text:
Sequin Jersey Dress
This spring, I think nighttime is all about the solid sequin sheath. I'll pretend I didn't just conceive of that phrase, and go on to say that sequins look hot and fancy without being bridge and tunnel. That's so hot. ($85.80 at ASOS.com)
Awesome nautical stripped crew neck shirt!
A great looking simple and comfortable tee.Added 8 Years Ago from Revolve Clothing
How can you say no to this cause or the shirt by just looking at it?
Another great basic shirt by the almost forgotten brand i love.
where have you been the past year rxmance? im glad your back.
Awesome basic henley at a very affordable price especially considering its made by ever, which means itll last a lot longer than this shirt at the same price from other companies.
same basic shirt in a sweet faded black dye. yes.
Basic tee with the exact looks everyone is looking for at a modest price. What else could you ask for?
Another awesome NSF striped shirt perfect for spring.
A beachy new "rad" shirt from the radasses warriors of radness.
A "rad" new shirt from warriors of radness
Ah Michael! This shirt makes me want to wear white socks and pennyloafers and moonwalk my way through life!
This shirt that could be rollup in the day and rolled down at night. Once rolled up the stripes give it an extra simple but unique twist. This also comes with an epaulette that could be held w/ a treated wooden button. It has a do... This shirt that could be rollup in the day and rolled down at night. Once rolled up the stripes give it an extra simple but unique twist. This also comes with an epaulette that could be held w/ a treated wooden button. It has a double ribbed crew neck and our signature two buttons on the bottom left corner of the waistband. This Crew Basic Tee is manufactured and pre shrunk and softened in Los Angeles. This is ideal for a day out with friends or family at the beach, brunch or to dinner. It can be worn under a blazer or with shorts, pants or jeans.
I absolutely positively love my striped American Apparel tee! It's not quite as long as the picture depicts, but I think I'm gonna get it in grey and white now (since I have the pink and purple one).Added 9 Years Ago from American Apparel
I'm entranced by these Steve McQueen t-shirts. I can't decide which color I like better.
I love comics and I love this Batgirl tee, the retro style is so cute.
Love this tee - cannot wait to lounge in them all summer! American Apparel wins for even naming a collection the "summer shirts."
If you're looking for a not-so-basic T-shirt for summer, this Modern Amusement tee will provide plenty of amusement. It manages to make hot pink masculine - really!
Thermal is so soft and casual, it's as if the fashion gods have permitted you to stay in your PJs all day. Valentine's Day is the perfect day to look pretty in pink.Tags: fashion, style, pink, tees, crew, thermal, Splendid, Valentines, long sleeveAdded 10 Years Ago from Revolve Clothing
"Special limited production of Scout hand-screened unisex print tee/tunic. Paper thin grey cotton vneck sized like a mens medium with a long narrow cut. One size fits all!!"Added 10 Years Ago from Lisa Kline


text:
Extra padding in the hips, buttocks and thighs is healthy and protects against heart and metabolic problems, according to British researchers.
A study published in this month's International Journal of Obesity says fat in the hips mops up harmful fatty acids and contains an anti-inflammatory agent that stops arteries from clogging, according to the report.
A big backside is better than extra fat around the waistline, and that too little in the hip can lead to serious metabolic problems, the BBC reports.
For example, the report says, waist fat breaks down quicker than fat in the thighs and backside, and that can trigger inflammation in the body.
Click here to read an abstract of the article.
"It is shape that matters and where the fat gathers," says Dr. Konstantinos Manolopoulos, of Oxford University, the lead researcher, the BBC reports. "Fat around the hips and thighs is good for you but around the tummy is bad."
Or as Britain's non-scientific tabloid Daily Star puts it: "Beyonce will live to a ripe old age."
(Posted by Doug Stanglin)
Doug is an unrepentant news junkie who loves breaking news and has been known to watch C-SPAN even on vacation. He has covered a wide range of domestic and international news stories, from prison riots in Oklahoma to the Moscow coup against Mikhail Gorbachev. Doug previously served as foreign editor at USA TODAY. More about Doug
Michael Winter has been a daily contributor to On Deadline since its debut in January 2006. His journalism career began in the prehistoric Ink Era, and he was an early adapter at the dawn of the Digital Age. His varied experience includes editing at the San Jose Mercury News and The Philadelphia Inquirer.
Also: Follow On Deadline on Twitter

subset: commoncrawl


text:
BUIES CREEK, N.C. – This week Campbell's softball team (9-11) returns home for a brief two-game midweek homestand before hitting the road to participate in the Winthrop/Adidas Invitational over the weekend. The Camels start the week with a doubleheader against Hampton on March 7 starting at 3 p.m. CU then travels to Rock Hill, S.C. with games against Albany (March 9 at noon), Bowling Green (March 9 at 4 p.m.), St. John's (March 10 at 1 p.m.) and UNC Wilmington (March 10 at 5 p.m.) on the docket.
The Camels went 2-3 last weekend at the Lipton Invitational held at the University of Florida in Gainesville, Fla. CU started the week with a 6-1 loss to Tennessee State. The highlight of the game for CU was freshman Stephanie Jones' first career home run. The Camels then defeated Eastern Michigan by a 5-0 score. Junior Brittany Arnn threw her second shutout of the season in blanking the Eagles. Sophomore Raven Lee launched her fifth home run of the season to aid Campbell to the victory. The Camels then took on Eastern Michigan for the second time in the tournament the following day (March 3). Freshman Julia Callicutt threw her first career complete game in earning her second win of the season. Senior Taylor McGee provided the late game heroics with her two-run home run in the bottom of the seventh inning to give the Camels a thrilling 3-1 triumph. The Camels then fell to Tennessee State by a 3-2 score in the nightcap with McGee hitting another two-run blast in defeat. In the team's final game of the tournament CU fell to No. 3/4 Florida by a 4-0 tally. Arnn pitched well in only allowing four runs to one of the top offenses in the country. Junior Sarah Forgacs had two doubles against the Gators. The Camels were the only team at the tournament that did not get run-ruled by Florida over the weekend. Forgacs led the offensive charge on the week with six hits, three doubles and a triple. McGee blasted two home runs and knocked in four with her four hits. With two home runs on the week she has now hit 36 in her Campbell career and only trails Shannon O'Bryan by four career home runs from tying the all-time school record. McGee also became only the eighth member of CU's softball program to ever reach 100 career RBIs with her four runs-driven in at the tournament. The CU pitching staff deserved a better fate than three losses with a combined team ERA of 1.70 in the weekend games.
CU enters the fifth week of the year ranking highly in Big South in numerous categories. Forgacs leads the league in doubles (7). She is tied for second in the conference in hits (22) and runs (11), sixth in stolen bases (5) and total bases (31) and 10th in on-base percentage (.438). Freshman Stephanie Jones is tied for the lead in stolen bases (7), second in doubles (6), tied for second in hits (22), sixth in total bases (31) and seventh in runs (10). McGee is tied for the lead in runs batted in (16), second in total bases (36), tied for second in home runs (5), tied for third in doubles (5), fourth in slugging (667) and tied for seventh in walks (8) and runs scored (10). Lee is tied for second in the league in home runs (5), tied for third in total bases (33),fourth in walks (11), fifth in slugging (.647), sixth in RBIs (11) and eighth in on-base percentage (.453). Arnn leads the conference in innings pitched (56.2) and complete games (6). She is second in strikeouts (37), tied for second in shutouts (2), third in wins (4), games started (9) and appearances (11). Senior Christina Melton is third in strikeouts (35) and complete games (5), fourth in innings pitched (51.1) and tied for sixth in wins (3).
Hampton (4-9) is riding an eight-game losing streak after falling five times over the weekend at the University of South Florida Tournament. Senior Bre'Anna Brown leads the team with her .333 batting average and four stolen bases. Sophomore Margaret Wilkins has a team-best 11 hits and is tied for the team lead with six RBIs. Junior Carla Trimble also has six RBIs and is tied for the team lead with a home run. She also has four doubles and nine walks. Senior Travonna Byrd leads the squad with her three wins. Freshman Jailynn Jackson has struck out 25 with five complete games this season. CU leads the all-time series with Hampton 6-0. CU defeated the Lady Pirates 12-0 and 16-1 scores last season in Norfolk, Va. Forgacs has four hits in nine career at bats against Hampton. McGee has four hits, five runs scored and three RBIs in four career games against Hampton.
Albany (2-3) has only had the opportunity to play in one tournament this season and they haven't played since Feb. 26. The program has won two games in a row with victories over Jacksonville State and Radford at the Eagles Classic last time out. Albany is the defending American East Champion and are the preseason pick for second in the league after making the NCAA Tournament last season. Sophomore Charlise Castro was named the American East Player of the Week on Feb. 27. She leads the team in most offensive categories including hits (8), runs (5), doubles (3), home runs (2), RBIs (6), batting average (.533), total bases (17), on-base percentage (.563) and slugging percentage (1.133). Sophomore Brittany MacFawn has a 3.60 ERA. Senior Brittany Schwieger leads the team in innings pitched and is second in strikeouts (8). Albany leads the series between the schools 2-0. The last time the schools met was for a tournament game at Winthrop in 2007.
Bowling Green (7-5) has won five of the team's last seven games with the only losses coming to Florida Gulf Coast and Quinnipiac at the Under Armor Invitational over the weekend. Junior Paige Berger leads the team with her .500 batting average and 20 hits. She also has three home runs and 14 RBIs. Katie Yoho has a team-high of five home runs and is tied for lead with 15 RBIs. Hannah Fulk has 11 walks and 13 runs scored on the season. Freshman Paris Imholz has three wins, two shutouts, 44.1 innings pitched and a 1.11 ERA. Sophomore Erin Greenwalt is 2-0 with 10 strikeouts in her 11 innings worked. The Falcons lead the series with Campbell 2-0. The teams last met in 2007 at a tournament hosted by Charleston Southern.
St. John's (3-14) has lost five of the team's last six games. Senior Kristi Cady and sophomore Jackie Reed lead the team with their .358 batting averages. Cady has 19 hits, 12 runs, two home runs and 10 RBIs on the season. Reed also has 19 hits to go along with six doubles and 16 RBIs. Redshirt senior Kacee Cox provides the power with four home runs. Freshman Ellen Czuba has scored 11 runs. Sophomore Ashley Beza has a 3.00 ERA in her 60.1 innings thrown. She also leads the team with her 34 strikeouts. Aleshia Link has won two games and with three complete games on the campaign. CU is 4-0 all-time against the Red Storm including a thrilling 7-6 victory earlier this season at the Red & Black Showcase in Athens, Ga. Nesbitt came up with the game-winning single in the bottom of the seventh inning. Jones had four hits and three RBI in her collegiate debut.
UNC Wilmington (2-11) went 1-2 last week with a loss to North Carolina and a split doubleheader to Presbyterian. Sophomore Daniela Torres is the top hitter with a .360 batting average. Senior Ashley Shingleton has 14 hits, two home runs and five RBIs. Freshman Kristen Jernigan leads the squad with her six RBIs. Senior Amanda Davenport has won both of the team's games with a 3.13 ERA and 50 strikeouts in her 54.2 innings worked. She also has thrown seven complete games. The Seahawks will play a pair of games against North Carolina A&T on Wednesday, March 7, before heading to the tournament. The Camels lead the series with UNCW by a 43-24 count. The teams have met at least twice a season every year since 1997. CU defeated the Seahawks by scores of 4-1 and 2-0 last season in Wilmington. The Camels and UNCW will play again later this season with a doubleheader scheduled for April 18 in Buies Creek.
After this weekend's action, the Camels return home to host the Camel Stampede from March 16-17. CU will welcome in Drexel and North Carolina Central for the tournament with each team playing the others twice.


text:
News Writing
Our office can handle your news writing project using the university's preferred AP Style.
After meeting or discussing with University Communications, we can help you determine which news writing project(s) are needed:
Our office handles news writing from the initial idea all the way through media distribution.
We can help you determine the best ways to distribute your news item in order to reach your target market. Contact us for more information.


text:
Robin Williams' 10 Best Movie Scenes
On the one-year anniversary of his death, we're celebrating Robin Williams' life and career by revisiting his 10 best movie scenes.
On the one-year anniversary of his death, we're celebrating Robin Williams' life and career by revisiting his 10 best movie scenes.
A clip of Robin William's final film performance has been released, offering us a bitter-sweet look into his last acting role.
As we head into the homestretch of 2014, here are the topics we were all buzzing about and googling!.
Three months have passed since the tragic news of Robin Williams' passing, but it looks like the Marin County Sheriff's Office and Coroner have finally finished their autopsy.
Every weekday morning at 6:50 we dish on the latest from Hollywood!
The 2014 Emmys, which aired last night (Aug. 25), struck a somber note with Billy Crystal's touching speech that honored his good friend Robin Williams. As it turns out, Crystal wasn't the only star who wanted to pay tribute to Williams. Emmy-winner Kathy Bates admitted she wanted to dedicate her award to the late star.
Amid all the celebrations and laughter during Sunday night's 2014 Emmy Awards, there was one larger-than-life presence that was sorely missed: the late, great Robin Williams. And following the annual In Memoriam segment to honor the famous faces we've lost over the last year, Billy Crystal took the stage to honor his longtime friend and fellow comedian in a moving and heartfelt tribute.
Robin Williams' friend and 'Fathers' Day' co-star Billy Crystal will introduce a segment at this year's Emmys on Monday remembering the late Academy Award-winning actor.
Robin Williams has been laid to rest. The late actor was cremated and his ashes were scattered in the San Francisco Bay on Aug. 12, one day after his death.
Apart from all the good spirits of the evening, every Emmys inevitably becomes a somber occasion in honoring those we've lost over the course of the year. Now, with Robin Williams' tragic suicide still weighing on the world at large, the 2014 Emmy Awards have announced that Billy Crystal will step up to honor his fallen friend in the memoriam segment of the evening.


text:
ABCD - Anybody Can Dance was released in 750 screens (400 3D screens and 350 2D screens) this Friday. India's first dance 3D movie opened to better response than Special 26 with its occupancy ranging between 55% and 70% in the morning and matinee shows, but the film showed a slight dip in the evening shows. The film has collected Rs 5.5 crores nett at the domestic Box Office on the first day.
Whereas Special 26, which was released in 1,750 screens in the country, opened to an average response with its occupancy ranging between 5% and 60% in the morning and matinee shows, but it picked up in the evening shows in the country. As per early estimates, the movie has collected approximately Rs 7 crores nett at the domestic Box Office on the first day of its release.
However, the first day collection of Special 26 is more than ABCD - Any Body Can Dance, but its per screen average is much better lesser than the other. Trade analyst feel that it would show a big jump in its collection on Saturday and Sunday. It should be seen whether it will pick up or not.
Stay locked to this space to read the Box Office updates on Special 26 and ABCD - Any Body Can Dance business.


text:
I think that this may be true of people who embrace the Singularity as a scientific prediction or even as a social project, but I don't think it's particularly true of literature about the Singularity. Novels like Vernor Vinge's Rainbows End, Rudy Rucker's Postsingular and Karl Schroeder's Sun of Suns, are all about this idea of problems lurking inside the solutions. Charlie Stross and I have written two novellas, "Jury Service" and "Appeals Court," that are also about this notion (we're writing a third one now, "Parole Board," and Tor's going to publish all three as a novel called Rapture of the Nerds).
Indeed, it seems to me that in literature, the Singularity's role is to serve as a straw-man for critiquing technology as a one-sided panacea (see, for example, my interview with Ray Kurzweil on the Singularity as a literary device, a spiritual belief system, and a technological prediction).
But Newitz's critique of insufficiently weird technological prediction is spot on. Read the rest


text:
i recently bought an amd 940 and everything works fine except when i want to play games. for some reason my keyboard does not want to respond correctly. for example, i will start walking forward...still holding "w" and all the sudden i stop. i am still holding "w" down but not going anywhere. i have to let go and press it again but it continues to happen. this happens with all directional buttons as well.
problem exists in every game from crysis to halo and a few in between
now this sounds like a stupid problem from just getting a new processor but it had NO problems with my amd 7750.
sounds stupid but i could use some help


text:
A local Ahwatukee resident and a Certified Jazzercise Instructor is offering a non-intimidating environment for women who want to get fit but don't want to go to a health club or typical gym. No matter where you are in your fitness you can change your body and improve your health and start living a healthier lifestyle. Jazzercise is the world's leading dance-fitness program choreographed to today's hottest music. Each 60-minute Jazzercise group fitness class offers a fusion of jazz dance, resistance training, Pilates, yoga, cardio box and Latin style movements.
Ahwatukee Jazzercise classes are offered in the Sonoran Science Academy Gym located at 14647 S. 50th Street, Suite 175 on Monday and Wednesday at 6 p.m. and Saturday at 9 a.m. For more information on classes, call (602)292-7521 or go to jazzercise.com.


text:
Assault Pistols and PDWs
Assault Pistols, also known as PDWs: Assault pistols, known as Personal Defensive Weapons (PDWs) in military circles, are usually patterned after very small submachine guns like the Micro UZI or the MP5K. There are also a small number of purpose built PDWs on the world market (Russian Bizon and FN P90). The HK PDW is a very compact 9mm submachine gun that is intended as an emergency weapon for use by combat aircrews in case they find themselves shot down in hostile territory. These weapons tend to offer maximum firepower in very compact packages. Semi automatic only versions are available on the open market and are usually regulated as handguns.
PDWs are less concealable than regular handguns. Fully automatic PDWs are a hot black market item among outlaw circles due to compact size, high firepower, and high profit per cargo volume ratio for smugglers. PDWs serve as status symbols in many criminal social circles. These weapons are also favored by CIA contractors because of easy portability, low cost and ease of smuggling into hostile countries. Fairly decent PDWs of simple design can also be made with machine tools that are too small for constructing larger weapons. The picture to the right is an example of a PDW that was submitted by an anonymous contributor to an Internet discussion group about home made guns.
One attribute of these weapons is that they are not intended for use as the primary equipment of the user. This means that they are essentially large backup weapons for "non-combative" personnel and large weapon crews that require more than regular handguns for self defense but are, for reasons of necessity or comfort, precluded from using larger personal firearms. Vehicle operators of all kinds can benefit from the PDWs that are quickly deployable (due to compact size) from within the confines of a vehicle. Scouts in particular can benefit from using PDWs because PDWs are lighter in weight and less encumbering than rifles and shotguns but offer more firepower than pistols. The fairly compact size, ease of use, low cost and moderate power of assault pistols made them particularly popular among North American street gangs in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Legal restrictions throughout the mid to late 1990s reduced the popularity of the weapons in the US while the trends favoring their use did not emigrate to "copycat" gangs in other countries where genuine military hardware is more easily obtainable.
One fairly common assault pistol found in Eastern Europe and exported around the Globe is the Czech Scorpion. It was essentially the PDW of the Warsaw pact and was issued to special security personnel, terrorists, police and VIPs in the Communist party. Designed as a full automatic weapon that required a minimum of training, the scorpion was deadly even in the hands of a complete amateur although the person should not be a total idiot. An accident with such a weapon can be quite catastrophic. The Scorpion is one of the smallest PDWs and easily adaptable for use with a silencer. It is most commonly found in weaker calibers like .32 ACP and .380. Again, the rather weak ammunition used in this gun almost makes full auto fire necessary to make it an effective weapon. Newer models are available in 9mm Makarov and 9mm parabellum (the most uncommon). Since the fall of the Iron Curtain, limited numbers of semi-automatic Scorpions have been produced for export. Still others have been sold in 'parts kit' form without the critical lower receiver or with the lower receiver cut in several pieces with a blowtorch.
Assault pistols are semi-concealable and can be overlooked at roadblock searches - an attribute that can be valuable in urban environments (partly attributing to their popularity among criminals). Assault pistols usually share some parts interchangeability with larger guns, especially submachine guns, thus making logistics a little easier for those who use a systems approach to their arsenal. Nearly all assault pistols have a rifle-style positive safety selector, a feature that is frequently absent from handguns (especially those intended for police). These guns also tend to be more durable than regular handguns; being able to withstand the rigors of hard use with little maintenance. Assault pistols typically lend themselves to easy custom modification with sound suppressors, folding stocks, and brass catchers.
Assault pistols Backup guns Hunting Rifles Compact Shotguns Machine guns Submachine guns Paintball guns Sniper Rifles Silenced guns Black powder guns Arrow weapons Grenades Grenade launchers Non-lethal Weapons Dart guns Air guns
Heavy Weapons Mortars Artillery Explosives Flame weapons


text:
|Adair, Robert K. The Physics of Baseball. New York: Harper and Row, 1990.
|Flatow, Ira. Rainbows, Curveballs, and Other Wonders of the Natural World Explained. New York: Harper and Row, 1989.
|Kindall, Jerry; Ed. Science of Coaching Baseball. [Science of Coaching Series] Champaign : Human Kinetics Publishers, 1992.
|Kluger, Jeffrey. "What's Behind the Home Run Boom?" Discover, April 1988, pp. 78-79.
|Schlossberg, Dan. The Baseball Catalog. New York: Jonathan David Publishers, 1989.
|Watts, Robert G. and A. Terry Bahill. Keep Your Eye on the Ball: The Science and Folklore of Baseball. New York: W. H. Freeman and Co., 1990.
|Williams, Ted, and John Underwood. The Science of Hitting. New York : Simon & Schuster Trade, 1986.
|--. "The Way the Baseball Bounces." Science News, February 24, 1990, pp. 127.
|Blanding, Sharon, and John Monteleone. "Baseball: What Makes a Knuckleball Flutter Like a Butterfly and a Curveball Curve?" [Chapter 9 of:] What Makes a Boomerang Come Back: How Things in Sports Work. Ann Arbor : Borders Press, 1992, pp. 1-17.
|Fleisig, G. S. , et al. "Biomechanics of Overhand Throwing with Implications for Injuries." Sports Medicine, v21 n6, June 1, 1996, pp. 421.
|Hall, Stephen S. "Baseball's Dirty Tricks." [Chapter in:] Newton at the Bat: The Science in Sports. Ed. by Allman, William F., and Eric W. Schrier. Ann Arbor: Books on Demand, 1994, pp.20-24.
|"Can You Help the Mets by Watching on TV?" Science, May 19, 1989, p. 773.
|"Crack the Case of the Home Run Records. " Current Science, v80 n3, October 7, 1994. pp. 12+
|"Dimpled Bat." Current Science, v80 n1, September 9, 1994, p. 15.
|"High Tech Up at Bat." Popular Science, v240 n5, May 1992.
|"How Baseball Outfielders Determine Where to Run to Catch Fly Balls." Science, v268, n5210, April 28, 1995, p. 569.
|"The Latest Slant on Batting." Sports III, v74 n23, June 17, 1991, p.
|"Major League Mystery." [baseball construction] Science World, v51 n1, September 2, 1994, p. 12.
|Rawlings Sporting Goods Co. Rawlings: The Professional Baseball. [Series of company documents on baseball design.] Rawlings Sporting Goods Co. , P.O. Box 22000, Saint Louis, MO 63126.
|Video / Film
Lesson Plans & Experiments
|SportsScience. Better Baseball Through Science: Learn How to Hit a Home Run and Other Baseball Skills by Using Scientific Principles. [9 Activities / Experiments] Science Media Inc. P.O. Box 9171, Cambridge, MA 02139.
|Computer Media
|Internet Resources
|Check back as we are continuing to update the Sport! bibliography. If you know of resources you'd like us to add let us know!
|©1997 The Exploratorium


text:
Full Text of Zed McLarnon 'Complaint' in Federal Court
Introduction and Jurisdiction
1. This is a complaint for relief under 42 U.S.C. §1983, with pendant state claims, against certain current and past officials, workers, and judges in the Massachusetts court system, along with other institutions, agencies, social workers and conspirators:
A. For declaratory and injunctive relief - Defendants, in conspiracy with David Douglas and each other, violated Mr. McLarnon's protected due process rights by a pattern and practice of criminally editing, falsifying, and manipulating official court hearing tapes, docket records, case files, and impounded files in his Probate and Family Court restraining order case, and used the Massachusetts anti-SLAPP law to deprive him of any meaningful remedy.
B For damages - Defendants, in conspiracy with each other, deprived Mr. McLarnon of due process and equal protection of the law in the Massachusetts State Courts for seven years, resulting in the "kidnapping" of his son under color of state law.
C. For Pendant State Claim - Defendants, by their actions intentionally interfered with Mr. McLarnon's parent-child relationship, by their fraudulent and deceitful actions in his restraining order case.
2. Jurisdiction for this action is
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331, as it deals with
a civil complaint arising under the Constitution
and laws of the United States, more specifically,
42 U.S.C. §1983, and the 5th and 14th Amendments
to the United States Constitution.
4. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, by virtue of Articles V and XI of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, has made itself accountable for suit in Federal Court, precluding immunity under the Eleventh Amendment of the United States Constitution.
5. Plaintiff Edward S. McLarnon (Mr. McLarnon) is a natural person domiciled at 49 Hanover Street, Malden, Massachusetts.
6. Defendant Sean M. Dunphy ("Judge Dunphy") is the chief justice of the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court, located at 24 New Chardon Street, Boston, Massachusetts. He is sued in his individual and official capacities.
7. Defendant Middlesex Probate and Family Court is a unit of the Massachusetts Trial Court, located at 208 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
8. Defendant Sheila E. McGovern ("Judge McGovern") is the chief justice of the Middlesex Probate and Family Court, located at 208 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts. She is sued in her official and individual capacities.
9. Defendant William Highgas ("Judge Highgas") was, at all pertinent times, a justice of the Middlesex Probate and Family Court, located at 208 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts. He is sued in his official and individual capacities.
0. Defendant Beverly Weinger Boorstein
("Judge Boorstein") is a justice of the
Middlesex Probate and Family Court, located at 208
Cambridge Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts. She
is sued in her official and individual capacities.
12. Defendant John Buonomo ("Register Buonomo") is Register of Probate in Middlesex County, whose office is located at 208 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts. He is sued in his official capacity.
13. Defendant Lee G. Johnson ("Johnson") is a former Register of Probate in Middlesex County. He is sued in his individual capacity.
14. Defendant Marie A. Gardin ("Gardin") is a former acting Register of Probate in Middlesex County, and a current assistant Register of Probate, located at 208 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts. She is sued in her individual capacity.
5. Defendant Donna Lambert ("Lambert") is a former Register of Probate in Middlesex County. She is sued in her individual capacity.
16. Defendant Arthur W. Havey ("Havey") is an assistant register at the Middlesex Probate and Family Court, located at 208 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts. He is sued in his official and individual capacities.
17. Defendant George Briggs ("Briggs")
is the audio tape coordinator at the Middlesex Probate
and Family Court, located at 208 Cambridge Street,
Cambridge, Massachusetts. He is sued in his official
and individual capacities.
19. Defendant Barbara Beardslee LICSW, ("Beardslee") is a licensed social worker, an agent or employee of MGH, and was the primary provider of GAL services to the plaintiff. She is sued in her official and individual capacities.
20. Defendant Kenneth Herman Ph.D. ("Herman") is an agent or employee of MGH and is the director of the Children and the Law Program there, and directed the provision of guardian ad litem (GAL) services for the Plaintiff. He is sued in his official and individual capacities.
21. Defendant Massachusetts Department of Social Services ("DSS") is an executive agency of the Massachusetts State government.
22. Defendant David Douglas LICSW, ("Douglas") is a licensed independent clinical social worker, and the new husband of Plaintiff's ex-wife. He has controlled, colluded with, and manipulated many of the other defendants to bring about the violations complained of herein. He is sued in his individual capacity.
23. Defendant Lisa Steckler ("Steckler") is a duly licensed Massachusetts attorney, and served as a guardian ad litem for the Middlesex Probate and Family case, as set forth herein. She is sued in her individual capacity.
24. Defendants John Doe ONE and TWO are unidentified agents of one or some of the defendants who assaulted Mr. McLarnon, requiring hospitalization, and threatened that he would never see his son again if he went back to court, after a hearing in the matter.
Background Facts
25. The Plaintiff was married in May of 1974 to Virginia Jokisch ("Jokisch"), and divorced in June of 1986, in the Middlesex Probate and Family Court, Docket No. 148360. Their son Ian McLarnon ("Ian") was born on March 13, 1981.
26. Between 1986 and 1994, Mr. McLarnon was a custodial parent sharing joint physical custody of his son Ian with his former wife, by virtue of a divorce decree in the Middlesex Probate and Family Court, dated June 11, 1986.
Concord District Court Facts
27. On September 1, 1994, Virginia Jokisch obtained an ex parte restraining order pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (M.G.L.) Chapter 209A, at Concord District Court, on behalf of herself and Ian, where Jokisch falsely alleged that Mr. McLarnon abused her, and that he "abused" his son by asking him to write an essay about his bad behavior. The order was returnable on September 9, 1994.
28. Mr McLarnon had not, as M.G.L. Chapter 209A requires, physically abused the petitioner or placed the petitioner in "fear of imminent serious physical harm."
29. On September 9, 1994, both parties were present at the return hearing, with Ian. Ian testified to no fear of imminent serious physical harm. The only "fear" he vocalized was, "fear of the disrespect that a relationship should have", implying that he was coached.
30. Although the plaintiff asked for a one year order, the District Court judge issued an order for a duration of two hours only, and referred the matter to Middlesex Probate and Family Court.
31. Later, in October of 1995, the
court adjudicated a CHINS proceeding for the child
Ian, where custody was granted to DSS, without any
notice to Mr. McLarnon.
Probate and Family
33. Later that same day, September 9, 1994, Jokisch made an ex parte application to the Middlesex Probate and Family Court for a new restraining order, on behalf of herself and Ian, in which she again used the same false allegations of abuse. No evidence was presented which conformed to the legal standard required to issue an order under the law.
34. Nonetheless, Defendant Judge Dilday issued an ex parte restraining order, returnable on September 23, 1994, Middlesex Probate and Family Court Docket No. 84D 3694 AB-1.
35. At a hearing on September 16, 1994, Mr. McLarnon having moved the return day up, Jokisch presented a motion for custody of Ian, and for extension of the restraining order, in front of Defendant Judge Highgas.
36. At that hearing, Jokisch and Defendant
Douglas, Jokisch's husband, each presented a false
affidavit to support their motions. Douglas, a licenced
independent clinical social worker, (LICSW) made
allegations, in a professional capacity, that Mr.
McLarnon abused Jokisch in 1984, years before Douglas
even met Jokisch or Mr. McLarnon. Douglas also made
a clinical diagnosis of Mr. McLarnon as an abuser
without any basis, having barely known him in passing.
38. At the hearing, Judge Highgas read a letter submitted from Mr. McLarnon's therapist, Bruce Jason, assuring the court that he and Doctor Norman Zinberg of Harvard Medical School, Mr. McLarnon's psychiatrist, found no history of abuse by Mr. McLarnon. After being reassured by these mental health professionals, Judge Highgas questioned whether there was a need for a restraining order, and looked straight at Mr. Douglas, who shook his head.
39. Then Judge Highgas extended the restraining order until November 30, 1994.
40. Mr. McLarnon later discovered that the tape of this hearing was edited to excise both the reading of Mr. Jason's letter, and the subsequent discussion of having no need for a restraining order. Mr. Jason's letter was not placed in the case file.
41. At that hearing, Judge Highgas allowed Mr. McLarnon's motion for a psychiatric evaluation of the parties. After the hearing, he then appointed an attorney, defendant Lisa Steckler, a lawyer with no psychological training or credentials, to be the evaluator.
42. Defendant Steckler did an "investigation" and produced a report, dated October 28, 1994, which falsely accused Mr. McLarnon of abuse. It contained evaluations of Mr. McLarnon from David Adams, EdD, and Lisa Gary, LICSW, both of whom are friends of Defendant Douglas, and who had both worked with Douglas at the same employer.
43. The evaluations of Adams and Gary
condemned Mr. McLarnon, and accused him of abuse,
although neither Adams or Gary had ever met with,
spoken with, or evaluated Mr. McLarnon. Steckler
used these evaluations as a basis for accusing Mr.
McLarnon of abuse in her report, at the urging of
45. In 1996, Mr. McLarnon retained new counsel to deal with the aftermath of the September 16, 1994 Highgas hearing. This attorney made ex parte contact with Judge Highgas, who communicated to counsel that he would never win another case in Highgas's court if that attorney took Mr. McLarnon's case to Superior Court. He stated that he had to quit representing McLarnon because Highgas has "his n*** in a vise"
46. At a hearing on November 30, 1994 at the Middlesex Probate and Family Court, Judge Boorstein struck Steckler's report due to: a) Bias, and; b) Steckler was not qualified to make clinical judgments.
47. Judge Boorstein then ordered that the Judge Baker Clinic perform an investigation as Guardian ad Litem for Ian McLarnon.
48. At that hearing, Defendant clerk Havey loudly argued with the judge to not strike the GAL report, lest she have nothing upon which to base the restraining order. This colloquy was edited from the hearing tape.
49. At that hearing, the complainant Jokisch testified for about 15 minutes, repeating the same false allegations that are in her affidavit. Her entire testimony is edited from the hearing tape.
50. At that hearing, Judge Boorstein
ordered that Mr. McLarnon have an evidentiary hearing
after the guardian ad litem report was produced,
and extended the restraining order against Mr. McLarnon
until November 30, 1995.
52. At a hearing in March of 1995, Judge Dilday transferred the responsibility for the evaluation to the Law and Psychiatry Service program at Massachusetts General Hospital, ("MGH") via an order issued March 27, 1995.
53. Judge Dilday also required Mr. McLarnon to pay a fee for that service, in violation of M.G.L. Chapter 215 §56A.
54. Judge Dilday did not have the power and/or authority or the discretion under 215:56A, to shift the burden of payment from the Commonwealth to the parties.
55. Defendant Barbara Beardslee, a social worker at MGH, was assigned as GAL.
56. No report was ever produced, nor did Mr. McLarnon get an evidentiary hearing.
57. Despite Mr. McLarnon's request at further hearings to complete the report, neither Judge Boorstein or Judge Dilday ordered the report to be produced, so that he could get his evidentiary hearing.
58. Neither Judge Boorstein or Dilday held MGH, Beardslee or Herman in contempt of court, despite their direct and continued refusal to produce the GAL report ordered by the court.
59. On November 30, 1995, a restraining
order extension hearing took place in front of Judge
McGovern. At the hearing, the judge reviewed a letter
from GAL Beardslee which stated that Ian was "fragile",
and that Douglas and Jokisch were actually abusing
Ian. No evidence was presented of abuse by Mr. McLarnon.
Nonetheless, Judge McGovern extended the order against
Mr. McLarnon, until May of 1996, allowing Ian to
stay in an abusive household.
61. The judge also threatened Mr. McLarnon several times with jail if he could not prove his assertion that Defendant Register Lambert was suppressing a key medical report from Domingo Pagan, M.D., which is now missing from the impounded file.
62. Mr. McLarnon produced paperwork which satisfied the judge, and was not put in jail.
63. All of these threats from Judge McGovern were edited out of the tape.
64. At this same hearing, Judge McGovern granted a restraining order against McLarnon to one Jennifer Marino, whom Mr. McLarnon had never met or threatened.
65. Miss Marino admitted that she was the mother of 14 year old Ian's son, whom she had raped.
66. Although social worker Douglas and Judge McGovern were mandated reporters under the child abuse laws of Massachusetts, they made no statutorily required report to the Massachusetts Department of Social Services, and did not make a referral to the district attorney for criminal prosecution.
67. Judge McGovern extended the order
until June 26, 1996, without hearing evidence of
abuse by Mr. McLarnon, and did not take into account
the information previously presented about the abuse
from his Mother and David Douglas.
69. At that hearing , Judge Dilday coached the plaintiff's attorney to request a removal of an exception from the restraining order allowing Ian McLarnon to contact his father, which is outside the judge's jurisdictional power.
70. At that hearing, Defendant Clerk Havey would not give McLarnon his case file after being asked, and told that his former lawyer would not relinquish it to Mr. McLarnon.
71. At the hearing, Judge Dilday completely ignored Mr. McLarnon's repeated protestations, and did not even answer or acknowledge that he said anything.
72. Judge Dilday extended the order until May 30, 1997, without evidence that Mr. McLarnon was "placing another in fear of imminent serious physical harm". Upon query of Mr. McLarnon, the judge could not supply any instance of abuse to justify the order, again leaving Ian in an abusive home.
73. On July 1, 1996, Mr. McLarnon was summonsed to Cambridge District Court for an alleged violation of the restraining order, which was dismissed when it was shown that the version of the order presented by Douglas and Jokisch to the court had been altered, and was not valid.
74. On May 30, 1997, the Court yet again extended the order, until June 18, 1997, again leaving Ian in an abusive home.
75. On June 18, 1997, in front of Judge Highgas, the parties testified briefly.
76. At that hearing, Judge Highgas
"misplaced" Mr. McLarnon's motions to
drop the restraining order and modify custody, and
deliberately misstated the facts in the case record,
in order to cover up Douglas' and Jokisch's previous
78. Mr. McLarnon asked the judge upon what abuse or threat of harm a restraining order was based. The judge could cite no instance, but stated that to Mr. McLarnon, "You've been overbearing with Ian. Take my word for it, you've been a little bit overbearing with him."
79. During the hearing, Judge Highgas mocked and ridiculed Mr. McLarnon in front of his son Ian, to his shame and embarrassment, and undermined his son's parental respect.
80. At a hearing on June 30, 1998, Jokisch sought only to renew the order on behalf of Ian, then 17 years old. She did not seek to renew her own order. The only material presented to the court for that hearing concerned the child.
81. After a brief hearing where only the parties testified, only one order was issued, pertaining to the child. Mr. McLarnon was only served with an order on behalf of the child, and was never served with an order pertaining to Jokisch, the Mother.
82. At that hearing, most of the testimony of Virginia Jokisch was edited from the hearing tape.
83. At a hearing held June 30, 1999, on whether to extend the restraining order, the attorney for Jokisch asked to renew Jokisch's non-existent order.
84. Inexplicably, Jokisch's non-existent order was "renewed", without testimony of abuse.
85. At a hearing on September 22,
1999, in front of Judge Dilday, Ian, now age 18,
requested a 209A order in his own right. No evidence
of abuse, or fear of imminent, serious, physical
harm was presented. He had not seen his father in
several years. The most recent evidence of "abuse"
which Ian could evince was that his father had allegedly
thrown his guitar in the grass many years ago. The
order was issued anyway by Judge Dilday.
87. On March 9, 2000, Judge Boorstein heard motions by the plaintiff to correct the record and obtain the evidentiary hearing that had been promised to him in November of 1994. To this date, Mr. McLarnon had not had an evidentiary hearing, nor is one noted on the docket.
88. One of the many attachments to the Motion to Correct the Record was a meticulously documented scientific report with computer wave form analysis of several of the hearing tapes in this case, prepared by several forensic audio consultants, showing conclusively that the tapes were severely edited. There were also eyewitness affidavits, which stated that material matters which they had heard at the hearings were removed from the tapes.
89. Without even looking at or ruling on the motions, Judge Boorstein assessed Mr. McLarnon $3,500.00 in attorneys fees, pursuant to M.G.L. Ch. 231 §6F. The motions were not docketed for months, so the fee award could not be appealed.
90. Months later, Judge Boorstein and McGovern allowed two of Mr. McLarnon's motions, showing that they were not frivolous, but long after any possibility of appeal of the attorney fee sanction.
91. On June 30, 2000, a hearing was
held on renewal of Jokisch's improperly issued 209A
restraining order before Judge Boorstein, against
whom Mr. McLarnon had an open complaint at the Judicial
Conduct Commission. Although counsel requested the
judge to recuse herself, she nevertheless proceeded
with the hearing.
93. In July of 2000, Jokisch's attorney filed a Complaint for contempt for payment of the $3,500.00 in attorneys fees, which was heard on July 24, 2000.
94. At the time of the filing of the complaint, there were still no findings from the court on most of Plaintiff's motions, no docketing of the motions, and Defendants Havey and Maxine Doe had repeatedly denied Mr. McLarnon and his counsel access to his case file.
95. On July 24, 2000, Judge Dilday found Mr. McLarnon in contempt, and jailed him, without allowing him to be sworn, give testimony, or present witnesses.
96. Mr. McLarnon was handcuffed and shackled by order of the judge while his counsel was literally in the middle of the first paragraph of his defense to the court on the matter, without any opportunity to present a case, witnesses, or testimony, and was summarily jailed for non-payment of $3,500.00 in fees to an attorney.
97. At the time of the contempt hearing, most of the motions for which Mr. McLarnon had been assessed attorneys fees had not been decided. Of the two motions of Mr. McLarnon that had been decided, one was allowed, and one was denied.
98. On August 2, 2000, five months
after the March 9 motion hearing, and over a week
after Mr. McLarnon was jailed, Judge McGovern denied
Mr. McLarnon's Motion to Correct the Record. Judge
McGovern was not present at the motion hearing.
100. The only incident Ian testified to at the hearing allegedly occurred in 1985, when Ian was four years old, when his mother brought him to the doctor falsely stating that his father had bruised him. However, the medical record from that visit showed "no bruising."
Facts Pertaining
to Massachusetts
101. On June 22, 2000, Mr. McLarnon filed a petition for superintendence to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, under M.G.L. Chapter 211 §3, alleging essentially the same facts in this complaint, including the falsified court tapes, files, dockets, and improperly issued orders.
102. After a hearing before Judge Francis X. Spina, on December 13, 2000, the Judge dismissed the petition, stating that the claims should be addressed by the Chief Judge of the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court, Judge Sean Dunphy. He would not address the substantive claims of falsified records, edited hearing tapes, diverted files, and visible corruption of officials.
103. Mr. McLarnon had no other legal remedy, since there was no mandated administrative remedy to exhaust prior to seeking SJC intervention for these criminal and judicial violations, and any legal remedy was thwarted by failure to docket orders, and an appeals record that was tainted and unusable because of the editing of the hearing tapes..
104. Mr. McLarnon did not appeal earlier issued restraining orders, because he was waiting for the promised evidentiary hearing, which he believed would set the matter aright, and dismiss the restraining order.
Pertaining to the Massachusetts
105. Due to false allegations in Jokisch's and Douglas's affidavits which they used to obtain the restraining orders, Mr. McLarnon filed a malicious prosecution and civil rights complaint against Jokisch and Douglas in Middlesex Superior Court in January of 1998.
106. The defendants filed a special motion to dismiss under the so-called anti-SLAPP law, M.G.L. Chapter 231 §59H, which protects petitioning activities from suit, when the suit is based solely on those petitioning activities.
107. The Superior Court dismissed Mr. McLarnon's suit against both defendants, even though Mr. Douglas was not a petitioner, and not covered by the law.
108. Mr. McLarnon appealed the dismissal, which the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court took up for review on its own, based on the fact that false claims in petitioning should not be protected under the anti-SLAPP law.
109. On May 4, 2000, the Supreme Judicial Court upheld the dismissal in favor of both Jokisch and Douglas, even though Mr. Douglas was not a petitioner.
110. This dismissal established that false claims of abuse in restraining orders are now protected from suits for malicious prosecution and civil rights, in essence establishing a "perjury protection law", and eliminating a remedy for redress, in violation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.
111. The judges of the SJC acted in a nonadjudicatory fashion and, in effect, rewrote the anti-SLAPP statute in such a manner that they suspended it and usurped a legislative function in violation of the constitutionally guaranteed separation of powers, and thereby violated Arts. XX and XXX of the Mass. Declaration of Rights.
of Chief Justice Dunphy to
112. In early March of 2001, Counsel presented the Tape Report, and voluminous material proving the facts set forth in this complaint, to Defendant Judge Dunphy, Chief Justice of the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court, after the SJC would not intervene.
113. Judge Dunphy wrote back requesting more information, which counsel provided, but avoided addressing the substantive issues set forth in Mr. McLarnon's submission, namely the falsified master tapes and court record in the Middlesex Probate and Family Court, and the actions of its corrupt officials.
114. In an attempt to justify destruction of certain of the falsely edited tapes, Judge Dunphy refused to acknowledge the application of Massachusetts Supplemental Probate Court Rule 201, which requires tapes to be saved as long as the matter is pending in any court.
115. To date, Judge Dunphy has not admitted to, or taken action to correct the pervasive wrongdoing in his Courts, which has obstructed and delayed Mr. McLarnon's due process even further.
116. Judge Dunphy has failed to train the defendant judges in the proper procedure and administration of the Massachusetts restraining order law, Chapter 209A.
117. Judge Dunphy has covered up the illegal tampering with the court record, hearing tapes, dockets, case files, and other official records of the Middlesex Probate and Family Court.
118. Judge Dunphy has failed to require the Middlesex Probate and Family Court to correct the false docket entries in Mr. McLarnon's file.
119. Judge Dunphy has failed to require
the Register to replace the report of Dr. Domingo
Pagan, which he or his agents removed from the impounded
121. Judge Dunphy has failed to propound appropriate standards and requirements for guardians ad litem in the Probate Court, so that MGH, Beardslee and Herman were not constrained to obey any requirement to file their report, as ordered by the court.
122. Judge Dunphy has failed to instruct the Middlesex Probate and Family Court judges to obey Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 215 §56A, requiring the Commonwealth to pay for all court ordered guardian ad litem reports.
Facts Involving Hearing Tapes
123. The hearing tapes of at least four of the hearings in the above referenced 209A restraining order case have been materially edited, and a substantial amount of material has been removed from them. The edits are not random; They are carefully crafted to remove material that was damaging to defendants and helpful to plaintiff.
124. The tape of the November 30, 1994 hearing in front of Judge Boorstein was edited in several critical places. For example:
125. The tape of the June 30, 1998
hearing in front of Judge Dorothy M. Gibson was
edited to remove about four minutes of the perjured
testimony of Virginia Jokisch.
127. The tape of the May 31, 1996 hearing in front of Judge McGovern was edited to remove the record of the judge asking opposing counsel whether Mr. McLarnon was the person they had discussed "the other night", several threats to jail Mr. McLarnon, as well as all references to the medical report of Domingo Pagan, M.D.
128. Mr. McLarnon, who is a forensic audio specialist by trade, prepared the thesis for a lengthy report (the "Tape Report"), consisting of computer wave form analysis showing at least 10 improper edits in two of the hearing tapes, as well as edits in many others. The report also contains corroboration by two other independent and experienced audio consultants verifying the edits, as well as reconstructed transcripts and affidavits of witnesses who were at the hearings, verifying the material that was missing from the edited tapes.
129. At a hearing on December 15,
1999, after reviewing the Tape Report, the Court
issued an order requiring the Register of Probate
at the time, Defendant Lee G. Johnson, to impound
nine hearing tapes for this case, in anticipation
of a motion from Mr. McLarnon to investigate.
131. On November 7th and 8th, 2000, Edward Oliver, a reporter for the Massachusetts News, was able to observe the tape duplication office at the Middlesex Probate and Family Court, and speak to Defendant George Briggs, the employee who supervises that office. Mr. Oliver discovered an unusual recording setup that would allow Mr. Briggs to edit the hearing tapes as alleged, and that would not be used or needed for tape duplication in a court.
132. On information and belief, Defendant Briggs, at the direction of defendants Havey, Douglas, and the Defendant judges, edited the tapes of Mr. McLarnon's hearings.
133. After Mr. McLarnon discovered the tapes were edited and complained about it, one or more of the Defendants destroyed several of the master hearing tapes.
134. In her ruling on Mr. McLarnon's Motion to Correct the Record, Judge McGovern deliberately misquoted the Massachusetts rule requiring the preservation of tapes, Supplemental Probate Court Rule 201, which requires tapes to be saved as long as the matter is pending in any court, and justified their destruction.
135. Judge McGovern also summarily refused to address the issue of the tape editing, with a statement that she had confidence in the tapes, and did not respond to the specific scientific proof of their editing, thereby covering for the wrongdoing of her fellow defendants.
136. To date, none of the defendants
have addressed or disproved a single allegation
in the Tape Report. No one has provided proof to
refute any of the edits or changes alleged by Mr.
McLarnon, or his allegations that the defendants
were responsible for them.
138. Any appeal using the falsified written record and edited audio tapes would be unfair and invalid, since the Appeals Court would not have a true record of the proceedings below.
139. In March or April of 2001, McLarnon requested that Defendant Briggs provide him with an audio tape of the September 22, 2000 hearing in Ian's restraining order case, which was docketed under a different case number than all the other restraining orders.
140. Mr. Briggs stated that the tapes were impounded by Judge McGovern. However, only the tapes in the divorce case were impounded.
141. Mr. Briggs consulted with Judge McGovern, and stated that she would not allow him to give the tape to Mr. McLarnon.
Facts Concerning Mr. McLarnon's Case File
142. The Middlesex Register's office has extensively manipulated the case file (including an impounded part of the file) in Mr. McLarnon's Case.
143. Mr. McLarnon has rarely been
allowed to see his case file, or its impounded portion,
since 1994, when the first restraining order was
issued. Mr. McLarnon has attempted to see the Impounded
File dozens of times during this case. He is usually
told that it cannot be found. Counsel was finally
able to see it briefly in December of 1999, but,
despite repeated requests, has not seen it since
145. Documents from Mr. McLarnon's active case file, Docket No. 84D 3694, had the docket numbers crossed out, and were improperly diverted to an earlier closed 1984 divorce file, stamped 'inactive', Docket No. 148360, by defendants Maxine Doe and/or Havey.
146. A letter presented to Judge Highgas from therapist Bruce Jason, dated September 14, 1994, and made part of the evidence of a hearing on September 16th of that year, has simply disappeared from the file, along with the entire discussion of it on the audio tape.
147. On June 26, 1996, at a hearing at which Mr. McLarnon appeared pro se, he attempted to obtain his case file to take into court. Defendant Havey handed Mr. McLarnon his file, which contained only the Steckler GAL report and the current restraining order, and was missing the rest of the more than 70 documents shown on the docket.
148. Present counsel first attempted to review the case file on September 22, 1999, but it wasn't there. After many calls to the Register's office, they found the file on October 8, 1999.
149. On December 15, 1999 and January 10, 2000, counsel again attempted to see the file. It was not there either time.
150. At the September 22, 1999 hearing,
a letter from the Mass. Dept. of Social Services
condemning Mr. McLarnon had been secretly placed
in the file. It was not placed in evidence, nor
shown to counsel or the defendant. Counsel observed
the Judge reading something during the hearing,
without knowing it was the letter, until later inspection
of the file.
152. At that same March 9, 2000 hearing, GAL Beardslee from MGH was allowed to present a secret affidavit, which counsel could only briefly look at, and was not allowed to have. A request to Judge Boorstein for a copy of the affidavit was denied.
153. On November 7, 2000, Mr. McLarnon again attempted to obtain his case file. Defendant Maxine "Doe" told him it was not there, and he would have to come back another day. Mr. McLarnon continued to request the file during a four hour period from about 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM.
154. About 2:00 PM, almost immediately after Mr. McLarnon's last request, Edward Oliver, a Massachusetts News reporter, went to the counter and asked Defendant Maxine "Doe" for Mr. McLarnon's public case file. Defendant Havey then got it for him to see, even though it was "not there."
155. On November 8, 2000, at approximately 11:00 A.M., Mr. McLarnon, asked defendant Maxine Doe to see his impounded file. Again, it could not be found, until about 2:30 P.M., after much wrangling with Defendant "Doe."
156. Petitioner has appealed several rulings in this case, as far back as September 22, 1999. Not one has been acknowledged, to counsel's knowledge, negating any appeal remedy.
157. The defendant and his counsel have repeatedly been denied access to Mr. McLarnon's impounded file for years by defendant Havey, by each of the defendant Registers of Probate, and by defendant Maxine Doe.
158. A 1985 report by Domingo Pagan,
M.D. (The "Pagan Report") has been removed
from the impounded court file, which condemned Jokisch's
allegations of domestic abuse as unfounded, and
said that false allegations of abuse should not
be brought up again.
160. On June 26, 1999, Judge Edward Donnelly of the Middlesex Probate and Family Court ordered the then Register of Probate Marie Gardin, the Middlesex Family Service Clinic, MGH, and three attorneys to search their files for the report, and to respond to the Register's office as to whether they were able to find it.
161. Everyone who had the Pagan Report responded that it was gone.
162. In September of 2000, Jokisch's attorney sent counsel and the Register a redacted copy of the "missing" Pagan Report, "found" by Virginia Jokisch in her files. However, it was missing a signature and much of the conclusion.
163. Even though the copy sent to the court is not accurate, has come from a party rather than the doctor, and lacks any signature of the doctor, the Register's office placed it in the public case file. Any medical report about a minor child must be placed in the impounded file.
164. Other documents in the impounded
file have also been tampered with. The impounded
GAL report by Defendant Steckler, described above,
which was struck by Judge Boorstein at a hearing
on November 30, 1994, was placed in the public file
rather than the impounded file where it belongs.
There is no notation that the report had been struck.
166. Similarly, a medical report of Dr. Arne Korsvedt, favorable to Mr. McLarnon, was removed from the impounded case file, and never returned.
Facts About the Manipulation of the Docket
167. Between September 22, 1999 and June of 2000, not one hearing in the McLarnon case was docketed by defendants, even though several took place The Register's office stated that they were behind in docketing, but a check of other docket sheets showed motions docketed within one or two weeks after hearings.
168. On June 28, 2000, one day after serving a superintendence petition to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on the Middlesex Probate and Family Court, the court docketed all the motions which they had refused to docket up until then.
169. The docket of the McLarnon case does not contain notations listing most of the documents which are or should be impounded.
170. Recently, the court began to docket more various public and impounded documents which it had long withheld, "lost", or refused to docket. Many entries are placed in formerly empty spots on the page, and some are squeezed in between the lines of others, including the Steckler GAL report, which was inserted in the year 2000, and backdated to 1994.
171. At a hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to Correct the Record in the Probate and Family Court on July 31, 2000, Judge Boorstein, when confronted with evidence of blatant revisions and fabrications in the docket, admitted that "the docket is no good".
Mr. McLarnon Threatened
172. On June 12, 1996, Mr. McLarnon was summonsed to Cambridge District Court for a criminal complaint for violation of his restraining order before the judge, rather than being given a statutorily required show cause hearing. After much wrangling, one was scheduled.
173. On July 1, 1996, Mr. McLarnon returned to Cambridge District Court for the show cause hearing on whether to issue a complaint for violation of the restraining order in this case. Jokisch presented a doctored copy of the restraining order to the Magistrate, alleging Mr. McLarnon had violated it. However, Mr. McLarnon had a copy of the genuine order, which he had not violated, and was able to refute Jokisch's allegations. The magistrate, rather than ask Jokisch about this, turned to Defendant Douglas, a non-complainant, for an explanation.
174. Mr. McLarnon requested a copy of the restraining order submitted to the court, and a copy of the tape of the hearing. Both requests were refused.
175. Three days later, while Mr. McLarnon was stopped at an intersection near his house in Malden, Massachusetts, two large men, John Does One and Two, yanked him out of his vehicle, beat him severely, and told him that he better not go back to court if he ever wanted to see his son again. The beating was severe enough that he had to seek emergency room treatment.
176. When counsel later attempted to check the criminal file at the Cambridge District Court, most of the documents had been removed.
Pertaining to GAL Evaluation/
177. On March 27, 1995, Judge Dilday ordered that an evaluation of Mr. McLarnon, his former wife Virginia Jokisch ("Jokisch"), and their son Ian McLarnon, take place at the Law and Psychiatry Service of MGH.
178. This evaluation was to fulfill an November 30, 1994 order of Judge Boorstein that there be an evidentiary hearing on visitation, to be scheduled upon completion of the evaluation.
179. Defendant Judge Dilday ordered Mr. McLarnon to pay for the difference between the cost of the original evaluation and the new one, despite M.G.L. Ch. 231 §56A, which requires the Commonwealth to pay the entire cost for all court ordered GAL evaluations.
180. Defendant MGH required $3000.00 in advance for the evaluation, and MGH accepted such payment, despite the law requiring the Commonwealth to pay such costs.
181. In August or early September of 1995, GAL Beardslee told Mr. McLarnon's therapist that they were going to reunite Ian with his father, in time for the beginning of the school year.
182. Two months later, on October 31, 1995, Beardslee unilaterally decided to discontinue the court ordered evaluation, ostensibly because Jokisch and her new husband David Douglas were having trouble with Ian. Beardslee sent a letter to that effect to the Register of Probate, without seeking permission of the court, notifying Mr. McLarnon, or requesting any hearing at the court.
183. In another seven months, on May 24, 1996, Beardslee sent a letter to the court falsely blaming Mr. McLarnon for wanting to stop the evaluation in October.
184. At hearings on May 29, and May
31, 1996, Judge McGovern ordered that the evaluation
187. Dr. Kenneth Herman, Beardslee's supervisor at MGH, threatened Mr. McLarnon that he would not see his son unless he contracted for up to two years of therapy services with them, at a huge additional cost. There was no order for therapy.
188. Mr. McLarnon was forced to defend himself at a number of court hearings during and after the pendency of the evaluation, which could have been avoided had the court ordered the GAL to perform its duties, and produce a report.
189. Mr. McLarnon did not appeal the underlying restraining orders, pending the production of the GAL report, after which he anticipated the court-mandated evidentiary hearing to overturn to the order, once the false allegations were exposed.
190. During the time in which the guardian ad litem was controlling the therapy of Mr. McLarnon's son Ian, aged 14 through 15, Mr. McLarnon shared joint legal custody with the mother. However, the court and the GAL hid the facts from Mr. McLarnon that his son was criminally prosecuted twice, was the subject of three CHINS petitions, and that the GAL allowed Ian to live with a 21 year old woman who plied him with drugs and alcohol, and with whom he had a child at age 14.
191. Herman and Beardslee knew that
the child was living in an abusive and dangerous
situation, not only failing to do anything to stop
it, but allowing and encouraging it, thus becoming
complicit in Ian's abuse.
193. Ian came to Mr. McLarnon in mid May of 1996 and begged for help, stating "I'm caught in a plot and I can't get out". By this, he was referring to the manipulations of his mother, stepfather defendant Douglas, the GAL, juvenile probation personnel who were friends of his stepfather, and their lawyers.
194. After coming to his father for help, Ian was hounded by the "plotters", and defendant Douglas pushed Jokisch to make a false criminal complaint against Mr. McLarnon.
196. Beardslee of MGH presented a secret updated affidavit to the Court on March 9, 2000, but the court would not let counsel or Mr. McLarnon have a copy of it.
197. Beardslee ordered Ruth Kirschbaum, of the special education department of the Town of Lexington, to not notify Mr. McLarnon that Ian was undergoing a CORE evaluation, which requires parental notification. Thus, Mr. McLarnon was removed from another aspect of his son's life.
Facts About
the Massachusetts
198. The Defendant Massachusetts Department of Social Services ("DSS") took custody of Ian on October 13, 1995, after a CHINS complaint was filed by Jokisch and Douglas.
199. Mr. McLarnon was never notified
by the Court or DSS of any of the proceedings. They
took custody without informing Mr. McLarnon, who
found out for the first time almost a year later.
201. David Douglas had a friend in Cambridge Juvenile Probation manipulate the contents of the files which were used by DSS, in order to show no fault to Douglas.
202. DSS has to this day refused to produce its records to Mr. McLarnon or to his counsel.
Facts Concerning Damages
203. The defendants' actions in issuing illegal restraining orders on perjured testimony, and covering up with falsified records, has damaged Mr. McLarnon by loss of consortium with his son for seven years.
204. The Defendants' actions in kidnapping his son under color of law has caused Mr. McLarnon substantial emotional and physical distress. He has been harmed and has been suffering from worry about the welfare of his son, grief from the loss of a meaningful relationship with him and watching him be raped and abused, induced into drugs and alcohol and recycled through the system with arrests, abuse clinics, etc. He has felt stress, humiliation, anxiety, fear for his son's safety and well?being, loss of trust, loss of confidence in and feelings of betrayal by the justice system, shock, and emotional scarring, all compensable as emotional distress, and other damages.
205. Mr. McLarnon was injured physically
and emotionally by agents of the defendants, when
he was dragged from his car, beaten, and threatened
to stop his legal proceedings, or he would not see
his son again.
207. The Defendants damaged Mr. McLarnon by hampering his ability to engage in his profession of music composer/arranger, due to the emotional stress, humiliation, fraud, stonewalling, collusion, and corruption, and the amount of time spent defending himself against the false allegations, which has resulted in a drastic loss of earning capacity and income.
208. Since the defendants' false allegations of abuse, Mr. McLarnon has been put on a registry of alleged abusers, which has virtually destroyed his ability to find work in the electronics or forensics fields in which he has experience.
209. Mr. McLarnon has been damaged by substantial legal fees to defend himself in several hearings held during the pendency of the GAL evaluation, which would have been unneeded had the defendant judges and GAL defendants performed their contractual duties.
210. Mr. McLarnon has been damaged in the amount of $3000.00 in illegally extracted GAL fees, and liability for $2,190.00 more, in violation of Massachusetts law.
211. Mr. McLarnon has been damaged by the assessment of $3,500.00 in attorneys fees for bringing motions to the Court to seek to correct the record that the defendants falsified, prior to rulings on those motions.
212. Mr. McLarnon has been damaged by being falsely incarcerated in the Middlesex House of Correction for non-payment of attorneys fees.
213. Mr. McLarnon has been damaged
by repeated deprivation of his due process rights
to an appeal, since there is no accurate record
from which to appeal.
215. The defendants' failure to act in a timely fashion both administratively and judicially, and continue to ignore the evidence, refer the matter the others, or blame Mr. McLarnon, have led to inexcusable delays, and violate Mr. McLarnon's right to due process.
216. The financial pressure caused by the defendants forced Mr. McLarnon to file for protection under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy code, incurring further financial stress.
217. Plaintiff reasserts and incorporates all averments set forth above into this count.
218. The judges and Register officials in the Middlesex Probate and Family Court have engaged in a pattern and practice of violating Mr. McLarnon's due process rights as protected under the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution, as follows:
A. The right to appeal adverse decisions in his restraining order hearings, due to falsified hearing tapes, concealment of the case record, manipulation of the case file, falsification of the case docket, refusal to docket hearings, and the removal of key documents from the record;
B. The right to a fair, unbiased tribunal;
C. The right to timely justice, rather than continual delays.
D. The right to an accurate, truthful,
complete written and audio record of the case;
F. The right to tapes of hearings, rather than their destruction by the court in a case that is open.
G. The right to an evidentiary hearing in this matter, with an accurate, truthful record;
H. The right to be heard before being incarcerated;
I. The right to be free from unjust incarceration over non-payment of attorney's fees to an opponent's lawyer;
J. The right to enjoy the companionship and direct the upbringing of his son.
219. All the actions of the defendants set forth above were done under color of law.
220. No effective remedy at law is available. The court from which Mr. McLarnon has sought a remedy is corrupt and is thwarting every attempt to obtain a remedy, withholding the case file, falsifying the record, making any appeal impossible by failing to docket hearings, denying the falsified record after being shown irrefutable scientific proof, making appeal impossible because any record on appeal would be materially tainted, refusing to allow an evidentiary hearing where these issues could be addressed, and incarcerating Mr. McLarnon without an opportunity to be heard.
221. The plaintiff has been damaged in numerous ways by the defendants' actions and failure to act, as set forth in the "Damages" section above.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff requests
the following equitable relief:
B. Issue a temporary and permanent injunction, enjoining the Middlesex Register of Probate, all Middlesex Probate and Family Court judges, and their agents, from editing, falsifying, destroying, and concealing tapes of hearings in this case;
C. Issue an order to the Chief Judge and Register of the Middlesex Probate and Family Court, requiring them to provide Mr. McLarnon with any available unedited copies of tapes of all hearings in this case, as well as transcripts of such tapes, at the expense of the Commonwealth;
D. Issue an injunction to the Middlesex Register of Probate, enjoining him from failing to Docket all motions, orders, documents, and hearings in this matter in a timely manner;
E. Issue an injunction to the Middlesex Register of Probate, enjoining him or his agents from withholding the case file, including the impounded file, in this case, from inspection by Mr. McLarnon and his counsel at any time upon reasonable request and notice;
F. Issue an injunction to the Middlesex Register of Probate, enjoining him or his agents from withholding or removing any documents that should be properly contained in Mr. McLarnon's case file, past or future;
G. Issue an order to require a full accounting by the GAL appointed in this matter, as to why it has never produced a report ordered by the judge in November of 1994;
H. Issue an order to Judge Dunphy, Chief Justice of the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court, to fully investigate the wrongdoing in the Middlesex Probate and Family Court;
I. Issue an order to Chief Judge
McGovern requiring her to hold a full evidentiary
hearing in this restraining order matter, after
all the fraud and false documentation by the court
is corrected.
K. Issue an order for attorneys fees and costs against the defendants necessary to prosecute this action.
L. Issue an order to remove Mr. McLarnon's name from the abuser registry;
M. Any other relief that is just, in order to redress the harm that these actions have done to Mr. McLarnon and his son Ian.
222. Plaintiff reasserts and incorporates all averments set forth above into this count.
223. The defendants, in their individual capacity, engaged in a pattern and practice of depriving Mr. McLarnon of his protected due process rights under the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution, as set forth above.
224. John Does One and Two beat and threatened Mr. McLarnon to not exercise his due process rights in court.
225. All of the actions by the defendants set forth above were done under color of law.
226. Defendant Douglas, acting in collusion with an uncertain number of the state defendants, helped these state defendants to violate Mr. McLarnon's due process rights.
227. The plaintiff was damaged by the defendants' actions, as set forth above.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff requests the following relief:
A. A judgment in the plaintiff's favor that the all of the defendants, individually and in concert, violated Mr. McLarnon's protected 5th and 14th Amendment due process rights;
B. An award of money damages against all the defendants for violation of his civil rights;
C. An award of money damages against all the defendants for loss of consortium with his son;
D. An award of money damages against all of the defendants for emotional distress;
E. An award of money damages against John Does One and Two, for medical expenses and pain and suffering from the beating at their hands;
F. An award for previously expended attorneys fees for defense against the defendants' improper actions in the Middlesex Probate and Family Court;
G. An award of attorneys fees and costs for prosecuting this action;
H. Any other relief which seems just;
228. Plaintiff reasserts and incorporates all averments set forth above into this count.
229. The Massachusetts anti-SLAPP
law, Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 231 59H,
as applied, deprives persons of a remedy at law,
in violation of the due process requirement in the
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution,
and Article XI of the Massachusetts Declaration
of Rights.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests that the court declare that Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 231 §59H is unconstitutional, as applied.
231. The individual and corporate defendants, as well as the DSS, individually, and in conspiracy with each other, intentionally interfered with Mr. McLarnon's parent- child relationship with his son Ian, resulting in a loss of filial consortium.
232. The defendants, in essence, abducted, enticed, harbored and secreted Ian from a Father who had legal custody.
233. Through an active and wrongful effort, knowing that Mr. McLarnon did not consent, the defendants induced Ian to leave his Father's home.
234. The defendants further encouraged the child, once away from Mr. McLarnon's home without consent, harbored him and continued to keep him away from the parent.
235. While away, the defendants placed Ian in a damaging relationship which further interfered with his relationship with his father.
236. While away, the defendants enticed Ian to quit school, depriving him of an education.
237. Ian has been, and continues to
be substantially damaged by the disruption of this
WHEREFORE, Mr. McLarnon requests the following relief:
A. Damages for the loss of more than seven years with his son.
B. Damages for the emotional harm done to Mr. McLarnon, as he daily grieves his loss.
C. Damages for cost of recovering the child;
D. Expenses for Mr. McLarnon to obtain treatment for the child's drug and alcohol addiction, therapy, and recovery from the emotional and psychological abuse which he suffered because of the actions of the defendants in keeping him from his Father.
Plaintiff requests a jury trial on all issues so triable.
|Copyright 2004 ©All Rights Reserved
P.O. Box 5882
Holliston, MA 01746


text:
Sagamore Hill Vest by Susie Allen
Welcome! You are browsing as a guestWould you like to see projects made from this pattern and much more? create a free account What am I missing?
© Suzy Allen
© Suzy Allen
© Suzy Allen
Sagamore Hill Vest
This pattern is available from chaintwo.com for $4.99.
A brisk walk in the fall is not complete without your favorite fall vest and this vest is pretty sure to be it. The simple detail of the cables, give this vest a great rustic quality that is not only functional but fashionable as well.
This pattern is part of our Fall 2012 and may be either purchased as part of the ebook or separately check us out at http://www.chaintwo.com Online's first digital magazine!
For more information, see: http://www.chaintwo.com


text:
Dave Gemignani (pronounced Gem-in-nani) is a bio med technician at Fairview Northland Medical Center in Princeton, where he repairs health care machines. He began his job this past March while completing his coursework for his bio med degree from Western Tech in LaCrosse, Wis.
Gemignani grew up in Beloit, Wis., and one of his big interests growing up was racing go-karts for 12 years. He now wants to race Formula 4 cars. Gemignani also enjoys baking, taking road trips with friends, sailing and snorkeling. One of his favorite places is Key West, Fla. Gemignani learned cooking and baking from his father, who is Italian, and also through making meals with grandparents in Chicago.
1 pkg. Jiffy yellow cake mix
8 oz. pkg. cream cheese
1 pkg. vanilla instant pudding
3 or 4 sliced bananas
1 lg. tub Cool Whip
milk according to pudding directions
fresh strawberries
Make cake according to package directions and bake in 9×13-inch pan for 20 minutes at 350 degrees. Whip together the cream cheese and milk and then stir in the pudding mix and beat until fluffy. Pour on top of cake. Place banana slices on stop of pudding and then spread the Cool Whip over that. Slice the strawberries lengthwise and place evenly over top. Chill until set.


text:
Technology Used By Girl To Seek Help During Rape Attempt
This case is an example of how technology can help combat sexual violence. So often when sexual assault and technology are mentioned, only the efforts of predators are mentioned. This needs to change.
Technology can be a useful tool for those being assaulted and it can be useful for bystanders. If technology is exploited fully by all non-offenders that may cause some offenders to have more fear of detection.
H/T: twitter feed of Hollydes
Labels: legal


text:
The JohnGray Real Estate Ltd. team comprises of the industry's top talent, with an innovative vision and the will and resources to get the job done on time and on budget. Ours is a disciplined, focused, creative and flexible approach that has consistently provided unparalleled value and service. Over the years, we have developed a set of core competencies and operating principals to ensure this is achieved.
As part of its evolution, JohnGray Real Estate Ltd. has selected the following values to be used at all times:
Integrity, with a strong sense of professional ethics is the cornerstone of all our activities.
Respect is fundamental in our relationships with our employees, partners, clients, investors, suppliers and competitors.
Build strong and lasting relationships based on trust and preserve the company's reputation and branding
These values guide us in the day to day operations as well as in employee relationship matters.


text:
Week 1: Wednesday
Get the recipe for Turkey Burgers With Creamy Romaine Slaw.
Perfect wine pairing for this dish: 2008 Lucky Star Chardonnay ($9, klwines.com)
This big Chardonnay lends richness to the lean burgers while complementing the creamy carrot and romaine slaw.
Your Four-Week Dinner Plan Shopping List for all the recipes.


text:
As promised, I hope to explain the basics of personal finance on youngandthrifty.
Mostly everyone I know has a mutual fund. So, what REALLY is a mutual fund, you ask?
Mutual funds are a collection of stocks that are professionally managed by a high-paying fund manager. They collect everyone's money (or whoever is interested in buying the mutual fund) and then pools it together to buy the selected stocks, bonds, and money market funds that they think will provide good return.
They then distribute the gains (or boooo, losses) back to you, the investor.
Mutual funds can be held in: TFSA's, RRSP's and non-registered accounts.
The pros of mutual funds are:
- Diversification. Everyone in personal finance loves this word. It decreases the riskiness (so if one stock does poorly, then you might be offset by another stock that does well, in another sector) of your investment. Because most normal people don't have the cashola to buy a lot of stocks to diversify, the mutual fund is meant to help you do just that.
- A Professional Does the Stock Picking for You. A fund manager picks the fruit so you don't have to worry about it. These people are trained (hopefully…nervous laughter) to find the best picks the ensure that the fund has a good return of capital. That being said, many times the S&P index beat a plethora of mutual funds. Which means that even with professional management, your fund could still suck, and your money could be going nowhere.
- Guaranteed Principle. Some big banks have mutual fund options that guarantee your principle investment, say if you hold your cash with the bank for a minimum of five years.
The cons of mutual funds are:
- FEES! The Management Expense Ratio fees aka MER's are what kills ya. They can cost anywhere from 1.5 to 3.2% a year, depending on the company. I was with Investors Group for a bit in the beginning of my foray into personal finance. The financial adviser I gave my $5000 to neglected to tell me he was making a pretty penny (3.2%) off my investment, he kept saying that they have "no commissions". But the MER is sort of like a commission for the financial adviser. So on a $5000 investment you're possibly out $175, EVEN if the mutual fund is losing money. Where does this hard earned money go? Some of it goes to the fund manager, your financial adviser (so heads up if they seem pretty keen on getting you that fund, because they might be getting a big commission from selling you a piece of the pie, instead), and other costs of keeping the fund professionally managed. The important piece of this to take away is that if you want that compound interest really working for you, you have to lower your investment costs.
- Sometimes hard to find how well your fund's doing. Sometimes it can be hard to find how well (or poorly) your fund is doing. Sometimes once your financial adviser gets your money and sells you the fund, they become MIA. This happened to me and I only found out how poorly my fund was doing about a few times a year, when they send you those quarterly statements. I recently found out you can track your funds ONLINE (just ask your financial adviser for the login addresses and ID's) and since then, my financial advisers seemed to have smartened up a bit and check-in with me a bit more frequently.
- Not Traded on the Exchange. Because they're not traded on the exchange, you don't have to pay a trading commission each time you buy more of the fund. Trade commissions can cost anywhere from $4.95 to $29 a pop (each time you trade).
So how does one avoid paying for costly MER's? The beautiful balance is to find either an Exchange Traded Fund (remember how I said that the index has historically provided better returns that actively managed funds?) or an E-fund.
One of the ones that I like is the TD E-Series Fund. It has a low MER, I think 0.5% is one of the highest they have. Because you skip the middle man (the financial adviser, banks etc.) it's cheaper for you. Hurrah! We can have our cake and eat it too. The trick is that they're hard to apply for, but once you get it, it's easy peasy. In my next post, I'll talk about how to apply for a TD E-series fund with the least amount of hassle.
What do you think of mutual funds? Do you like them or do you prefer to use ETF's?


text:
Ron Paul has gone Hollywood.
Appearing on "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno," the presidential hopeful took a swipe at his GOP rivals telling the crowd that Michele Bachmann "hates Muslims."
When asked by host Jay Leno what he thought of his rivals, Paul shook his head, slowed his voice and said, "she doesn't like Muslims, she hates them, she wants to go get 'em" — in reference to the comments Bachmann has made on the campaign trail over her willingness to attack Iran over its suspected nuclear program.
The comment was especially surprising for Paul, who up until now has shied away from personal attacks.
The comment even left the audience and host Jay Leno momentarily stunned.
In reference to Rick Santorum, Paul said he can't stop talking about "gay people and Muslims."


text:
For Online Computer Support, Ask a Computer Technician
Tried using IE 8, 9 & 10; and tried resetting IE Tried re-installing Adobe reader X & XI.
I'm sorry; please click on the website below and allow the ScreenConnect program to run, then I will be able to chat with you and help you directly:http://22.214.171.124:8040/?Session=2519708e-a30d-4fbb-978b-30bed0db1b5b&SUPPORT=JAVAWEdit: Did you click on the website link I gave you yet? It looks like you've gone away, so I'm canceling the website link for now. Please reply back when you are available to continue, so I can help. Thank you,
Google Chrome works fine.
Sorry I was called away for a while.
Don't have my phone, so I'll check regularily to see if you come on-line.
I need to use IE, some web-sites don't work properly in Chrome or the others. I will try the Foxit Reader.
Foxit is secure as I am in a legal firm? I'll need to clear its use with my superiors.
I tried the new account approach and it didn't fix the problem either; this Foxit looks okay and probably will be accepted, I'll let you know on Monday.


text:
Photos of Rachel Zoe at Madeo in LA
Celeb Style: Rachel Zoe
Rachel enjoyed a ladies' night out at Madeo in LA looking utterly chic in cool separates. Check out how she paired a gorgeous ivory tweed jacket with a draped tunic and over-the-knee boots. Her accessories, comprised of a gold and pearl Chanel necklace, jeweled cuff, gold watch, and patent clutch, finish her fantastic fervor.
Check out CelebStyle for lots more celebrity street style!
Image Source: Pacific Coast News Online


text:
Inbred strain
Inbred strains (also called inbred lines, or rarely for animals linear animals) are individuals of a particular species which are nearly identical to each other in genotype due to long inbreeding. Inbred strains of animals are frequently used in laboratories for experiments where for reproducibility of conclusions all the test animals should be as similar as possible. However, for some experiments, genetic diversity in the test population may be desired. Thus outbred strains of most laboratory animals are also available.
Certain plants including the genetic model organism Arabidopsis thaliana naturally self pollinate, which makes it quite easy to create inbred strains in the laboratory (other plants, including important genetic models such as Maize require transfer of pollen from one flower to another). For most animals, the usual procedure is mating of brother-sister pairs for a minimum of 20 generations, which will result in lines that are roughly 99% genetically identical.[1][2] Many inbred strains have been inbred for many more generations and are in effect isogenic.[3]
Inbreeding animals will sometimes lead to unwanted genetic drift. The continuous overlaying of like genetics exposes recessive gene patterns that often lead to changes in reproduction performance, fitness, and ability to survive. A decrease in these areas is known as inbreeding depression. A hybrid between two inbred strains can be used to cancel out deleterious recessive genes resulting in an increase in the mentioned areas. This is known as heterosis.[4]
The best-known strains of laboratory animals are:
Rats and mice[edit]
"The period before World War I led to the initiation of inbreeding in rats by Dr Helen King in about 1909 and in mice by Dr C. C. Little in 1909. The latter project led to the development of the DBA strain of mice, now widely distributed as the two major sub-strains DBA/1 and DBA/2, which were separated in 1929-1930. DBA mice were nearly lost in 1918, when the main stocks were wiped out by murine paratyphoid, and only three un-pedigreed mice remained alive. Soon after World War I, inbreeding in mice was started on a much larger scale by Dr L. C. Strong, leading in particular to the development of strains C3H and CBA, and by Dr C. C. Little, leading to the C57 family of strains (C57BL, C57BR and C57L). Many of the most popular strains of mice were developed during the next decade, and some are closely related. Evidence from the uniformity of mitochondrian DNA suggests that most of the common inbred mouse strains were probably derived from a single breeding female about 150-200 years ago."
"Many of the most widely used inbred strains of rats were also developed during this period, several of them by Curtis and Dunning at the Columbia University Institute for Cancer Research. Strains dating back to this time include F344, M520 and Z61 and later ACI, ACH, A7322 and COP. Tryon's classic work on selection for maze-bright and dull rats led to the development of the TMB and TMD inbred strains, and later to the common use of inbred rats by experimental psychologists."[5]
Inbred strains of rats[edit]
- Wistar as a generic name for inbred strains such as Wistar-Kyoto, developed from the Wistar outbred strains.
Inbred strains of mice[edit]
Guinea pigs[edit]
G.M. Rommel first started conducting inbreeding experiments on guinea-pigs in 1906. Strain 2 and 13 guinea-pigs, were derived from these experiments and are still in use today. Sewall Wright took over the experiment in 1915. He was faced with the task of analyzing all of the accumulated data produced by Rommel. Wright became seriously interested in constructing a general mathematical theory of inbreeding. By 1920 Wright had developed his method of path coefficients, which he then used to develop his mathematical theory of inbreeding. Wright introduced the inbreeding coefficient F as the correlation between uniting gametes in 1922, and most of the subsequent theory of inbreeding has been developed from his work. The definition of the inbreeding coefficient now most widely used is mathematically equivalent to that of Wright.[citation needed]
See also[edit]
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Inbred strains.
- ^ Mary F. Lyon (1981). "Rules for Nomenclature of Inbred Strains". In Green, Margaret C. Genetic Variants and Strains of the Laboratory Mouse. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer Verlag. p. 368. ISBN 0-89574-152-0.
- ^ Thomas H. Roderick; Gunther Schlager (1966). "Multiple Factor Inheritance". In Green, Earl L. Biology of the Laboratory Mouse. New York: McGraw-Hill. p. 156. LCCN 65-27978.
- ^ Michael Festing. "Isogenic". Retrieved 2013-12-19.
- ^ Michael Festing. "Inbreeding & it's effects". Retrieved 2013-12-19.
- ^ Michael Festing. "History of inbred strains". Retrieved 2013-12-19.


text:
Here you go!
Step 1: Identify the notes of the song corresponding to the tune. The song will include only those chords which are combinations of these notes.
Step 2: Analyse the song, line-by-line. Divide each line of the song into logical segments, call each segment a measure. There's more to a measure of a song that what is mentioned here. For simplicity, I'm calling a segment a measure. A measure can typically include 3-6 notes of the tune. Now the question is, where do you set the break points inorder to get measures of a line of song? Here's the simple rule of thumb: Follow your intuition! How I look at it is, I set the breakpoint at the transition of the song from one scale to another. Now, "scale" is yet another technical term like "measure". Pls note that all these terms are used in a very general sense in my context.
Lets take an example. "Yeh mera dil" from Don.
Yeh mera dil pyaar ka deewana
------------ -------- -------
Deewana deewana pyaar ka parvana
------- ------- -------- -------
Aata hai mujhko pyaar mein jaljaana
--------------- ---------- --------
Listen to the song keeping an eye on the segmentation above. Sounds right?
I play the first line ("Yeh mera dil pyaar ka deewana") using only three chords. The original song might include many more, but the tune can be contained in three chords. I guess I'm sure of that.
Step 3: Having identified the measures, the next task is to map each measure to a chord. The rule for this is, the chord that correctly maps to the measure should include as many notes of the measure as possible. For instance, look at this:
Yeh mera dil
The chords C and Aminor include both the notes E & C. But how ironical, I play Dminor chord for this measure. An exception in the very beginning! Well, its like this. Generally, the note with which the song begins determines the "scale" of the song. Most of the chords would be centered around this note.
Try playing this measure with C, Aminor and Dminor. You'll see the difference yourself.
Here's what I do. I have this simple chords table which I drafted out.
Step 3.1: Given a measure, using the table above, I identify all possible chords (only major, minor and flat) that include the notes of the measure. I then set the "accompaniment" of my keyboard to ON, and play the notes of the measure with each chord. The chord that perfectly carries the tune of the measure is the one I go with. Somewhat a brute force approach, but for a layman like me, it sure works.
Step 3.2: Once you get a rough idea of the chords for a line (like "yeh mera dil pyaar ka deewana"), play them in sequence without playing the notes. If you can identify the tune by playing just the chords, your chords are right! Otherwise, use your judgement and tweak the chord combination by reconsidering those chords that you've discarded in step 3.1 above.
Repeat steps 3.1 and 3.2 for each line of the song.
Step 4: That's the end of the algorithm!
Powered by intuition, Driven by sharp ears (Quotation courtesy: Infosys :D)