text:
No doubt, you've been enjoying all of the Pinterest shitstorm goodness out there. If you'd like to read a great summary, check out the article on The Photo Life.
Here are two more. Christian Oth wrote a thoughtful article on the subject, and Sean Locke's research was impressive.
Should we be offended by Pinterest? Sure, why not? But insofar as this all applies to wedding photographers, what difference does it really make? Copyright is so yesterday. Sure, it's everything in the corporate world, where infringement is costly and the ramifications broad. But in the consumer world, it never had any teeth to begin with. Someone rips off this or that. Fine. It happens. It's a pisser. But that's the Internet, and it comes with the territory. And if the question is whether Pinterest is going to open an Etsy store to steal our goods as per their ToS, while a public with an insatiable appetite for low-resolution, watermarked images flocks to pay top dollar for our pristine pictures of kissing couples and crying brides, well, I think I can fairly say it ain't gonna happen.
Look at Napster. Napster didn't reveal that record companies lacked legitimate copyright. They won that battle. What Napster revealed was that record companies weren't innovative enough address new technology, once it became apparent that the copyrights weren't going to save them even after Napster was gone. It didn't matter when it was a small-time make-a-mix-tape type deal. But when it was everything once it was about file sharing and mass distribution. The companies were so mired in the past, they just couldn't cross the bridge to the future. You have to be willing to cannibalize yourself. You have to take the hit, or someone else will. They were an old boys club to whom copyright was a God-given right, and they milked it for all it was worth, until the well ran dry. Live by the sword. Die by the sword. The dam didn't burst. The water flooded and ran right over it.
But remember what it was like when it was all about the negatives? Life was good back then. No copying. No duplicates. Huge print orders. All the money we wanted. Being a wedding photographer meant something back in the day. People respected it. We were flush, right up until everyone started entering the market and everything went digital. Now we have to spend all of our time chasing after people to stop them from violating our copyrights, reselling our images, and sharing their pictures with everyone.
Doesn't sound very familiar, does it? Because it never happened. Success came as we embraced the Internet ethos. Whether it was because of it or along with it isn't the question. It's part and parcel to the way we do business. We opened the floodgates and took the risk long before Pinterest. Wedding photography used to suck. Who wanted to be a wedding photographer in the 80′s? The 90′s? No one. Sure, people didn't expect to get the negatives and no one could steal our pictures, but so what? If people can live differently, they will live differently. And they are, and there's nothing we can do to change that.
The real question is whether we use this momentum to our advantage, or we just push back and piss up a tree until the wind doesn't blow our way. The Pinterest ToS agreement sucks, and some people aren't to keen on seeing their pictures shared every which way, but we're looking at a tempest in a teapot. Because this isn't an issue of loss of rights and erosion of protections. That ship sailed long ago. We posted, we shared, we tagged. We already embraced the risks and turned a blind eye to them when it helped us. And while that doesn't mean we gave up our rights, it does mean we've committed to a direction, and the world is changing.
Business is not about resistance and holding on for dear life. Business is about reading the winds of change, and using it. People want to share. People want to pin. People want to store information about what they find valuable. And it happens that Pinterest is the only game in town. Society has moved forward. We need to get ahead of that. Whether it's the next big thing or not for wedding photographers, if it is, it's surely true that it will be for those who use it wholeheartedly and commit to getting it done that make it work. The rest of us are just going to have to wait for the workshops.
I've read a lot of the Pinterest hulabaloo and have been of mixed minds about it I do love Pinterest as a curating, gathering, and image sharing medium. It IS fun and easy and addicting: qualities I admire. And I DO get mad at how easily, and thoughtlessly, people pin and repin without giving full citations. That, I think, is partly the fault of Pinterest because they have yet to build something into the architecture of the site that makes it easy, or even necessary, to pin the proper credits, links, and sources.
But I am delighted and somewhat relieved to read your take on it. People do love to share, pin, post, link, as they should. They – we – still have to figure out how to do it in an ethical. yet not tedious way. thanks.
Cheers, Liza=not a wedding photographer.
Liza – Sometimes, as a photographer, it's hard to gauge how others feel about sharing and crediting, and it's so nice to hear this from you. Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts!
The real problem isnt just about copyright at all, and it amazes me so many people drone on and on about the issue with such tight blinkers on.
1) why does Pinterest want to be able to sell the images you place onto anyone pinboard.
2) why do they strip the metadata off the images.
3) why doesnt anyone answer these concerns other than the usual snow job, which is the "disguise" of the copyright issue.
4) while Pinterest build their business model on other people amazing gullability, the masses talk about their love to share – well sure share your own images by all means, just respect the fact that there are people out there who would prefer for you the uploader and supporter of Pinterest, not to give them an image of mine and then autotmatically give them the right to sell it. The business model is absurd. And I'm glad someone mentioned Napster, as the Supreme High Court in the US shut that down and the record companies (the owners of the IP in many cases) were awarded a vast amount of damages.
I've gotta confess, I'm having some trouble parsing your statement. It seems like you're asserting…
1. People on all sides have been duped by the smokescreen that is copyright and are missing the true point. It's about image theft, and unauthorized sharing.
2. Image theft, and unauthorized sharing aren't copyright issues.
3. Pinterest's intentions are likely malicious, as evidenced by their actions cited in questions 1 and 2.
First, if the real question is why Pinterest is doing these things, then we should ask the question in earnest. Not by couching the questions with language that support the conclusion we want. I don't think the evidence is there. Looking to the ToS for evidence of intent is like looking to a resume to see how good someone looks. It's certainly not a smoking gun. The metadata thing is less palatable in my mind, but we need more inquiry, before we assume the most dire of circumstance. But more importantly, we need to take a step back ask why we're asking why.
If, for example, the objection is that they don't like the display of their content without their approval, that's one thing. I don't see that Pinterest's intentions really matter that much in this case. It is the actions that have done the damage. Either you care about the display of your images in unapproved contexts or it doesn't bother you. And for those it hasn't bothered in the past, but are reacting now, then we need to ask what makes this the breaking point? What is the threshold crossed here?
If the objection is that people don't like the potential commercial abuse of it, that's another thing. Then it's a practical issue. Do we think they'll abuse it? What are the risks and what are the rewards? Nothing they've done suggest they're planning to position themselves as the alternative stock photo library. Reselling would certainly cross the line. But we're not there. Where are they heading?
If the objection is simply that Pinterest is sinister, that's still another issue. Here, asking why they're doing what they're doing is the entire issue. But then I'd say, fine, you're right. But Pinterest's intention or lack thereof to dominate the world is the least illuminating discussion to have. Because this stuff now – it's just a start. We're barely into Web 2.0. And I find it hard to imagine we're not in store for much bigger changes.
We need to go further than just a knee-jerk reaction saying "This pisses me off," or "Pinterest is bad." And that holds for "It's neat" and "It's fun," as well. As image creators, we need to look at all the aspects involved. At a practical level, we have to ask how we can thrive in the current reality. And second, how does all of this fit in the bigger scope of things?
Copyright is being stretched thin. It is yesterday. The usage that is part of our everyday life isn't remotely similar to the circumstance for which the laws were imagined. Everyone is running to keep up. The notions we abide by are all too frequently anchored on similarly distant conditions. We need to figure out tomorrow. Yeah, music companies won with Napster. Didn't save them. What are the values we currently embrace?
The question of whether Pinterest violates copyright law, whether they intend to sell our images, or whether they're just plain bad, aren't enough. Having society means give and take. It doesn't mean everyone will be happy with everything. We need to look at fair use, protections, rights, and we need to look at what beliefs we have are pertinent now, and which are relics from a pre-Internet past. Not to assess what Pinterest is doing. But to assess what it means to us. If you think I'm saying everything Pinterest is doing is fine, then that's not my point. If you think that I'm saying that people's gut reactions are wrong, that's also not my the point, either. This is about where we go. Not how to stay.
What are limits of acceptable use now? Where do we leave off and where does the public begin? What is good and bad for the whole, and how do we balance it with individual need? Expectations or privacy, fair use, protections of copyright, and each person's level of responsibility change. How? What? Why?
Pinterest's massive growth is just evidence. It's a state of the union address telling us that image use isn't what it was. We need to look at what's going on in the world, what our role in it can be, and how to get on top of it. The future is coming at us like a freight train. We either take the ride or get run over. I appreciate that you shared. Honestly, thank you for that. Let's go further with it all.
Finally! Someone has written what I was thinking. As you say, the ship has sailed. If you don't want stuff shared/copied/stolen then don't put it on the internet.
Thanks, Nick!
Isn't that like saying if you don't want your prints stolen don't put them in an art gallery ? The only difference is the ease of theft
Actually, it's not. You're talking about the mental state of the actor – in this case, the photographer – and the anticipation and significance of theft would vary quite dramatically between the two. To assume that someone who put their work in a gallery would expose themselves to the same vulnerabilities as posting on the Internet is inaccurate and unlikely. You'd have to be living under a rock not to know the implications of posting online. In fact, I think we post online, exactly because of those implications.
Look at the issue of privacy. If I'm sitting around in my fenced-in backyard sun bathing (not a sight to behold), my expectation of privacy is wholly different than if I do so on the sidewalk or in the middle of Times Square. There is a much higher burden in the latter case to prove that an act violated my expectation of privacy than in the former.
Hi Spencer – I'm with Getty and they like my wedding images – I have an excellent arrangement that works with my wedding clients.
Was wondering if I can send you a hard drive to load up all your shots and send back to me so I can sell them to Getty too?
I mean, copyright is so yesterday and anyways Pinterest can do this too right?
Control – it's a beautiful word…
Did I not just say its wholly different in the corporate world? That's commercial use you're talking about, and stock photography functions wholly differently than consumer photography, and weddings in particular. B2B is not B2C. The analogy only holds if they're going to resell the images. Maybe you think otherwise, but I just don't see resale happening.
Spencer – did you miss the part about Pinterest's terms and conditions including the right to sell images that are posted ?
Seriously you need to take your blinkers off, because the analogy is correct, their terms and conditions ask exactly that. What you "dont see" is limited because you're not reading what is there in black and white within Pinterests' terms and conditions.
You could continue having "trouble parsing my statement" or you could try actually reading it – I thought what I posted was brief and without an specific viewpoints other then to respond to the continuing debate over the copyright issue, which if you'd read my post carefully, I dont think people should be concerned over. You can post essays on all your personal views on why its a lost cause to speak about copyright, because as I've referred to already, the Napster experience should have demonstrated that view is a lost cause, and that copyright within music and film is not scattered about the net for free any longer. Again I put a list of 3 questions, and one viewpoint. Nor did I use the word "image theft"? You seem to have some trouble understanding the written word.
The Facts are quite clearly within the Terms and Conditions of Pinterest. They require you to agree to the sale of the images you share – simple.
Ask yourself this if you want me to even have an ounce of understanding or compassion to your personal argument – If Pinterest was so interested in simply allowing people to share (what in many cases is not theirs to share – again re Napster, and various other IP issues like Software, Movies etc) then seriously, why do they want the right to SELL the image that you share ? Why wouldnt they be giving that away in the same free spirit you support ?
That was if you care to actually read what I originally posted, was the 3 main questions I initially raised within this blog.
Why not have a look at this link:
by the way, asking 3 pertinent questions – specifically something that even you state is "crossing the line" is not IMHO a knee jerk reaction. I actually am surprised you've read so much into my 3 questions – and admittedly, and additionally one personal view. Here's the next question though ? Why hasnt Pinterest answered those 3 questions (which have been asked in many places, and directly)?
Thanks for sharing and supplying the link, William. I think it's fair to say we've probably both gotten our points on the page. I will say one last thing. One thing I have communicated poorly is that my primary point of reference has primarily been towards the issue of pinning our own work and using Pinterest ourselves as a self-promotion tool. In my eyes, it's a risk worth taking, but that's me. Either way, it's honestly not Pinterest I'm interested in defending. I'm interested in photographers finding the most significant role in society they can. There are a lot of struggles, and I want to see all of us come out the other end of it.
I too communicated rather roughly Spencer – my apologies for being a tad brutal – I've since had coffee and am now approachable
Thanks Spencer and thanks William for your response too.
From where I stand I can see the potential benefits of the service for a wedding photographer – if some of the issues raised here weren't present.
Now more than ever wedding photographers have to get their marketing smarts on.
I don't want Pinterest to vanish, but just adjust how it goes about things.
Think for a moment if a wedding couple came to you and said "Yes, we are confirming our booking, but we just need to make a slight amendment on the contract allowing us to sell the images – I mean in reality we probably won't ever do it, but we'd like it on there…"
Would you book them in?
Well, that's a fair enough question. And thanks for your reply, as well. Here's my best guess about what I'd do. I'd probably be very skeptical, because the request sounded suspicious. Then, I'd ask what they had in mind. I assume based on the scenario, they'd say something vague, but they'd assure me they weren't likely to sell them and that wasn't their primary interest. I'd probably be too puzzled to answer right away, so I'd ask for some time to go mull it over. After that, I'd break it down and look at three things specifically:
1. What is the benefit?
2. What are the possible detrimental outcomes?
3. How likely do I think those things will happen?
Then, depending on how I felt about these things, I'd make a decision. I could see rejecting it, and I could see accepting it. That's pretty much my approach for the Pinterest issue, too. To me, the most important part of #3 is to look at their intentions. I'm guessing from your replies that you feel the use term "sell" in the ToS suggests a strongly reveals their intentions. Which is fine – everyone can make their own conclusions. For me, I really don't believe it's likely to happen. Why does it seem less dubious to me than a couple asking for resale rights? Because wedding clients don't generally ask for this type of thing, so it would set off alarms in my head. But corporations and businesses do this type of thing all of the time to cover themselves. So I see it as a case of business as usual, which means it tells much less of intent. Not to mention, it would be a disaster for Pinterest to start reselling images. If they're getting this type of heat for playing it fast and lose with copyright, imagine what would happen if they really did resell images. They know that the majority of what's pinned is not coming from copyright holders. It would be the end of them. Anyway, that's my take on things, for what it's worth.


text:
Franchise Encyclopedia ▪ 1994-95 Charlotte Hornets ▪ 1996-97 Charlotte Hornets
Record: 41-41, Finished 6th in NBA Central Division (Schedule and Results)
Coach: Allan Bristow (41-41)
PTS/G: 102.8 (8th of 29) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 103.4 (24th of 29)
SRS: -0.48 (17th of 29) ▪ Pace: 91.6 (18th of 29)
Off Rtg: 111.2 (5th of 29) ▪ Def Rtg: 111.8 (27th of 29)
Expected W-L: 39-43 (17th of 29)
Arena: Charlotte Coliseum ▪ Attendance: 985,722 (1st of 29)
Promote your website or business by sponsoring this page for $20 on Basketball-Reference.com. Your message will replace this ad.
Transactions listed are from July 1, 1995 to June
30, 1996.
Click on the Team for team roster and stats.
Click on the Player for career stats and accomplishments.
September 27, 1995
Signed Rafael Addison as an unrestricted free agent.
October 3, 1995
Signed Pete Myers as an unrestricted free agent.
October 4, 1995
Signed Corey Beck as a free agent.
Signed Negele Knight as an unrestricted free agent.
October 24, 1995
Waived Negele Knight.
November 2, 1995
Waived Corey Beck.
November 3, 1995
Traded LeRon Ellis, Alonzo Mourning and Pete Myers to the Miami Heat for Matt Geiger, Khalid Reeves, Glen Rice and a 1996 1st round draft pick (Tony Delk was later selected).
November 6, 1995
Waived Joe Wolf.
December 23, 1995
Signed Corey Beck to a contract for the rest of the season.
January 3, 1996
Waived Greg Sutton.
January 5, 1996
Waived Corey Beck.
January 19, 1996
Traded Kendall Gill and Khalid Reeves to the New Jersey Nets for Kenny Anderson and Gerald Glass.
January 22, 1996
Signed Anthony Goldwire to a 10-day contract.
January 31, 1996
Signed Anthony Goldwire to a contract for the rest of the season.
February 16, 1996
Signed Pete Myers as a free agent.
February 22, 1996
Waived Gerald Glass.
February 23, 1996
Signed Donald Hodge to a 10-day contract.
March 4, 1996
Released Donald Hodge.
April 23, 1996
Fired Allan Bristow as Head Coach.
May 29, 1996
Hired Dave Cowens as Head Coach.
June 26, 1996
Drafted Malik Rose in the 2nd round (44th pick) of the 1996 NBA Draft.
Drafted Kobe Bryant in the 1st round (13th pick) of the 1996 NBA Draft.
Drafted Tony Delk in the 1st round (16th pick) of the 1996 NBA Draft.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
By Joseph A. Grillo, PsyD. (Licensed Clinical Psychologist-Forensics)
As noted in the earlier post, and through the ongoing discussion, individuals can be placed inappropriately. Economic costs seem to be one of the major causes of the "shift" to the community, and a possible contributor to a lack of information from the sending facility. What can a facility do if they find themselves with the person already at their site?
Also, let's not simply restrict this to the shift outside of the wall! Many of us who work or have worked behind the wall are no stranger to the "late Friday afternoon transfers" who have no paperwork. The Saturday morning mental health professional is typically shocked to see what awaits them. With this in mind, what can the professional do at the receiving facility to gather information that may be masked (for lack of a better term)? How can facilities protect themselves from an increase in liability? Are there ways to deal with the Individual who has been transferred who may be "irritated, annoyed, or non-compliant" (which also increases the risk/liability of the receiving agency)?
These are some of the issues that I deal with in my private consultation work, and I look forward to discussing at the conference.
Dr. Grillo


text:
Step 1: What Is Scenario paintball?
Step 2: Marker Choices...
Step 3: Gear/Apparel
Step 4: Thats All!
I would be more than happy to answer any questions...just post on this instructable
Like hydration, other equipment needed, how to find scenario games around your area.
Also i notice that the introduction of this article sounds really close to the wikipedia article.


text:
Dental Student Interest Group
This program gives predoctoral dental students who have an interest in periodontics online access to all AAP member-only content, including the Journal of Periodontology and a multitude of research and practice info.
Eligibility for DSIG Participation
A predoctoral dental student is entitled to join the AAP Dental Student Interest
- Current enrollment in a U.S. dental school accredited by the Commission on Dental Accreditation of the American Dental Association
- Current membership in the American Student Dental Association (ASDA)
- Submission of a complete and accurate DSIG online application
- Payment of first year's DSIG fee ($57) via credit card with application
Graduates of a predoctoral dental school may apply for AAP membership as Student members (if they are enrolled in postdoctoral training in periodontics) or as Associate members (if they did not pursue postdoctoral training).
Benefits of DSIG Participation
- Reduced registration fee for the Annual Meeting
Online access to full-text articles in three AAP publications:
• Journal of Periodontology
• Clinical Advances in Periodontics
• Annals of Periodontology
- Access to the members-only section of the AAP website with full access to free study club presentations, practice marketing resources, bulletin boards and chat rooms, and much more.
- Monthly AAP e-newsletter, Perio.org News
- This Week in Perio emailed news briefs
- Online access to the Academy's Membership Directory
DSIG Related Links
- Clinical and Scientific Papers on the etiology, pathogenesis or treatment of periodontal diseases and the practice of periodontics
- AAP Meetings and Continuing Education enabling participants to acquire new skills and techniques, updates on current scientific research, and insight into the future of the profession
Members Only Content:
Not Member Only


text: Hough -- Becky and Bryan Amell have been recognized by their neighbors with a Vancouver Sparkles award for their all their positive efforts -- like the way their meticulous newer home blends with the older character of the neighborhood. "Every year, they stage an amazing holiday light display, including lit trees, yard decorations, and a giant Christmas tree made out of lights," the latest neighborhood newsletter says. Plus, the Amells contribute effort and money to clean up graffiti, to weed and to care for the Historic Hough Neighborhood sign at the corner of Franklin and Mill Plain. Vancouver Sparkles is the city's community pride award, as selected by members of neighborhood associations.


text:
Below is a letter to officials of Caln Township from John Robinson, Jr. of the Carver Court Association:
Friday, April 1, 2011
Swat Task Force apparently bursts into the wrong Caln Township home
A multi-jurisdictional task force of US Marshals, Pennsylvania State Police, members of Chester County District Attorney's office and members from the Coatesville Police Department; apparently looking for a fugitive burst into a home in Carver Court in Caln Township on March 17, 2011. It was the wrong home.
Below is a letter to officials of Caln Township from John Robinson, Jr. of the Carver Court Association:
Below is a letter to officials of Caln Township from John Robinson, Jr. of the Carver Court Association:
A delegation from Carver Court addressed the Caln Township Commissioners last evening in regard to the incident on March 17, 2011 on Foundry Street in Carver Court, Caln Township:
From the March 31, 2011 Caln Township Commissioner's meeting.
Listen here:
A transcript:
"Good evening everyone my name is John Robinson Jr. I reside at Foundry Street in Carver Court. First I'd like to thank Commissioner Chambers for your response to our complaint. And I would like to thank Chief Byerly for the information you've provided for our complaint. Thank you very much.
This police incursion we consider to be a grave matter of public safety in Carver Court.
I start by saying that we the members of Carver Court Association strongly encourage the actions of the police department to search out and apprehend criminals and fugitives. We have no problem with that at all. However we do not condone when the information that they gather in order to find this fugitive is in error and that they fail to verify that information. When this failure results in an endangerment to one of our citizens it's an endangerment to the community as a whole.
Now you have my narrative that had been forwarded to you and I read a statement from that:
It must be recognized that had this event happened at any of certain other residences in Carver Court the result could have been catastrophic. Had this happened at my home and my 86 year old mother had been confronted by this crew or up the street from where we live at my 88 year old aunt's house or two doors, three doors from where the event took place at the mother of the resident at that location I dare to say that any of them would not have survived this event.
Had I been been the one who confronted this force, my background is; I'm an Army Veteran of two tours of combat in Vietnam as a First Lieutenant Infantry Platoon Leader. I do not know what my reaction would have been had I had several weapons aimed at my head. If I were the one confronted I could probably say that I wouldn't be standing here talking to you right now.
This is a very serious matter as far as public safety is concerned, and we the citizens of Carver Court and Carver Court Association have some questions.
I'd like to defer to Mr. Dixon to pose those questions. Thank you."
Elwood Dixon, "We would like to as community members, we would like to know what can be taken back to our citizens, to our neighbors that this cannot happen again.
And my other question is what happens when the police were doing this to you; who do you call? Because if you don't know what's going on and nobody tells you what's going on who do you call?
The third question I have is, I'd like to know if this was a legitimate raid and why; Can anyone answer me?
Mr. William Chambers, President of the Board of Commissioners of Caln Township, "Ok, Mr. Dixon let me back up; you're first one and Mr. Robinson…We received a second letter from you dated March 28th.
Mr. Robinson, "Yes"
Mr. Chambers, "The next to the last paragraph which is a very short paragraph says:
'We now understand that this armed force was a multi-unit police fugitive warrant force which consisted of officers from the Pennsylvania State, the Chester County, Caln and Coatesville Police Departments.'
Caln was not was not involved at all, OK. Just to set your letter and the record straight there.
So that being said Mr. Dixon, I'm going to defer to Chief Byerly, who has informed me of what's going on. I believe he's had at least two telephone conversations with Mr. Robinson, so chief if you can do your best to help answer these questions.
Chief Byerly, "This was multi-jurisdictional task force and like Mr. Chambers said is made up of US Marshals, it's made up of Pennsylvania State Police, It's made up of members of Chester County District Attorney's office and It's made up of members from the Coatesville Police Department.
It was made up that way by design to cross jurisdictional boundaries at will.
Now, I'm not the person to answer why they were at 43 Foundry Street on March 17th at 6:30 am. I don't know why they were there. I have been in contact with Chief of the County Detectives and my understanding is there is a meeting set up Tuesday…"
Mr. Robinson, "Monday"
Chief Byerly, "Monday, I'll double check on that because I wrote it down as Tuesday, with Chief Vito from the Chester County District Attorney's Office. He's the Chief of Detectives and he's from the Chester County District Attorney's office and Sergeant Vichevo who's the leader of the task force from the Pennsylvania State Police. They should be the ones that are able to answer what led them to 43 Foundry Street any tactics that were taken. Is it a legitimate unit? Yes it is a legitimate unit. But I can't give you some of the details that you might want. And they're going to answer the questions that they can. And if they can't answer your questions they can tell where you who to go to see that can.
But there's also a boss somewhere. There's always a governing body somewhere.
When I first referred Mr. Robinson to the Chester County District Attorney's office to answer questions, that's the top law enforcement officer in the County, is the DA. And if we had done something illegal or improper it would be the District Attorneys job to investigate that. If the District Attorney errs and people aren't satisfied with him, there is always someplace else, the Attorney General's office at the State or Federal level.
I hope you can get your answers on Tuesday that will give you an idea of why they were there. What they did. Honestly, I don't know. Yes sir."
"I'm not on the agenda but could I just could I just interject?"
Chief, "Absolutely"
"It was my understanding that when the action takes place in another jurisdiction that the local police are supposed to be notified.
Chief Byerly, "We received a call, cell phone call, while they were in route to do this in Caln. That's a good question because let me explain. If it was Coatesville only that's coming across our border to serve a warrant or attempt to serve a warrant in Carver Court or anywhere in Caln Township they would have to notify us. They have to do that. But the Pennsylvania State Police already have jurisdiction. Chester County Detectives already have jurisdiction. So do the US Marshals. And that's one of the reasons why it is put together that way.
They are under no obligation as a unit to that those individuals being part of it, to tell us that they're coming. They do that as a matter of courtesy. If something does happen and a citizen calls department of emergency services and said something terrible is happening at any given location we are going at least we know that there's a unit there or a police department there and there's a problem. So we don't just see a bunch of people running around the neighborhood with guns. We have an idea of who might be there.
Mr. Dixon, "Chief can you tell me if there was an error or not?"
Chief Byerly, "I don't know. I honestly don't know….Like I said, I don't know how they came to 43 Foundry Street. Sometimes when you're looking for people it's kind of like a fluid motion. You might go to one place that gives you some information that leads you to another place, that leads you a third place. I don't know. They should be able to tell you that on Monday. I'm going to double check on that. I'm sure I wrote down Tuesday.
Mr. Dixon, "So what we need to know you can't give us."
Chief Byerly, "I cannot, I cannot give it, but Sergeant Vichevo and Chief Vito should be able to you that information. Sergeant Vichevo who's from Pennsylvania State Police was there. And he is the coordinator of the multi-jurisdictional police task force. So there may be some things that he cannot tell you. They'll tell you that. But he's the man who should be able to answer your questions.
Mr. Dixon, "The other question that I have is what can we tell the people in Carver Court to feel safe again with the police? Because of this situation, what can we tell them?"
Chief Byerly, "Why don't we wait and see what happens when you have the meeting. I don't know what to tell you because we were not involved. We were not there. I can't say I would have handled the situation the same way or would have handled it differently. I don't know enough about it.
If you need us, call us we're coming and we're going to help, but you have to understand I can't stop, nor can the Board of Commissioners stop this type of unit from operating. We just have to make sure that they operate within the guidelines that are set for them."
Mr. Dixon, "Thank you Chief, but we will not stop here. We've got to find out some answers."
Chief, Byerly, "I think Monday's were you're going to get all your answers, all your questions may be answered on Monday. But if not they're going to tell you what the next place to go if you need to. They will give you that information. I've already talked to Chief Vito. He said, 'Look if they're not happy with what we're telling them we will tell them who they need to talk to."
Commissioner Rose, "If you don't get the answers, please report back to us and let us know because we…Not that we necessarily have the jurisdiction or anything on this but you know there are public officials out there, state representatives, state senators and those kinds of folks you can reach out to as well. And if you need assistance in setting up meetings with them, I'm sure anyone of us up here would be more than happy to assist you in getting your questions answered. Whether you're going to hear what you want or not, I don't know. As the Chief said, we don't know what brought them there. We don't know what evidence they had…But we're as interested in getting some answers."
Mr. Dixon, "Thank you very much."
Mr. Chambers, "Mr. Dixon and Mr. Robinson, "After the conversation with the Chief it's like well jeepers, we're just going to regurgitate 'we don't know'. But to let you know what kind chief we have, the first time this unit came in, they came in unannounced and Chief Byerly got on the phone and rattled some cages. And that's why he got at the very least a call when they were in route. So he knew, because as we had discussed things could go from bad to worse in a real short time. So he's looking out for us. And yes you do have higher courts of appeal. So please go for it. And I'm glad the Chief has talked to Mr. Robinson to facilitate this meeting. Thank you very much.
Posted by James Pitcherella at 12:39 AM
1 comment:
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
Is Eva Longoria's New Show, Devious Maids, Heading to Lifetime?
Things might not be quite so desperate for Devious Maids after all.
It had seemed as though Devious Maids, the new show from Desperate Housewives creator Marc Cherry, was officially dead (much like many of the characters on Desperate Housewives over the years) after ABC rejected its pilot earlier this month. However, the soapy drama may have new life at Lifetime, as Deadline is reporting that the cable channel is looking at the pilot and is said to be interested. Perhaps Devious Maids won't end up locked in a basement (metaphorically speaking) after all.
The show stars Ana Ortiz (Ugly Betty), Judy Reyes (Scrubs), and soap-opera legend Susan Lucci. Eva Longoria is an executive producer of the show. And after all that Marc Cherry has been through in the past year (court case, anyone?), the man could use some good — or even halfway decent — news.
Source: Deadline
Fall in Like with us! For the latest from Wetpaint Entertainment, Like us on our Facebook page at Facebook.com/Wetpaint, or follow us on Twitter at Twitter.com/WetpaintTV.


text: The RVCA Polar Opposite T-Shirt reads RVCA across chest. Thin and light with stretch. A 100% cotton t-shirt. Seamless graphic tag at neck. Available in colorways as seen below. Men's sizes: SM (34-36), MD (38-40), LG (42-44), XL (46-48) unless otherwise noted. Skate Warehouse shows all colors that we have in stock. In rare cases the logo or the color pictured may be slightly different than what is shipped. Model wears a medium.


text: Prev | Next Purchase this photo Bishop Nash/The Herald-Dispatch Live-action roleplayers battle it out at Huntington's Ritter Park on Sunday, April 13, 2014. Gallery: A day at Huntington's Ritter Park, April 13 Apr. 13, 2014 @ 04:10 PM Bishop Nash Huntington residents came out to enjoy a beautiful day at Ritter Park on Sunday. ()


text:
Yes, Office 2007 is fully supported when used with Windows XP. This question is one I'd heard a few times in the past week; there is a lingering perception that Vista is required to use the 2007 versions of the products. Rest assured, this is not the case.
System requirements are posted here: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/products/HA101668651033.aspx
Winding down the year causes a variety of reactions from people. Some (like me) have a mild panic when


text:
MMA News
VIDEO | Bobb Sapp Loses Again (5th straight loss this year) | MMA NEWS
Bob Dapp dropped his eighth straight MMA fight this past weekend against Tolegen Akylbekov. That makes him 0-5 in 2012 and 2-12 in his last 14 bouts.
Attached is a video of his latest outing, enjoy the fight!
20 Responses to "VIDEO | Bobb Sapp Loses Again (5th straight loss this year) | MMA NEWS"
Hey,bob time to give it up.on the brightside mcdonalds is casting for a new grimace.
wtf was that? hope the paycheck was worth a bash lmmfao
lol promotions keep signing this joker! He never were a great fighter, but now he's really over the hill.
His chest looks like a pair of leaky silicone tits.
STOP reporting on Bob sapps fights… he is just giving this sport a bad name and is in no way an MMA fighter. All your doing is giving him attention and getting him paid to throw fights
this guy is like a turtle when u put him on his back….i cant believe people still wanna see this freak show
what a joke…
LOL @ "Bob Dapp"
Lets cover one of the worst MMA fighters and report on every loss he has. Never was any good, no need for covering him, he was never important in MMA.
Maybe its time to give fighting up bob
He already did genius.
Bob. is actually smart. He's collecting 40k paychecks while these dumbass promotions are providing him with fights. Can't blame the guy for makin that money.
How the hell does this guy keep getting fights? Why does any promotion pay him? Is it the novelty? I mean, yea he was in the longest yard, but he also played that one annoying character that no one can stand. I just don't get it.
On a more positive note, the music they played after he tapped was fucking fantastic.
This guy belongs in wwe Not mma.
What a joke. The Promoter that puts him on the card is a bigger joke then him. He obviously doesn't take his Promotion very serious. The fans are either stupid or maybe it is treated as a professional wrestling type deal. Anyway you look at it Bob Sapp is running to the bank laughing at the MMA community. He could never get a license to fight in the USA in a real MMA fight. The way to handle this is just refuse to cover any of these spectacles and do not put them on anywhere to be seen. Just My Opinion.
It's funny because Bob has another fight in 3 days. This guys just jumps from promotion to promotion getting his ass kicked for a couple of hundred bucks. It's pathetic.
Biggest Tomato can in MMA, maybe in all sports.
This is getting ridiculous.
If he's healthy and getting paid too much maybe the answer is a full blown beat down.
Let someone fight him and take him the full 10 or 15 minutes and just beat him down. The moment he turtles, let him stand up and continue. He knows all he needs to do is cover up and hope the raining punches don't last too long.
Perhaps after a much deserved ass kicking he'll reconsider ever entering the cage again.
Just my opinion. Than again, I'd like to know his take per fight. At this point I'm actually quite concerned he's not all there.
this guy is a sideshow act always has been.
War Sapp! He's doing it to the man. Exploit those promotions like they exploit the fighters!!! Too funny. War sapp!!!
If the company has brick-and-mortar locations, make sure to add the names of people locations in links and titles about those stores. This helps improve the chances of being found any time a user performs a location-specific search. That you are much more likely to be the best of the company in your town or state than globally, and so you achieve greater rankings in local searches.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.


text:
Berry: Unprecedented negativity?Written by Thomas Berry | | firstname.lastname@example.com
The Barack Obama re-election campaign's "Truth Team" e-mail "Tip Sheet" of May 20 was sent in anticipation of what it calls "the unprecedented level of negative campaigning we're going to see from our opponents this year."
What is being said and published in the effort to defeat President Obama and his agenda is nothing compared to the blatant lies and vicious character assassinations that his party have disseminated for the past several years against conservative Republican politicians and spokespersons, conservative causes such as Ohio SB5 and protection of religious freedom, and ordinary Americans like me who support them.
"Unprecedented negativity"? Ask conservative women about negative. Ask them about Playboy's list of the top 10 conservative women who should be "hate-f***ed." Ask Laura Ingraham, whom Ed Schultz of MSNBC called a "right-wing slut." Ask S.E. Cupp, whose image was defiled in a recent issue of Hustler.
Ask Wisconsin Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch, who Democrat talk show host John Sylvester accused of performing "fellatio on all the talk show hosts in Milwaukee" and of engaging in gang sex. Ask ordinary conservative women who are being called whores by Democrats — the party that is supposedly sensitive to women — about negativity.
Ask conservative columnists Michelle Malkin, who has published a list of media attacks on conservative women at http://michellemalkin.com/2012/03/07/the-war-on-conservative-women/, and Cupp. Democrats have called Malkin "(a) mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick on it," and Cupp a demonstration of the necessity of abortion.
Ask Ann Romney, who was attacked for having "never worked a day in her life," even though she raised five boys while suffering from breast cancer and multiple sclerosis — as conservatives are accused of being insensitive to the sick.
Ask Condoleeza Rice, who was smeared with vilely racist cartoons crafted by liberals — who call conservatives racially insensitive.
Negative? Rep. Paul Ryan has been depicted in an online ad paid for by the pro-Obama Agenda Project as gleefully pushing a wheelchair-bound grandmother off a cliff.
Negative? Democrats have
publicly fantasized about former president George W. Bush being assassinated and Rush Limbaugh and Justice Clarence Thomas dying horrible and painful deaths, and lamented former vice-president Dick Cheney's successful heart transplant. They have actively campaigned on demonstrably false grounds to drive Limbaugh and other conservative spokesmen from the airwaves. This, from the party that advocates civility and free speech.
Democrats have characterized me, a conservative blogger and tea party activist, as bigoted, a terrorist, racist, a Nazi, a religious fanatic, an idiot, a liar, a failure, hateful, ignorant, un-American, uneducated, anti-free speech and, by the President himself, a hick who clings to his guns and religion. My opinions have been called slanted nonsense, laughable, trash, rubbish, childishly simplistic bombast, revisionist, blind, irresponsible and manipulative, and I have been threatened with physical harm for expressing them.
The president welcomes the backing of Bill Maher (who, among many offenses against civility, attacked Sen. Rick Santorum's children for being home-schooled) and other character assassins, and — speaking of unprecedented — used his 2010 State of the Union address to defame Supreme Court justices who dared defy his will by upholding election law.
In other words, only Democrats are allowed to criticize their opponents, and there are no limits on the obscenity, crudeness, slander and deceit that are to be deployed in doing so; but conservatives, even though they make every effort to be civil and stay with the facts, are to be forbidden from speaking out in any way against the progressive agenda.
This mindset is precisely typical of Obama's crybaby, the-buck-stops-there attempts to divert scrutiny from his hideous record of failed policies, broken promises and betrayals of the Constitution, liberty and the best interests of the republic.
Thomas Berry, for Children of Liberty, www.meetup.com/The-children-of-liberty/.
Tags: Barack Obama, Children of Liberty, Dick Cheney, Ed Schultz, George W. Bush, Laura Ingraham, Michelle Malkin, S.E. Cupp


text:
The owners of a Largo mobile home said they left candles burning inside during a trip to buy fast-food Tuesday. When they returned, their home was on fire, officials said.
Officials said the fire apparently destroyed the mobile home at Kings Manor Estates, 1399 Belcher Road, Lot 140.
Arson detectives from the Largo Police Department and state fire marshal's office were investigating.
The homeowners were not at the residence during the fire, according to a news release from the police department, which responded to the scene along with firefighters.
"They indicated that they had left candles burning while they went to McDonald's," police Lt. Mike Loux said in the news release. "Upon their return they found their mobile home fully engulfed by fire."
The homeowners' cat was missing and presumed to be inside the structure during the fire, Loux said. However, they took their pet dog with them.


text:
Dorothy P. Walker, 91, died peacefully in her Perkins Township home, with family at her side, Thursday, Jan. 24, 2008, after suffering a stroke Jan. 16, 2008.
She was born in Lorain, Ohio, Dec. 5, 1916, the first child of Harold and Edna (Haupt) Pickett. She lived in Clyde throughout most of her childhood, but graduated from Margaretta High School in 1934, after her family moved to what would one day be known as Pickett Cherry Farm. She earned a teaching degree from Bowling Green Normal School in 1937, and began her teaching career with a class of 40 first graders in Perkins School District, and later taught for Sandusky City Schools. When she was widowed in 1962, she worked hard to raise her three daughters and is remembered by them for her love of music, gardening and nature, as well as her deep commitment to faith and family. In 1980, she remarried and subsequently retired from Port Clinton City Schools, where she had been a kindergarten teacher at Catawba Elementary. She belonged to First Presbyterian Church of Sandusky, where she served on the Session, and was also a lifetime member of Presbyterian Women. Additionally, she had been active in the Ohio Osteopathic Association Auxiliary, Sandusky Memorial Hospital Auxiliary and Sandusky Yacht Club Auxiliary.
Survivors include her husband, Dr. James E. Walker; daughters, Anne (John) Moran of West Carrollton, Ohio, Nancy (John) Herl of Port Clinton and Fort Myers, Fla., and Joan (Ken) Hartley of Huron; stepdaughter Elizabeth (John) Nielsen of Brighton, Mich.; grandchildren Melissa and Melinda Moran, John David (Melissa) and Patrick Herl, Kathryn (Jon) Roodvoets, Stephen, Benjamin and Madison Hartley, and James, Meredith and Matthew Nielsen; four great-grandchildren; sister, Eileen Detlefsen of Bellevue; three nieces; one nephew; and her dear little dog, Abby.
She was preceded in death by her parents; her former husband John F. Kerchner; niece, Julie Wallingford; stepdaughter, Jennie Walker; and, most recently, her brother, Charles Pickett.
Friends may call 3-6 p.m. Sunday in Pfeil Funeral Home, Sandusky Chapel, 617 Columbus Ave. The Rev. Kimberly Secrist Ashby will officiate at a private family funeral, with burial to follow at the Pickett family plot in Deyo Cemetery in Groton Township.
Those wishing to make a memorial contribution are asked to consider Stein Hospice, 1200 Sycamore Line, Sandusky, OH 44870; Catawba Island Fire and Rescue, 4606 E. Cemetery Road, Port Clinton, OH 43452; or the Dorothy Pickett Walker Memorial Scholarship Fund, BGSU Firelands, One University Drive, Huron, OH 44839.
Family members wish to express their sincere gratitude to all who helped care for Mrs. Walker during her most recent stroke, as well as the one a year ago from which she so valiantly worked to recover.