text:
Latest Event Updates
Tom Cruise…The Mummy…Oooh!
I won't even start to comment on this one… Look. Oohhhh!!!!
The Blakemores Are Back!
This weekend only!
This Incredible Commercial Will Warm Your Heart And Then Break It Before You Know What Happened — Real Stories – UPROXX
Before you even start to read, you should hit play on the video above. You do not want to spoil it. The ad is titled Evan and keeps its secret hidden until the very end. We follow the title character as he writes on a desk in the library and begins a conversation with a…
via This Incredible Commercial Will Warm Your Heart And Then Break It Before You Know What Happened — Real Stories – UPROXX
Take the Book Challenge
I am well read? Oh really? There are some books on thi slist by the BBC that I may, maybe, possibly, I think I may have read in high school. However, the BBC only thinks that most people have read maybe 6 on this list..
The BBC has an esteemed list of books they think every person should read before they die. A bucket list of literature, if you will. So get checking … how many of this list have you already tackled? Are any on your own personal "to-read list?" And are there any on the list you think shouldn't even be on it? Keep in mind this list may be a little bit biased, being from the BBC and all.
1. Pride and Prejudice – Jane Austen
2. The Lord of the Rings – JRR Tolkien
3. Jane Eyre – Charlotte Bronte
4. Harry Potter series – JK Rowling
5. To Kill a Mockingbird – Harper Lee
6. The Bible
7. Wuthering Heights – Emily Bronte
8. Nineteen Eighty Four – George Orwell
9. His Dark Materials – Philip Pullman
10. Great Expectations – Charles Dickens
11. Little Women – Louisa M Alcott
12. Tess of the D'Urbervilles – Thomas Hardy
13. Catch 22 – Joseph Heller
14. Complete Works of Shakespeare
15. Rebecca – Daphne Du Maurier
16. The Hobbit – JRR Tolkien
17. Birdsong – Sebastian Faulk
18. Catcher in the Rye – JD Salinger
19. The Time Traveler's Wife – Audrey Niffenegger
20. Middlemarch – George Eliot
21. Gone With The Wind – Margaret Mitchell
22. The Great Gatsby – F Scott Fitzgerald
24. War and Peace – Leo Tolstoy
25. The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy – Douglas Adams
27. Crime and Punishment – Fyodor Dostoyevsky
28. Grapes of Wrath – John Steinbeck
29. Alice in Wonderland – Lewis Caroll
30. The Wind in the Willows – Kenneth Grahame
31. Anna Karenina – Leo Tolstoy
32. David Copperfield – Charles Dickens
33. Chronicles of Narnia – CS Lewis
34. Emma -Jane Austen
35. Persuasion – Jane Austen
36. The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe – CS Lewis
37. The Kite Runner – Khaled Hosseini
38. Captain Corelli's Mandolin – Louis De Bernieres
39. Memoirs of a Geisha – Arthur Golden
40. Winnie the Pooh – A.A. Milne
41. Animal Farm – George Orwell
42. The Da Vinci Code – Dan Brown
43. One Hundred Years of Solitude – Gabriel Garcia Marquez
44. A Prayer for Owen Meaney – John Irving
45. The Woman in White – Wilkie Collins
46. Anne of Green Gables – LM Montgomery
47. Far From The Madding Crowd – Thomas Hardy
48. The Handmaid's Tale – Margaret Atwood
49. Lord of the Flies – William Golding
50. Atonement – Ian McEwan
51. Life of Pi – Yann Martel
52. Dune – Frank Herbert
53. Cold Comfort Farm – Stella Gibbons
54. Sense and Sensibility – Jane Austen
55. A Suitable Boy – Vikram Seth
56. The Shadow of the Wind – Carlos Ruiz Zafon
57. A Tale Of Two Cities – Charles Dickens
58. Brave New World – Aldous Huxley
59. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time – Mark Haddon
60. Love In The Time Of Cholera – Gabriel Garcia Marquez
61. Of Mice and Men – John Steinbeck
62. Lolita – Vladimir Nabokov
63. The Secret History – Donna Tartt
64. The Lovely Bones – Alice Sebold
65. Count of Monte Cristo – Alexandre Dumas
66. On the Road – Jack Kerouac
67. Jude the Obscure – Thomas Hardy
68. Bridget Jones's Diary – Helen Fielding
69. Midnight's Children – Salman Rushdie
70. Moby Dick – Herman Melville
71. Oliver Twist – Charles Dickens
72. Dracula – Bram Stoker
73. The Secret Garden – Frances Hodgson Burnett
74. Notes From A Small Island – Bill Bryson
75. Ulysses – James Joyce
76. The Inferno – Dante
77. Swallows and Amazons – Arthur Ransome
78. Germinal – Emile Zola
79. Vanity Fair – William Makepeace Thackeray
80. Possession – AS Byatt
81. A Christmas Carol – Charles Dickens
82. Cloud Atlas – David Mitchell
83. The Color Purple – Alice Walker
84. The Remains of the Day – Kazuo Ishiguro
85. Madame Bovary – Gustave Flaubert
86. A Fine Balance – Rohinton Mistry
87. Charlotte's Web – E.B. White
88. The Five People You Meet In Heaven – Mitch Albom
89. Adventures of Sherlock Holmes – Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
90. The Faraway Tree Collection – Enid Blyton
91. Heart of Darkness – Joseph Conrad
92. The Little Prince – Antoine De Saint-Exupery (In French)
93. The Wasp Factory – Iain Banks
94. Watership Down – Richard Adams
95. A Confederacy of Dunces – John Kennedy Toole
96. A Town Like Alice – Nevil Shute
97. The Three Musketeers – Alexandre Dumas
98. Hamlet – William Shakespeare
99. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory – Roald Dahl
100. Les Miserables – Victor Hugo
100 Greatest Movies of All Time
Well, okay, if the American Film Institute says so, but how many of these have you personally seen? A few years back, Hubby and I started collecting these movies. We located and purchased 10, but never did watch them. I think for 2017, we are going to add these to our Netflix list, and get to watching. I will keep you posted.
And before you write me a nasty note, no, I have not seen The Godfather or Star Wars. I will get there though…promise (wink).
AFI's 100 GREATEST AMERICAN FILMS OF ALL TIME
AFI's 100 Years…100 Movies – 10th Anniversary Edition is an updated edition to AFI's 100 Years…100 Movies, a list of the top 100 greatest American films of all time.
Honoring the 10th anniversary of this award-winning series, a jury of 1,500 film artists, critics and historians determined that CITIZEN KANE remained the greatest movie of all time. The television special AFI's 100 Years…100 Movies – 10th Anniversary Edition originally aired on CBS on June 20, 2007.
Tell us how you did.
Welcome to Serenity
I set out to write something different and was amazed at the direction this series ended up taking me. It has been well over two years, but the vision is finally coming to life. Before I get into the the details, I want to tell you about the vision and the journey to the finished products.
Initially when I discussed the idea with my inner circle, it was met with a few reservations. If the people who knew me and writing style best were confused, then I needed to head back to the drawing board. My current hypotheses for a calculated success was not going to work out. it would be too big of a transition for my readers to randomly head out to Wyoming for no reason. Okay, well, let me figure this out. Instead of introducing the characters in the Serenity right away, I started with a darker story about redemption and starting over.
Enter Darlene and Daniel.
Darlene loses everything and desperately needs to start over. Her crazy, loving, and bordering on insane friend sets out to get her remarried by setting her up online to meet four men.
The fourth one is the winner.
What I love about Daniel is that he was okay to just be her friend if she didn't choose him. In the end, everything she lost was returned threefold in the way of Jamar, Jack and a Cassandra.
These characters are bold, rich, well rounded and hilarious. You meet Jamar, whom Darlene learns is building a town in the middle of nowhere in Wyoming. Jamar is a lovable dude who doesn't quite get along with Cassandra. Their interactions are priceless.
Along with Jamar, you have his right hand and partner in building Serenity, Jack Kinson who has his own secrets and reasons for coming to help Jamar build his town. I really like Jack. He says what he means and means what he says, he just says it all wrong.
I needed to tie the two books together and give the readers a feel for what Jamar was trying to accomplish as well as explain how he and Jack met. This provides a better overview of Jamar's overall vision for the town as well as my vision for the series.
You can get this one for free. You can even get it in a PDF. Of course, it is on Amazon, Nook, and Kobo as well.
From here I was ready to build Serenity. Jamar's list of people he needed to build the town are: A construction worker, an electrician, a farmer, a doctor, a general store owner, to name a few. Let's add an electrician.
I already had one in my database. (Yes I keep a data base of my characters and their jobs). I took this one from my Venture, Georgia Series.
You initially meet Holden in Turning the Page, he is Janie Cimoc's brother, who has an immediate attraction to Ethan, his brother in law's sister. You know how my mind works. I am nuts. Tallullah Strom is an accomplished woman, a pediatrician and a catch. Holden is a freelance contractor, was raised by hippies who live in a double-wide painted with peace signs with a yard filled with garden gnomes. The gnomes are also holding peace signs.
Holden is currently available for your reading pleasure, Farmer will be available in November.
Here are the links to Holden. Happy Reading.
Come fall in love as we head back to Venture, Georgia to revisit some old friends.
Kindle: http://amzn.to/2eCvdtR
Nook: http://bit.ly/2ezFQcz
Kobo: http://bit.ly/2eK91Jg
Indigo: http://bit.ly/2dPkBVN
Inkterra: http://bit.ly/2enx1oQ
What would you do if you won the lottery?
Jamar Smalls built a town.
Jamar Smalls has just won the lottery. Since he was a child, somewhere in the back of his mind sat a budding vision of a very pleasant new life.
He now has 197 million ways to make his dream come true. He starts by building a town.
Welcome to Serenity, Wyoming. Population -1.
Claim your free copy. https://www.instafreebie.com/free/jFXIl
What would you do if you won the lottery? No, not just pay off bills, buy cars and houses and shit, think bigger. How would you make the world just a tad bit nicer?


text:
Resident Evil began as a popular zombie action horror game on the Sony Playstation, spawning numerous sequels, novels, comic books, and action figures. Resident Evil is also a popular movie franchise. Resident Evil: Afterlife opened in theaters on September 10, 2010.
Resident Evil is a popular series of action, horror video games and movies featuring an evil corporation which has turned humans into zombies.
Known as Biohazard in its country of origin, Japan, the game Resident Evil released in 1996 for the Sony Playstation. Over a decade later, the Resident Evil series has produced numerous sequels and spin-offs, and has situated itself as the game to beat in the video game horror genre.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Research Paper:
The first is the actors in the setting. The researcher will collect variables such as age and gender so as not to interfere with the natural setting of the revelers. The second category is the behaviors being carried out by these actors. These will be recorded as acts which are small units of behavior, activities which are a set of related acts and events which are a set of related acts in a sequence. The third category is the space that is occupied by these actors. This will essentially be an understanding of the setting of the underground rave. Information on ventilation, lighting, cleanliness, and setting of the underground rave will be collected. The fourth category is the arrangement of objects in the space. This will seek to collect information regarding the arrangement of tables, chairs, bars, and other items in the underground rave. The next category is the time of the observation which will give crucial information regarding the timing of the underground raves. The sixth category is the goals that are associated with the behavior of the actors. Here the researcher will seek information regarding the reasons behind the activities being undertaken by the revelers. Emotions and feelings of the revelers is the last category. The researcher will seek information on whether the behaviors being undertaken by the revelers have any level of emotions or feelings behind them. Other items that the researcher will observe include the language used by the revelers and their interactive patterns.
The researcher will also conduct interviews with promoters, DJs, and bouncers for these events. This information will help to understand the organization and operation of these underground raves and thus enable the researcher gain information regarding the raves. A standardized interview form will be used to ensure consistency of data collected.
Data analysis
Data collected through participant observation and interviews will be analyzed through concept analysis to find emerging patterns, themes, concepts and meanings which will then be presented systematically. It is expected that since this ethnographic study uses the natural human social setting or encounter, routinized patterns will be recognized which will be the emerging themes sought in this analysis. The researcher will also be able to find the social norms applicable to underground raves which will create an understanding of the broader socio-cultural context of the society. Information regarding the deep structural interactions of revelers at these events will also be studied to pick up stimuli for these interactions.
Data presentation
Data collected from the DJs, promoters and bouncers informed the researcher that the Southern California underground rave scene has become popular since 2010 when the law was passed to prevent raves in public places. Promoters have the role of organizing these raves which begins from hiring the location, printing informational leaflets and passing word-of-mouth communication to revelers. They also seek musicians and DJs to mix in the event and from the two promoters interviewed, one had personal experience in underground raving as a reveler while the other was a famous DJ before assuming the role of promoters. The promoters have the task of keeping up with local, national and international trends in organizing raves that create huge hype and give huge returns.
The DJs are the personalities in the rave and they help to pull the crowd. When a popular DJ is mixing at a rave party, revelers flock the event. They have an artistic personal that comes from the intricate relationship between them and the revelers at these raves. DJs need to be smooth in their transitions from one song to the other in order to maintain a continuous beat which allows the revelers to dance continually for hours without stopping.
Bouncers are the event security and they have the job of ensuring everyone at the underground rave is safe. They prevent brawls from happening during the event as well as overdosing on drugs or alcohol. They also ensure the security of the musicians, DJ and promoter at the event by using crowd control measures. Bouncers also collect entry fees and issue tickets to revelers to prevent unauthorized entry. They also keep a look out for police or other forms of law enforcement that may show up at the event.
Revelers in the underground raves were aged between 19 and 21 years of age with 54% being female revelers and 46% being male revelers. The revelers were dressed up in distinctive rave style which consisted of clunky shoes, oversized clothes and old fashioned night caps. Males had large pairs of pants common in the hip hop culture with bottoms being un-hemmed and cutoff. Female ravers wear the scantiest dresses and tops that expose as much as is possible. They also are heavily clad in ornaments such as earrings, bangles, and necklaces. Rave dancing is also unique and different from dancing in clubs and music videos. It is an individualistic experience that lacks sensuality. Ravers are often high on drugs and lose themselves in the music. They do not dance to relay any form of sexual messages to other ravers.
The raves had smart bars as well as alcoholic bars. The smart bar was a booth that sells nonalcoholic drinks which as the researcher found out are integral to the worldwide rave culture. These nonalcoholic drinks were made using fruit juices, powders purchased legally at health food stores, proteins, vitamins and stimulants such as caffeine. These smart drinks are promoted as enhancers to the psychedelic experience of the revelers since they increase their ability to dance for long periods of time. The researcher also found that smart drinks have been in the market for many years but they only gained popularity as a result of the rave culture. The smart bars also sold "smart drugs" which were referred to as blast capsules by the revelers. These contained caffeine and phenylalanine which are also advertised to give fast energy to ravers allowing them to dance for long periods.
The alcoholic bar is the more popular bar. Lines for alcoholic drinks were found to be much longer than those for nonalcoholic drinks for both raves attended. The rave organizers take the same precautions to prevent underage drinking as in other clubs. Young ravers had yellow wrist bands that glowed. In these raves, the young ravers have a harder time getting older ravers to buy drinks. Hard drugs were such as ecstasy which was referred to as 'E' or 'X' by the revelers was in sale at both raves and the researcher observed 100 different ravers purchase the drug at the raves from the alcoholic bar within a span of 1 hour. LSD was also on sale and was referred to as 'pig' or 'orange' by the revelers. In the same 1 hour, the researcher observed 20 different ravers purchase the drug.
Other aspects of the rave parties included laser lighting, visual stimulation through film loops and virtual reality, permanent and temporary tattoos and interactive phosphorescent art. During the rave, the dance floor was always fully packed with ravers only taking brakes of few minutes to catch their breath before resuming dancing on the dance floor.
The researcher found that ravers use alcohol and drugs to enhance their psychedelic experience which was consistent with information collected in the literature review. Ravers head straight to alcoholic counters to purchase their psychedelic enhancer which may be alcohol, ecstasy or LSD. This enables them to stay on the dance floor for long periods of time. Raves have, however, failed to differentiate between reality that is altered through the use of electronic and technological means and reality altered through the use of drugs and alcohol. This is seen in the presence of both reality alterations which has led to loss of distinctiveness of the psychedelic enhancers in this setting.
Information collected from secondary data informed the researcher that the profitability of smart bars is very low and as a result they are usually contracted out to other rave entrepreneurs. Most of the drinks in smart bars are more expensive than the alcoholic drinks. Ravers also argue that alcoholic drinks give them a better feeling as compared to these smart drinks. Scholars have also argued that smart bars are attempts made by rave cultures to redeem their lost image by trying to promote nonalcoholic behavior.
Rave culture has grown since the 1980s when it first began to become a youth culture that is centered on maximizing the rave experience. Today, raves are marked by latest technology in lights and loud music as well as dancing to fast-paced music. They are also marked by fear of violence which leads to tight security at these events. Event promoters also have concerns over their legal liability which has enhanced the exclusivity of the raves. Mass media portray raves as hip events marked by state-of-the-art technology and other youth cultures such as environmentalism, computer generated art, alcohol and drug abuse, and loud music. The picture painted by mass media is…[continue]
"Underground Raves In Southern California" (2012, November 01) Retrieved December 5, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/underground-raves-in-southern-california-76255
"Underground Raves In Southern California" 01 November 2012. Web.5 December. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/underground-raves-in-southern-california-76255>
"Underground Raves In Southern California", 01 November 2012, Accessed.5 December. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/underground-raves-in-southern-california-76255
Loving Pschizophrenic MALE VOICE (IN THE TONE OF A BEATNIK READING POETRY) He thrived upon the collaboration. At times they brought a large copy of the Webster's dictionary to randomly find topics and adjectives that would soon hypnotize their readers into the concepts of the fantasies. FX Boy and girl murmuring, turning pages. MALE VOICE (CONTINUES) They wrote for months until the girl grew paranoid and very insecure. She began to Question herself, the ward, and


text:
- Underboob is sluttier.42% (21)35% (18)38% (39)Vote
- What's the difference?26% (13)33% (17)29% (30)Vote
- YAY BOOBS / I have ADD32% (16)32% (17)33% (33)Vote
Most Helpful Guy
Boobs aren't slutty.
Showing them isn't slutty.
Flashing them huh...11|01|0
Most Helpful Girl
Underboob seems sluttier. lol
maybe it shows more private area than other?
and it is more rare?11|00|0


text:
The Legislature has agreed to request greater transparency from Michigan's public school districts, adopting a cause the Mackinac Center first took up more than 18 months ago, according to The Grand Rapids Press.
The Center since March 2008 has been requesting school districts, municipalities and legislators be more transparent by posting checkbook registers, staff names and salaries and other expenditures online for greater public inspection.
Related Articles:
SEIU Sues Its Own Members for Banquet Hall They Paid For
Don't Impose Granholm-era Mandates on Michigan Energy
Pension Officials Mislead Lawmakers
December 2, 2016 MichiganVotes Weekly Roll Call Report
More Than 18,000 in Michigan Voted Without a Photo ID This Election


text:
8,886pages onAdd New Page
this wiki
this wiki
Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you've made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
|The subject matter of this article was cut from the final version of a Call of Duty game.
Substation is a cut multiplayer map in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.


text:
- Hi there, welcome to Tribesmart. Log in to get started...
Apple Ipod Shuffle 4g 2gb Mp3 Player Pink
Guide price: £37
Last updated on 29th Nov 2011
Tags: players
Apple Ipod Shuffle 4g 2gb Mp3 Player Pink
The Apple iPod shuffle 4G 2GB MP3 player in Pink is sleek and durable letting you take hundreds of songs wherever you may be going. Perfect for your commute to work or gym workout, the Apple iPod shuffle really is the most versatile iPod yet.
Login or Register to add this to your wish list or favourites.
Similar to Apple Ipod Shuffle 4g 2gb Mp3 Player Pink
Apple Laptop Rental - ABCOMRENTS
As a strategic partner with NEC Display Solutions, ABCOMRENTS is not only the largest rental provider of NEC's Ultra Narrow Bezel Video Wall Display, but also a reseller & integrator of NEC's latest technologies.
SONY BDP-S1200 Region Code Free Blu Ray DVD Player
SONY BDP-S1200 Multi Zone All Region Code Free Blu Ray DVD - CD Disc Player - 100~240V 50/60Hz Auto, Our Region Free Blu-ray & DVD players allow you to play DVDs and Blu-ray Discs from any region in the world. We use the best of the best ICOS-HD. All of our players use state of the art FPGA hardware technology that allows for future firmware updates. As well as they all include the built in NTSC PAL Conversion this means that you do not need a special TV or an external video converter Our HD-ICOS hardware players use the best 1:1 digital PAL/NTSC conversion.


text:
Live action RPG at its best. Choose from 3 classes and battle over 60 different enemies as you quest for gear, gold, and the alligences of your allies.
Either scripts and active content are not permitted to run or Adobe Flash Player version
13.0.0 or greater is not installed.
Slay monsters. Complete quests. Level up. All to save the world!
Is this game not working? Any suggestions? Send your comments.


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
June 30, 1995
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,v.CEDRIC PETERSON AND WILLIAM CASTILE, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
Rehearing Denied July 31, 1995.
Presiding Justice Scariano delivered the opinion of the court: DiVITO, J., concurs in part and dissents in part. McCORMICK, J., concurs in part and dissents in part.
PRESIDING JUSTICE SCARIANO delivered the opinion of the court:
This case arose out of a shooting incident on June 6, 1992, in which a bystander, 68-year-old Reverend Daniel Vinson, was wounded. Defendants Cedric Peterson and William Castile were subsequently indicted on charges of armed violence (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, par. 33A-2 now codified at 720 ILCS 5/33A-2 (West 1993)); attempt first degree murder (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, pars. 8-4, 9-1 now codified at 720 ILCS 5/8-4, 5/9-1 (West 1993)); aggravated battery of a senior citizen (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, par. 12-4.6(a) now codified at 720 ILCS 5/12-4.6(a) (West 1993)); aggravated battery with a firearm (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, par. 12-4.2 now codified at 720 ILCS 5/12-4.2 (West 1993)); and aggravated discharge of a firearm (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, par. 24-1.2(a)(2) now codified at 720 ILCS 5/24-1.2(a)(2) (West 1993)). Defendants were tried in a joint bench trial.
Reverend Vinson testified that on June 6, 1992, he was director of the Outreach Mission Christian Center in the City of Chicago and that he managed the Outreach Mission Car Wash at 3519 West Madison Street. At about 1:30 p.m. on that day, he was seated in front of the car wash with Dorothy Harris, a bookkeeper, and Peterson, whom Reverend Vinson knew from the neighborhood.
While Reverend Vinson and Harris were doing book work, Peterson approached Castile on the street and told him to get out of his territory. Castile, whom Reverend Vinson also knew, responded by saying, "Get out of my face. I'll blow you away. Peterson opened his coat and stated, "Blow me away. I don't have anything." As Peterson started to walk back to the car wash, he suddenly turned around, fell to one knee, and drew a gun. Peterson and Castile then began shooting at each other. At this time, Peterson was about five feet away from Reverend Vinson and Castile was about 10 feet away. Reverend Vinson heard six or eight shots fired in quick succession, and saw both Peterson and Castile fire their guns, although he could not tell who fired first. As they fired, Castile chased Peterson through the car wash and "everybody went to run."
At that time, Reverend Vinson realized that he had been shot. He flagged down a car and had the driver take him to the hospital where he was treated for a bullet wound in his right elbow. No bullet was removed from his arm, but he spent six hours in the hospital where he was given a tetanus shot, but no stitches, because the doctor hoped to prevent an infection by allowing the wound to drain. Reverend Vinson has a one-half-to-one-inch scar on his elbow as a result of the wound.
On cross-examination, Reverend Vinson stated that the "first thing I heard that immediately got my attention" was Castile's comment that he would blow away Peterson. He recalled that Peterson was facing away from him during the first several shots, but that he was running through the car wash when Reverend Vinson first noticed blood on his elbow.
Also on cross-examination, Reverend Vinson contradicted his earlier testimony by recalling that Peterson fired the first shot and that Castile hid behind a box situated in front of the car wash and fired back. However, on redirect examination, Reverend Vinson reiterated that he was unsure who fired the first shot.
At the time of the shooting, Officer Tony DiCristofano was making a traffic stop at 45 South Homan, around the corner from the car wash. He heard several shots coming from the alley behind Madison and observed Castile chasing Peterson through the alley. When he ordered Castile to drop his gun, he complied. Officer DiCristofano observed that there were four spent cartridges and one live cartridge in the gun. A few minutes later, Peterson was arrested. Peterson initially denied having a gun, but then told the police that he had hidden it in an air vent at a Chicago Housing Authority (C.H.A.) building. The officers found the gun and Officer DiCristofano noticed that it had one spent cartridge and four live cartridges in its cylinder. Both Peterson and Castile admitted shooting at each other, but denied intending to shoot Reverend Vinson.
Peterson gave a statement which was published without objection and was admitted into evidence against only him. In it, he stated that about three weeks earlier he had lost $150 in a dice game and that he borrowed the money from Castile. On the day of the shooting, he paid Castile $160 after Castile asked for repayment of the loan plus $10. Peterson then retrieved a gun from the car wash where he had hidden it and placed it in his waistband. As Castile and some others were walking towards the car wash, Peterson told Castile to stop threatening him. Castile responded that they should stop arguing and shake hands before they killed each other. After they shook hands, Castile pulled out his gun and shot at Peterson. Peterson simultaneously pulled a gun and fired at Castile. Castile fired three or four times and Peterson fired three times. Peterson ran into the car wash as they fired at each other, and Castile followed him. Peterson knew that other people, including Reverend Vinson, were at the car wash while he and Castile were shooting. Peterson further stated that he ran through the car wash and hid his gun in a vent in the laundry room of a C.H.A. building and then left the building. The police spotted him and eventually arrested him.
Castile also made a statement after he had been treated for a bullet wound to his knee. The statement was admitted into evidence against only Castile and was published without objection. According to Castile, in the afternoon of June 6, 1992, he was in Garfield Park across from the car wash when his friend, Peterson, approached him. He asked Peterson to repay him the $160 that he had lent him. Castile said that they argued over the money. At one point, Peterson reached under his clothes as if he were reaching for a gun and told Castile to stop "messing" with him.
Peterson then walked across the street to the car wash. Shortly afterwards, Castile began to walk to the tavern next to the car wash and Peterson called out to him, asking why he was still "messing" with him. Castile said that they should stop fighting and shake hands before they hurt each other. They then shook hands and Castile began to walk towards the tavern. At that point, Peterson jumped up and pulled out a handgun. Castile ran behind a box and pulled out his gun. Peterson fired three shots, one of which hit Castile. Castile fired two shots. Castile was aware that other people were at the car wash during the shooting, including Reverend Vinson. Peterson fled into the car wash and shot from there. Castile followed him and was arrested as he exited from the back of the car wash.
After the State rested, both defendants moved for a "directed" finding (despite the fact that they were tried in a bench trial). The court granted the motion only on the attempt first degree murder charge, denying it as to all other charges. The judge did not elucidate the basis for his ruling.
Peterson testified that he knew Castile for about nine or 10 years prior to June 1992. He stated that Castile had a reputation as a killer and a threatening and dangerous person. Counsel for Castile objected to this testimony, but the trial court overruled his objections. Peterson went on to testify, over Castile's counsel's objection, that Castile had shot him in 1991. Castile's counsel then moved for a severance, stating, "I was not aware this was going to happen." The trial court denied his motion, noting that he would have an opportunity to cross-examine Peterson.
Peterson testified further that when Castile approached him in the park and asked for the $160, he motioned, revealing a gun in his jacket, and Peterson interpreted this gesture as a threat. He got the money and paid Castile. He then got his gun from the car wash because he was fearful that Castile would start shooting. When he and Castile shook hands in front of the car wash, they "said a couple more words to one another" and Castile then threatened to blow him away. Peterson recalled that they pulled their guns simultaneously and that he drew his gun because he was scared. Castile fired first and he returned fire only once. When he fired, he was facing Castile, not Reverend Vinson. Peterson ran away when he saw a police car coming.
On cross-examination by the State, Peterson acknowledged that even though he believed that Castile was a threatening person, he borrowed money from him. He also admitted that he did not tell the police that Castile shot him in 1991 and that he did not go home, leave the area, or contact the police when Castile threatened him on June 6, 1992.
When cross-examined by Castile's counsel, Peterson denied that Castile had lent him money on other occasions or that he helped him get bond money when he was charged with first degree murder in a different case. Peterson said that before the shooting, he put his gun in the front of his belt and denied that he opened his coat to show Castile he had no weapon.
After Peterson rested, the State and Castile entered a stipulation that Castile was treated for a through-and-through gunshot wound to the left knee in the afternoon of June 6, 1992. Castile then rested.
The judge found both defendants guilty of aggravated discharge of a firearm, aggravated battery with a firearm, armed violence, and aggravated battery of a senior citizen. He also found that self-defense was not applicable because "it was in fact a mutual combat situation." *fn1
Both defendants filed motions for a new trial, but the judge denied them. The judge stated that each defendant performed conscious and deliberate acts which caused Reverend Vinson's injury. He went on to note that while it would never be known whose bullet injured Reverend Vinson, each defendant was equally responsible for the injury.
The judge sentenced Castile to nine years in the custody of the Illinois Department of Corrections for aggravated battery with a firearm and seven years for aggravated battery of a senior citizen and aggravated discharge of a firearm, the sentences to run concurrently. He sentenced Peterson to concurrent sentences of eight years for aggravated battery with a firearm and seven years for aggravated discharge of a firearm and aggravated battery of a senior citizen. Defendants' armed violence convictions merged. They now appeal.
The State correctly agrees with defendants that their convictions for aggravated battery of a senior citizen must be vacated under the one-act-one-crime rule. We therefore find that analysis of issues relating to those charges is unnecessary. See People v. Tayborn (1993), 254 Ill. App. 3d 381, 391, 627 N.E.2d 8, 15, 193 Ill. Dec. 849; People v. Robinson (1993), 250 Ill. App. 3d 824, 829, 619 N.E.2d 1359, 1364, 189 Ill. Dec. 310.
Peterson first contends that since the "overwhelming evidence" indicated that Castile shot Vinson, his conviction was based on accountability. He reasons from this proposition that his convictions must be reversed because he never intended to aid or abet Castile in the commission of a crime. In fact, he and Castile acted as adversaries when they shot at each other. The State counters that Castile and Peterson are equally responsible for shooting Reverend Vinson because they engaged in a course of criminal conduct the foreseeable result of which would be the wounding of a bystander.
Contrary to Peterson's assertion, the evidence is not clear that Castile shot Reverend Vinson. When the shooting began, Peterson's back was to Reverend Vinson, who was sitting near the entrance to the car wash. At some point, however, Peterson turned around to run through the car wash. Peterson indicated in his statement that he and Castile fired at each other as they ran into the car wash. Reverend Vinson testified to the same effect. Thus, Peterson conceivably could have shot Reverend Vinson when he turned to enter the car wash. Since the bullet which hit Reverend Vinson was not found, the judge's finding that it was unknown who actually hit Reverend Vinson was reasonable. See People v. Banks (1994), 260 Ill. App. 3d 464, 469, 632 N.E.2d 257, 261, 198 Ill. Dec. 198 (reiterating the familiar principle that the trier of fact determines the credibility of witnesses, the weight to give their testimony, and reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom).
Peterson contends that he could not possibly have shot Reverend Vinson because he shot Castile in the leg and Officer DiCristofano found only one spent cartridge in his gun. However, the evidence on this point was conflicting. In Peterson's statement, he admitted that he shot three times during the incident. These conflicts in the testimony were for the trial judge, not this court, to resolve. See Banks, 260 Ill. App. 3d at 469, 632 N.E.2d at 261.
Nonetheless, Peterson convincingly argues--at least as to his aggravated battery with a firearm --that there is insufficient evidence to sustain that conviction. Although Castile does not make this argument on appeal, he argued in the trial court and in his post-trial motion that his guilt was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. We therefore consider the sufficiency of the evidence as to each defendant. See People v. Lopez (1993), 242 Ill. App. 3d 160, 162, 610 N.E.2d 189, 191, 182 Ill. Dec. 765 (although waived, sufficiency of the evidence issues can be considered on review as an exception to the waiver rule); see also People v. Starnes (1980), 88 Ill. App. 3d 1141, 1143, 411 N.E.2d 125, 127, 44 Ill. Dec. 219.
Our supreme court has instructed that
"the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment [citation] protects an accused against conviction except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime for which he is charged. [Citation.] When presented with a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, it is [the reviewing] court's function to carefully examine the evidence, giving due consideration to the fact that the court *** saw and heard the witnesses. If, after such consideration, [the] court is of the opinion that the evidence is not sufficient to remove all reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt and is not sufficient to create an abiding conviction that he is guilty of the crime charged, then the conviction must be reversed. [Citations.]" People v. Young (1989), 128 Ill. 2d 1, 48, 538 N.E.2d 461, 472.
On review of a sufficiency of the evidence issue, the appellate court must view all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution. The relevant inquiry is whether any rational trier of fact could have found that the State established every material element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. People v. Collins (1985), 106 Ill. 2d 237, 261, 478 N.E.2d 267, 276-77, 87 Ill. Dec. 910.
Accountability was not argued at trial by the State nor was it mentioned by the judge when he convicted defendants. Undoubtedly, the State was cognizant that accountability requires a showing that the offender intended to promote or facilitate the commission of a crime, and that such intent is usually proven by showing that the accomplice shared a community of purpose or common design with the principal. See People v. Hodge (1993), 250 Ill. App. 3d 736, 744, 620 N.E.2d 651, 658, 189 Ill. Dec. 683, appeal denied (1994), 154 Ill. 2d 564, 631 N.E.2d 713; see also Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991 ch. 38, par. 5-2(c) now codified at 720 ILCS 5/5-2(c) (West 1993) (one is accountable when "either before or during the commission of an offense, and with the intent to promote or facilitate such commission, he solicits, aids, abets, agrees or attempts to aid, such other person in the planning or commission of the offense."). The principal attribute of accountability is the showing of affirmative conduct by an accomplice that in some way aids, encourages or incites another to commit a crime. (John F. Decker, 1 Illinois Criminal Law § 3.06, at 3-10 (2d ed. 1993).) We have found no case where, as in the case at bar, defendants who acted at cross purposes, spontaneously shooting at each other, were held accountable for each other's conduct.
The State argues on appeal that defendants define accountability too narrowly and that the supreme court in People v. Stanciel (1992), 153 Ill. 2d 218, 606 N.E.2d 1201, 180 Ill. Dec. 124, found that accountability was applicable even though there was no common criminal design. In Stanciel, two mothers were convicted of murdering their children based on an accountability theory when their boyfriends' abuse of the children resulted in their death. In each case, the mother entrusted the care of her child to her boyfriend despite knowledge of his abusive behavior. The defendants argued that the State was required to show that they had the specific intent to promote or facilitate the crime. However, the supreme court held that "accountability, tied as it is to the crime charged, must comport with the requirements of that crime", and that the State was therefore required to show that each defendant possessed the requisite general intent for the crime of murder. ( Stanciel, 153 Ill. 2d at 234, 606 N.E.2d at 1210.) The court went on to hold that the defendants' shared intent could be demonstrated through evidence of a common criminal design. Contrary to the State's representation of the opinion, however, the court expressly concluded that each defendant shared a common criminal design with the principal, as evidenced by each woman's allowing her boyfriend to care for her child despite knowledge of the abuse. Stanciel, 153 Ill. 2d at 235, 606 N.E.2d at 1210-11.
In the present case, there is no evidence that either defendant aided and abetted the other in furtherance of a common criminal design. The judge agreed with the State that both defendants could be convicted on the battery charges based upon the proof that one of them must have shot Reverend Vinson. This reasoning overlooks the State's burden to prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. (See People v. Gibson (1990), 205 Ill. App. 3d 361, 562 N.E.2d 1142, 150 Ill. Dec. 339.) The elements of aggravated battery with a firearm are found in the statute defining the offense which provides that "any person who, in committing a battery, knowingly causes any injury to another by means of the discharging of a firearm, commits aggravated battery with a firearm." (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38 par. 12-4.2(a) now codified at 720 ILCS 5/12-4.2(a) (West 1993).) A battery occurs when a person "intentionally or knowingly without legal justification and by any means, (1) causes bodily harm to an individual or (2) makes physical contact of an insulting or provoking nature with an individual." (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, par. 12-3 now codified at 720 ILCS 5/12-3 (West 1993).) The indictment charges each defendant with "knowingly causing injury and bodily harm to Daniel Vinson by shooting him about the body with a gun ***."
Although the State merely alludes to the doctrine of transferred intent, we have considered whether it is applicable in the instant case and we hold that it is not. Under that doctrine, "where someone in the commission of a wrongful act commits another wrong not intended, or where in the execution of an intent to do wrong, an unintended act resulting in a wrong ensued as a natural and probable consequence, the one acting with a wrongful intent is responsible for the unintended wrong." ( People v. Psichalinos (1992), 229 Ill. App. 3d 1058, 1067, 594 N.E.2d 1374, 1381, 171 Ill. Dec. 854.) We attribute the State's cursory treatment of transferred intent to an implicit recognition of the fact that because we cannot ascertain which defendant committed the unintended wrong, we cannot apply the doctrine to hold both guilty. Compare Psichalinos, 229 Ill. App. 3d at 1067-68, 594 N.E.2d at 1381 (holding that when the defendant attempted to strike his intended victim, but actually struck his child, the requisite intent was transferred to the child and he was appropriately found guilty of aggravated battery of a child).
Since we have held that accountability and transferred intent are inapplicable in the case at bar, we are compelled to hold also that there is a reasonable doubt as to each defendant's guilt in committing a battery on Reverend Vinson, although clearly one defendant did shoot him. See People v. Rothermel (1982), 88 Ill. 2d 541, 544, 431 N.E.2d 378, 380, 59 Ill. Dec. 93; People v. Handzik (1951), 410 Ill. 295, 307, 102 N.E.2d 340, 346 ("As a general rule, it is elementary that the State is required to prove every essential averment of the charge against the defendant[]") cert. denied (1952), 343 U.S. 927, 96 L. Ed. 1337, 72 S.Ct. 760; see also John F. Decker, 1 Illinois Criminal Law § 9.17 (2d ed. 1993).
Although not cited by any party, we find People v. Lopez (1979), 72 Ill. App. 3d 713, 391 N.E.2d 105, 28 Ill. Dec. 906, on point. In Lopez, the defendants, identical twin brothers, were convicted of attempt murder and aggravated battery arising from a shooting incident. They were with several people in a car when one of their companions got out of the car and threatened a group leaving a store across the street. A witness saw both defendants exit the car; one of them had a gun. He chased a man into a hallway and shot, wounding two men. His brother, meanwhile, remained across the street. There was no testimony identifying which twin fired his gun and which stayed near the car. However, it was clear that one of the brothers shot the victims. Lopez, 72 Ill. App. 3d at 716, 391 N.E.2d at 106-07.
We found that the defendants were not guilty under an accountability theory as urged by the State because there was no evidence that the defendant who stayed near the car had any knowledge that a crime was planned or that he "voluntarily attached" himself to the group with the knowledge that they were going to engage in illegal conduct. ( Lopez, 72 Ill. App. 3d at 717, 391 N.E.2d at 108.) We accordingly reversed the judgments against both defendants because the State failed to prove which brother fired the gun. Lopez, 72 Ill. App. 3d at 717, 391 N.E.2d at 108.
Similarly, in the present case, accountability is inapplicable and, although one of the defendants shot Reverend Vinson, the State failed to show which one and thus, failed to prove either guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of aggravated battery with a firearm. (See Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, par. 12-3 now codified at 720 ILCS 5/12-3 (West 1993); see People v. Bowman (1971), 132 Ill. App. 2d 744, 270 N.E.2d 285 (reversing the defendant's conviction of battery when the evidence indicated that he did not strike or make any contact at all with the victim and he could not be held accountable for his codefendant's conduct).) While the State may have proven defendants guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on another charge, such as aggravated assault (see Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, par. 12-2(a)(13) now codified at 720 ILCS 5/12-2(a)(13) (West 1993)), it did not choose to pursue that theory of prosecution; nor are we empowered to find defendants guilty on a more appropriate charge. See Fagan v. Washington (7th Cir. 1991), 942 F.2d 1155, 1160 (commenting that "the State must live with the consequences of having proceeded on a theory that it could not establish with the certitude required in criminal cases[]").
The Illinois cases the State relies on to support its contention that the identity of the shooter is irrelevant are inapposite, because in each, the State successfully utilized a theory of prosecution which rendered such proof unnecessary. E.g., People v. Stanciel (1992), 153 Ill. 2d 218, 606 N.E.2d 1201, 180 Ill. Dec. 124 and People v. Bolden (1978), 59 Ill. App. 3d 441, 375 N.E.2d 898, 16 Ill. Dec. 791 (accountability); People v. Allen (1974), 56 Ill. 2d 536, 309 N.E.2d 544, cert. denied (1974), 419 U.S. 865, 42 L. Ed. 2d 102, 95 S.Ct. 120 and People v. Hickman (1974), 59 Ill. 2d 89, 319 N.E.2d 511, cert. denied (1975), 421 U.S. 913, 43 L. Ed. 2d 779, 95 S.Ct. 1571 (felony-murder).
The State urges us to consider State v. Lilliston (N.C. 1906), 141 N.C. 857, 54 S.E. 427, contending that it presents a similar factual situation. In that case, the defendant became involved in a gunfight with another man after they argued. The two fought it out at a crowded railroad station and, as a result, one bystander was killed and another wounded. The reviewing court affirmed his murder conviction. However, in Lilliston, unlike the case at bar, there was evidence that the defendant's bullet killed the bystander. ( Lilliston, 54 S.E. at 428-29.) Thus, Lilliston does not provide support for the State's position.
Accordingly, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we hold that the evidence was insufficient to convict defendants of aggravated battery with a firearm. Consequently, we reverse those convictions. *fn2
The above discussion does not apply to the charge of aggravated discharge of a firearm. On that charge, the State needed to prove only that each defendant knowingly "discharged a firearm in the direction of another person", Reverend Vinson. (See Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38 par. 24-1.2(a)(1) now codified at 720 ILCS 5/24-1.2(a)(1) (West 1993).) The State was not required to prove that the defendants actually shot a person.
Each defendant next contends that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he acted in self-defense. Each also reasons that because he was acting in self-defense, he could not be guilty of any offense relating to the injury sustained by Reverend Vinson. See People v. Whitelow (1987), 162 Ill. App. 3d 626, 631, 515 N.E.2d 1327, 1330, 114 Ill. Dec. 56, appeal denied (1988), 119 Ill. 2d 573, 522 N.E.2d 1254, 119 Ill. Dec. 395.
When a defendant presents some evidence of the elements of the affirmative defense of self-defense, the burden shifts to the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that issue as well as the other elements of the offense. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, par. 3-2 now codified at 720 ILCS 5/3-2 (West 1993); People v. Luke (1993), 253 Ill. App. 3d 136, 141, 625 N.E.2d 352, 356, 192 Ill. Dec. 392; People v. McGrath (1989), 193 Ill. App. 3d 12, 26, 549 N.E.2d 843, 852, 140 Ill. Dec. 192. The elements of self-defense include: (1) that force was threatened against the defendant; (2) that the defendant was not the aggressor; (3) that the danger of harm or injury was imminent; (4) that the threatened force was unlawful; (5) that the defendant actually believed that (a) danger existed, (b) that force was needed to avoid the danger, (c) that the type and amount of force used was required; and (6) that the defendant's beliefs were reasonable. People v. Harmon (1990), 200 Ill. App. 3d 411, 413, 558 N.E.2d 173, 174, 146 Ill. Dec. 210.
If, in the view of the trier of fact, the State negates any of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, it has carried its burden of disproving the defense. ( Harmon, 200 Ill. App. 3d at 413, 558 N.E.2d at 174.) A reviewing court may not disturb the trier of fact's determination that the defendant was not acting in self-defense unless that conclusion is so unreasonable or improbable that a reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt lingers. (See People v. Felella (1989), 131 Ill. 2d 525, 533-34, 546 N.E.2d 492, 495, 137 Ill. Dec. 547). Furthermore, when the only evidence of self-defense is the defendant's testimony, the trier of fact has discretion to accord that testimony less weight because of its self-serving character. Luke, 253 Ill. App. 3d at 142, 625 N.E.2d at 357; see also Harmon, 200 Ill. App. 3d at 413-14, 558 N.E.2d at 174.
In Peterson's case, the evidence of self-defense consisted of his testimony that Castile had a reputation as a killer and as a dangerous and threatening person and that he had shot Peterson a year earlier. He also testified that he felt threatened when Castile asked him to pay on his debt and that Castile made movements toward his gun at that time. He claimed that he drew his gun because he was frightened.
However, on cross-examination, Peterson testified that he had known Castile for nine or 10 years, that he approached him for the loan, and that he never reported the earlier shooting to the police. He further conceded that he did not go home after paying the money or contact police to report Castile's threatening behavior. Reverend Vinson indicated that he was shocked by the shooting because they had all been friends. He also testified that Peterson warned Castile to stay out of his territory as Castile was approaching the car wash. Furthermore, in his statement, Peterson indicated that he and Castile pulled their guns simultaneously.
The issue of self-defense thus rested on the credibility of the witnesses, a determination for the trial judge. ( Banks, 260 Ill. App. 3d at 469, 632 N.E.2d at 261.) Ample evidence supports the conclusion that Peterson was not in fear of imminent danger and that he and Castile were both aggressors. We accordingly find no error in the trial judge's determination that Peterson did not act in self-defense.
The judge's determination that Castile did not act in self-defense was equally well-founded. Castile claims that when he told Peterson to get his "stuff", he was "making an offer to engage in combat at some future time when Mr. Peterson became armed." When Peterson suddenly turned around with his weapon drawn, Castile shot in response to a "deliberate sneak attack."
However, Reverend Vinson testified that in response to Peterson's warning to stay off of his territory, Castile, who was armed, stated that he would blow him away. Reverend Vinson was unsure who shot first. Additionally, Reverend Vinson and Officer DiCristofano corroborated Castile's statement that he chased Peterson through the car wash. Thus, even if Castile initially shot in self-defense, he lost the benefit of that defense when he became the aggressor by pursuing Peterson rather than retreating. (See People v. Johnson (1975), 33 Ill. App. 3d 957, 961, 338 N.E.2d 895, 899.) We consequently find no merit to Castile's claim that he acted in self-defense.
Defendants next argue that the aggravated discharge of a firearm statute is unconstitutional. Although they concede that we have addressed and rejected their arguments on this issue in People v. James (1993), 246 Ill. App. 3d 939, 617 N.E.2d 115, 186 Ill. Dec. 876, they now urge us to reject James. *fn3 However, since the analysis in that case was based on the clear language and purpose of the statute, we decline to reconsider our conclusion that the aggravated discharge of a firearm statute is constitutional. See James, 246 Ill. App. 3d 939, 617 N.E.2d 115, 186 Ill. Dec. 876; accord People v. Tucker (1994), 264 Ill. App. 3d 923, 637 N.E.2d 477, 201 Ill. Dec. 888.
Peterson argues that if we find the statute constitutional, the State failed to prove him guilty of that charge. He contends that even if he fired more than once, he aimed only at Castile, and not in the direction of Reverend Vinson. The State counters that both defendants were equally guilty of firing in the direction of Reverend Vinson if "either or both defendants fired shots in [his] direction ***."
As noted above, the defendant is guilty of aggravated discharge of a firearm if "he knowingly discharges a firearm in the direction of another person ***." (720 ILCS 5/24-1.2(a)(2) (West 1993); see also People v. Hartfield (No. 1-92-4057, 1st. Dist., 2d Div., September 13, 1994).) "Knowingly" is defined as a mental state in which one acts with knowledge of "the result of his conduct, described by the statute defining the offense, when he is consciously aware that such result is practically certain to be caused by his conduct." 720 ILCS 5/4-5(b) (West 1993; see also Committee Comments 720 ILCS 5/4-3 (West 1993).
Peterson finds support for his claim in Hartfield. In that case, the defendant drew his gun and ran into a gangway between two buildings. A police detective heard gun shots as he pursued the defendant but never saw the defendant fire his gun. We reversed the defendant's conviction of aggravated discharge of a firearm because there was no evidence that the defendant aimed his gun at the detective.
Unlike Hartfield, in the present case there was evidence that Peterson shot as he ran into the car wash knowing that Reverend Vinson was nearby. Peterson admitted in his statement that he and Castile were shooting outside of the car wash and as they ran through it. Reverend Vinson testified that Castile and Peterson were still shooting when they entered the car wash. Since Peterson had to turn around to enter the car wash and was still shooting as he did so, the trial judge's conclusion that he shot in the direction of Reverend Vinson was supported by the evidence. We therefore affirm Peterson's conviction of aggravated discharge of a firearm.
Finally, Castile argues that the denial of his motion for a severance made during Peterson's testimony was "damaging" and forced him to defend himself against Peterson, as well as the State.
Defendants who are jointly indicted are jointly tried unless one defendant will be prejudiced by, for example, antagonistic defenses. ( People v. Brown (1989), 194 Ill. App. 3d 958, 963, 553 N.E.2d 712, 715-16, 143 Ill. Dec. 5, appeal denied (1990), 133 Ill. 2d 561, 561 N.E.2d 696.) Generally, a defendant must move for a severance prior to trial, demonstrating how he or she will be prejudiced in a joint trial; mere anticipation of prejudice is not sufficient to justify separate trials. (See People v. Hall (1987), 164 Ill. App. 3d 770, 781, 518 N.E.2d 275, 283, 115 Ill. Dec. 750, appeal denied (1988), 121 Ill. 2d 576, 526 N.E.2d 835 and cert. denied (1988), 488 U.S. 867, 102 L. Ed. 2d 143, 109 S.Ct. 174.) The propriety of a trial judge's ruling on a motion to sever is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. ( People v. Appold (1976), 39 Ill. App. 3d 814, 815, 350 N.E.2d 511, 512.) Moreover, in a bench trial, it is presumed that the judge can exclude from consideration any improper evidence. Brown, 194 Ill. App. 3d at 963, 553 N.E.2d at 716.
The State contends that Castile waived this issue by not requesting a severance prior to trial. However, when Castile's counsel moved for a severance, he indicated that he was surprised by Peterson's testimony. The trial judge considered the motion without objection by the State and we accordingly consider this claim of error.
On the merits of Castile's claim, he has not shown that reversal is required because he suffered no prejudice as a result of the trial court's denial of his motion. Peterson was effectively cross-examined by Castile's counsel, bringing his veracity into question. This is evident from the fact that the trial judge expressly rejected Peterson's self-defense claim. Consequently, there is no reason to abandon the presumption that the trial judge considered only proper evidence in assessing Castile's case. See Brown, 194 Ill. App. 3d at 963, 553 N.E.2d at 716).
Based upon the foregoing, we vacate defendants' aggravated battery of a senior citizen convictions and reverse their aggravated battery with a firearm convictions. We affirm their aggravated discharge of a firearm convictions and remand their cases to the trial court for resentencing.
Vacated in part, reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded.
DiVITO, J., concurs in part and dissents in part.
McCORMICK, J., concurs in part and dissents in part.
The Honorable Justice DiVITO, concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur with the majority's vacatur of defendants' convictions for aggravated battery of a senior citizen under the one-act, one-crime rule; with its affirmance of defendants' convictions for aggravated discharge of a firearm; and with its holding that the aggravated discharge of a firearm statute is constitutional. I respectfully dissent, however, from its reversal of defendants' convictions for aggravated battery with a firearm and from its judgment remanding the cases to the circuit court for resentencing.
When two persons are illegally shooting at each other (committing the felony of aggravated discharge of a weapon) and one of them inadvertently shoots an innocent bystander, it is unacceptable that neither should be considered culpable because it cannot be determined whose bullet wounded the victim. Such a conclusion is inconsistent with the well-established principle that a "defendant is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of his acts." People v. Terrell (1989), 132 Ill. 2d 178, 204, 547 N.E.2d 145, 156, 138 Ill. Dec. 176, cert. denied (1990), 459 U.S. 959, 109 L. Ed. 2d 749, 110 S. Ct. 2567.
One natural and probable consequence of two people shooting at each other is that someone is going to get shot.
The majority states that it has found no case where, as here, defendants shooting at each other were held accountable for each other's conduct. Nonetheless, we should so hold in this case. One is accountable for the actions of another when "either before or during the commission of an offense, and with the intent to promote or facilitate such commission, he solicits, aids, abets, agrees or attempts to aid, such other person in the planning or commission of the offense." (720 ILCS 5/5-2(c) (West 1992).) The majority correctly states that "the principal attribute of accountability is the showing of affirmative conduct by an accomplice that in some way aids, encourages or incites another to commit a crime." Unlike the majority, however, I would hold that, when someone is shot, each of the participants in an illegal gun fight is guilty of aggravated battery with a firearm both by his own actions and by accountability for the actions of the other. There can be no gunfight without at least two participants, and each participant aids and abets the others in furtherance of a common criminal design.
Further, I would also hold the doctrine of transferred intent applicable to this case. Since I would hold each defendant culpable by reason of accountability for the actions of the other, it does not matter which of the defendants actually fired the bullet that struck Reverend Vinson. Whichever one did so is guilty of aggravated battery with a firearm based on the doctrine of transferred intent, and the other is guilty of aggravated battery with a firearm based on a combination of accountability for the actions of the other and the other's transferred intent.
I disagree with the majority that People v. Lopez (1979), 72 Ill. App. 3d 713, 391 N.E.2d 105, 28 Ill. Dec. 906, is on point. We should not compare that case, where one of the defendants had to be not guilty, to this one, where each might be held responsible for the natural and probable consequences of his actions.
I understand that virtually all of the cases treating factual situations analogous to this one address the issue in terms of accountability or felony murder. Some of the language from the felony murder cases, however, supports the State's position here. In Terrell, for example, our supreme court held that the murder in that case was sustainable "under any or all three sections of the murder statute." ( Terrell, 132 Ill. 2d at 204, 547 N.E.2d at 155.) In People v. Rosochacki (1969), 41 Ill. 2d 483, 244 N.E.2d 136, the supreme court approved jury instructions on all three versions of murder even though the defendant in that case was charged only with intentional murder. (Seealso People v. Allen (1974), 56 Ill. 2d 536, 309 N.E.2d 544, cert. denied (1974), 419 U.S. 865, 42 L. Ed. 2d 102, 95 S. Ct. 120.) Given those cases, the State's argument here should not be dismissed simply by stating that the cases it cites are dependent on felony murder, as the majority does.
In People v. Brackett (1987), 117 Ill. 2d 170, 510 N.E.2d 877, 109 Ill. Dec. 809, an 85 year-old woman died as a result of choking on her food one month after she had been beaten and raped by the defendant. The defendant was held responsible for her death because her injuries precluded insertion of a nasal feeding tube and caused her to be unable to expel food lodged in her trachea. The supreme court discussed the natural consequences of the defendant's actions and the fact that the defendant was not relieved of responsibility for murder because he could not foresee the precise manner of the victim's death. In commenting on the issue of causation and the deference to be afforded the fact finder's conclusions, the court employed words that apply equally well here:
"Causal relationship is a question of fact which should be left to the trier of fact [citation], and we will not disturb this verdict unless this evidence is so unreasonable, improbable and unsatisfactory as to leave a reasonable doubt as to defendant's guilt [citation]." Brackett, 117 Ill. 2d at 177, 510 N.E.2d at 813.
I would affirm the judgments for aggravated battery with a firearm.
The Honorable Justice McCORMICK, concurring in part and dissenting in part:
The record before the court on this appeal supports none of the convictions under review. Therefore, I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion affirming defendants' convictions for aggravated discharge of a firearm.
The majority gives short shrift to defendant Castille's self-defense argument; however, an examination of our case law on self-defense indicates that he was acting in self-defense when he either returned defendant Peterson's gunfire or initiated the gun battle after Peterson pulled his gun on Castille. Even ignoring both defendants' statements, Reverend Vinson's testimony clearly established that Peterson drew a gun on Castille. That Castille may have said some fighting words prior to Peterson's act does not alter the fact that (1) unlawful force was threatened against Castille; (2) Castille was not the aggressor; (3) the danger of harm was imminent; (4) Castille believed that a danger existed and that the use of force was necessary; and (5) Castille's belief was reasonable. Thus, the State was required to disprove at least one of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt. ( People v. Rodriguez (1994), 258 Ill. App. 3d 579, 582, 631 N.E.2d 427.) It did not do so.
Indeed, the majority acknowledges that Castille was acting in self-defense when he began firing. Nonetheless, the majority insists that he became an aggressor because he chased Peterson through the car wash while firing his gun. I recognize that for a defendant to maintain a claim of self-defense, he may not become the aggressor after initially being the nonaggressor. ( People v. De Oca (1992), 238 Ill. App. 3d 362, 606 N.E.2d 332, 179 Ill. Dec. 500.) However, when Castille ran into the car wash, any allegation that he was committing the offense of aggravated discharge of a firearm, as charged in the indictment against him, fails. The State charged Castille with "knowingly discharging a firearm in the direction of Donald Vinson. " (Emphasis added.) The State did not charge Castille with firing his gun at Peterson, yet when he was running through the car wash, he was no longer firing in the direction of Reverend Vinson. Whether he was the aggressor or defender at this point is irrelevant because Castille was not indicted for firing at Peterson.
As to Peterson, the majority holds that the accountability and transferred intent doctrines do not apply in this case. I agree, but given this, the State plainly failed to carry its burden of proving that Peterson discharged his firearm in the direction of Reverend Vinson, as alleged in the indictment. The photographic evidence in the record establishes that Vinson was sitting in a chair in front of the wall next to the open garage-sized door of the car wash. Vinson testified that when Peterson opened fire, Peterson's back was to Vinson. Thus, the crime of firing a gun in Vinson's direction could not have been accomplished at this juncture. ( People v. Hartfield (1994), 266 Ill. App. 3d 607, 608-09, 640 N.E.2d 39, 203 Ill. Dec. 612.) Acknowledging this, the majority concludes that when Castille and Peterson ran through the car wash, shots continuing to ring out, Peterson must have been firing in Vinson's direction, although nobody saw Peterson firing backwards as he ran through the car wash. When Peterson's gun was recovered minutes later, it contained only one spent shell. The evidence fairly shows that the bullet from that casing was fired at Castille and passed through his leg. Hartfield holds that a conviction for aggravated discharge of a firearm cannot stand under such circumstances, e.g., where a witness hears gunshots, but does not see either from where they emanated or in what direction they were aimed. ( Hartfield, 266 Ill. App. 3d at 609.) On the evidence presented, Peterson did not fire in Vinson's direction. Only Castille did so. Certainly, Peterson could have been charged with firing at Castille. Inexplicably, he was not. That error does not justify sustaining an unsupported conviction.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
Kuryakyn - Iso-Pegs And Shift Pegs
- Give you a custom look and dampen vibration
- Interchangeable ends allow use on early- or late-style footpeg mounts
- Hollow-core neoprene inserts are long lasting
- Small peg measures 11/4" in diameter x 45/8" long
- Large peg measures 11/2" in diameter x 47/8" long
- Longhorn peg measures 11/4" in diameter x 53/4" long
- Dually peg measures 21/2" wide x 5" long
- Matching pegs, brake pedal pads and stirrups are available separately
- Footpegs sold in pairs; shifter pegs sold each
- NOTE: Will not fit 13-14 XL1200X/XL1200V/XL1200C models.
- NOTE: ISO-Pegs components are not compatible with other footpegs such as the Soft-Ride style.
Shipping Information
- Item Requires Shipping
- 73.0 lbs.
- W15.0000" x H8.0000" x L108.0000"
Aftermarket Product Use
By checking the box and clicking continue below, the individual acknowledges and agrees to the following terms and conditions:
In order for performance components to be listed "for use on a public highway" there is an approval process that needs to be met. This approval process varies based on the component (e.g. the process for a head lamp bulb and an exhaust system is entirely different). If a product manufacturer opts not to obtain approval for use on a public highway, the part is labeled and is intended for "off-road use only".
Performance components that have been approved for use on a public roads are badged on www.fuelmotousa.com with the STREET LEGAL stamp and are U.S. 49-State legal manufacturer declared emissions replacement parts.
Performance components not approved for use on public roads are badged on www.fuelmotousa.com with the OFF-ROAD USE stamp are not legal to use and operate on public roads. Fuel Moto Inc. or www.fuelmotousa.com hold no responsibility either implied or otherwise for mechanical, electrical or other failure when using any aftermarket performance product. Items sold for off-road use only are not legal in many states and provinces and are not intended for use on a public road.
By purchasing any aftermarket performance product, the customer takes full responsibility for any use, and/or misuse of the product and agrees that Fuel Moto Inc or www.fuelmotousa.com holds no responsibility for any consequences, legal, or other, of such use and/or misuse. The use of performance modifications may violate warranties from the manufacturer of the vehicle or from others. Use of this product for purposes other than solely for competition is a violation of federal law and may violate applicable state or local environmental, motor vehicle and other laws.


text:
This sweet boy was found on the Crabby Daddy's patio charming guests into sharing some of their fish with him. He loves a treat but really enjoys rubs behind his ears and will even wait on the treat just to get some loving first. Well-mannered, doesn't scratch furniture and was 100% trained with his litter box since the first day I took him home. Although he is still a young tabby he has gone through his biggest growth spurt and will always be a smaller cat.
Thank You!
Your message has been sent to Operation Pets Alive!.
You'll receive a copy, too, at to help you keep track of which pets you've inquired about, and which shelters and rescues you've emailed.
NOTE: Some shelters have physical locations you can visit; some of these shelters may only have pets for a limited time, so please do not wait for a reply—just go visit the shelter! Other organizations are rescue groups run by busy volunteers who may take a while to reply. You can find information about the shelter or rescue group caring for this pet, and their adoption procedures, on the pet's details page on Adopt-a-Pet.com.


text:
Watch Apocalypse, CA: Wry, cynical and full of off-beat humor, 'Apocalypse, CA' is the story of friends as they prepare for certain death at the hands of a massive asteroid, sex-inducing drugs, a three-hundred foot giant, and a horde of other absurd problems.
|December 13, 2011
|Adventure Comedy Fantasy
|Chad Peter
|Shana Gagnon Mark Heiliger Jared Higgins D Kevin Kelly Chandler Morris
Apocalypse, CA (2011) Links
Apocalypse, CA (2011) Comments
Apocalypse, CA (2011) Keywords
Latest Comments
Life After Beth
rawrxja : This was an interesting (awkward) take on the zombie apocalypse. i really...
Life After Beth
rawrxja : This was an interesting (awkward) take on the zombie apocalypse. i really...
A Haunted House 2
lambiyong : a one time watch 3/5
Temptation: Confessions of a Marriage Counselor
mimi0327 : Loved the movie and the lesson learned, it was sad .
Ninja Assassin
KRogue91 : If you're into action and ninjas, James McTeigue brings them both with this...
Captain America: The Winter Soldier
itsjustmejessi : The movie itself is awesome!!!
Teen Beach Movie
CrazyBecky12 : I LOVE THIS MOVIEE!!


text:
The latest review of Joe's solo album Power of Music is here. MODERN ROCK REVIEW
"The album opens strongly with a seven minute plus multi-part mini-suite called "Walk With the Devil". A slowly developing acoustic intro bursts into a heavy electric / piano riff for the song proper, while a later section features dark acoustic with rich harmonized backing vocals...." Ric Albano at Modern Rock Review.
To order a CD or Vinyl LP click here.
Joe's cover of the Blue Öyster Cult song CAREER OF EVIL (CLICK HERE).
Career of Evil is also the title of a new J.K. Rowling book released under her pseudonym Robert Galbraith. This best selling book contains many references to Blue Öyster Cult. The Career of Evil song was written by Patti Smith and Albert Bouchard for Blue Öyster Cult's Secret Treaties album. A movie of the book will be produced by the BBC next year.
On June 17, 2016 I made a rare appearance with Blue Öyster Cult at BB Kings in New York. It was a tribute to our guitar/keyboard player Allen Lanier who passed away in 2013. The song is Hot Rails to Hell which was the second Blue Öyster Cult single from 1973. Click here for the video.


text:
Peter Jackson
Michael J. Fox
Trini Alvarado
Jeffery Combs
Printer-Friendly version
The film boasts a strong cast, most noticeably Michael J. Fox, who does a good job playing against type. His Frank Bannister is an embittered and manipulative fraud, but he's still got that likable Marty McFly quality to him. Jake Busey is equally convincing as a whacked out psychotic (not too shocking considering he's the spawn of Gary Busey). Chi McBride, John Astin and child friendly R. Lee Ermy make for some entertaining ghosts. And look for horror favorite Jeffery Combs, the Re-Animator himself, stealing every scene he's in.
However, the main selling point of THE FRIGHTENERS is the groovy special effects work, especially with the Reaper and other ghouls. For being a decade old, most of the CGI still looks pretty impressive, thanks to the geniuses at WETA. While translucent spirits aren't anything new (darn you Patrick Swayze for setting the bar so high!), the brilliance lies in how Jackson and crew cleverly utilize the effects. The ghosts constantly interact with the live actors so often and seamlessly in such clever ways that you won't think "green screen" for a single second. In THE FRIGHTENERS, it's easy to see the attention to detail and imaginative storytelling that would garner Jackson praise (and multiple Oscars) for the LOTR trilogy.
Side A:
Commentary by Peter Jackson: It's always a pleasure to hear Peter Jackson talk about film. He's got a childlike energy and passion for movies that make his commentaries entertaining and informative. It had been a few years since I'd seen THE FRIGHTENERS and luckily Jackson points out exactly what's new in this director's cut.
[Geek Note: While praising the creative and realistic benefits of CGI, Sir Peter mentions wanting to make another balls-to-the-wall zombie splatter film…to which I say "Bring it on, Mr. Jackson!"]
Storyboards (45:33): Nearly an hour of animated storyboards with intro and commentary by the director. Most of the storyboards are for scenes that they never got to film, either for lack of time or moolah, so this is a nice way to see Jackson's creative side unrestrained.
Side A is capped off by the film's Theatrical Trailer.
Side B:
Making of THE FRIGHTENERS (3:43:21): The pičce de résistance of this DVD is this nearly four hour long documentary that covers every aspect of THE FRIGHTENERS you can imagine. Seriously, try and think of anything related to this movie that you want to know about and I guarantee you its covered (at length) here, including:
- Countless interviews with cast and crew
- Deleted scenes (including The Gatekeeper—an enormously obese, foul mouthed robot baby)
- Bloopers (the best being Michael J. Fox repeatedly calling John Astin's Judge character "Doc")
- In-depth looks at the effects, both digital and practical, for nearly every sequence in the movie
- Character and actor vignettes
- Makeup tests
- Script Development
- Rehearsal footage
- Music
- Stunts
- Real life ghost stories from Jackson and the actors
- Ginormous assloads more…


text:
I am pleased to report that 2010 was another successful year for Spire Healthcare. We were able to increase revenue by £23 million by continuing to focus on investments in our staff, clinical services and equipment. This revenue growth, aligned with our Group buying and purchasing power, enabled us to continue to improve profitability. As a result, Spire was able to record a £169.8 million EBITDAR (pre-exceptional items) with an improvement of 10.5% over 2009. This represents an improvement over the 2007 baseline results of 114.8%.
Improved financial performance – despite the challenge of a global downturn – is testament to the management skills within the company and the hard work and dedication of everyone at Spire. These results have been achieved through our strategy of continuous improvement and investment in equipment, operating theatres, staff and new services, plus a true commitment to managing the performance of key components of the business: service quality, reputation, people and shareholder value, which are all monitored via a balanced scorecard.
The private sector has an important role in the UK healthcare system and, within it, Spire is the second largest private provider of acute care hospital services. We have continued to stay focused upon our core business of private patients, while providing complementary services to the NHS. We believe the private sector will continue to expand in the UK, fuelled by uncertainty around NHS cuts in services, increased waiting times and an increasing desire from patients and doctors for advanced techniques and treatments. We also continue to work very closely with private health insurance companies and assist where we can in helping them to expand their product range and sales in the current environment.
The main focus for Spire in 2010 has been in expanding our facilities and range of services and our growth in this area is impressive. During the year we added a range of new services and increased capacity. This included opening our new £24 million hospital in Edinburgh (Spire Shawfair Park Hospital), acquiring London Fertility Centre and the majority share of The London Cognitive Behaviour Therapy Centres, creating four out-patient clinics and one theatre, and launching additional paediatric, cardiac, spinal surgery and fertility services.
Engagement with doctors and our staff is always a high priority. Our bi-annual national Medical Advisory Committee Chairman's meetings were held in February and June 2010. They provide a valuable forum in which consultant representatives from our hospital teams across the UK can present their views and assist management in formulating clinical strategy.
Over the last three years we have also worked to empower local management and give them autonomy. We believe this has led to higher levels of staff engagement and determination in hospitals to achieve set business goals. We are pleased to say that, during the year, we successfully increased our employees' level of engagement while improving once again on our financial results.
I have announced my resignation as Chairman of Spire Healthcare and I am pleased to inform you that I will be handing over the reins of Chairman to Garry Watts, who has extensive experience in the private health sector. Garry was Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of SSL International, a consumer healthcare company, for six years and was previously its Chief Financial Officer (CFO). He has also been a director of Protherics plc and Celltech plc and was a member of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency supervisory Board for 17 years. I am confident that Garry will provide great support and guidance to the company as it drives forward in the years ahead.
Robert Wise has stepped aside as CEO after more than three very successful years at Spire Healthcare. I would like to thank Rob for all his hard work and the success he has brought to the company, and am delighted that he has agreed to stay on with Spire as a Non-Executive Director. Rob Roger, who has been our CFO since the formation of Spire, stepped into the CEO role on 1 May 2011. Rob played a significant role in transforming the business into the strong organisation it is today and together he and Garry will provide the experience and stability needed to expand the company in the future.
I am stepping down at a very positive time for Spire Healthcare. It is no mean feat that in its fourth year of operation, against a strong ebb tide in the economy, the business has once again achieved its financial and operational targets. I would like to congratulate the management team and staff. The success of Spire Healthcare celebrates the hard work and team spirit of our employees, who in turn rely on us for good communication. Our strategies, our staff and the consultants who work with us have enabled Spire to deliver excellent services across the country and Spire continues to grow on these solid foundations.
Thank you to my fellow directors, and my congratulations and good wishes to Garry Watts as he takes the helm in what promises to be another exciting and successful year.
Robert CookeChairman, June 2011
Use one or more of the options below to search for a consultant and link through to view their Spire profile.
fill out this form and we will get back to you:
Please select a hospital
Please enter your details below and we will call you back.
What is the aim of your enquiry?
If we are unable to reach you by phone, please include your email address so that we can get in touch...
Garry Watts, 54, was CEO of SSL International plc for six years until its acquisition by Reckitt Benckiser in November 2010 and was previously its CFO.
SSL was a £2.5 billion consumer healthcare company headquartered in the UK with global operations. It had a large brand portfolio that included Durex and Scholl. Garry is a chartered accountant and a former partner at KPMG. He is now a Non-Executive Director of Stagecoach plc and of Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. He was previously a Director of Protherics plc and Celltech plc and was a member of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency supervisory board for 17 years.
11.01.2017 -
Come along to Spire Portsmouth Hospital for a free information evening on weight loss surgery on 11 January and find out about a range of obesity procedures we offer.
07.12.2016 -
Spire Sussex Hospital announces it has pledged to improve patient safety as part of the national campaign, Sign up to Safety.
A patient safety campaign, Sign up to Safety is one of a set of national initiatives in England to help the NHS improve the safety of patient care. Collectively and cumulatively these initiatives aim to reduce avoidable harm by 50% and support the ambition to save 6,000 lives.
View all news & events>
© Spire Healthcare Group plc (2016)


text:
Forgot Password? | Not a User? Sign up
Your browser does not support iframes.
A hundred community volunteers picked up trash and looked into repairing homes in the Clinton Elementary attendance zone during the first Lancaster Pride Promise Neighborhood workday on Saturday.
Project organizers have split up the area into smaller zones, and the first one tackled was the Brooklyn area south of downtown.
"We are elated by the participation," said Sharon Novinger, executive director for Lancaster County Partners for Youth. "We are glad that people were able to give time to volunteer."
Jim Melvin
Clemson University
CLEMSON — Despite being too dry, too wet or damaged by winds, S.C. Christmas tree farms have weathered the storm and are experiencing another strong year in 2016.
Though some trees have been stressed by severe drought in most areas of the state – or by standing water and wind damage along the coast – there are still more than enough healthy trees to go around for anyone looking to jump-start their Christmas spirit.
Two Lancaster County Parks and Recreation all-star soccer teams are headed to the state tournament after winning Central District championships in Fort Mill earlier this month.
The 12U county stars blanked Kershaw County, 9-0 to net a state bid in Sumter.
Sergio Pavon paced the 12U stars with three goals. Jacob Starnes and Joshua Ramirez each tallied two goals.
Staff Reports
RICHBURG – The Andrew Jackson Lady Volunteers swept to a pair of wins to capture the Lewisville preseason girls basketball tournament crown Tuesday at the LHS gym.
AJ, coming off a 17-4 season, wrapped up the title with a 56-31 win over Class A foe Great Falls.
AJ opened the tournament with a 52-29 win over North Central on Monday.
Independent wrestler Fuzzy "the Southern Rebel" Bass has finally had enough of cuts, scrapes and bruises.
Bass, 46, will compete in the ring for the last time on Friday, Dec. 9, during a Lynx Wrestling Alliance fundraiser at 7 p.m. to help with the medical bills of Gwen Parker and Brandy Watts.
Lancaster County Council approved the new Unified Development Ordinance Monday night by a vote of 5-1. Councilman Jack Estridge cast the vote of opposition.
"Lancaster County has changed, and this is an effort to try to manage that growth," said Councilman Larry McCullough. "I fully support the UDO and applaud all who worked long and hard on this."
November is National Family Caregivers Month. This is important to me because every day I see individuals and families whose lives have been completely turned upside down by Alzheimer's disease.
As a member of the S.C. Alzheimer's Association Board of Directors and the owner of a home-care organization serving Lancaster, York and Chester counties, I have the opportunity to assist families in navigating through this horrible disease, but more help is needed.
Beverly Lane Lorenz
For The Lancaster News
Sun City Carolina Lakes expanded the scope of its annual Thanksgiving food drive this year to include families from more county schools and the Lancaster Children's Home.
CHESTER – The Lancaster County Parks and Recreation small fry football all-stars have earned a bid to the Upper State championship game.
The small fry stars, ages 9-10, captured the Central District championship with a 22-0 win over Fort Mill on Thursday night at Joe Collins Stadium in Chester.
From release
Lancaster County Sheriff Barry Faile is one of two sheriffs in the state appointed by Gov. Nikki Haley to the S.C. Law Enforcement Training Council, where he will help formulate training procedures and policies for the state.
Copyright © 2016
The Lancaster News is your source for local news, sports, events, and information in Lancaster County and Lancaster, South Carolina, and the surrounding area..


text:
Culinary Arts
All to enhance the preparation of your best dishes: essential oils with carminative plants, the uses and possibilities are many! Molecular cooking, kitchen BIO, natural cuisine ...
Commande rapide
Save time by using the quick order form. With a few clicks , you can easily order your favorite references.
Be fan
Be fan of our Facebook page and get 5 % discount!
If you are not logged in to Facebook, please first log in and then refresh this page before clicking the Like button. Otherwise, you will not get your voucher.


text:
Become a Member
Our members are the business, government, and community leaders representing a variety of industries. The Chamber partners with individuals and organizations from around the corner and across the State of Arizona as part of our effort to make a positive impact on our community. Continue reading
Download the Free Chamber App
Find local services, shopping, dining, community organizations, and much more around the Southwest Valley community.
Board of Directors Nominations
Nominations for the FY2016-17 Chamber Board of Directors election must be received by Friday January 6, 2017 at 5:00pm.
Board of Directors Nomination & Election Information
Shop Local
Big, little, or in between, it's a good thing when you shop
in the Southwest Valley community!
Like Us - Follow Us on Facebook
Chairman's Circle Partners
Member & Community News
Read all that's happening
on the News Page


text:
THIS IS A DIRECTORY PAGE. Britannica does not currently have an article on this topic.
Learn about this topic in these articles:
discussed in biography
...of Prometheus Unbound with the urbane self-irony that had emerged in Peter Bell the Third, showing Shelley's awareness that his ideals might seem naive to others. Late that year, Oedipus Tyrannus; or, Swellfoot the Tyrant, his satirical drama on the trial for adultery of Caroline (estranged wife of King George IV), appeared anonymously but was quickly suppressed. In 1821,...


text:
Vetr Inc. Downgrades Tyson Foods Inc. (TSN) to Strong Sell
Tyson Foods Inc. (NYSE:TSN) was downgraded by stock analysts at Vetr from a "sell" rating to a "strong sell" rating in a research report issued on Monday. They presently have a $61.30 price target on the stock. Vetr's price target points to a potential downside of 13.05% from the company's previous close.
TSN has been the subject of several other reports. JPMorgan Chase & Co. reiterated a "focus list" rating on shares of Tyson Foods in a research note on Tuesday, October 4th. Pivotal Research cut Tyson Foods from a "buy" rating to a "sell" rating and reduced their target price for the company from $100.00 to $40.00 in a research note on Friday. Jefferies Group increased their target price on Tyson Foods from $78.00 to $80.00 and gave the company a "buy" rating in a research note on Wednesday, July 27th. Zacks Investment Research upgraded Tyson Foods from a "hold" rating to a "buy" rating and set a $83.00 target price for the company in a research note on Tuesday, August 9th. Finally, RBC Capital Markets reiterated a "sector perform" rating and set a $72.00 target price (up from $68.00) on shares of Tyson Foods in a research note on Friday, August 5th. Two analysts have rated the stock with a sell rating, five have issued a hold rating, six have given a buy rating and one has assigned a strong buy rating to the company. The company presently has an average rating of "Hold" and an average price target of $67.38.
Shares of Tyson Foods (NYSE:TSN) traded up 4.06% during trading on Monday, reaching $70.50. 5,460,472 shares of the company's stock traded hands. The company has a market capitalization of $26.94 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 17.14 and a beta of 0.26. Tyson Foods has a 1-year low of $42.89 and a 1-year high of $77.05. The company has a 50 day moving average of $74.59 and a 200-day moving average of $69.19.
Tyson Foods (NYSE:TSN) last released its earnings results on Monday, August 8th. The company reported $1.21 EPS for the quarter, beating the Thomson Reuters' consensus estimate of $1.06 by $0.15. The company earned $9.40 billion during the quarter, compared to analysts' expectations of $9.32 billion. Tyson Foods had a return on equity of 17.29% and a net margin of 4.28%. The business's revenue was down 6.6% on a year-over-year basis. During the same period in the prior year, the business posted $0.80 EPS. Equities analysts predict that Tyson Foods will post $4.53 earnings per share for the current year.
The firm also recently declared a quarterly dividend, which will be paid on Thursday, December 15th. Stockholders of record on Thursday, December 1st will be issued a dividend of $0.15 per share. This represents a $0.60 dividend on an annualized basis and a dividend yield of 0.85%. The ex-dividend date of this dividend is Tuesday, November 29th. Tyson Foods's dividend payout ratio (DPR) is 14.53%.
In other news, insider Donnie King sold 146,641 shares of the firm's stock in a transaction on Thursday, August 25th. The stock was sold at an average price of $75.75, for a total transaction of $11,108,055.75. The sale was disclosed in a document filed with the SEC, which can be accessed through the SEC website. Also, insider Noel W. White sold 74,500 shares of the firm's stock in a transaction on Wednesday, August 10th. The shares were sold at an average price of $74.56, for a total value of $5,554,720.00. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. Insiders own 2.69% of the company's stock.
Several hedge funds and other institutional investors have recently modified their holdings of the stock. Meeder Asset Management Inc. acquired a new position in shares of Tyson Foods during the first quarter worth approximately $3,248,000. State Street Corp raised its position in Tyson Foods by 5.3% in the first quarter. State Street Corp now owns 12,852,492 shares of the company's stock worth $856,748,000 after buying an additional 647,431 shares during the last quarter. Canada Pension Plan Investment Board raised its position in Tyson Foods by 2,527.8% in the first quarter. Canada Pension Plan Investment Board now owns 482,252 shares of the company's stock worth $32,147,000 after buying an additional 463,900 shares during the last quarter. Credit Agricole S A raised its position in Tyson Foods by 94.8% in the first quarter. Credit Agricole S A now owns 1,426,087 shares of the company's stock worth $95,066,000 after buying an additional 694,025 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Aviva PLC raised its position in Tyson Foods by 3.2% in the first quarter. Aviva PLC now owns 181,316 shares of the company's stock worth $12,086,000 after buying an additional 5,668 shares during the last quarter. 74.07% of the stock is currently owned by institutional investors.
Tyson Foods Company Profile
Tyson Foods, Inc is a food company. The Company is engaged in offering chicken, beef and pork, as well as prepared foods, including bacon, breakfast sausage, turkey, lunchmeat, hot dogs, pizza crusts and toppings, tortillas and desserts. The Company offers food products under Tyson, Jimmy Dean, Hillshire Farm, Sara Lee, Ball Park, Wright, Aidells and State Fair brands.
Receive News & Stock Ratings for Tyson Foods Inc. Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Tyson Foods Inc. and related stocks with our FREE daily email newsletter.


text:
Attached: Our behavoiur is often influenced by a motive.edited.docx
$25.00Buy an answer
To prepare for this assignment, complete the following:
For the drive state you have selected, complete the following:
Additional Requirements
$25.00Buy an answer
Sign In to Your Account
Create Account
Thank you for registration!
Thank you for registration!
You password was sent to your email address !