to continue her studies at a different sixth form.
She is now studying classics at Selwyn College, Cambridge.
Her writ claims the school was in loco parentis, and accuses it of failing in its duty of care by leaving Miss St Johnston in a first-floor room with a window not fitted with a restricter while it was ‘known she was under the influence of alcohol’.
Miss St Johnston refused to discuss the case yesterday, saying: ‘I don’t really want to talk about it, I don’t think I should - partly because of legal reasons but also it’s just not something I want to discuss.’
Her father James, a 47-year-old millionaire financial sector worker for KNG Securities, and mother Emily, 44, also refused to comment last night at the family home in Woodbridge, near Ipswich.
However, a close friend of Miss St Johnston’s said: ‘She is a remarkable girl who has come through a lot with incredible determination.
‘She has never lost sight of how lucky she is and how supportive her family have been.
‘But she and her parents do feel she was failed by the school and that Oundle should bear some responsibility.’
Oundle’s rules state that sixth formers can drink beer, cider and wine at social events sanctioned by a house master or mistress where a ‘substantial meal’ is served.
Since 1969, the British Standard Code of Practice recommends that limiters are fitted on windows above ground level restricting opening to less than four inches, the writ adds.
The 1998 Edition of Building Regulations also made it a requirement they are fitted with limiters or safety guards to prevent falls.
Charles Bush, headmaster of Oundle School, refused to discuss the case yesterday.
However, spokesman Liz Dillarstone said: ‘The matter is being dealt with by the school’s legal advisors and Mr Bush is not in a position to comment further.’
Charles Bush, headmaster of Oundle School, refused to discuss the case
Oh well. A Bush in the picture? Maybe it’s his fault!
Posted by peiper
on 06/12/2009 at 05:51 AM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Education • UK •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - June 11, 2009
Gardening Heroics
In case you missed it in one of her comments yesterday, here are the frightful details.
Hey - short break - we have a snake (biggest I’ve even seen - probably 4+ feet) entangled in the plastic bird netting that is the grape protection system. I discovered him yesterday at about 5 pm - he is still alive at 10:41 am. We are trying to figure out how to get him out - 1) without expending money, 2) without getting bitten - although he seems to be more flight than fight) and 3) preferably without cutting the heck out of the netting (which now seems impossible) however, since he was alive - I tried using the small shears we have out in the garden - no luck and the tree pruner (give me some distance please) - again no such luck. So I think I will sacrifice one of my forever knives (as they are brand new, I have two paring knives and I think that they might be sharp enough to do the cutting). Did I mention that it is pouring down rain? What fun.
I wrote her back with a couple of suggestions for capturing snakes, and some advice for putting in a couple of plants that are natural snake repellents. And I asked for pictures of course!
Drew, I had the urge to run screaming (or magically levitate as your mom did) - but I’ve been around the most egregious of animals (heck a crocodile in the bath tub) - that my run screaming mode has a kill switch. And then yesterday my ‘oh look at the poor animal trapped - how can I get him out’, mommy mode kicked in.
However, I do know that holding his tail end while hubby was cutting the netting away - my heart was racing at about 200 beats a millisecond.
So here:
The first one, shows you how far away I was taking the first pictures.
The rest are pretty much self explanatory.I am shooting off a note to Fiskars - can’t believe that the garden shears (which I’ve used to cut the metal tying ‘string’) and the pruners didn’t cut at all but the Fiskars scissors (and older ones at that, they started in my desk) did the trick.
I have never heard about the rue - will look into it. And tell people if they can identify the snake - we’d be much appreciated - would like to know exactly what is roaming around behind us.
Wardmama4
Ok, do we have any herpetologists with snake ID skills here? She didn’t mention that it had a rattle, so it’s not a rattlesnake. But that big diamond shaped head says Viper to me ... but I don’t know squat about snakes.
And I think she deserves some sort of recognition, for both eco-sympathy and braveness. Maybe we should call her Snake Wrangler from now on or something? 
Posted by Drew458
on 06/11/2009 at 11:21 AM
Filed Under: • Animals • Daily Life • Heroes •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - June 09, 2009
Family barricaded in driveway every week for a YEAR in feud with bullying binmen. OR …
HOW THINGS WORK IN THE UK. OR DON’T AS THE CASE MAY BE.
This story is a good example of why guns are good!
First time maybe it’s funny. After that, all bets are off and then claim “diminished responsibility.”
Works like a charm every time.
Be a good lesson for binmen to learn what health and safety REALLY can mean.
Family barricaded in driveway every week for a YEAR in feud with bullying binmenBy Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:38 PM on 09th June 2009When Emma Harper made a complaint to the council about a black wheelie bin being left on her step, she simply assumed her comments would be dealt with in the usual manner.
Instead, her family has been subjected to a year-long campaign of bullying from binmen who now barricade them into their driveway every week with up to 15 of their neighbours’ bins.
The feud erupted last June when Emma Harper, 35, complained to a council worker after she almost tripped over a black wheelie bin which had been left on her doorstep.
But she was stunned when, the following week, a row of ten large black wheelie bins were lined at the bottom of her drive, blocking her in.
The bullying tactics have continued every week, with up to 15 bins stacked side-by-side at the end of the driveway outside their semi-detached house in Coventry.
Emma, a secondary school teacher, has now reached ‘breaking point’ after binmen cited health and safety reasons for leaving the bins outside her house.
She said: ‘The first week it happened we could see the funny side of it but we didn’t expect it continue.
‘We dread waking up on collection day to find we’ve been targeted yet again by these arrogant binmen.
‘I know it’s not a life-threatening issue, but it takes a while to move the bins each morning which can make me late for work.
‘The binmen say they aren’t allowed to touch the bins because it’s somebody else’s job - but they’re being paid with my council tax.
‘One even swaggered up to me and said it was against health and safety procedure to move them - I was amazed.
‘I’ve reached breaking point and something has to be done to sort this out. We’re being treated appallingly.’
Every Wednesday night Emma places her two bins - one for recycling and another for domestic waste - at the end of her driveway for collection the following morning.
But before she can drive to work she has to move at least ten of her neighbours’ bins which have been lined up outside her driveway after the binmen have emptied them.
Emma has even taken pictures of the bins as evidence and posted them to Coventry City Council in a bid to stop the bullying.
She tried to ask one of the bin men why they blockade her drive but they swore under their breath and walked off.
Another simply shrugged his shoulders and said it was not his job to collect the bins.
Emma said: ‘I hate confrontation and understand everyone has a job to do but I am staggered by the behaviour of these people.’
Now Emma has to spend around ten minutes dragging the bins away from her driveway every Thursday morning so that she can take her daughters Abigail, 17, and Chloe, 11, to school.
Emma added: ‘I thought somebody was playing a ‘Beadle’s About’ type prank on me at first but now it’s gone way beyond a joke.
‘It’s utterly ridiculous that we should be met with abuse every time we try to get the problem sorted.’
A Coventry City Council spokesman said: ‘We thank Mrs Harper for raising this concern and we apologise for any inconvenience caused.
‘We will be ensuring that measures are taken to prevent this from happening again in the future.’
Posted by peiper
on 06/09/2009 at 07:44 AM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • UK •
• Comments (6)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • BAN ALL KNIVES OF ANY SIZE AND DESCRIPTION AND ALL SHARP INSTRUMENTS. WILL IT WORK?
Oh right. Sure.
I understand the fear many have and am not without that fear myself. But who exactly will a ban save? Some might say that a person who carries a knife might use it under some kind of emotional stress or in the heat of anger, where otherwise death or injury might not be the result. I understand that argument.
But the honest to gosh fact of the matter is that most citizens don’t carry a knife anyway. And the criminals and madmen who do are not going to be put off because the law says they mustn’t carry a sharp instrument.
I heard about this on the radio the night before last and saw it in the paper yesterday. It was depressing to be honest and I wasn’t going to post it.
Then I read Drew’s post on the subject of knives and so am posting this now.
All the laws in the world would not have saved this poor young woman and her unborn baby. The miserable bastard who did it, did not even know her.
It says he was a mental patient. Then what the hell was he doing out loose? How many more innocent people have to die before authorities decide it’s more important to protect their law abiding citizens, then it is the ‘u-man rights’ of some fuckin loony tune who by all that’s right, should be gassed or hung or shot.
People like this have no worth unless used for medical experiments to further medical knowledge. Or else as farms for organs to save other lives but not criminal lives.
I guess I’m just fed up and sick of reading about these things. And trust me, they are frequent. This is NOT a one off thing.
Oh yeah ... I don’t buy the term ex-mental patient. Ain’t no such animal.
Tributes to pregnant woman ‘knifed to death by ex-mental patient’By Chris Brooke
Last updated at 10:56 AM on 09th June 2009A heavily pregnant woman was stabbed to death ‘at random’ by a former mental health patient, it emerged last night.
Claire Wilson, 21, was seven months pregnant with her first child, who also died, when a man plunged a knife into her back as she walked to work in broad daylight.
The killer was described as ‘cool as a cucumber’ after the attack.
Asked by a shocked witness: ‘Why have you just stabbed a young girl like that?’, he ‘shrugged his shoulders’ and made no effort to run away.
Mental health services and police are investigating the stabbing after it emerged that the suspect had a history of psychiatric illness.
He was admitted to the Diana, Princess of Wales Hospital in Grimsby last year after making threats to kill and hearing voices. He received three or four weeks of treatment.
Since his release, sources claim he has moved from address to address and has not sought any treatment.
A man who had been following her stabbed her in the back once with a 12-inch black-handled knife. There was reportedly no warning, confrontation or provocation.
Publican Steve Greasby, who was also quickly on the scene, said: ‘Rick said he had walked down the road as cool as a cucumber as though he hadn’t done anything.’
Mr Greasby added that the knife was still in the victim’s back. ‘There was a lot of blood,’ he added. ‘She wasn’t talking but people were comforting her.’
Mr Kennard and Miss Wilson had spent a couple of years in Italy before returning to take up their life in Grimsby.
Dave Stembridge, 18, a colleague of Miss Wilson, called her ‘one of the greatest people anyone would want to meet’.
PHOTOS AND REST OF THE STORY HERE
● The case echoes one in nearby Hull four years ago when pregnant Tina Stevenson, 31, was stabbed in the back by paranoid schizophrenic Benjamin Holiday. He admitted manslaughter and was detained indefinitely at a secure mental hospital. An NHS trust apologised to the family of Miss Stevenson after an independent report criticised his care.
Posted by peiper
on 06/09/2009 at 07:04 AM
Filed Under: • Crime • Daily Life • UK •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - June 02, 2009
Worker who suffered racial discrimination at refugee charity wins £65,000. Another wronged negr
They’re everywhere.
So ok. Maybe he’s telling the truth. Although I don’t believe him. Which counts for less then nothing I know.
See what gets me is all this BS talk about flashbacks to where he’d lived before.
Born here but parents took him back to the dark continent when a baby and so he grew up there. But times got bad for mammy and old black joe and so back to the UK they came as fast as their donkey could carry them. Article says they came back due to the war and killing where they were. Right. More likely they wanted Brit largess which more then likely put this guy thru law school. Oh wonderful. Another black lawyer.
How’d he handle the stress there must have been studying and taking tests. Of course, we don’t actually know if the tests he took were the very same ones, others took. I mean, maybe his civil and human rights required he have an easier test. ??? Well hell. I don’t know. I just see that old RCOB when ppl start suing for “hurt feelings.”
He suffered psychiatric trauma
he suffered flashbacks to the Nigerian Civil War
He suffered disabling depression
His mind always wandering
He became very resentful of white women, who he feels have been given work in preference to him.
He felt demotivated
And all because he thought he was being discriminated against. Well, perhaps he was. But how is it determined that race was the reason? Oh right. I forget.
Any time a person of color raises that issue, the door is closed to anything else.
There has been a total failure by the respondent to offer any form of apology to him at any time.’
Well duh ... would that make a difference? Sure it would. It would be an admission of guilt and besides. What if they don’t think there is anything to say sorry for? What if race really had nothing to do with it? But of course, it had to. De black dude says so and ya can’t deny it by sayin’ , it ain’t necessarily so.
Black immigration worker who suffered racial discrimination at refugee charity wins £65,000By Andrew Levy
Last updated at 3:43 PM on 02nd June 2009A black man who was made redundant by the British Refugee Council, leaving only white people at the immigration centre where he worked, has been awarded more than £65,000 compensation.
Emmanuel Obikwu, 45, was unfairly singled out when his unit was earmarked for closure, an employment tribunal ruled.
While he and a Tanzania-born colleague lost their jobs, white colleagues were moved on to new posts.
Mr Obikwu, who has two British Masters degrees in law, suffered stress, anxiety, sleeping disorders, depression, and flashbacks to his own time as a refugee as a result of his treatment.
He has now been awarded £65,475 for unfair dismissal, racial discrimination, injury to feelings, psychiatric injury, and loss of earnings.
The payout follows £30,000 awarded in January to a former colleague, Tanzania-born Zaina Ukwaju, who also lost her job.
Speaking yesterday after the tribunal’s judgement was published, Mr Obikwu accused his former employers of racism.
‘This was a charity that I believed was dedicated to equal treatment of its employees and committed to human rights and the welfare of refugees,’ he said.
‘All I had ever wanted from the British Refugee Council was to be treated equally and fairly.
‘The racism and unfairness meted out to me by this organisation affected my health and damaged my well-being psychologically and psychiatrically.’
Mr Obikwu was born in London but his Nigerian parents returned with him to their homeland when he was a baby.
They came back to the UK a few years later after fleeing the country’s brutal civil war.
Mr Obikwu was educated in Britain and went on to work as an asylum support advice worker at the Oakington Immigration Centre, near Cambridge.
He lost his job in May 2006 after plans to close the unit at the Home Office-run centre were announced.
But he was horrified to learn later on that his white colleagues had been allowed to take jobs elsewhere.
During the eight-day hearing last year, the tribunal was told the council had failed to follow its redundancy rules in ‘the most extreme way’.
It was alleged by Mr Obikwu and Miss Ukwaja that the operations manager Anne-Marie Leech was ‘consciously biased’ when selecting members of staff to be made redundant.
They highlighted the fact that no one who attended a party at her home had lost their job.
The tribunal rejected this claim but said it was likely Ms Leech ‘subconsciously’ favoured colleagues she was friendly with - particularly those at the party.
Bury St Edmunds Employment Tribunal in Suffolk ruled Mr Obikwu deserved compensation for his psychiatric trauma and refused to accept the council’s claim that he would have lost his job regardless of his skin colour.
In their judgement, the three-man panel commented: ‘We are quite satisfied that the ill health which the claimant suffered was caused by race discrimination for which the respondent is responsible.
‘There has been a total failure by the respondent to offer any form of apology to him at any time.’
After losing his job, the tribunal heard, Mr Obikwu took a post as a night project worker with the Salvation Army. But he left in May last year as his psychological problems mounted.
A psychiatric report published with the judgement said he suffered flashbacks to the Nigerian Civil War.
It said: ‘These are pictures coming into his mind, certainly two or three times a week, of them moving from place to place.
‘He was also doing some studying but found his mind always wandering back to what happened at Oakington. He felt demotivated and it was pointless to study.’
A GP’s report added Mr Obikwu’s attitude to employment had also suffered.
‘He has had a major change in his attitude towards colleagues, particularly becoming very resentful of white women, who he feels have been given work in preference to him,’ it said.
‘This depression has been a disabling condition, particularly affecting his motivation and concentration, but also his attitude to work and relationships within the family.’
The British Refugee Council yesterday insisted its managers had acted ‘in good faith’.
A spokesman added: ‘We have reviewed our procedures to ensure that all staff are treated equally and fairly. We regret the distress the process has caused Mr Obikwu.’
Posted by peiper
on 06/02/2009 at 12:04 PM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Racism and race relations • UK •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • THE COMRADES IN CHARGE OF TRUTH MINISTRY ADVISE AGAINST PUTTING OPINIONS INTO WORDS.
I know this story or one like it was covered only two months ago. Maybe less.
So this is either an update or a new story. Doesn’t much matter frankly as it’s clearly a window into what this place has become.
Farmer branded racist for telling the truth about travellersBy Luke Salkeld
Last updated at 12:28 PM on 02nd June 2009Having lived next to a community of travellers for 30 years, Bryan Lee thought he had valuable insight into plans to give them a permanent home.
But when he objected to transforming a field into a new settlement, his input was ignored - and he was even branded a racist.
Mr Lee, 65, was warned he could face legal action from the police and equality watchdogs if he dared to continue with his ‘racist representations’.
Yesterday, the retired dairy farmer spoke of his outrage at being labelled a bigot by officials at Mid Devon District Council.
Their response came after he wrote in March to disagree with plans to turn a field half a mile from his home in Silverton, Devon, into two pitches for travellers.
The father of two outlined the problems he had faced with another travellers’ site and said the application was ‘inappropriate for the area’.
He wrote: ‘The number of families at any one time on the permanent site was an ongoing problem for the local authority, as was the nature of business carried out on the site.
‘This included vehicle wrecking and various small-scale livestock ventures.’
He continued: ‘Horses were turned into my fields regularly. The police were regular visitors, usually to trace stolen property but also to break up fights with traveller families from other sites.’
When staff eventually responded, Mid Devon District Council said it would take ‘no account’ of his letter and warned he may be investigated under race laws.
Officials wrote: ‘It is policy on planning and building proposals to take no account of representations of a racist nature.
‘If the council receives any more racist representations from you, this matter will be referred to the Commission for Racial Equality or the police.’
Yesterday Mr Lee, who lived next to a camp in Broadclyst, Devon, before moving to Silverton, said: ‘This extreme reaction would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic and damaging to my character. It is absolutely outrageous. I am not a racist.’
He insisted his letter over the proposal was ‘a factual report of my own first-hand experience’.
He continued: ‘I spent 30 years living next to a travellers’ site and it was hell.
‘ I had lots of my farming equipment stolen. If my property wasn’t bolted down, it would disappear overnight.
‘The place was a complete tip with rubbish everywhere. I also witnessed some very aggressive and unpleasant behaviour. I wasn’t suggesting all travellers acted in this way - of course they don’t.
‘I was simply pointing out what happened in my personal experience. I was within my rights to oppose the application, especially after what I’ve been through, without being accused of racism by some jumped-up official.’
He added that the council withdrew the plan after being flooded with 50 complaints from residents.
A spokesman for Mid Devon District Council said: ‘I appreciate that planning applications for gipsy and traveller sites can be quite sensitive.’
She added that the authority had a ‘clear policy’ meaning that officials would not take into account comments ‘where they could reasonably be considered to be racist’.
reasonably be considered to be racist’.
Reasonable? I don’t even see where that enters it here. Do any of you? I couldn’t find anything in what he said that could be taken that way. Except by the shitheads on that council who want to read it that way. And btw, where exactly does race enter into this anyway?
Seems like the asswipes in power simply make up a race and after that whatever group they so designate is beyond criticism.
WAY BEYOND!
Words, all words and all meaningless. Blow off steam, the pc crowd keeps chugging along making things worse and nobody with a gun to stop the shits.
There is loads of honest evidence in plain view from the victims to police reports and people living in a general area near these vermin. They are trouble wherever they land. The laws here mean nothing. The green belt means less when they pave over and settle that. They are a law unto themselves and will damn well do whatever they please so, up yours native and other law abiding citizens. You can stick your clawless laws where the sun don’t shine.
Now move it citizen, we have some more property to destroy.
Posted by peiper
on 06/02/2009 at 10:34 AM
Filed Under: • Blog Stuff • Daily Life • Outrageous • Travelers/Gypsies/Squatters • UK •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Sunday - May 31, 2009
WORLD FAMOUS CLOCK IS 150 TODAY. LONDON’S BIG BEN
This has to be my final post for today, Sunday, May 31 of 2009.
BIG BEN IS 150 today.
London’s Big Ben ticks over to 150th anniversary
1 hour agoLONDON (AFP) — Big Ben, arguably the world’s most famous clock which towers over London, marked its 150th anniversary Sunday.
The clock started ticking on May 31 1859 and has continued with only occasional interruptions for maintenance, bad weather and even bird strikes ever since.
The clock, housed in St Stephen’s Tower which adjoins Britain’s House of Commons, is one of the capital’s most popular tourist attractions and boasts some amazing statistics.
Each of the four Gothic clock faces is seven metres wide, with a minute hand over four metres long which travels the equivalent of 190 kilometres per year.
A Latin inscription is carved beneath each one—“Domine salvam fac Reginam nostrum Victoriam primam” which means: “O Lord, save our Queen Victoria the First.” Queen Victoria was on the throne in Britain at the time.
The 96 metre-high tower which houses the clock was built as part of the rebuilding of the Houses of Parliament by architects Charles Barry and Augustus Pugin following a major fire in 1843.
A competition was opened in 1846 to decide who should build the clock, but it took seven years to decide a winner.
Eventually, the winner was named as Edward Dent, who had already made a chronometer for the HMS Beagle, the ship which carried Charles Darwin on a worldwide voyage which led him to the theory of evolution.
The clock cost 2,500 pounds to build and was completed in 1854 but it was not installed until the clock tower was finished five years later.
Even then, there was a last-minute hitch—the original cast-iron minute hands were too heavy and had to be replaced with copper ones.
The famous bell chimes—which are used at the start of many television and radio news bulletins in Britain—did not sound for another six weeks afterwards.
The name Big Ben originally referred to the bell in the clocktower, but has come to be used for the tower and the clock as well.
It is not entirely clear where the name Big Ben comes from—some say refers to Sir Benjamin Hall, an MP at the time, while others claim it was after heavyweight boxer Benjamin Caunt
Whoops ... left this off. You can tell I’m tired.
Catch this link please. Interesting Big Ben stuff.
the clock which Sir Charles Barry designed with the help of Augustus Pugin, after the Palace of Westminster was destroyed by fire in 1834, has an appeal out of all proportion to its measurements.
Posted by peiper
on 05/31/2009 at 10:47 AM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • UK •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • The jury’s still out on if Sonia Sotomayor is the right judge for the job, in editorial page here ..
Following up on editorials and articles re this person by Drew and a tip from Blake, I thought maybe I should post this for the benefit of BMEWS readers as it’s from the editorial page of the Telegraph.
I’m not posting all of it as much has already been posted with regard to her bio.
I hesitated at first but the idea stuck me that maybe some of you would be interested in seeing how this is being reported outside our own country.
I’m not clear on why the author here thinks the jury is still out. Which jury would that be?
I do believe this is an attempt to please a large and rapidly growing segment of the American population. A segment that by and large voted for Obama.
I think it’s fair and honest to say our side would do the same, except our side is far less likely to join the social engineering diversity one size WILL fit all mind set. But then again I do tend to be biased.
Oh wait, I can’t let this go just yet. There’s one really important thing. Guns, and the control or banishment of them by this judge if she has her way.
I may be judging her in a negative light on just that one issue, and critics will say that’s wrong.
Well, I am living in a place right now that has a gun ban, of serious sorts, and where only the really bad guys have them. I’m in a place and at an age where self defense is a personal issue.
I would HATE to see anyone on the court with the means of screwing up the right to arms for law abiding citizens.
I’m witness to what happens to those law abiding folks who are, armless. Don’t much like what I see let me tell ya. It’s very scary!
You must not allow that to happen in the USA!!!!
Profile: From the tough Puerto Rican projects of the Bronx, to the threshold of the Supreme Court, she’s certainly come a long way – but no one is quite sure where she stands, says William Langley.
William Langley
Last Updated: 4:45PM BST 30 May 2009Soon after the start of his run for the presidency, Barack Obama dropped a big hint about the kind of judges he wanted to see on the bench of the Supreme Court. “We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognise what it’s like to be a young teenage mom,” said the candidate. “The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old.” The “old” bit seemed superfluous, given that one of the current judges is 89 and four others are in their 70s, but that’s campaign rhetoric for you.
Of far more interest is what Obama actually meant by “empathy”. The word – a longstanding pop-psychology and self-help manual standby – has been heavily in play since Obama last week proposed Sonia Sotomayor, a New York appeals court judge, as his first Supreme Court pick. Miss Sotomayor, a glossily coiffeured, divorced and childless daughter of Puerto Rican immigrants, would, if approved by the Senate, become the first Hispanic woman – and only the third woman ever – to join the ranks of the Supremes. But uncertainty as to whom and what she might choose to do her empathising with swirls around her, and may yet scupper her candidacy.
Many conservatives see her nomination as, at best, a payback for the 67 per cent of the Hispanic vote that Obama took in November’s election, and at worst a sign of the new President’s stealthy, socialistic refashioning of the American state. “Empathy,” wrote Karl Rove, the previous President’s senior policy adviser, in The Wall Street Journal last week, “is the latest code word for liberal activism, for treating the Constitution as malleable clay to be kneaded and moulded in whatever form justices want. It represents an expansive view of the judiciary in which courts create policy that couldn’t pass the legislative branch, or, if it did, would generate a voter backlash.”
The Supreme Court’s job is to interpret the Constitution. This isn’t as dull as it sounds, and can occasionally throw up cases like the claim of Anna Nicole Smith, the voluptuous blonde ex-lapdancer and TV reality star, to inherit her 89-year-old billionaire husband’s fortune. For most of the court’s 218-year history the bench has been occupied by worthy, middle-aged, white, male constitutional lawyers of little or no obvious political leanings. It was only during the second half of the 20th century that the White House began to realise that a president’s right to nominate judges could be a powerful extension of policy.
As Rove suggests, an ideologically supportive Supreme Court is a convenient way of “laundering” legislation into the system. The court deals with around 100 cases a year, nearly all of which have a bearing on the nation’s political character, and some of which shape it. The problem is that partisan appointments have a history of backfiring. Eisenhower rued his nomination of the celebrated Chief Justice Earl Warren as “the biggest damned mistake I ever made”, after Warren – sent in as a conservative – returned a series of ultra-liberal judgements. Something similar happened with David Souter, appointed by George Bush Sr. It is his retirement, after a controversial 19-year tenure, that has opened the door for Miss Sotomayor.
Appointments are for life: the justices can only be replaced as a result of death, retirement or impeachment. So Miss Sotomayor, at 54, is likely to remain in office long after Obama has gone and, just as few people know who she is, still fewer can predict with any certainty what she might do. Consequently the liberal lobby is displaying signs of nervousness comparable to those that afflict the conservative camp.
Judge Sotomayer has a surprisingly limited track record on hot-button social issues such as abortion, gay rights, gun control, affirmative action, immigration and the death penalty. The kinds of things, in other words, that those cheering her appointment are likely to be most consumed by. Her largely uncontroversial years in the appeals court have provided few clues as to how she might proceed on the big constitutional questions.
This could be because the judge is extremely clever – or, as her detractors see it, because she is nowhere near clever enough. In a detailed examination of her career, Jeffrey Rosen, the legal affairs editor of The New Republic, raised doubts about “her temperament, her judicial craftsmanship, and most of all, her ability to provide an intellectual counterweight to the conservative justices”. One former New York court official is quoted by Rosen as saying: “She’s not that smart, and a kind of a bully.”
This seems harsh. No one claims she’s the next Oliver Wendell Holmes, but Miss Sotomayor’s life story is a qualification in itself.
Posted by peiper
on 05/31/2009 at 09:58 AM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Guns and Gun Control •
• Comments (7)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
Once Again, The One And Only Post
(4 total trackbacks)
Tracked at iHaan.org
Thｅ advantage to having a guide with you is thɑt an expert will haѵe very first hand experience dealing and navigating the river with гegional wildlife. Tһomas, there are great…
On: 07/28/23 10:37
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We've Been Waiting For
(3 total trackbacks)
Tracked at head to the Momarms site
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We’ve Been Waiting For
On: 03/14/23 11:20
Vietnam Homecoming
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at 广告专题配音 专业从事中文配音跟外文配音制造，北京名传天下配音公司
专业从事中文配音和外文配音制作，北京名传天下配音公司 北京名传天下专业配音公司成破于2006年12月，是专业从事中 中文配音 文配音跟外文配音的音频制造公司，幻想飞腾配音网领 配音制作 有海内外优良专业配音职员已达500多位，可供给一流的外语配音，长年服务于国内中心级各大媒体、各省市电台电视台，能满意不同客户的各种需要。电话：010-83265555 北京名传天下专业配音公司…
On: 03/20/21 07:00
meaningless marching orders for a thousand travellers ... strife ahead ..
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Casual Blog
[...] RTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPL [...]
On: 07/17/17 04:28
a small explanation
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at yerba mate gourd
Find here top quality how to prepare yerba mate without a gourd that's available in addition at the best price. Get it now!
On: 07/09/17 03:07
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
