 mode, not a prerequisite for success. 'Nuff said.

[*] Outlining is organizing and distilling the course material into a concise reference document, in order to understand that material. But go ahead and participate in group outlines, because you should be outlining for yourself regardless and (if competitive advantage is an issue) other people's outlines aren't that much help anyway.

Jun. 14th, 2011 07:04 pm

From page 8 of this decision (PDF):

The fact that this is a case . . .

SCOTUSblog has context and a summary.

My standard response to people who aren't sure if they want to go to law school is, "Don't." In the past, I've gone on to say, "Law school sucks enough that unless you're positive you want to practice law [*], you shouldn't spend three years of your life at it."

This NYT article reminds me that my answer also must include, "and the job market is so bad that it is an amazingly risky gamble."

So, for the record.

[*] Two notes about "practice law":

First, if you're one of the minuscule number of people who can go straight into teaching law, you don't need to be asking me for advice.

Second and far more importantly, as the article says:

This gets to what might be the ultimate ugly truth about law school: plenty of those who borrow, study and glad-hand their way into the gated community of Big Law are miserable soon after they move in.

If you don't know what kind of law you want to practice and what it'll be like, it behooves you to find out.

and all others who think rationally:

So you're a lawyer who's been out of law school and practicing at the same place for three or four years. Your place of employment has just taken on a new client and your boss has assigned you the case, which requires urgent attention. You believe the new client should win, but you disagree with your boss's reasons for assigning you the case and demand time to think it over. Your boss agrees but warns you that the opponent in the case, a prominent businessperson, is dangerous and that taking the case could make that person your enemy.

At the end of the conversation,

[Poll #1553005]

If you are the protagonist of the novel I was reading last night )

A while ago, someone on my reading list had a post inviting people to pick one historical figure they would like to kick in the shins. I can't find the post now, but as I recall, the rules were that a mysterious person with a time machine made you the offer, with the restrictions that you were strictly limited to one kick in the shins, and that you couldn't choose Hitler (or, I suppose, any other such really obvious figure) since if you did, everyone would, and then history would be altered thanks to the permanent bruise he'd have.

I couldn't think of anyone then, but now I've got my choice: Roger B. Taney, Chief Justice of the United States, the author of the Supreme Court's opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford. It's been years since I read it, and my memory had faded about just how absolutely vile Taney's opinion is; but yesterday, I was listening to a lecture series on the history of the U.S. Supreme Court [*], and all through the sections on Dred Scott [**] and Taney's other slavery-related decisions, my foot just kept twitching.

So, who would you like to kick in the shins?

[*] I listen to podcasts, radio plays, or lectures while in the nursery with SteelyKid (I tried audiobooks, but while fiction moves fast enough when I'm distracted by driving, it's not sufficient for this). I picked this series as a way of easing myself back into the legal mindset before I go back to work in a few weeks.

[**] The decision is over 100 thousand words, so I don't recommend reading it (trust me—I have), but the principal holdings are that (1) no-one of African descent can be an American citizen, because the Constitution's framers viewed them "as beings of an inferior order" who "might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for [their own] benefit", and (2) Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in territories—neither of which was remotely supportable. For more, see Wikipedia.

Three quick comments I found interesting:

  • Dahlia Lithwick on the difference between judicial activism and judging; also on how "when your citizens and/or their Legislature are racing around banning and legalizing the same thing at the same time, the will of the people is not necessarily the last word on what's constitutional."
  • Kenji Yoshino on the potential wider legal consequences of the decision. I note that the decision explicitly refused to make immutability a requirement of traits deserving the highest legal protection, as Yoshino argued in Covering.

    (Also, it is amusing to contrast his and Lithwick's characterizations of the way the decision is written.)

  • The Slacktivist considers people who are sincerely opposed to same-sex marriage for religious reasons and wonders "why these friends and brothers and sisters of mine think that such theological arguments can or should be persuasive to those who don't share our religious perspective."

As everyone has said, California's highest court today ruled that "the designation of marriage" must be made "available both to opposite-sex and same-sex couples." I am so happy about this, though my happiness must pale besides that of those more directly affected by the decision.

That decision, by the way, is 172 pages: 121 pages of majority opinion (including 73 footnotes), 40 pages of concurring and dissenting opinions, and 11 pages of administrative stuff (PDF, 500KB). I've only had time to skim the majority opinion (and I am, alas, not the sharpest knife in the drawer at the moment thanks to sleep deprivation), but the only word that comes to mind is "exhaustive." Which—to go off on a tangent—interests me, because there are several different potential audiences for all this exhaustive discourse, and talking to multiple audiences is a tough thing to do.

legal natter )

Have any of the non-lawyers here ventured into the decision itself? What did you think?

In Covering: The Hidden Assault on Our Civil Rights, Kenji Yoshino argues for a new way of looking at discrimination and civil rights. As the title indicates, this centers on the concept of covering, or downplaying a disfavored trait to blend in:

Famous examples of covering abound. Ramón Estévez covered his ethnicity when he changed his name to Martin Sheen, as did Krishna Bhanji when he changed his name to Ben Kingsley. Margaret Thatcher covered her status as a woman when she trained with a voice coach to lower the timbre of her voice. Long after they came out as lesbians, Rosie O'Donnell and Mary Cheney still covered, keeping their same-sex partners out of the public eye. Issur Danielovitch Demsky covered his Judaism when he became Kirk Douglas, as did Joseph Levitch when he became Jerry Lewis. Franklin Delano Roosevelt covered his disability by ensuring his wheelchair was always hidden behind a desk before his Cabinet entered.

The central argument of the book is that covering is an assault on civil rights because it is an assault on autonomy. If one has a right to be something, one has the right to do the things that one feels are part of that identity. Otherwise, "the demand to cover . . . is the symbolic heartland of inequality—what reassures one group of its superiority to another." In other words, though assimiliation can be necessary for peaceful co-existence, its dark side also should be recognized.

The book is a blend of memoir, history, and legal analysis. It begins with a chapter of memoir, charting the author's "struggle to arrive at a gay identity." Yoshino did undergraduate and graduate work in literature before switching law when he accepted his sexuality—because, he writes, "A gay poet is vulnerable in profession as well as person"—and all of the autobiographical portions of the book are elegant and precise. And in the later chapters Yoshino moves between memoir and history or legal analysis with a remarkable fluidity, never jarring me in the transition.

After the context-setting opening chapter, the book divides into three parts. The first is an examination of gay history, which is itself divided into three parts: conversion, or attempts to change sexual orientation; passing, or attempts to hide sexual orientation; and covering, or attempts not to flaunt sexual orientation. Each section emphasizes how it is still a current problem. Conversion lives in the idea that homosexuality is "contagious" and therefore children need to be protected from the promotion of homosexuality in schools, and passing in the U.S. military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. And both can co-exist with covering, such as in custody cases:

[When denying] custody to a lesbian mother in 1990, a Louisiana appellate court cited "open, indiscreet displays of affection beyond mere friendship . . . where the child is of an age where gender identity is being formed." If acceptable sexuality for same-sex couples is limited to the appearance of friendship, then the expectations for parents are clearly not orientation-neutral.

Notice as well why such covering is required—parental flaunting is dangerous because it could convert a child whose "gender identity is being formed." All three demands for assimilation are simultaneously in play—because children must not be converted, parents must pass to their children and cover to the courts. The shifts from conversion to passing to covering . . . are shifts


 happy to hear your opin<|endoftext|>Immigrating to a new country can be a challenging journey filled with legal hurdles and paperwork. In the UK, legal aid immigration solicitors play a crucial role in helping individuals navigate this complex process. These solicitors offer essential services, from filling out complicated forms to representing clients in court. This article explores the vital role of legal aid immigration solicitors and how they can assist those in need.

Key Takeaways

The Vital Role of Legal Aid Immigration Solicitors

Legal aid immigration solicitors play a crucial role in the UK by specialising in the laws and regulations that govern entry, stay, and citizenship. They provide invaluable assistance, from filling out complex forms to representing clients in court. Their expertise can be the difference between success and failure in immigration applications and appeals.

Specialisation in Immigration Law

Legal aid immigration solicitors are experts in immigration law. They understand the intricate details of the legal system and can offer tailored advice to each client. This specialisation ensures that clients receive the most accurate and relevant information for their specific situations.

Assistance with Complex Forms

Filling out immigration forms can be a daunting task. Legal aid solicitors guide clients through each step, ensuring that all forms are completed accurately and thoroughly. This helps to avoid delays or rejections, which can be common in the immigration process.

Representation in Court

When it comes to court representation, legal aid immigration solicitors are invaluable. They present evidence, argue on behalf of their clients, and support legal arguments effectively. This representation can significantly impact the outcome of a case, providing clients with the best possible chance of success.

Who Needs an Immigration Solicitor?

In the UK, various individuals may require the expertise of an immigration solicitor. These professionals play a crucial role in navigating the complexities of immigration law. Here are some groups who often seek their assistance:

An immigration solicitor can provide essential support throughout the application process, ensuring that all necessary documentation is correctly completed and submitted.

Having the right legal support can significantly improve your chances of a successful application.

For those considering their options, it is vital to understand that the right solicitor can make a substantial difference in the outcome of your immigration case. They can clarify the legal pathways available and help you avoid common pitfalls that could lead to delays or rejections.

In summary, if you find yourself in any of these situations, seeking the guidance of a qualified immigration solicitor is highly advisable. They can help you understand your rights and responsibilities while navigating the UK immigration system effectively.

Understanding Legal Aid in Immigration

Legal aid can offer free or subsidised legal help to those who can’t afford a solicitor. However, eligibility for legal aid in immigration cases is limited and often depends on the type of case and your financial situation.

Eligibility Criteria for Legal Aid

To qualify for legal aid, applicants must meet specific criteria. These criteria ensure that only those who genuinely need assistance receive it. The main tests include the Means Test, the Merits Test, and the Nature of the Case.

Means Test

The Means Test evaluates your income and capital. To pass, your financial resources must fall below a certain threshold. This involves a detailed assessment of your financial situation, including recent bank statements and any support you receive from friends or charities. If your only income is from section 98 support and you have no savings or assets, you will likely pass the means test.

Merits Test

The Merits Test assesses whether your case has a reasonable chance of success. Legal aid is granted only if paying for legal advice is a good use of public money. The criteria for this test depend on the type of case. Generally, funding is provided if your case is likely to succeed, but in some instances, you may receive basic legal advice even if you do not meet this condition.

Nature of the Case

Legal aid is typically available for specific types of cases, such as asylum claims, domestic violence cases, and human rights claims. It’s essential to ensure that your case falls within these categories to qualify for assistance.

At KJ Conroy, we help you navigate these eligibility criteria, ensuring you can resolve civil disputes confidently with no win no fee solicitors.

Initial Consultation and Case Evaluation

At the start of your journey with KJ Conroy, the initial consultation is a crucial step. This meeting is designed to discuss the specifics of your case, understand your goals, and evaluate the best legal strategies to achieve them. A no obligation, professional, free conversation with a friendly and experienced lawyer will provide you with an honest assessment of your options and prospects.

Discussing Case Specifics

During this phase, we will delve into the details of your situation. This includes understanding the legal issues at hand, the costs involved, and any further documentation you need to provide. We aim to ensure that you fully grasp the strengths and merits of your case.

Understanding Client Goals

Our solicitors will take the time to understand your personal objectives. Whether you are seeking to reunite with family, escape adverse conditions, or navigate the UK immigration system, we tailor our approach to meet your unique needs.

Evaluating Legal Strategies

We will evaluate the best legal strategies to achieve your goals. This involves providing a realistic assessment of the prospect of success and ensuring you understand the potential outcomes. We believe in transparency and will not charge fees for applications that have no realistic chance of success.

At KJ Conroy, we understand that clients seeking immigration advice can be vulnerable. We are committed to providing the support you need, whether it’s help with interpreting and translating information or referring you to relevant support services.

Application Assistance

Guidance Through Forms

Navigating the complexities of immigration forms can be daunting. At KJ Conroy, our solicitors provide expert guidance to ensure every section is completed accurately. This reduces the risk of errors that could delay your application.

Ensuring Accuracy and Completeness

Our team meticulously reviews all documents to ensure they are both accurate and complete. This thorough approach helps in avoiding common pitfalls that might lead to rejections.

Avoiding Delays or Rejections

By leveraging our expertise, we help you avoid unnecessary delays or rejections. We understand the importance of timely submissions and work diligently to meet all deadlines.

At KJ Conroy, we are committed to providing comprehensive support throughout your immigration journey. Our goal is to make the process as smooth as possible for you.

Legal Representation in Court

Presenting Evidence

When your case reaches the courtroom, having a solicitor from KJ Conroy is crucial. They will gather and present evidence to support your case effectively. This includes organising documents, witness statements, and any other relevant materials.

Arguing on Behalf of Clients

Your solicitor will stand by your side, arguing on your behalf. They will use their expertise to make strong legal arguments, aiming to achieve the best possible outcome for you. Having a skilled solicitor can make a significant difference in court.

Supporting Legal Arguments

KJ Conroy’s solicitors will support their arguments with solid legal foundations. They will ensure that all points are backed by relevant laws and precedents, giving your case a robust defence. This meticulous approach helps in presenting a compelling case to the judge.

Advice on Rights and Responsibilities

Understanding your rights and responsibilities under UK immigration law is crucial. Solicitors provide clear, accessible advice, helping you navigate the legal system confidently.

Understanding your rights and responsibilities is crucial. Whether you’re dealing with personal injury, family law, or employment issues, knowing what you can and cannot do helps you make better decisions. For more detailed advice and to get the support you need, visit our website today.

In conclusion, legal aid immigration solicitors play a crucial role in helping individuals navigate the complex and often daunting UK immigration system. Their expertise and support can make a significant difference in the outcomes of immigration applications and appeals. By providing essential services such as form completion, legal representation, and advice on rights and responsibilities, these solicitors ensure that those in need have access to justice and fair treatment. Despite the challenges in accessing legal aid, it is important to seek expert legal advice to improve the chances of a successful immigration process. Legal aid solicitors are a vital resource for many, offering hope and guidance in difficult times.

Frequently Asked Questions

What do legal aid immigration solicitors do?

Legal aid immigration solicitors help people with immigration issues. They know the laws about entering, staying, and becoming a citizen in the UK. They help fill out forms and represent clients in court.

Who might need an immigration solicitor?

Anyone dealing with the UK immigration system may need help. This includes people wanting to start a new life in the UK, reunite with family, or escape bad conditions in their home country.

What is legal aid in immigration?

Legal aid helps people who can’t afford a solicitor. It can be free or cheaper, depending on the case and the person’s financial situation.

How do I know if I qualify for legal aid?

To get legal aid, you need to pass a means test and a merits test. The means test checks your financial situation, and the merits test looks at the strength of your case.

What happens during an initial consultation with a solicitor?

In the first meeting, you will talk about your case, what you want to achieve, and the best ways to reach your goals. The solicitor will evaluate your case to decide the next steps.

Why is legal representation in court important?

Having a solicitor in court is very helpful. They present evidence, make arguments, and support your case, which can make a big difference.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *<|endoftext|>Supreme court curbs states' power to levy fines and seize property through civil forfeiture

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/02/20/supreme-court-curbs-states-p.html

IANAL…google translate doesn’t seem to be functioning here, can someone break this down in a way a layman like myself can understand?

Any lawyerly Mutants care to speculate if this decision could apply to the stealth


 them such as, age difference, size, gender, and disabilities.

Defense of others

In this case the individual must have understandable reason to believe the person they were defending was in risk of being harmed. This defense has the same requirements and limitations as self defense claims.

Defense of Property

A defendant in an assault and battery case in Myrtle Beach South Carolina can claim that he or she acted only in defense of his or her property.  According to “The Post and Courier” in South Carolina there is a long standing ruled called The Castle Doctrine. This Doctrine basically states that someone’s home is their castle and that no one should have to run away or feel uncomfortable in their own home. However the Doctrine was recently codified by the General Assembly and the new law says that in order for it to be justified the person had to be in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury. When it comes to personal property from an item standpoint there are other rules such as if there is dispute over personal property the owner is not entitled to use force. On the other hand if property is stolen directly from the person such as pick pocketing the person has the right to use reasonable force to recover their stolen property.

Consent is a defense used mostly in prosecutions for sexual assault. When someone gives another consent to an act then the same act can not be charged as assault and battery. However, once the person exceeds the point of the permission  provided, it can still possibly be classified as assault and battery in South Carolina. Courts examine the defense of consent very closely and most find that if harmful violations of public policy occur it should be punished under assault and battery or under another law if fitting, even if consented.

What Defenses Can Not be Used?

Assault and battery cases as result to alcohol or drug abuse will not be excused in court. If voluntary intake of drugs or alcohol occurs the defendant cannot blame their actions on the substance. When it comes to the other defenses it’s important to analyze your situation and see which one is your best fit. Our team at David Aylor Law Offices will evaluate your situation to the fullest and get you justice just as we’ve been doing for so many satisfied clients since 2007.<|endoftext|>Court Cases By State - Tennessee

Court Cases by Tennessee

Black v. Tennessee
No. M2004-01345-CCA-R3-PD, slip op., 2005 WL 2662577 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005)

Black was convicted of three counts of first degree murder and the jury sentenced him to death. On appeal, argued that he was ineligible for the death penalty due to mental retardation, under   Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002). Black's experts testified that his mental retardation was largely due to prenatal exposure to alcohol, but may have had other causes, as well, including lead exposure and head trauma from football injuries. The conclusions of the experts were based in part on brain imaging, including MRI and PET scans.

Tennessee law defines mental retardation by the presence of three factors: (1) sub-average intellectual functioning, evidenced by and IQ of 70 or below, (2) deficits in adaptive behavior, and (3) manifestation of the mental retardation by the age of 18.

Based on the evidence presented (including the fact that IQ tests administered to Black prior to the age of 18 all resulted in scores above 70; his score declined in later years), the court concluded that Black did not meet the third prong of Tennessee's definition of mental retardation.

As regards Black's prenatal exposure to alcohol, his sister testified that their mother drank alcohol during pregnancy, but the court noted that she "did not...testify as to the amount her mother drank while she was pregnant" (perhaps reflecting a mistaken impression that a certain level of alcohol exposure is required to result in damage or diagnosis). The court further noted that "it cannot be determined with certainty that the ingestion of alcohol during pregnancy will cause mental retardation." (It is not clear whether, if the court were convinced that Black's mental retardation was a result of his prenatal exposure to alcohol, that would have affected its conclusion as to whether his mental retardation manifested before he reached the age of 18.)

The court's opinion was based strictly on the state's statutory definition of mental retardation, and does not indicate whether FAS was otherwise presented as a mitigating factor during sentencing.

In re Dalilah Rose
1996 WL 745838 (Conn. Super.)

The court ordeed termination of the mother's (and father's) parental rights because they were unable to care for the child. the opinion describes in detail the mother's inability to care for the child. The opinion notes that the mother believes that she herself was born with FAS. 1996 WL 745838 at *2.

Davidson v. State
2000 WL 674697 (Tenn. Crim. App.)

Davidson was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. He contended that his trial counsel had failed to provide effective legal assistance.

Davidson asserted that his attorney should have requested a "psychological evaluation" because the attorney knew that Davidson's mother had consumed alcohol regularly during pregnancy. The court held that the lawyer had made a sufficient effort to look into that issue.

"Counsel testified at the post-conviction hearing that Dr. Wilroy, an expert witness, was hired to investigate the possibility of a defense based upon fetal alcohol syndrome. Dr. Wilroy reviewed medical records, photographs of the petitioner and other information provided by counsel and determined that there was no basis for a defense based upon fetal alcohol syndrome. Additionally, counsel engaged in discussions with psychologists at Midtown Mental Hospital and also with Dr. Ciocca. These consultations confirmed counsel's initial determination that a psychological evaluation would be of no benefit."

20000 WL 674697 *2.

The fact that this attorney at least attempted to inquire whether his client might have FAS sets a higher standard of care for attorneys than is met in many other cases.<|endoftext|>Lipitor Lawsuit

At the root of many Lipitor lawsuits, plaintiffs claim that the drug contributed to their development of type 2 diabetes. The plaintiffs filing lawsuits against Pfizer also claim that patients and doctors were inadequately warned by the company about the serious potential side effects of the drug.

Why Are People Filing Lipitor Lawsuits?

Lipitor (atorvastatin) is a statin used to lower both high cholesterol and triglycerides in the bloodstream. By lowering high cholesterol in patients, statins have been shown to help reduce a patient's risk of a heart attack and heart disease. Since its approval in 1996, Lipitor has been prescribed to 29 million patients across the United States and made $130 billion in global sales for Pfizer, making it one of the best selling drugs in the pharmaceutical industry.

Despite their widespread popularity and life-saving attributes, Lipitor and other statins have been scrutinized for a few of their more serious side effects. In 2012, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) updated the warning labels for several different statins including Lipitor. The new labels listed potential "non-serious and reversible cognitive side effects" like memory loss or confusion as well as reports of increased blood sugar levels in patients using statins. While the cognitive side effects introduced in the warning can be reduced by stopping the medication, increased blood sugar levels can potentially lead to type 2 diabetes in patients.

Atorvastatin lawsuits have been filed against Pfizer for failing to adequately warn patients about the increased risk of diabetes associated with the drug.

Lipitor and Type 2 Diabetes

In 2012, after studying data from clinical trials and medical literature, the FDA approved a label change for Lipitor and other statins warning patients and healthcare professionals about the increased risk of increased blood sugar levels attributed to statins. One particular meta-analysis looked at 13 different trials that showed a combined 9% increase in the risk of developing diabetes during statin therapy. Despite the increase, both the study authors and the FDA concluded that the risk was low compared to the cardiovascular benefits gained from statin therapy.

Several other studies have since been published looking at the relationship between statins and diabetes. While the studies have varied in their estimation of the risk, some newer studies have also found that in addition to an increased risk of diabetes when taking statins, there is also a correlation between the size of the dose and the level of risk.

Lipitor Lawsuit History

Following the FDA's warning concerning statins side effects in 2012, Lipitor lawsuits quickly grew in numbers. A multidistrict litigation was soon formed to consolidate the large number of Lipitor claims filed. No Lipitor class action lawsuit has been filed.

Federal Lipitor Lawsuits (MDL 2502)

On February 19, 2014, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) created MDL 2502 in the District of South Carolina to cover Lipitor litigation filed against Pfizer. The Lipitor MDL would eventually manage several thousands of cases filed mostly by women who claimed that the use of the prescription drug Lipitor contributed to their development of type 2 diabetes.

The first two bellwether trials ended in a summary judgment in favor of the defendants. Three of the plaintiff's expert opinions had been excluded during the trials, and neither plaintiff was able to adequately demonstrate causation between lower doses of Lipitor and diabetes. The plaintiffs were also unable to prove that their diabetes diagnoses were caused by their use of Lipitor.

Following the two bellwether


 level 0.08. At which there’s a legal edict that says above 0.08, you are impaired. There’s no such level for, for instance THC, which is the active ingredient of cannabis.

Dean: Right.

Mike: In any number of the prescribed medications, if you’re taking them as prescribed and you’re within your therapeutic range for those medications, you’re not necessarily impaired.

And then there’s an element with the prescribed medications where the government has to prove knowledge. That you knew, going into taking the medications, what the side effects were going to be in combination with all the meds and you drove anyway. And that’s very difficult to prove if someone’s following the doctor’s orders and taking the medication. With the illicit drugs, they need to prove impairment, but that’s easier.

Dean: Well, marijuana in Massachusetts is not an illicit drug if for medical use.

Mike: We’re there now, yes.

Dean: Exactly.

Mike: So it’s a difficult –

Dean: It’s a new avenue or realm.

Mike: Yes. You will see – and in my own practice, given the number of DUI defense matters that I handle – I have certainly seen, over the last several years, more and more of the impaired by drugs driving charges. Both prescribed and illicit. There’s – you would not – well, you probably know very well the number of people that are on either mood enhancers, anti-depressants, anti-anxiety. Any number of medications which taken in combination or mixed with alcohol very well could impair a driver, so yes. That is kind of the next wave, I believe, of drunk driving defense and prosecution.

Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana

Dean: Right. Exactly. Because in Colorado, the government of Colorado is coming out with TV advertising not to drive under the influence of cannabis.

Mike: Which is completely recreationally legal.

Dean: That’s correct. And which has opened a new Pandora’s Box in law in Colorado, so that will filter down to the other states if they legalize it in Massachusetts or New Hampshire.

Mike: Right. There’s a program in Massachusetts and I’ve seen it in New Hampshire as well called DRE. Drug Recognition Examination or Drug Recognition Expert, and these are officers that are selected to receive specialized training in just that. Detection of those that are impaired by either prescription medications or illicit drugs.

Dean: So how will that be — they’ll have to be trained, right?

Mike: They are trained. It’s a whole different protocol than the standard. The standard battery of field sobriety tests at road side is; horizontal gaze nystagmus, follow the pen with your eyes –

Dean: Right.

Mike: – the walk and turn nine steps up, turn, nine steps back, and then a one leg stand, and then typically, well, you take a breath test.

Dean: I don’t know my alphabet, I forgot – I haven’t said it since the first grade…

Mike: What they’re going to ask you to do — they say start with a letter other than A, and I want you to start at the letter D without singing the alphabet. Start at the letter D and end at the letter N as in Nancy. Go. It’s not easy.

Dean: It’s not easy.

Mike: But that DRE protocol is essentially – it is a battery of various tests including blood pressure, pupil size, heart rate –

Dean: Right.

Mike: – plus some other tests where they try to determine what, if any, substance, you are under the influence of. It also involves a number of questions and then you get to Miranda issues, because when the DRE protocol or examination is conducted, it’s typically at a station. You already have been arrested, you’re definitely in custody for purposes of, you have the right to remain silent, you don’t have to answer questions, so they have to get through that to the point where they can conduct the protocol, so they tend to be complicated cases<|endoftext|>An officer with the Tompkinsville (KY) Police Department was assaulted by a male and female couple during a traffic stop on Wednesday night, leaving the officer with minor injuries including a scraped elbow and a black eye, police say.

According to ABC News, the officer made the traffic stop due to an extinguished tail light and before he could get out of his patrol vehicle the man and woman had exited their vehicle and began approaching the squad car.

The officer exited his vehicle and an altercation ensued. The officer was eventually able to gain compliance by drawing his TASER.

The officer refused treatment for his injuries.<|endoftext|>Girl killed, then mum loses job

Last updated 08:39 28/05/2013
Jenny Doyle

JOBLESS: Jenny Doyle with photos of her murdered daughter KaJenny Doyle's daughter was shot and killed last month.

After sitting by her daughter's bedside for five days while she died from her wounds, Doyle took time off from her job - which she lost, a fact she found out when she rang the welfare agency Centrelink with an inquiry.

She was working as a manager for Australian Commercial Catering at the Thales ammunition factory in the New South Wales town of Mulwala, when her daughter, Kara, was shot on April 17.

Kara's then boyfriend, Mehmet Torun, has been charged with murdering her with a sawn-off shotgun after the pair argued at Torun's Avondale Heights home. He allegedly shot her in the stomach, then dumped her at a nearby service station.

After Kara's death, Doyle's GP provided her with a certificate saying she was suffering from ''major depression'' and would not be able to return to work until the end of July.

Doyle said the only communication she received from the company before this was a text from her area manager asking whether she had done the banking, and where the canteen keys were.

''I was in the intensive care unit with Kara, and I was really upset because it wasn't a 'how are you, how's everything going','' she said. ''It was literally that: have you done the banking and where are the keys.''

Australian Commercial Catering then sent her a letter less than three weeks after the shooting saying it was ''unable to keep the position open until 29/07/2013 due to the position type and location of site'' and that she would receive entitlements within two weeks.

However, in another letter sent on the same day, the company claimed money totalling A$1150 had been missing from the Thales canteen since the day Kara was shot, and demanded an explanation.

Doyle told Fairfax Media she did take a A$300 float home with her when she hurried from Mulwala to be with her daughter, and has subsequently returned it.

She said she had had no contact with the police, and the rest of the money had been left in an office at work. ''I would never have gone this far except for the fact I never even got a phone call from them, saying 'we're sorry for your loss'.''

The managing director of Australian Commercial Catering, Peter Darmos, denied Doyle's position had been terminated, saying that if the money was returned, she could have her job back.

''She's not terminated, she has never been terminated. Pending the proper investigation, she's free to return to work if she's done nothing wrong. You want to make mileage out of this, go right ahead,'' he said.

Ad Feedback

- The Age

Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content<|endoftext|>ew policy brief examines how immigration affects Ohio and the U.S. workforce

    https://aede.osu.edu/news/new-policy-brief-examines-how-immigration-affects-ohio-and-us-workforce

    management. The brief also dispels myths around how immigrants affect wages and crime rates.   “ExistingNatural Ventilation

    https://greenhome.osu.edu/natural-ventilation

    typologies and controls different types of windows will result in different ventilation rates. External ...

  10. Equestrian Injury Statistics

    https://ohioline.osu.edu/factsheet/19

    football, basketball, and baseball, the injury rate for horse riding is relatively low. However, several ... injury rates. A study conducted in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho found that novice riders are the most ... Bushau-Sprinkle, Brier, & Seger, 2018). Additionally, recreational riders had higher rates of injury than ...<|endoftext|>Shooting victim had other confrontations with Windsor police | GreeleyTribune.com

Shooting victim had other confrontations with Windsor police

Sherrie Peif

According to a report released by the Weld County District Attorney’s Office concerning the shooting of Ed Cavaliere by Windsor Police Chief John Michaels, Cavaliere had a recent history of confrontation with the Windsor Police Department.

On Sept. 6, Windsor police officers responded to a call from King Soopers, 1520 Main St., concerning a confused and disoriented man. When officers arrived, they found Cavaliere and concluded a mental health evaluation was appropriate. Cavaliere attempted to walk away from officers, the report said, and officers subdued him through the use of physical force.

On Sept. 26, North Colorado Medical Center called Windsor police to report that during another psychological evaluation, Cavaliere made death threats against Windsor police officers involved in the Sept. 6 incident. The report said Cavaliere planned to “get a copy of the report … kill the officer involved and kill any other Windsor police officers who he might come in contact with.”

The apartment manager where Cavaliere lived reported that Cavaliere had two .45 caliber handguns in his apartment.

On the day of the shooting, Safeway called in


 County Prison on a parole detainer.

Lee was employed by the Papenfuse campaign in February and March to collect names for the petition, according to arrest records filed by detectives with the district attorney's office.

A man and woman later called the Dauphin County board of elections and asked for a copy of the petition after they received a letter from Papenfuse thanking them for their support and signatures, records state.

The woman told investigators she was "surprised to see her name and her husband's signature on the document because they were both in Florida at the time," records state.

First Assistant District Attorney Fran Chardo said Papenfuse and his campaign were unaware of Lee's actions.

Investigators also determined that a third name, a man who works for the city, was forged on the petition, records state.

Lee was later interviewed by investigators and confessed to forging the three names on the petition, records state.

A preliminary hearing for Lee has been scheduled for May 15.

If you purchase a product or register for an account through one of the links on our site, we may receive compensation.<|endoftext|>The Opinions of General Partin and Other Bomb Experts

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version"My knowledge comes from practical handling of explosives," added Gronning. "And my belief is that 4800 lb. of ANFO wouldn't have scuffed the paint on the building."

The Opinions of General Partin and Other Bomb Experts

Brigadier General Benton K. Partin, U. S. Air Force, retired, has 25 years experience in explosives and ballistic weapons design and testing. General Partin also served as the Commander of the Air Force Armament Technology Laboratory.

Partin has this to say:

"When I first saw the picture of the truck bomb's asymmetrical damage to the Federal building in Oklahoma, my immediate reaction was that the pattern of damage would have been technically impossible without supplementary demolition charges at some of the reinforced concrete bases inside the building, a standard demolition technique.

"For a simplistic blast truck bomb, of the size and composition reported, to be able to reach out on the order of 60 feet and collapse a reinforced column base the size of column A7 is beyond credulity."

General Partin further explained that; "The total incompatibility with a single truck bomb lies in the fact that either some columns collapsed that should not have collapsed or some of the columns are still standing that should of collapsed and did not."

"Reinforced concrete targets in large buildings are hard targets to blast. I know of no way possible to reproduce the apparent building damage through simply a truck bomb effort."

"It is easy to determine whether a column was failed by contact demolition charges or by blast loading (such as a truck bomb)," Partin wrote in his letter to Congress. "It is also easy to cover up crucial evidence as was apparently done in Waco. I understand that the building is to be demolished by May 23rd or 24th. Why the rush to destroy the evidence?"

He concludes; "This is a massive cover-up of immense proportions."

The statement below is made by an Israeli terrorist expert who used his experience with bombings in the Middle East. In making his deductions he used film footage of the bombing just hours afterwards:

"It is clear that they used certain methods which were used in the Middle East. I mean using a car bomb, putting it in front of the building, and maybe planting inside the building itself . My feeling is that it was not just an explosion outside, which is clear it was outside as well, but also inside the building. So it is more than one man. It's a network."

Sam Gronning, a professional blaster for more than thirty years, says:

"I have been a blaster for over thirty years and there is no doubt in my mind that ANFO could not have been by itself the medium for that powerful an explosion.... even enhanced at that distance, I doubt that an external explosion could of created that extensive damage at the reported weight of the bomb."

"My knowledge comes from practical handling of explosives," added Gronning. "And my belief is that 4800 lb. of ANFO wouldn't have scuffed the paint on the building."

"No truck bomb of ANFO out in the open is going to cause that kind of damage we had there... In thirty years of blasting, using everything from 100 percent nitrogel to ANFO, I've not seen anything to support that story... I have set off 16000 pounds of ANFO and was standing upright just
1,000 feet away from the blast."

Gronning went on to say that even a bomb that big wouldn't have caused the damage seen at the Murrah building.

Dr. Roger Raubach, who has a Ph. D. in physical chemistry and is now the technical director of a chemical company has this to say;

"I don't care if they pulled up a semi-trailer with twenty tons of ammonium nitrate; it wouldn't do the damage we saw there."

David Hoffman, author of "The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror" (Published by Feral House) wrote the following (taken from a chapter in that book):

Yet Rick Sherrow, who wrote an article for Soldier of Fortune magazine entitled "Bomb Blasts & Baloney," contends that the General's assessment of the bombing is somehow inaccurate. Sherrow claims that the pressure wave that would have struck the building from the [rapidly deteriorating] blast of the ANFO bomb (375 p. s. i. according to Partin's figures) would be more than enough to destroy reinforced concrete columns, which Sherrow claimed in his article disintegrate at 30 p. s. i. (pounds per square inch).

Sam Gronning doesn't concur. "That's bullshit!!" exclaimed Gronning. "Thirty p. s. i. wouldn't take out a rubber tire!"

Citizens monitoring police radios heard the following conversation on the morning of the 19th: First voice: "Boy, you're not gonna' believe this!" Second voice: "Believe what?" First voice: "I can't believe it; this is a military bomb!"

When J. D. Cash, a journalist writing for the McCurtain County Gazette,, tried to interview members of the Bomb Squad, Fire Department and Police, he was generally told by potential interviewees, "I saw a lot that day, I wish I hadn't. I have a wife, a job, a family, I've been threatened, we've been told not to talk about the devices."

The most amount of force produced by even a perfectly made ANFO bomb weighing 4800 pounds, is 1,457 p. s. i. by the time it hit the glass of the Federal building. It's a law of physics that the destructive capabilities of a bomb fall off dramatically only a few feet from the blast.

By the time the blast front made contact with the column nearest to the bomb, the pressure would have decreased to 375 p. s. i., far below the 5,600 p. s. i. compressive yield strength of concrete. Even using General Partin's very conservative figure of 3,500 p. s. i. for the compressive yield strength of concrete, you would still require nine times the potential damage pressure from the bomb at that distance. Furthermore, the government would have us believe that the same bomb was able to blast through an additional seven major concrete columns. If we are to believe the absolute absurdity of the governments "science", then we should also endorse the practices of voodoo and witchcraft, for they both have the same amount of credibility.

Simply stated, it is a physical, chemical and thermodynamic impossibility for a 4800 pound ANFO bomb, at a distance of approximately 20 feet away, to of inflicted the kind of damage the government said it did.

As reported widely on CNN & news stations across the nation on the day of the bombing, up to four primed bombs were found inside the building by bomb detecting dogs. The BATF (Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms) later said they were dummy bombs, but why would bomb sniffing dogs find, or be needed to locate dummy bombs which are clearly marked as such; furthermore, why would munitions technicians spend so much time diffusing "dummy" bombs? KFOR-TV said that another bomb had been located strapped to a column next to the day-care center.

Around the noon hour, Channel 4 had as their guest Dr. Randall Heather, a terrorist expert. Dr. Heather stated: "We got lucky today, if you can consider anything about this tragedy lucky. We have both of the bombs that were defused at the site and they are being taken apart. We will be able to find out how they were made, and possibly who made them. These bombs are very sophisticated high explosives with maybe a little fertilizer damped around them."

In the Oklahoma bombing case it seems the government is attempting to perform a similar feat of light and magic. The fact is that a non-directional, low velocity 4800 pound ANFO bomb, parked 20-30 feet from a modern steel-reinforced super-structure could never have caused the pattern or degree of damage that they say it did.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly. If you have a Gravatar account associated with the e-mail address you provide, it will be used to display your avatar.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 2 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Syndicate content<|endoftext|>El primer libro que analiza en profundidad el fenómeno de la mafia


 big-boat sailing. The emphasis shifted from the lone man to the machine, from heroism to technology: How fast could a giant "maxi" yacht, driven day and night by a crack crew, cross an ocean or sail around the world? In 1973 this quest found its expression in the Whitbread Round the World Race, a six-stage, go-for-broke circumnavigation—the ultimate spectacle in terms of noise, visibility, and sex appeal, an eight-month circus of logo-plastered boats, crews, shore teams, money, and media that moved around the world taking over whole harbors and, in New Zealand's case, a whole country. It was the race that Blake made his own.

His first two outings, in 1973-74 and 1977-78, were as watch leader and mate on Robin Knox-Johnston's boats, but Blake proved to be his own best skipper. For his third Whitbread, in 1981-82, he organized an effort sponsored, designed, and crewed by New Zealanders. Ceramco New Zealand galvanized the island nation; millions of listeners tuned in to hear Blake's regular radio interviews from sea. But his boat lost its mast in the first leg of the race. In 1985-86, Blake's Lion New Zealand was also a disappointing performer, but finally, in the 1989-90 race, he got it right. Backed by New Zealand's premier brewer, his Steinlager 2 won all six legs and overall victory.

Alongside what became a full-time career as a yachtsman, Blake made ample room for a family. In 1979 he married Pippa Glanville; they spent their honeymoon delivering a yacht from England to Australia for the Sydney-Hobart Race. They eventually settled near her parents' home in Emsworth, England—close to Southampton, the hub of the Whitbread world—and raised two children, James and Sarah Jane.

In 1994 Blake teamed up again with Knox-Johnston to go after the Jules Verne Trophy, established by the French in 1992. They screamed around the world in a 92-foot catamaran, the ENZA , racing a French trimaran in an attempt to better the 80 days taken by Verne's fictional adventurer Phineas Fogg. ENZA won in just under 75 days, recording the highest speeds ever traveled by a sailing ship until that time. It was pure boat, pure seamanship, and a matchless voyage Blake reveled in.

In 1995 Blake's Team New Zealand won the America's Cup, the world's most prestigious (if perhaps dullest) sailing race. The bright red socks Blake wore during the qualifying rounds became a personal trademark and a badge of Kiwi solidarity; when TNZ ran low of cash, a "Red Socks Fund" drive prompted New Zealanders to buy 100,000 pairs in three weeks to boost the team's finances. After his decisive win in San Diego, Blake was knighted in England by Queen Elizabeth. In 2000 Team New Zealand, with Blake in command again, took the America's Cup a second time.

His success was the result not of an outsize personality—although at six-foot-four, Blake was a commanding figure—but rather of his unswerving drive and, most of all, his leadership. "He was a natural leader," says Knox-Johnston.

Blake made a career out of sailing into danger with gusto, but never without the most meticulous preparation. And he had a gift for bringing the right crew. "His great skill was picking, integrating, and managing the right mix of people for any job—the Shackleton method," says Angus Buchanan, who sailed around the world with Blake on ENZA . "The old cliché is not to meet your heroes, but Peter was the embodiment of everything I'd imagined a hero would be."

It is also a cliché that heroes die young. And after Macapá, New Zealanders hotly debated whether Blake's heroics might have cost him his life. When the pirates climbed aboard Seamaster with their guns, several crew members attempted to resist; one was pistol-whipped in the face and fell to the deck. Blake rushed below and emerged with a rifle. There was an exchange of gunfire. The Brazilians claimed that they had not set out to kill, but had fired only when attacked.

The picture of Blake, the larger-than-life captain charging the intruders with a rifle, was a compelling image, but it raised a disturbing question: What would have happened if Seamaster's crew had just handed over their watches and cameras? Could the whole episode have been merely one more theft in a rough port? Would Peter Blake, New Zealanders asked, still be alive?

MOST MODERN PIRACY is practiced against commercial vessels plying regular routes in the Far East, especially the waters of the South China Sea, around the Philippines and Indonesia and the Strait of Malacca, where police and military patrols are few. The International Maritime Bureau, which formed the Piracy Reporting Center in Kuala Lumpur in 1992, reported 335 incidents in the region last year, but these received no more attention in the press than truck hijackings on far-flung back roads. Elsewhere in the world, piracy is defined as sporadic, unplanned attacks on yachts. It resembles petty street crime, except that the distance from shore gives it a special, ugly menace. Between April 1999 and February 2001 there were at least 13 attacks by pirates on yachts in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, resulting in the hijacking and theft of one yacht and the murder of a British crewman on another. In March 1999 in the Caribbean, off the Mosquito Coast of Honduras, a Dutch family was attacked, their son shot in the abdomen—the third such incident off the Honduran shoreline in five years. There were about 14 other attacks in Caribbean and Latin American waters between March 2000 and March 2001. Worldwide, 56 attacks occurred on yachts in 2001, according to Klaus Hympendahl, a German maritime historian writing a book on modern-day piracy. The "pirates" are usually local men, in local fishing boats; their weapons range from machetes to Kalashnikov rifles.

Anyone with a rowboat can paddle out to an anchored yacht. The boat will generally be out of earshot of help, and the crew will be lightly armed if at all. Moreover, the blitheness, the unconscious ease, the sense of entitlement with which American, European, and Australian sailors will moor a quarter-million-dollar boat off a village in Asia, South America, or Africa and step cheerfully ashore to look for a beer only make it that much more remarkable that piracy is not a thousand times worse.
"Piracy has been a tradition in places like Indonesia, the South China Sea, and the Red Sea for thousands of years," Hympendahl told me, "but not in Latin and Central America." As long as sailors remain rich and locals poor, he says, "The situation is going to get worse."

Voyaging aboard a yacht, you step off the grid of normal travel, with its reassurances and safeguards. The very nature of such travel is to seek out remote, unspoiled places. You don't know what you'll sail into, but everything will depend on you alone, and what you carry with you.

I lived aboard my own small wooden boat in the late 1970s and early 1980s, sailing it between Europe, the United States, and the Caribbean. In those years there were numerous attacks against yachts, and fearing pirates and drug smugglers, sailors headed in droves to U.S. gun stores. Stainless-steel weapons were favored for their resistance to the corrosive saltwater environment. Ruger made a stainless-steel semiautomatic rifle, the Mini-14, which acquired considerable vogue in yachting circles. It fired a bullet with "armor-piercing" capability at great velocity and accuracy over a long range, and was thought an ideal weapon for stopping a boat making for you at a distance; whether that boat was full of pirates or fishermen hoping to sell you crayfish was another matter. In Fort Lauderdale in 1980, after my wife and I watched one night through our portholes as bales of cocaine were unloaded from a boat at the marina where we'd docked, I went into a store and came out with a stainless-steel pump shotgun, a stainless .38 revolver, and armfuls of ammunition.

The pros and cons of carrying firearms on a sailboat can become a more heated topic of discussion among sailors than keel shape or anchor design. Armed, you might protect your property. You might save your own life and those of your loved ones; you might be able to prevent your wife's being raped before your eyes, as a Swiss woman was in a pirate attack off Venezuela in 2000. A warning shot might dissuade pirates from approaching your vessel at all.

Those who oppose carrying weapons point out that a pistol, a shotgun, even an AK-47 is no match for the sort of large-caliber automatic weaponry favored by pirates. Traveling with guns invites major hassles with officialdom when clearing into port; declaring a weapon often means that port officials will confiscate it for the duration of the boat's stay. To not declare a weapon and then have it discovered invites even more trouble, ranging from heavy fines to the seizure of your boat. And having a gun aboard can


 tell meâ€”I did not see him with it for some time, I cannot think whenâ€”nothing had been done to the lock of the door before it was sawn off;

I had not had a locksmith to do anything to itâ€”it was used to lock the room upâ€”the police came with a man and cut off the piece.

By MR. MCINTYRE. Before it was cut off I had been shown the lock, which was partly burst off.

By the COURT. The lock was good on this Tuesdayâ€”nothing happened to it till a man belonging to the police broke open the doorâ€”I was out at the time; when I came back I saw the door openâ€”I saw the lock; it was then broken, hanging downâ€”that was a fortnight after the woman's deathâ€”I saw the man who did it, it was a detective, it was Bittenâ€”I said "What have you done this for?" and he said he would send a carpenter to put it on againâ€”the carpenter did not comeâ€”a week after the detective came with two men to saw off the lock altogetherâ€”daring the fortnight before Bitten came the lock was as it used to be; the woman used to lock it.

GEORGE BITTEN (Re-examined). When I went into the room for this purpose I merely opened the door, just turned the handleâ€”I never found the door locked so that I could not get in; I did not force it in any way or damage the lockâ€”Mr. Angel had left the room then; somebody was occupying it; I do not know the name, they were foreignersâ€”I went there on 13 or 14 occasionsâ€”I never forced the lockâ€”the lock produced is exactly in the same condition as it was on the night of the occurrenceâ€”there might be some little difficulty to explain about the locking of this particular lock (Taking up the lock)â€”this is the inside of the door, and this is the hole that has been spoken ofâ€”the landlord is here who put it on, and he can explain itâ€”on the day of the occurrence these screws had been forced out so as to get the door openâ€”this is an actual piece of the door and doorpost.

Cross-examined. Sometimes when I went there there were no persons in the room; sometimes Mrs. Lipski would come up with me; the occupier of the room opened the door to me on one or two occasions, but it takes a time to make it plainâ€”a week before she went there, when the room was unoccupied I used to open the door in the usual wayâ€”if you locked the door it would not answer, only just to keep the wind off; if you just touched the door it came open.

DINAH ANGEL . My son lived with his wife at 16, Batty Streetâ€”I saw her on the Monday evening before this happenedâ€”she used to come to me to breakfast; her time would be sometimes half-past 8, sometimes 9 o'clockâ€”on this Tuesday she did not come to breakfast, and about 11 o'clock I went round to her houseâ€”there was no one at the door when I got there, I saw no oneâ€”I afterwards saw Mrs. Rubensteinâ€”I then went up to my son's roomâ€”I had seen Mrs. Levy but not Mrs. Lipski before thatâ€”I went to the door of my son's room and tried it, and it was closedâ€”I saw Mrs. Levy try the handle, and she said "The key is inside," and then she went up the stairs and looked through this place in the partitionâ€”I knocked at the door, but could get no answerâ€”Mrs. Levy was there when the door was forced open; we got it open by forcing it with the hand; Mrs. Lipski was not there thenâ€”I and Mrs. Levy both went into the room together, ran to the bed, and I thought my daughter-in-law was fainting; she laid with her hands so, and her head aside, and Mrs. Levy put her hands aside and moved her head, thinking she was faintingâ€”she then saw she was dead, and went out and created an alarmâ€”she was lying on the bed with her head aside

and her hands behind, and the whole of her was uncovered, and her night-dress or chemise was upâ€”I did not see where the covering to the bed was; I rushed out of the room at onceâ€”I did not look at the furniture in the room, but the window-blind was pulled down and the window was closedâ€”I did not see the doctor come; I was in a fainting condition, and they took me out, and they would not let me in again.

Cross-examined. I did not try to see if the window had any fastening.

LEAH LEVY . I am the wife of Abraham Levy, but I am living apart from him and have been lodging at 16, Batty Streetâ€”on the morning of 28th June I came down about a quarter to nine, and shortly after I looked out into the street and saw Mrs. Lipski in the street coming to the house with a coffee pot in her handâ€”I called up to the prisoner, telling him that his coffee was ready, and the boy answered from upstairsâ€”I went out with Mrs. Lipski at 10 o'clock that morning and returned at 11â€”Mrs. Angel, senior, was coming in at the timeâ€”she went upstairs and knocked at the door of her daughter's bedroomâ€”I then went up and looked into the bedroom through the little window and saw young Mrs. Angel lying on the bedâ€”she looked very badâ€”Mrs. Lipski also came up and looked into the windowâ€”I said "She looks bad"â€”the mother-in-law then said "Perhaps she is fainting"â€”the three of us then came down from the landing to the bedroom door and the mistress said would she open the doorâ€”then the whole three of us pushed the door openâ€”before that was done I looked through the keyhole and saw the key inside in the lockâ€”when we pushed open the door we went into the room and saw the woman as she lay in bed.

Cross-examined. I lent Mrs. Angel 5s. the day before this to pay her rentâ€”about a fortnight afterwards I recollect police-sergeant Bitten coming to the houseâ€”he was alone thenâ€”he wanted to go upstairsâ€”I said it was lockedâ€”he said "I must go in very particularly"â€”I said "It is locked"â€”he said he would open itâ€”he then pushed in the door and went inâ€”at that time Mrs. Jacobs was the tenant of the roomâ€”she was not at home at the time.

RACHEL RUBENSTEIN . I live at J 6, Batty Streetâ€”I occupy the back room first floor with Mrs. Levyâ€”I slept there with her on that Monday nightâ€”on the Tuesday morning I went downstairs either at half-past nine or 10â€”Mrs. Lipski and Mrs. Levy afterwards went out shoppingâ€”I saw that the prisoner's coffee had been prepared for him and heard him calledâ€”while they were out I was downstairs in charge of the premises, and also took care of the childrenâ€”I was in the back roomâ€”I was at the street door at one timeâ€”I took a chair out from the room and sat myself there, because I cannot see wellâ€”during the time they were out no one entered the house directâ€”I first went into the yardâ€”I was minding the children in the yard and came back and took a chair there, so that the children should not go to the waterâ€”somebody came while I was sitting there and wanted to go upstairsâ€”I said "Where are you going?"â€”he said he was going upstairsâ€”I said "Why?" and I would not let him go thereâ€”I don't know that manâ€”he wanted to go up to Angel's room and I would not let himâ€”he asked if the boots were done.

Cross-examined. One of the children ran away to the back and went into the yardâ€”I had some trouble in catching the child, I was afraid he had run awayâ€”I was in the back yard some time trying to catch it, only a few minutesâ€”I did not take particular notice of the timeâ€”I don't know how

long it wasâ€”when I came from the back yard to the front I sat out in the street on the pavement on a chair; that is a little to the left hand of the doorâ€”I put the chair there for myself.

SAMUEL SPIERS . I am also called Lamed the teacherâ€”I live at 24, Brunswick Street, St. George's-in-the-Eastâ€”I am a Hebrew teacherâ€”the deceased woman, Mrs. Angel came to my house on Sunday, the


 He would send spies and informants. Perhaps, he - Allah bless and keep him -

even went himself as in the major Badr attack. AI-Khulafa Arrashidun [Mohammed's successors] also ordered it [spying]. Since Islam is superior to all human conditions and earthly religions, it permits spying for itself but not for others.

Majestic Allah says, "Not equal are the companions of the fire and the companions of the garden," and the prophet says, "Islam is supreme and there is nothing above it." Islam, therefore, fights so the word of Allah can become supreme. Others fight for worldly gains and lowly and inferior goals.

An Important Question:

How can a Muslim spy live among enemies if he maintains his Islamic characteristics? How can he perform his duties to Allah and not want to appear Muslim?

Concerning the issue of clothing and appearance (appearance of true religion), Ibn Taimia - may Allah have mercy on him - said, "If a Muslim is in a combat or godless area, he is not obligated to have a different appearance from [those around him]. The [Muslim] man may prefer or even be obligated to look like them, provided his action brings a religious benefit of preaching to them, learning their secrets and informing Muslims, preventing their harm, or some other beneficial goal."

Resembling the polytheist in religious appearance is a kind of "necessity permits the forbidden" even though they [forbidden acts] are basically prohibited. As for the visible duties, like fasting and praying, he can fast by using any justification not to eat with them [polytheist]. As for prayer, the book (Al- Manhaj Al-Haraki Lissira Al-Nabawiya) quotes Al-Bakhari that "he [the Moslem] may combine the noon and afternoon [prayers], sunset and evening [prayers]. That is based on the fact that the prophet - Allah bless and keep him - combined [prayers] in Madina without fear or hesitation."

Though scholars have disagreed about the interpretation of that tradition, it is possible - though Allah knows best - that the Moslem spy combines [prayers]. It is noted, however, that it is forbidden to do the unlawful, such as drinking wine or fornicating. There is nothing that permits those6.

[6] Al-Morabitoun Magazine, Issue No. 6
Guidelines for Beating and Killing Hostages: Religious scholars have permitted beating. They use a tradition explained in Imam Mosallem's manuscript, who quotes Thabit Ibn Ans that Allah's prophet - Allah bless and keep him - sought counsel when he was informed about Abou Soufian's arrival. Abou Bakr and Omar spoke, yet he [the prophet] did not listen. Saad Ibn Ibada said, "Do you want us, O Allah's prophet, who controls my life?

If you order us to subdue the camel we would do it, or beat and follow them to Al-Ghimad lakes (5-day trip beyond Mecca), we would do it, too." The prophet - Allah bless and keep him - called on the people, who then descended on Badr. They were met by Kureish camels carrying water. Among their takers was a young black [slave] man belonging to the Al-Hajjaj clan. They took him [as hostage]. The companions of the prophet - Allah bless and keep him - started asking him about Abou Sofian and his companions. He first said, "I know nothing about Abou Soufian but I know about Abou Jahl, Atba, Sheiba, and Omaya Ibn Khalaf." But when they beat him he said, “O yes, I will tell you. This is the news of Abou Soufian...” Meanwhile, the prophet - Allah bless and

keep him -, who was praying, started to depart saying, "Strike him if he tells you the truth and release him if he lies." Then he said, "That is the death of someone [the hostage]." He said that in the presence of his companions and while moving his hand on the ground.

In this tradition, we find permission to interrogate the hostage for the purpose of obtaining information. It is permitted to strike the nonbeliever who has no covenant until he reveals the news, information, and secrets of his people.

The religious scholars have also permitted the killing of a hostage if he insists on withholding information from Moslems. They permitted his killing so that he would not inform his people of what he learned about the Muslim condition, number, and secrets.

In the Honein attack, after one of the spies learned about the Muslims kindness and weakness then fled, the prophet - Allah bless and keep him - permitted [shedding] his blood and said, "Find and kill him." Salma Ibn Al-Akwaa followed, caught, and killed him.

The scholars have also permitted the exchange of hostages for money, services, and expertise, as well as secrets of the enemy’s army, plans, and numbers. After the Badr attack, the prophet - Allah bless and keep him - showed favor to some hostages, like the poet Abou Izza, by exchanging most of them for money. The rest were released for providing services and expertise to the Muslims7.

[7] Abdullah Ali Al-Salama: Military Espionage in Islam, pp. 253-258.
Importance of Information:

1. Based on the enemy's up-to-date information, his capabilities, and plans, the Organization's command can design good-quality and secure plans.

2. Information about the enemy's intention provides early warning signs for the command, which in turn makes appropriate preparation and thwarts the enemy's opportunity.

3. Information benefits the Organization's command by providing information about the enemy's strengths and weaknesses.

4. Information benefits the Organization's command by providing information about movements of the enemy and his members.

Information requirements include: Newness, Trustworthiness, Forthcoming, security, and confirmation.

General Mahmoud Sheet Khattab said, "The nation that wants to achieve victory over its enemy must know that enemy very well. It also must know the site of the battle in detail. Those who fight an enemy that they do not know, do not win because a successful military plan must be built on clear and trustworthy information. The commander who fights an enemy and does not know his strength (number and materiel) is blind and destined to fail and fall."

Information Sources: Any organization that desires to raise the flag of Islam high and proud, must gather as much information as possible about the enemy. Information has two sources:

1. Public Source: Using this public source openly and without resorting to illegal means, it is possible to gather at least 80% of information about the enemy. The percentage

varies depending on the government's policy on freedom of the press and publication. It is possible to gather information through newspapers, magazines, books, periodicals, official publications, and enemy broadcasts.

Attention should also be given to the opinion, comments, and jokes of common people.

Truman, a past American President, said, "We attribute our great advance to our press, because it gives America's enemies the capability of learning what we have not officially publicized about our plans and even our establishments.”

In 1954, Allan Dulles [PH],Director of American Intelligence [CIA], said, "I am ready to pay any amount of money to obtain information about the Soviet Union, even as little as what the Soviet Union obtains by simply reading American newspapers."

The one gathering public information should be a regular person (trained college graduate) who examines primary sources of information published by the enemy (newspapers, magazines, radio, TV, etc.). He should search for information directly related to the topic in question.

The one gathering information with this public method is not exposed to any danger whatsoever. Any brother can gather information from those aforementioned sources. We cannot label that brother a "Moslem Spy" because he does not make any effort to obtain unpublished and covert information.

2. Secret Sources: It is possible, through these secret and dangerous methods, to obtain the 20% of information that is considered secret. The most important of these sources are:

A. Individuals who are recruited as either volunteers or because of other motives

B. Recording and monitoring

C. Photography

D. Interrogation

E. Documents: By burglary or recruitment of personnel

F. Drugging

G. Surveillance, spying, and observation

Information Gathering Using Public Means:

A. Newspapers, Magazines,and Official and Party Publications:

In order to gather enemy information, the Military Organization can use means such as magazines, publications, periodicals, and official printed matter. Through these means, it is possible to learn about major government events and about the news, meetings, and travel of Presidents, ministers, and commanders. Information may be:

1. Names and photographs of important government personalities, police commanders, and security leaders.
2. Published meetings. Through these, one can learn about major decisions and topics being discussed.

3. Future meeting plans.

4. Present and future enemy capabilities through current photographs of projects and strategic sites or through

meetings with top officials.
5. Beneficial news about the enemy's diplomacy and its present and future plans.

6. Tourism news and the arrival times of foreign tourist groups.

7. Advertisements about apartments for rent, vacant positions, or anything else that is useful.

8. Advertisements about new and used car lots. These may be used in assassination, kidnaping, and overthrowing the government.

9. Learning the enemy position on current Islamic issues (veil,beard, dedication, Jihad, ...).

B. Radio and Television: The Military organization can use these important public sources to gather information all day and night. The importance of these means is explained below.

1. Visual


 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, passenger vehicles accounted for 94 percent of vehicle drowning fatalities in the US between 2004 and 2007. States with the largest number of motor vehicle drowning fatalities are Florida, California, Texas, Louisiana, and North Carolina.

It is not even necessary to drive into a source of water for this type of death to occur. Sometimes, the water comes to you. The current strength of floods is often underestimated and can sweep away cars.

A county court judge was on his way home from work when a flood swept his car off the roadside. He managed to telephone his wife for help but was soon overwhelmed by the rising water. His body was found by police in the submerged car.

Unfortunately, flood-related deaths are far from rare. In summer 2017, more than 1,000 people were killed by floods in South Asia alone. Heavy rain, landslides, and floods cause loss of life and property every year.

An expert advises remembering three rules to escape a submerged vehicle: seat belts, windows, out (children first from oldest to youngest).

Unbuckle your seat belt as soon as you hit the water. Open a window in any way you can. Break it, if necessary. Avoid breaking the windshield as the front of the car generally sinks first. Getting back into a sinking vehicle to rescue somebody is difficult, so assist any other passengers before you get out.[3]

7 Quicksand

Despite being extremely rare, deaths from quicksand still happen today. Anyone could mistake the seemingly solid water and sand mixture for safe footing. Quicksand turns more liquid once disturbed by a heavy object and tends to solidify afterward, encompassing the object in wet sand.

According to basic physics, however, fully sinking into quicksand is just a myth. Only by struggling, which can lead to submersion, would a human sink deeper than halfway.[4]

In July 2015, a 50-year-old man went missing in Texas. His car was found parked near a river, where he often went swimming. A helicopter search turned up nothing.

Four days after the man was reported missing, his body was found stuck from his feet to the bottom of his buttocks in quicksand along the riverbank. “He had expired and fallen face-first over the sandy outcropping,” said the report. For Texas, this had been the only quicksand-related incident in five years.

Loosening the mix of water and sand requires a lot of force. Spreading out limbs can help the body float to the surface. But when you’re stuck completely, it is advised to “take solace” in knowing that you cannot fully submerge and call for help. (The video above gives some tips on how to get out of quicksand.)

6 Cave

If squeezing into a cave is possible, then getting out of it should be possible as well. That is not always true, though, as proven by an amateur cave explorer in the fairly popular Nutty Putty Cave south of Salt Lake City, Utah. He died about 28 hours after getting stuck headfirst in a vertical shaft roughly 25 centimeters (10 in) high and 46 centimeters (18 in) wide.

The 26-year-old medical student attempted to explore an unmapped passage of the Nutty Putty Cave. Workers tried their best to free him from the chute 30 meters (100 ft) below the surface but did not succeed.[5]

Officials stated that his body would not be removed. Sending somebody to recover the body would be too dangerous and could result in more people getting injured. An agreement was made to permanently seal the passage with the body inside.

A movie about the incident, titled The Last Descent, was released seven years later.

5 Elevator

It becomes clear why so many people are terrified of tight, enclosed spaces when stories emerge about being stuck for a prolonged period of time. Most deaths related to inescapable circumstances tend to happen within the first 24 hours. But in a few cases, people are not faced with an immediate threat such as drowning or asphyxiation.

For example, a woman in China was found trapped in an elevator after she had been there for an entire month. By the time her body was discovered, it had begun decomposing. Friends and family had not reported her missing and seemed unaware of her entrapment. Futile attempts at escape were revealed by marks left on the inside of the elevator.

Her death by dehydration or starvation may have gone unnoticed due to many of the building’s residents being away during the Lunar New Year festivities. Others speculate that residents ignored the broken elevator because of access to a second lift in the building.[6]

4 Fridge

The reason behind magnetic fridge doors may be a lot darker than you’d expect. Vintage fridges used to have latches which could only be opened from the outside. Children playing hide-and-seek sometimes saw an empty fridge as the ultimate hiding spot but found themselves stuck once inside.[7]

There are no clear statistics on how many deaths have been caused by refrigerators, but it certainly was enough for authorities to notice. In the City of London, Ontario, a law was put into place prohibiting the disposal or abandonment of all fridges, freezers, iceboxes, and similar containers unless all locks and doors have been removed first.

In one incident, two children were trapped in an old refrigerator left in the backyard of their home in Jamaica, Queens, New York. A three-year-old girl and her four-year-old brother decided to get into the fridge for unknown reasons while their grandfather was not looking.

The grandfather found them after three hours of searching and took them to a hospital. Both children were declared dead within an hour of their arrival. According to the officer, no one was charged in the incident.

Similar accidents are significantly less frequent nowadays. But they have not ceased to exist, especially in third-world countries where fridges with latches are still common.

3 Donation Box

There is something ironic about a donation box taking a life. People go too far in their attempts to steal from the donation boxes and end up stuck. The boxes are designed to be hard to reach into because their purpose is to receive donated clothes, not give them away.

A homeless man reached too far into one box in South Los Angeles. His head was caught inside with his legs sticking out. He died before firefighters could cut the box open. It had been placed on the sidewalk illegally, but authorities have failed to track down the owner. Neighborhood residents had complained about the donation box, stating that it attracted criminals.[8]

At least three deaths involving donation boxes were reported in the US during 2017.

2 Coffin

The thought of being buried alive is enough to send chills down the spines of most people. For a few unlucky individuals, that fear became a reality after being mistakenly identified as deceased.

In summer 2015, screams for help were heard from the concrete tomb of a 16-year-old teenager in Honduras. She was three months pregnant and was buried in the dress she had recently worn to her wedding.

The day after the funeral, her husband heard banging and muffled screams while visiting her grave. Rescue attempts were too late, and she had died for real by the time her tomb was opened. However, her fingers were bruised and the glass viewing window on her coffin was broken.[9]

It is believed that she fell unconscious at her home after a panic attack induced by the sound of nearby gunfire. Her religious parents had believed that she was possessed by an evil spirit when she began foaming at the mouth. So they called the local priest. The girl had been declared dead three hours after her supposedly lifeless body was rushed to the hospital. This medical mistake led to the girl being buried alive.

1 Piano

This is a particularly odd way to die and likely the only one of its kind. Condor Club is an infamous bar in San Francisco. Known for breaking sexual boundaries, it became the world’s first topless bar in 1964. The lascivious customs are maintained to this day with striptease, lap and pole dancing, nearly naked hostesses, and naughty drink names. “Sex on the Piano” is one of the drinks, named after an incident in 1983.

One night, after the bar had closed, a bouncer was having sex with his girlfriend on top of the piano. The white baby grand, which has been a top attraction for decades, is rigged to rise to the ceiling and descend from it by a hydraulic motor.[10]

In the heat of passion, the couple accidentally hit the “Up” switch on the piano, which went unnoticed until it was too late. The bouncer died of asphyxiation, but his girlfriend survived, pinned beneath him. The next morning, she was found by a janitor and freed three hours later by emergency workers.

The Condor Club continues to thrive and hosts free live music events regularly.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *<|endoftext|>The Montana State University Police Department (MSUPD) provides police and emergency services on a continual 24-hour basis throughout the year. The police department is in the Roy Huffman Building and is always open to the public. The Department maintains the Crime Log on our web page, which is accessible to the public and provides the most recent reports of police activity. The Montana State University Police Department is comprised of 22 full-time police officers, one part-time police officer, and nine civilian staff.

MSUPD is the agency having primary law enforcement jurisdiction on MSU property. As such, it is responsible for enforcing local, state, and federal laws as well as university policies and procedures. State statute gives MSUPD Officers full jurisdiction on all property owned by the Montana University System and within one mile of such properties for campus-related activities. Additionally, the University


 wide range of topics.[4]Template:Sfn Its rulings are concerned with ethical standards as much as with legal norms,Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn assigning actions to one of five categories: mandatory, recommended, neutral, abhorred, and prohibited.[4]Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Fiqh was elaborated over the centuries by legal opinions (fatwas) issued by qualified jurists (muftis) and historically applied in Sharia courts by ruler-appointed judges,[4]Template:Sfn complemented by various economic, criminal and administrative laws issued by Muslim rulers.Template:Sfn

In the modern era, traditional laws in the Muslim world have been widely replaced by statutes inspired by European models.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Judicial procedures and legal education were likewise brought in line with European practice.Template:Sfn While the constitutions of most Muslim-majority states contain references to Sharia, its rules are largely retained only in family law.Template:Sfn The legislators who codified these laws sought to modernize them without abandoning their foundations in traditional jurisprudence.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn The Islamic revival of the late 20th century brought along calls by Islamism movements for full implementation of Sharia, including hudud corporal punishments, such as stoning.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn In some cases, this resulted in traditionalist legal reform, while other countries witnessed juridical reinterpretation of Sharia advocated by progressive reformers.Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn

In the 21st century, the role of Sharia has become an increasingly contested topic around the world.Template:Sfn The introduction of Sharia-based laws has been cited as a cause of conflict in some African countries, such as Nigeria and Sudan,[6][7]Template:Sfn and some jurisdictions in North America have passed bans on use of Sharia, framed as restrictions on religious or foreign laws.[8] There are ongoing debates as to whether Sharia is compatible with democracy, human rights, freedom of thought, women's rights, LGBT rights, and banking.[9][10][11] The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg (ECtHR) ruled in several cases that Sharia is "incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy".[12][13] Template:Islam

Etymology and usageTemplate:Anchor[]

Contemporary usage[]

The word sharīʿah is used by Arabic-speaking peoples of the Middle East to designate a prophetic religion in its totality.Template:Sfn For example, sharīʿat Mūsā means law or religion of Moses and sharīʿatu-nā can mean "our religion" in reference to any monotheistic faith.Template:Sfn Within Islamic discourse, šarīʿah refers to religious regulations governing the lives of Muslims.Template:Sfn For many Muslims, the word means simply "justice," and they will consider any law that promotes justice and social welfare to conform to Sharia.Template:Sfn

Jan Michiel Otto distinguishes four senses conveyed by the term sharia in religious, legal and political discourse:Template:Sfn

  • Divine, abstract sharia: God's plan for mankind and the norms of behavior which should guide the Islamic community. Muslims of different perspectives agree in their respect for the abstract notion of sharia, but they differ in how they understand the practical implications of the term.
  • Classical sharia: the body of rules and principles elaborated by Islamic jurists during the first centuries of Islam.
  • Historical sharia(s): the body of rules and interpretations developed throughout Islamic history, ranging from personal beliefs to state legislation and varying across an ideological spectrum. Classical sharia has often served as a point of reference for these variants, but they have also reflected the influences of their time and place.
  • Contemporary sharia(s): the full spectrum of rules and interpretations that are developed and practiced at present.

A related term Template:Transl (Template:Lang, Islamic law), which was borrowed from European usage in the late 19th century, is used in the Muslim world to refer to a legal system in the context of a modern state.Template:Sfn

The primary range of meanings of the Arabic word šarīʿah, derived from the root š-r-ʕ, is related to religion and religious law.Template:Sfn The lexicographical tradition records two major areas of use where the word šarīʿah can appear without religious connotation.Template:Sfn In texts evoking a pastoral or nomadic environment, the word, and its derivatives refer to watering animals at a permanent water-hole or to the seashore, with special reference to animals who come there.Template:Sfn Another area of use relates to notions of stretched or lengthy.Template:Sfn This range of meanings is cognate with the Hebrew saraʿTemplate:Clarify and is likely to be the origin of the meaning "way" or "path".Template:Sfn Both these areas have been claimed to have given rise to aspects of the religious meaning.Template:Sfn

Some scholars describe the word šarīʿah as an archaic Arabic word denoting "pathway to be followed" (analogous to the Hebrew term Halakhah ["The Way to Go"]),[14] or "path to the water hole"[15][16] and argue that its adoption as a metaphor for a divinely ordained way of life arises from the importance of water in an arid desert environment.[16]

Use in religious texts[]

In the Quran, šarīʿah and its cognate širʿah occur once each, with the meaning "way" or "path".Template:Sfn The word šarīʿah was widely used by Arabic-speaking Jews during the Middle Ages, being the most common translation for the word torah in the 10th-century Arabic translation of the Torah by Saʿadya Gaon.Template:Sfn A similar use of the term can be found in Christian writers.Template:Sfn The Arabic expression Sharīʿat Allāh (شريعة الله "God’s Law") is a common translation for תורת אלוהים (‘God’s Law’ in Hebrew) and νόμος τοῦ θεοῦ (‘God’s Law’ in Greek in the New Testament [Rom. 7: 22]).[17] In Muslim literature, šarīʿah designates the laws or message of a prophet or God, in contrast to fiqh, which refers to a scholar's interpretation thereof.Template:Sfn

In older English-language law-related works in the late 19th/early 20th centuries, the word used for Sharia was sheri.[18] It, along with the French variant chéri, was used during the time of the Ottoman Empire, and is from the Turkish şer’(i).[19]

Historical origins[]

A similar legal concept Eye for an eye first recorded in the Code of Hammurabi. Qisas was a practice used as a resolution tool in inter-tribal conflicts in pre-Islamic Arab society. The basis of this resolution was that a member from the tribe to which the murderer belonged was handed over to the victim's family for execution, equivalent to the social status of the murdered person.[20] The condition of social equivalence meant the execution of a member of the murderer's tribe who was equivalent to the murdered, in that the murdered person was male or female, slave or free, elite or commonone. For example, only one slave could be killed for a slave, and a woman for a woman. In these cases, compensatory payment (Diyya) could be paid to the family of the murdered person. On this pre-Islamic understanding added a debate about whether a Muslim can be executed for a non-Muslim during the Islamic period.

The main verse for implementation in Islam is Al Baqara; 178 verse; : 'Believers! Retaliation is ordained for you regarding the people who were killed. Free versus free, captive versus captive, woman versus woman. Whoever is forgiven by the brother of the slain for a price, let him abide by the custom and pay the price well."

According to the traditional Muslim view, the major precepts of Sharia were passed down directly from the Islamic prophet Muhammad without "historical development,"[21] and the emergence of Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) also goes back to the lifetime of Muhammad.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn In this view, his companions and followers took what he did and approved of as a model (sunnah) and transmitted this information to the succeeding generations in the form of hadith.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn These reports led first to informal discussion and then systematic legal thought, articulated with greatest success in the eighth and ninth centuries by the master jurists Abu Hanifah, Malik ibn Anas, Al-Shafi‘i, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal, who are viewed as the founders of the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafiʿi, and Hanbali legal schools (madhhabs) of Sunni jurisprudence.Template:Sfn

Modern historians have presented alternative theories of the formation of fiqh.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn At first Western scholars accepted the general outlines of the traditional account.Template:Sfn In the late 19th century, an influential revisionist hypothesis was advanced by Ignac Goldziher and elaborated by Joseph Schacht in the mid-20th century.Template:Sfn Schacht and other scholars[22] argued that having conquered much more populous agricultural and urban societies with already existing laws and legal needs, the initial Muslim efforts to formulate legal normsTemplate:Refn regarded the QuranTemplate:Refn and Muhammad's hadiths as just one source of law,Template:Refn with jurist personal opinions, the legal practice of conquered peoples, and the decrees and decisions of the caliphs also being valid sources.[23]

According to this theory, most canonical hadiths did not originate with Muhammad but were actually created