Solitary confinement is a form of imprisonment in which an incarcerated person lives in a single cell with little or no contact with other people. It is a punitive tool used within the prison system to discipline or separate incarcerated individuals who are considered to be security risks to other incarcerated individuals or prison staff, as well as those who violate facility rules or are deemed disruptive. However, it is also used as protective custody on incarcerated individuals whose safety is threatened by others in order to separate them from the general prison population.

A robust body of research has shown that solitary confinement has profound negative psychological, physical, and neurological effects on those who experience it, often lasting well beyond one's time in solitary. While corrections officials have stated that solitary confinement is a necessary tool for maintaining the safety and security of prisons and jails, numerous medical, mental health, and legal professional organizations have criticized the practice and hold the view that it should be sharply curtailed.

Nelson Mandela, the South African anti-apartheid activist, described solitary confinement as "the most forbidding aspect of prison life." Human rights experts have stated that prolonged solitary confinement may amount to torture, and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (known as the Mandela Rules) were revised in 2015 to prohibit placements in solitary for longer than 15 days.

History

The practice of solitary confinement traces its origins to the late 18th century, when Quakers in Pennsylvania used the method as a substitution for public punishments. Research surrounding the possible psychological and physiological effects of solitary dates back to the 1830s. When the new prison discipline of separate confinement was introduced at Eastern State Penitentiary as part of the "Pennsylvania" or separate system in 1829, commentators attributed the high rate of mental breakdown to the system of isolating prisoners in their cells. Charles Dickens, who visited the Philadelphia Penitentiary during his travels to America, described the "slow and daily tampering with the mysteries of the brain to be immeasurably worse than any torture of the body."

The Supreme Court of the United States made its first comment about the deleterious effects of solitary confinement in 1890, noting that the use of solitary led to reduced mental and physical capabilities (In re Medley 134 U.S. 160). Records from Danish prisons between 1870 and 1920 indicate that individuals in solitary confinement there had also experienced signs of acute mental distress, including anxiety, paranoia, and hallucinations.

In the 20th and early 21st centuries, Denmark and other Scandinavian countries have extensively used solitary confinement for individuals in pretrial detention with the stated goal of preventing them from interfering in investigations. Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik has been held in solitary confinement since his sentencing in 2012, partly to protect him from other incarcerated individuals. Breivik sued the Norwegian Correctional Service in 2016 alleging that the conditions of confinement in solitary violated his human rights, but his legal appeal was ultimately rejected by the European Court of Human Rights.

The use of solitary confinement increased greatly during the COVID-19 pandemic in response to the rising prevalence of the virus inside prisons and jails. Many correctional facilities were locked down for up to 23 hours a day, confining people in their cells with no programming, phone access, or human contact. In the United States alone, more than 300,000 incarcerated people were held in virus-related lockdowns during the early months of the pandemic.

Purpose
Solitary confinement is used on incarcerated individuals when they are considered a danger to themselves or others, or when they are suspected of organizing or being engaged in illegal activities within the facility. It is also used on individuals who are at high risk of being harmed by others, for example because they are transgender, have served as a witness to a crime, or have been convicted of crimes such as child molestation or abuse. This latter form of isolation is known as protective custody, and can be either voluntary or involuntary.

Solitary confinement is also commonly used as punishment for those who have violated prison rules or committed other disciplinary infractions. The practice is the norm in super-maximum security (supermax) prisons, where individuals who are deemed dangerous or high risk are held.

By country or region

Europe
While solitary confinement is less commonplace in Europe than in other parts of the world including the United States, it is still widely used in many European countries today.

The European Court of Human Rights distinguishes between complete sensory isolation, total social isolation and relative social isolation and notes that "complete sensory isolation, coupled with total social isolation can destroy the personality and constitutes a form of inhuman treatment which cannot be justified by the requirements of security or any other reason. On the other hand, the prohibition of contacts with other prisoners for security, disciplinary or protective reasons does not in itself amount to inhuman treatment or punishment."

The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture, or CPT, defines solitary confinement as "whenever a prisoner is ordered to be held separately from other prisoners, for example, as a result of court decision, as a disciplinary sanction imposed within the prison system, as a preventive administrative measure or for the protection of the prisoner concerned." The CPT "considers that solitary confinement should only be imposed in exceptional circumstances, as a last resort and for the shortest possible time."

Iceland

Iceland has faced criticism for decades over its extensive use of pre-trial solitary confinement. A 2023 report by Amnesty International documented that 61 percent of pre-trial detainees had spent time in solitary confinement in 2021; of those detained that year, 57 percent were foreign nationals, a percentage far higher than the percentage of foreign nationals in Iceland (around 14 percent of the population in 2021).

Italy
Italian prisoners subject to special surveillance ("41-bis regime") may be in de facto solitary confinement. A person sentenced to multiple life sentences in Italy may be required by the Minister of Justice to serve a period of between 6 months to years in the "41-bis regime" of solitary confinement, subject to extension and review.

United Kingdom

In 2015, segregation (solitary confinement) was used 7,889 times.<ref name= 54 out of 85,509 prisoners held in England and Wales in 2015 were placed in solitary confinement cells in Close Supervision Centres (Shalev & Edgar, 2015:149), England and Wales' version of the US 'Supermax'.

The use of solitary confinement on juveniles and children, as elsewhere, has been a subject of contention. Critics argue that, in the United Kingdom, the state has a duty to "set the highest standards of care" when it limits the liberties of children. Frances Crook is one of many to believe that incarceration and solitary confinement are the harshest forms of possible punishments and "should only be taken as a last resort". Because children are still mentally developing, Crook writes, incarceration also should not encourage them to commit more violent crimes.

The penal system has been cited as failing to protect juveniles in custody. In the United Kingdom, 29 children died in penal custody between 1990 and 2006: "Some 41% of the children in custody were officially designated as being vulnerable". That is attributed to the fact that isolation and physical restraint are used as the first response to punish them for simple rule infractions. Moreover, Frances Crook argues that these punitive policies not only violate their basic rights but also leave the children mentally unstable and left with illnesses that are often ignored. Overall, the solitary confinement of youth is considered to be counterproductive because the "restrictive environment... and intense regulation of children" aggravates them, instead of addressing the issue of rehabilitation.

Solitary confinement is colloquially referred to in British English as "the block", "The Segregation Unit" or "the cooler".

United States

Solitary confinement first arose in the United States in the late 1700s among religious groups like the Quakers, who thought isolation would promote repentance and rehabilitation. Though the practice fell out of use in the early 1900s, it experienced a resurgence during the tough on crime era in the 1980s and 1990s. This period also saw the construction of supermax prisons, which typically house individuals in indefinite solitary confinement consisting of upwards of 22 hours a day of isolation.

In the United States penal system today, more than 20 percent of individuals in state and federal prisons and 18 percent of individuals in local jails are placed in solitary confinement or another form of restrictive housing at some point during their incarceration. According to a 2023 report from Solitary Watch and Unlock the Box, it is estimated that more than 122,000 people are held in solitary confinement in state and federal prisons and local jails in the United States on any given day. A report from the Liman Center at Yale Law School found that between 41,000 and 48,000 individuals were held daily in solitary confinement in state and federal prisons for 15 days or more in 2021, with over 6,000 individuals found to have been held in solitary for over a year.

Since 2009, there have been legislative efforts in numerous states to ban the use of solitary confinement for vulnerable populations, including children, pregnant women, and LGBTQ+ people, as well as to end the use of long-term solitary confinement. In 2020, New Jersey passed the Isolated Confinement Restriction Act, which bans the use of solitary beyond 20 consecutive days. As of June 2023, New York, Connecticut, and Nevada have passed legislation banning the use of solitary beyond 15 consecutive days, bringing their use of isolation in line with the United Nations' Mandela Rules.

In July 2023, United States Representative Cori Bush (D-Mo.) introduced the End Solitary Confinement Act, which would prohibit solitary confinement except for up to a four-hour maximum in all federal prisons, jails, and immigration detention centers if passed. The bill would also incentivize similar legislation to be enacted at the state and local levels.

Venezuela

The headquarters for the Bolivarian Intelligence Service (SEBIN) in Plaza Venezuela, Caracas, have an underground detention facility that has been dubbed La Tumba (The Tomb). The facility is located at the place that the underground parking for the Metro Caracas was to be located. The cells are two by three meters that have a cement bed, white walls, security cameras, no windows, and barred doors, with cells aligned next to one another so that there is no interaction between prisoners. Such conditions have caused prisoners to become very ill, but they are denied medical treatment. Bright lights in the cells are kept on so that prisoners lose their sense of time, with the only sounds heard being from the nearby Caracas Metro trains. Those who visit the prisoners are subjected to strip searches by multiple SEBIN personnel.

Allegations of torture in La Tumba, specifically white torture, are also common, with some prisoners attempting to commit suicide. Those conditions according to the NGO Justice and Process are intended to make prisoners plead guilty to the crimes that they are accused of.

Effects

Psychological

Solitary confinement has been associated with significant negative effects on mental health. Research indicates that the psychological effects of solitary confinement may encompass a range of adverse symptoms including "anxiety, depression, anger, cognitive disturbances, perceptual distortions, obsessive thoughts, paranoia, and psychosis." These symptoms are so widespread among individuals held in solitary that some psychiatrists have labeled them "SHU Syndrome," with SHU standing for Special Housing Unit or Security Housing Unit. In a 1983 journal article, Stuart Grassian described SHU Syndrome as a "major, clinically distinguishable psychiatric syndrome."

For those who enter the prison system already diagnosed with a mental illness, solitary confinement can significantly worsen their condition. Incarcerated individuals with mental health conditions often "decompensate in isolation, requiring crisis care or psychiatric hospitalization." The lack of human contact and sensory deprivation that characterize solitary confinement have been shown to cause permanent or semi-permanent changes to brain physiology,  and can lead individuals to commit suicide or self-harm.

Firsthand accounts from individuals who have survived the experience of solitary corroborate the findings described in the scientific literature. As one individual held in solitary confinement in Louisiana said:
[Solitary confinement] has took a toll on me mentally, emotionally, physically... I even hear voices at night it frightens me to the point I sometimes just want to take my life.
As another individual in Louisiana said:
Before I came to [solitary] I was whole and well-grounded. Now I feel as if I kind of forgotten how the 'old me' use to work… I have started forgetting who certain people are and what are certain things. It's like being in a cell this long has started making me lose hope and being back here has [made me feel] like the cell walls are closing in on me.

Self-harm

A major issue within the prison system in general, and solitary confinement in particular, is the high number of incarcerated individuals who turn to self-harm. Self-harm in carceral settings can include, but is not limited to, cutting, head-banging, swallowing razors and other sharp objects, and self-amputations of fingers or testicles.

A 2014 study of New York City jail admissions published in the American Journal of Public Health found that, after controlling for length of jail stay, age, race/ethnicity, and mental illness status, individuals placed in solitary confinement were 6.9 times more likely to commit self-harm and 6.3 times more likely to commit potentially fatal self-harm than the general jail population. While 7.3 percent of jail stays included any time in solitary, 53.3 percent of acts of self-harm and 45 percent of acts of potentially fatal self harm took place among people who had spent time in solitary during their stay.

Incarcerated individuals who attempt self-harm or suicide are often placed on suicide watch, an intensive form of isolation and monitoring that takes place in a "bare cell" with few if any furnishings. While on suicide watch, individuals are typically denied clothing and bedding (to prevent them from hanging themselves using bedsheets), as well as programming and contact visits. Though these conditions are intended to prevent individuals from committing suicide, they often exacerbate trauma and other pre-existing mental health conditions. Individuals in suicide watch cells have still found numerous ways to harm themselves, including by diving head-first into the floor and biting through veins in their wrists.

Physical

Solitary confinement has been reported to cause hypertension, headaches, profuse sweating, dizziness, and heart palpitations. Many individuals in solitary experience extreme weight loss due to digestion complications and abdominal pain. They can also develop neck and back pain and muscle stiffness due to long periods of little to no physical activity. These symptoms have been linked to the intense anxiety and sensory deprivation caused by isolation, and often worsen with repeated visits to solitary.

Studies have shown that solitary confinement also has a marked effect on the human brain. fMRI scans have found that social isolation causes brain activity nearly identical to hunger cravings, and that it activates the same regions of the brain as physical pain. Furthermore, the sensory deprivation of solitary has been found to cause reduced electroencephalography (EEG) frequency on brain scans. One study that placed adult rats in solitary-like conditions found that, after a month in isolation, the rats' neurons had shrunk by 20 percent.

Social

Some sociologists argue that prisons create a unique social environment that do not allow individuals to create strong social ties inside or outside of the facility. The social isolation that incarcerated individuals experience is especially acute in solitary confinement, where they may be denied access to phone calls, mail, and visits from loved ones.

The psychological effects of isolation continue long after individuals are released from solitary, affecting society as a whole. Upon their reentry into society, many individuals who have spent long periods of time in solitary report having difficulty adjusting back to life outside the prison walls.  They are often startled easily, and avoid crowds and public spaces. They seek out small, confined spaces because public areas overwhelm their sensory stimulation.

 Anthony Graves, who spent more than 18 years in solitary confinement on the Texas death row before being exonerated in 2010, described the lasting effects of solitary in his testimony for the US Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights:
Solitary confinement does one thing, it breaks a man's will to live and he ends up deteriorating. He's never the same person again… I have been free for almost two years and I still cry at night, because no one out here can relate to what I have gone through. I battle with feelings of loneliness. I've tried therapy but it didn't work. The therapist was crying more than me. She couldn't believe that our system was putting men through this sort of inhumane treatment.

According to numerous studies, any amount of time in solitary confinement can increase the risk of recidivism after release. A 2007 matched control study of Washington State prisons found that people in the study cohort who spent time in supermax prisons had a 3-year felony recidivism rate of 53 percent, which was 15 percent higher than that of their counterparts in the general prison population. The recidivism rate was even higher among people who were released directly from supermax into the community, at 69 percent.

Criticism

Ineffectiveness
Though proponents of solitary have often expressed the belief that solitary confinement promotes safety in correctional facilities, there is substantial evidence that points to the contrary. In 2002, the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America, chaired by John Joseph Gibbons and Nicholas Katzenbach, found that "the increasing use of high-security segregation is counter-productive, often causing violence inside facilities and contributing to recidivism after release."

Shira E. Gordon has argued that solitary confinement "has not come close to solving the very problem it was meant to reduce: prison violence." In support of this view, Gordon cites a 2012 study showing that the rate of violence in California prisons is 20 percent higher than it was in 1989, when California's first supermax prison opened. Gordon also cites the Northern District of California court in Toussaint v. McCarthy, which found that solitary confinement "increase[d] rather than decrease[d] antisocial tendencies among inmates" at Folsom and San Quentin State Prisons in California.

Torture

Solitary confinement is considered by many to be a form of psychological torture with measurable physiological effects, particularly when the period of confinement is longer than a few weeks or is continued indefinitely.

In October 2011, Juan E. Méndez, then the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, called on all countries to eliminate the practice except in "very exceptional circumstances and for as short a time as possible," with a complete ban for juveniles and individuals with mental disabilities. "Solitary confinement is a harsh measure which is contrary to rehabilitation," Méndez told the General Assembly's Third Committee, which deals with social, humanitarian, and cultural affairs. He continued: "Considering the severe mental pain or suffering solitary confinement may cause, it can amount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment when used as a punishment, during pre-trial detention, indefinitely or for a prolonged period, for persons with mental disabilities or juveniles."

The United Nations Committee Against Torture cited the excessive use of solitary confinement in the United States as a violation of the Convention Against Torture in 2014. The United Nations' Mandela Rules, which were adopted in 2015 and establish minimum standards for the treatment of prisoners, prohibit placements in solitary beyond 15 consecutive days.

In Detention and Torture in South Africa: Psychological, Legal, and Historical Studies, psychologist Don Foster lists solitary confinement as one of the most common forms of torture used on South African detainees. "Given the full context of dependency, helplessness and social isolation common to conditions of South African security law detention," Foster writes, "there can be little doubt that solitary confinement under these circumstances should in itself be regarded as a form of torture."

Political use

Solitary confinement has been used to punish and suppress organizing, activism, and other political activities in carceral facilities, a practice that has drawn criticism from human rights watchdogs and other concerned groups. In immigration detention centers, reports have surfaced that immigrant detainees are being placed in solitary to keep those knowledgeable about their rights away from other detainees. Individuals who go on hunger strike to protest poor conditions in immigration facilities are also frequently placed in solitary. Although immigration officials have claimed that their policy of isolating hunger strikers is for the protection of the detained person, medical and legal experts have pointed out that there is no medical basis behind the policy, and that, in the United States, it constitutes a violation of the detainee's First Amendment rights.

Solitary confinement is similarly used as retaliation in prisons and jails, including against whistleblowers who raise awareness of inhumane conditions and jailhouse lawyers who assist others in litigating their rights. There have been further reports of people being placed in solitary based on their race, religion, or sexual orientation.

Racial and other disparities

Statistics indicate that members of marginalized groups are disproportionately likely to end up in solitary confinement. A 2019 Correctional Leaders Association/Yale Law School study found that Black women make up 21.5 percent of the United States female prison population, but 42.1 percent of the U.S. female prison population held in solitary. Another study found that 11 percent of all Black men born in Pennsylvania between 1986 and 1989 had been held in solitary by the age of 32. Disparities in the use of solitary have also been found to exist for LGBTQ+ people, Latinos, and Native Americans.

The disproportionate use of solitary on marginalized groups has been attributed to racism and other forms of discrimination which are exacerbated by the correctional environment. People of color may be more likely to be perceived as threatening and consequently receive more disciplinary tickets that land them in solitary; LGBTQ+ individuals may be placed in solitary as protective custody (either voluntarily or involuntarily) to prevent them from being assaulted or otherwise victimized. Notably, some transgender individuals have stated that they would rather risk their safety in the general prison population than being held in the isolation of protective custody.

As Angela J. Hattery and Earl Smith have written, "Solitary confinement is a place where [the] racial history [of the United States] is on full display... Not only are the majority of the staff white and the majority of the prisoners Black and brown, but the very premise of solitary confinement relies on the foundation of white supremacy on which this country was built."

Ethics

The harsh effects of solitary confinement on the individuals who experience it, particularly those diagnosed with mental illness, have led many to view the practice as cruel and unethical.

In an article for Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Jeffrey Metzner and Jamie Fellner write that solitary confinement may constitute a violation of medical ethics. As the authors note, healthcare professionals are "ethically obligated to refrain from countenancing, condoning, participating in, or facilitating torture or other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment," yet human rights experts have stated that solitary confinement may amount to such treatment. "It is not ethically defensible for health care professionals to acquiesce silently to conditions of confinement that inflict mental harm and violate human rights," they write.

Metzner and Fellner call on physicians not only to provide adequate medical services to individuals in isolation, but to advocate for changes to segregation policies in the facility in which they are employed and to undertake public advocacy to raise awareness of the harms of solitary in society as a whole.

Legality

The legality of solitary confinement has been frequently challenged over the past sixty years as conceptions surrounding the practice have changed.  Much of the legal discussion concerning solitary confinement has centered on whether or not it constitutes torture or cruel and unusual punishment. While international law has generally begun to discourage solitary confinement's use in penal institutions, opponents of solitary confinement have been less successful at challenging it within the United States legal system.

United Nations Special Rapporteurs on Torture Manfred Nowak and Juan Méndez have "repeatedly and unequivocally stated that prolonged solitary confinement is cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and may amount to torture," though their statements are not primary sources in international law.

A 2005 law journal article argued America's detention system is far below the basic minimum standards for treatment of prisoners under international law and has caused an international human rights concern: "U.S. solitary confinement practices contravene international treaty law, violate established international norms, and do not represent sound foreign policy."

Opposition and protests

For nearly as long as solitary confinement has existed, there have been individuals and organized movements protesting its existence. As early as 1838, Quaker prison reformer Elizabeth Fry traveled throughout England and Scotland to speak to policymakers about the dangers of solitary and to call for a reduction in its use. During the mid- to late-20th century, solitary confinement served as a site of resistance for imprisoned Black radicals. At New York's Attica Correctional Facility, for example, Black Muslims purposely filled restrictive housing units to prevent them from being used punitively against members of the Nation of Islam.

In July 2011, individuals held in Security Housing Units (SHU) at Pelican Bay State Prison began a hunger strike to protest the "torturous conditions" in SHU. The participants also sought to advocate for an end to California's policy of holding alleged gang members in indefinite solitary confinement, as well as the termination of the debriefing process, which compels people in solitary to identify either themselves or others as gang members in order to leave isolation. Over the course of the strike, more than 6,000 incarcerated individuals throughout the California prison system stood in solidarity with the Pelican Bay hunger strikers by refusing food.

The men at Pelican Bay organized another strike in 2013, this time drawing 32,000 participants across 33 California prisons. As a result of the strike and subsequent litigation by the Center for Constitutional Rights, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation agreed to end indefinite solitary confinement for all individuals in custody. The Prisoner Hunger Strike Solidarity Coalition, a coalition of grassroots organizations and family members of strike participants, played a key role in raising public awareness for the strikers and their demands.

In the years following the Pelican Bay strikes, incarcerated individuals across the United States have continued to organize for improved prison conditions, including an end to prolonged solitary confinement. In 2022, incarcerated workers in Alabama withheld labor to draw attention to harsh prison conditions and the need for decarceration. In 2023, dozens of incarcerated individuals in Texas went on hunger strike to protest the state's solitary confinement policies. Prison officials in some cases have retaliated against strike participants by sending them to solitary confinement.

Alternatives and reform

In light of the increasing public scrutiny of solitary confinement and its documented effects, corrections leaders, policymakers, and advocates have begun to look to alternatives. The New York City Department of Correction announced in 2013 that it would start transferring individuals with severe mental illness who commit disciplinary infractions to a setting similar to a hospital ward, where they would receive medication and therapy. Those with less severe mental illness who violate facility rules are still placed in solitary, but with increased hours of therapy and a behavioral intervention program.

Another approach that facilities have taken to reduce their reliance on solitary is to restrict the reasons for which people can be sent to solitary in the first place. In 2013, Maine replaced its policy of using solitary as a punishment for every infraction with a system of "informal sanctions" of reductions in privileges, which helped the state cut its then-full supermax population in half. In 2021, Washington State ended its use of disciplinary segregation entirely, stating in a press release that "the agency's data indicates that disciplinary segregation… has not been proven to be an effective sanction or deterrent to negative behavior."

A number of jurisdictions have also enacted legislation prohibiting the use of solitary for vulnerable groups or limiting it to a set number of days for the general prison population. New York's Humane Alternatives to Long-Term (HALT) Solitary Confinement Act prohibits people from being placed in solitary for more than 15 consecutive days, or 20 days in any 60-day period. The legislation also bans placements in solitary for individuals 21 and under or 55 and older; people with physical, medical, or mental disabilities; and people who are pregnant or have recently given birth. Legislative efforts to curb the use of solitary, many of which reflect aspects of HALT, have taken place or are underway in at least 44 other states.

Finally, some corrections agencies have drawn inspiration from European countries such as Norway and Germany for reforming their use of solitary. In these countries, solitary confinement is typically used far less often and for shorter periods of time than in the United States. Norwegian prison cells are also usually more spacious and better furnished compared to their North American counterparts. However, scholars have noted that the experience of solitary confinement in Norway is not necessarily less painful, and have been critical of prison reformists for prioritizing aesthetic sensibilities over the lived experiences of incarcerated people.

See also
 Prison#Control units
 Isolation to facilitate abuse
 Prison abolition movement
 Single-celling
Separate system
 Box (form of torture involving solitary confinement in an overheated room)
 Solitary Watch
 Suicide watch

References

Bibliography
 Birckhead, T. R. (2015). Children in isolation: The solitary confinement of youth. Wake Forest Law Review 50(1), 1-80.
 Shalev, S. & Edgar, K. (2015). Deep Custody: Segregation Units and Close Supervision Centres in England and Wales. London: Prison Reform Trust.
 Shalev, S. (2009). Supermax : controlling risk through solitary confinement. Cullompton, UK: Willan. ISBN 978-1-84392-409-8.

External links

 6×9: A virtual experience of solitary confinement. The Guardian.
 Seeing Solitary: A Project of the Liman Center at Yale Law School
 Voices from Solitary: Dispatches from People Surviving the Lived Experience of Solitary Confinement. Solitary Watch.
 Unlock the Box

.SolitaryConfinement.org

Forensic psychology
Penal imprisonment
Penology
Torture
Human rights by issue

Solitary confinement


The Bigamist is a 1921 British silent romance film directed by Guy Newall and starring Newall, Ivy Duke, and Julian Royce.

Plot
As described in a film magazine, Pamela (Duke) and Herbert Arnott (Royce) have been happily married for five years and have had two children. On the day of their wedding anniversary, Pamela receives a letter from another woman signed Lucy Arnott which states that she is the legal wife of Herbert. Herbert confirms that this is the truth and explains that Lucy refused to give him a divorce. For the sake of their children, Pamela continues to live with Herbert, but their governess Blanche (Everest) later overhears a conversation between them and learns the truth regarding the status of the marriage. Pamela discharges Blanche, and on the day the governess leaves Herbert also departs. Pamela calls on family friend George Dane for advice. George agrees to search for Herbert, and by tracing the governess locates Herbert in a hospital. He is ill but has a message disclosing that Lucy Arnott has died. Pamela and Herbert are then remarried by the hospital priest. There is also a subplot about the Carruthers, another couple who are friends of the Arnotts, where Constance Carruthers (Scott) desires to have babies but her husband Richard (Davenport) is more interested in golf.

Cast
 Guy Newall as George Dane
 Ivy Duke as Pamela Arnott
 Julian Royce as Herbert Arnott
 Barbara Everest as Blanche Maitland
 A. Bromley as Richard Carruthers
 Dorothy Scott as Constance Carruthers
 Douglas Munro as Proprietor

References

Bibliography
 Bamford, Kentom. Distorted Images: British National Identity and Film in the 1920s. I.B. Tauris, 1999.
 Low, Rachael. History of the British Film, 1918-1929. George Allen & Unwin, 1971.

External links

1921 films
British black-and-white films
1920s romance films
British romance films
British silent feature films
Films directed by Guy Newall
Films based on British novels
Films set in England
1920s English-language films
1920s British films

The Bigamist (1921 film)


Solange Michel (27 November 1912 – 15 December 2010) was a French classical mezzo-soprano who sang in concerts, recitals, and operas from the 1930s to the 1970s. She was particularly associated with the French opera repertory and was one of the most popular interpreters of the title heroine in Georges Bizet's Carmen in post World War II France.

Life and career
Born Solange Boulesteix in Paris, Michel studied at the Conservatoire de Paris under Thomas Salignac and André Gresse. She began  her career as a concert singer, giving her first performance on French Radio in 1936, and made her stage debut in 1942, as Charlotte in Werther.

In 1945, she changed her name to Solange Michel and became a member of the Opéra-Comique where she debuted as Mignon. Shortly afterwards, she was invited to perform at the Paris Opera, and quickly established herself as the most important mezzo of her era. Her interpretation of Carmen is now widely regarded as a classic. Other notable roles included; Charlotte, Dalila in Camille Saint-Saëns's Samson et Dalila, Geneviève in Claude Debussy's Pelléas et Mélisande, Marguerite in Hector Berlioz's La damnation de Faust, and Orfeo in Christoph Willibald Gluck's Orfeo ed Euridice. She also participated in the premieres of Pierre Wissmer's Marion in 1951, and Gian Carlo Menotti's The Last Savage in 1963.

She made guest appearances at the Royal Opera House in London, at La Scala in Milan, the Teatro San Carlo in Naples, the Liceu in Barcelona, the Teatro Colón in Buenos Aires, also appearing in Amsterdam, Brussels, Madrid, Lisbon, etc.

Michel was also much admired as a recitalist, and made her last appearance in Besançon, in 1978.

She made a number of recordings, the most famous being Carmen, opposite Raoul Jobin, and conducted by André Cluytens.

References

Sources
 Le dictionnaire des interprètes, Alain Pâris, (Éditions Robert Laffont, Paris, 1989),

1912 births
2010 deaths
Singers from Paris
Conservatoire de Paris alumni
French operatic mezzo-sopranos
20th-century French women singers

Solange Michel


The Cape mole-rat (Georychus capensis) is a species of mole-rat endemic to South Africa. It is the only extant species currently described as belonging to the genus Georychus.

Description
Cape mole-rats closely resemble other African mole-rats in physical appearance. They have cylindrical bodies with short limbs, and large feet with leathery soles. The head is large and rounded, and the tail is short, with only a few sparse hairs. As with other mole rats, external ears are absent. The eyes are very small, but they are functional, and when the animals exceptionally leave their tunnels, they see well enough to turn actively and present their powerful incisors to repel approaching attackers. Adults are around  in head-body length, with a  tail, and weigh around . Females have three pairs of teats.

Cape mole-rats can most easily be distinguished from other species of mole-rat by the colour pattern of their fur. Most conspicuously, they have prominent white blazes around the ears and eyes, and smaller patches of white fur on the muzzle and often on top of the head. These white patches are the basis for the common name blesmol, Afrikaans for "blaze mole".  Most of the fur is russet in colour over the rest of the body, with distinct, silvery-white underparts. The head is darker, sometimes even a charcoal grey shade. The hair on the feet is also white. Unlike the related Damaraland mole-rats, Cape mole-rats have no guard hairs, although there are slightly longer stiff hairs around the mouth and feet, and the animals do have stubby whiskers. Lacking guard hairs, the fur is thick and woolly in texture.

Distribution and habitat
Cape mole-rats inhabit forested and savannah regions across the coastal regions of Western Cape and Eastern Cape provinces in South Africa. Isolated populations have also been reported from KwaZulu-Natal, just east of Lesotho, and from Mpumalanga. Although there are no formally recognised subspecies, this may be due to limited research on the species, and it has been proposed that the mole rats of KwaZulu-Natal may represent an entirely distinct species. They apparently prefer sandy loam, alluvium, or clay soils.

Fossils of Cape mole-rats are known from the middle Pleistocene of Elandsfontein in the Western Cape. Fossils referable to the genus Georychus, but not to the living species, have been identified from the lower Pleistocene at Swartkrans.

Behaviour

Like other mole-rats, Cape mole-rats rarely travel above ground, and spend most of their lives within excavated burrow systems. Their burrows typically range from  in length, with tunnels about  wide. Like other mole rat species, but unlike most other species of animals popularly called moles, they dig with their incisors; this enables them to dig through earth much harder than most moles can deal with. Their lips are adapted to close laterally behind the incisors when they gape; this prevents earth from entering the mouth when they dig. The only part the feet play in digging, is in moving the loosened earth to the rear.  They are herbivorous, feeding on the bulbs, corms and tubers of plants such as Star-of-Bethlehem, Cape tulips, and wood-sorrels, among others. They obtain this food by digging foraging tunnels to reach plant roots; these tunnels are narrower than their main tunnels and may be as little as  below the surface. Food may also be taken to deeper storage chambers to store up for hard times, or when a female is raising young. They have no need to drink, being able to obtain all the water they need from their diet.

In order to feed on bulbs, Cape mole-rats hold the food item in their fore-paws, chew away the base, and then peel away the husk with their teeth, moving from the tip to the base, in the manner that humans peel bananas. They have an enlarged caecum, and, like rabbits, are coprophagic, passing food through their digestive tract twice.

In addition to storage chambers, the centre of the tunnel system includes a nest, and a separate latrine chamber. The tunnels are entirely closed off from the surface, although their presence may be evident from dome-shaped mounds of excavated material similar to mole hills. As a result, there is little circulation of air within the tunnels, which are therefore hypoxic and humid, but are protected from extremes of weather. The mole rats occasionally travel above ground to forage for surface vegetation, and to disperse to found new burrow systems.

Despite spending almost their entire lives underground, and having very poor eyesight, Cape mole-rats exhibit distinct diurnal rhythms in time with the hours of daylight on the surface, and are primarily nocturnal. Unlike some other species of mole-rat, they are solitary animals, and, except when a female is raising young, only one individual inhabits each burrow system. They are highly aggressive towards other members of their own species outside the breeding season. When encountering a rival, they adopt a rigid posture with the head thrown back and jaws open, chattering their teeth and occasionally making short leaps in the direction of their opponent. Because burrow systems can approach within  of each other, burrowing animals warn away rivals using sex-specific seismic signals.

Cape mole-rats become alarmed if they sense a breach in their tunnel system, moving cautiously towards the break, and making characteristic 'pumping' motions with their hindquarters, of unknown significance. Predators that may enter the tunnel system to feed on Cape mole-rats include mole snakes and Cape cobras. They are particularly vulnerable while travelling above ground, where they may also fall victim to jackals, mongooses, owls and grey herons.

Reproduction
During the summer mating season, both sexes drum on the sides of their tunnels with their hind feet, using a different signal than when warning off potential intruders at other times of the year. The drumming is loud enough to be heard above ground at a distance of up to  away. Once the male finds a partner, courtship and mating are brief, and interspersed with bouts of grooming.

Gestation lasts 44 to 48 days, and a litter of three to ten young are born between August and December. The young are born hairless and blind, weighing only , and  in length. The fur begins to grow on day seven, and the eyes open on day nine. The young grow rapidly, and begin to take solid food around day seventeen, being fully weaned at four weeks of age. By five weeks, siblings begin to show aggression towards one another, and they leave to establish their own burrows at around seven weeks.

Cape mole-rats reach sexual maturity at eighteen months of age, and live up to five years.

References

 Animal Diversity Web (ADW). . Retrieved 7 April 2007.

Mammals described in 1778
Bathyergidae
Mammals of South Africa
Taxa named by Peter Simon Pallas
Endemic fauna of South Africa

Cape mole-rat


John 'Cat's Eyes' Cunningham , born: , died , was a Royal Air Force (RAF) night fighter ace during the Second World War (WWII), and a test pilot.  During the war, he was nicknamed 'Cat's Eyes' by the British press to explain his successes and to avoid communicating the existence of airborne radar to the enemy.

Cunningham was born in Croydon in the southern  United Kingdom, which at that time, was close to London's primary airport.  As a teenager, he was keen on entering the aviation industry.  Temporarily abiding by his father's wishes for him to avoid the military, he approached the de Havilland company, and was accepted as an engineering candidate. Concurrently, he joined the Royal Auxiliary Air Force (RAuxAF) and became a member of No. 604 (County of Middlesex) Squadron. Cunningham began his training in August 1935, flew solo in March 1936 and received his wings in 1937.  He gradually became an established test pilot, gaining considerable flying time on different types of aircraft.

In August 1939, Cunningham rejoined his squadron, now equipped with a version of the Bristol Blenheim.  His observer was Jimmy Rawnsley, who would serve as his gunner and radio operator for most of the war, and contribute to all but three of his victories.  In July 1940, the squadron was re-designated as a specialised night fighter unit, and was amongst the first to receive airborne interception radar (AI).  Cunningham was promoted to squadron leader (Sqn Ldr) in September 1940.

On the night of 19 November 1940, Cunningham claimed his first victory.  By the time the Blitz had ended in June 1941, he had destroyed thirteen enemy aircraft and claimed three as probable victories, and two damaged.  After a prolonged rest period, he was promoted to wing commander (Wg Cdr) in 1942. He was also appointed to command No. 85 Squadron RAF, by which time, his tally had reached sixteen enemy aircraft destroyed. In 1943 and early 1944, he added a further four victories, one probable and one damaged. Cunningham's combat career ended with twenty aerial victories, three probable and six damaged.  He spent the remainder of the conflict in various staff officer positions. By the end of the war in Europe in May 1945, he had attained the rank of group captain (Gp Cpt).

After the war, Cunningham rejoined de Havilland, and continued his test pilot career.  He flew the world's first jet airliner, the de Havilland Comet, in 1949.  He then flew commercial jets for a time in the early 1960s, and continued flying in the industry until the late 1970s.  He also worked for British Aerospace (BAe) as executive director, retiring in 1980. In recognition of his wartime exploits and his contribution to civil aviation, he was appointed a Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE).

Early life
John Cunningham was born in Croydon in south London on 27 July 1917.  His father, Arthur Gillespie Cunningham, worked for the Dunlop Rubber Company at Fort Dunlop in Birmingham, and rose to the position of company secretary.  In 1910, Arthur Cunningham married Evelyn Mary Spencer.  Her family owned an engineering company in Coventry which supplied heavy machinery to the fabric and textiles company Courtaulds.  In the 1920s, her grandfather was Mayor of Coventry. The family moved to Croydon. Cunningham had two elder sisters, Mary and Janet, and a younger brother, William.  John attended Bowden House School, a preparatory school at Seaford, East Sussex until he was nine years of age. He was subsequently a pupil at Whitgift School, a public school in Croydon. In 1926, on a school holiday, he took a flight in an Avro 504.  His experiences encouraged him to enter the officer's training corps at the school. A personal tragedy occurred in 1930 when his father died. Still, Cunningham did well at school, particularly in mathematics.  As a teenager, he was keen on entering the aviation industry.

de Havilland apprenticeship
At 18, he joined the de Havilland Aircraft company in 1935 as an apprentice.  Cunningham began his engineering career with some menial projects, before being invited to assist with the building of the de Havilland T.K.2 and de Havilland Moth Minor. At the same time, he joined the Royal Auxiliary Air Force (RAuxAF), a part-time branch of the Royal Air Force (RAF), and became a member of No. 604 (County of Middlesex) Squadron after a recommendation by a friend of the family. Cunningham began his pilot training at Hatfield Aerodrome in August 1935, and flew solo on 15 March 1936, receiving his commission as a pilot officer (PO) on 7 May 1936.

He was awarded his wings in the summer of 1936. This was when he met Cecil F. 'Jimmy' Rawnsley, a 32-year-old electrical engineer who would later serve as aerial gunner and radar operator on all but three of his successful air battles. Cunningham later became a junior test pilot with de Havilland, working with light aircraft alongside Geoffrey de Havilland, the company founder's son and chief test pilot. The company was short of test pilots, and Cunningham caught de Havilland's eye as his flight experience grew. It was reflected by his promotion to flying officer (FO) on 5 December 1937.  At this time, he began to care more for test-flying than manufacturing and design. He became one of de Havilland's four top test pilots.

In March 1938, he was called to readiness with 604 Squadron during the Munich crisis.  At this time, the squadron was flying the Hawker Demon. He was displeased when they converted to the Bristol Blenheim. The machines were fitted with a tray of four 303 Browning machine guns to give forward-facing firepower. As a long-range fighter it was of dubious value. The German Messerschmitt Bf 109 and Messerschmitt Bf 110 could, and would, expose the frailties of the aircraft, which was originally intended as a bomber. However, Cunningham was told by the Air Ministry that it would be sufficient in the night fighter role, which is where they intended to use this variant. On 20 April 1938, he returned to de Havilland, test-flying de Havilland Moth Minors.

On 11 April 1939, he narrowly escaped with his life alongside Geoffrey de Havilland, both men parachuting to safety. They had taken a de Havilland Moth Minor into the air to test its response to spins. The prototypes had had an anti-spin parachute, but preceding tests had been carried out without needing to resort to this safety measure. Geoffrey put the aircraft into a left-hand spin, which was recovered. After climbing back to , the aircraft was put into a right-hand spin. The engine cut out, the nose reared up, and the aircraft stalled and entered a flat spin. When de Havilland's recovery efforts failed, both decided to bail out. Once they had done so, the lightened Moth lowered its nose and recovered from the spin. The engine ignition had been left on, and the wind-milling propeller started the engine.  The aircraft began circling the descending airmen at dangerously close range. Fortunately, it descended at a faster rate than their parachutes did, and it was destroyed when it hit the ground.  Cunningham casually took pictures of the wreckage and his parachute, which exemplified his cool nature.

The growing tension in Europe made war more likely. In response to the Nazi–Soviet pact on 23 August 1939, the Royal Air Force (RAF) mobilized. Cunningham had been test-flying the de Havilland Dragon airliner. Only sixteen were completed before the declaration of war in September. At this juncture, Cunningham was forced to commit himself either to de Havilland or to the RAF. The RAF had trained him, and he felt he could be of far more use in the RAF than test-flying aircraft.

Second World War
In August 1939, Cunningham rejoined his squadron, which had been equipped with a version of the Bristol Blenheim.  He was not enthusiastic about the aircraft.  The turret had been eliminated to reduce weight and increase speed, but the flying suits and cockpit were not heated, which caused discomfort to the crews in winter flying.  The radios were too short in range, which caused communication problems.  The Blenheim's cockpit windshield was made up of several panes and was difficult to clean.  It was also liable to reflect light, which made cooperation with searchlights hazardous.  Lastly, problems were encountered with blind-flying instruments.  The squadron incurred some losses owing to the inexperience of crews flying patrols over the North Sea from RAF North Weald in Essex; a number of them a result of the difficulties with the aircraft.  In January 1940, 604 Squadron moved to RAF Northolt and flew Blenheims adorned with the Finnish Air Force's blue swastika to Finland via Sweden to assist the country after the Soviet invasion.

Cunningham was promoted to flight lieutenant (Flt Lt) on 12 March 1940.  In April, the squadron flew as escort for a de Havilland Flamingo carrying Winston Churchill, First Lord of the Admiralty, to Paris, to attend a meeting after the German invasion of Denmark and Norway.  Most of the unit's time during the Phoney War was spent in intensive training over The Wash, which included co-operation with searchlights and mine-laying operations.  On 15 May, 604 relocated to RAF Manston.  From this airfield, Cunningham flew sorties over the English Channel and patrols over Dunkirk as the Battle for France intensified.  Cunningham made no recorded contact with the enemy, and France capitulated on 25 June.

Night squadron
On 26 July 1940, the squadron was re-designated a specialised night fighter (NF) unit.  The squadron was amongst the first to receive airborne interception radar (AI).  604 Squadron was sent a number of AI Mk. IV radar sets.  Jimmy Rawnsley, Cunningham's friend and crew-mate, saw this as an opportunity to join a programme that promised a bright future.  Rawnsley retrained as a radar operator, and would re-join Cunningham in January 1941.  In the intervening period, the squadron was frequently frustrated by the Blenheim's limitations.  Even with the 'magic boxes', they were too slow to catch any of the German bombers if the enemy was given the slightest advantage.  Cunningham flew with 604 on the night of 18/19 June when the Luftwaffe flew its first major operation in the Greater London area.  No victories were claimed in the summer of 1940.

Cunningham was promoted to acting squadron leader (Sqn Ldr) in September 1940, commanding B Flight.  Within the month, the unit received the heavily armed and powerful Bristol Beaufighter.  After the commanding officer, Cunningham was the second man to fly it.  The Beaufighter went through a teething stage in relation to its gun sight.  The sight projected a ring of light with a spot at the centre onto a small sheet of glass directly in front of the pilot's head.  The spot in the centre provided the aiming point, and the ring, of variable diameter, helped him to judge the range and amount of deflection needed to attack a target.  The light's brilliance was adjustable by rheostat, but the control was ineffective.  Rotating it a fraction could produce maximum brilliance or cause the spot to flicker out.

Air marshal Sholto Douglas formed the Night Fighting Committee, and met regularly at RAF Bentley Priory to discuss operational problems.  As an experienced aviator, Cunningham was invited to attend.  Henry Tizard invited Cunningham to air his views at the meeting.  Tizard referred him to the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) to meet Arnold Alexander Hall, a gun sight expert.  With his engineering expertise, and Cunningham's assessment of the issue, Hall ironed out the inadequacies in the design.  Hall later became Cunningham's managing director at Hawker Siddeley twenty years later.  Cunningham also worked with ground control of interception (GCI), carrying out various exercises.  He made the acquaintance of Philip Joubert de la Ferté, Chief of the Air Staff (CAS), who dropped in on 604 as well as Douglas; the two men were always keen to hear the experiences of the crew.

The AI sets added to Beaufighters were the first to be mass-produced.  The operating frequency was 190 to 195 MHz, with a wavelength of 1.5 metres.  The equipment consisted of a receiver, transmitter, control panel, modulator, indicator unit, and a system of fixed dipole aerials.  On the nose, the aerial was a double arrowhead shape with a pair of azimuth aerials protruding above and below the leading edge of each wing between the cannon and the wingtip.  A pair of elevation aerials were located above and below the wing surfaces near the RAF roundel on the starboard side.  The indicator display consisted of two cathode ray tubes.  They displayed elevation and azimuth bearing.  The set had a range-limitation of four miles (circa ).  The minimum range of detection was usually around .  At closer ranges, the target merged with the transmission pulse and was obscured.  At altitudes below , the returns from ground objects would swamp the tubes.  Operators like Rawnsley were left to do a fair amount of guesswork.  No scales or calibration markings were put on early sets.  The position and heading of the enemy in the azimuth plane, its height, and its range had to be guessed.  At least the GCI could bring the Beaufighter well within range of the target, usually a mile or so behind the bomber.

The Cunningham–Rawnsley team used the AI specifically to position themselves directly astern and underneath the enemy.  Although the German bombers carried a dorsal gunner, it was difficult to locate an enemy against the black colour of the landscape.  Usually, the blackness of the country would swallow up the outline of an approaching night fighter.  As they approached, the enemy aircraft's slipstream could prove hazardous, bucking the Beaufighter and throwing the pilot off his aim.  Approaching from slightly below allowed the attacking pilot to avoid the slipstream.  These tactics allowed Cunningham to close the range and fire first, which was usually sufficient to end the engagement quickly and successfully.  Bob Braham, a rival night fighter ace, also used this tactic.

'Cat's Eyes'
Throughout the summer of 1940, Cunningham and 604 Squadron had to sit idle and frustrated as the Battle of Britain raged.  By autumn, the battle had subsided.  Having failed to gain air superiority, the Luftwaffe now resolved to bomb British ports and industries.  This change in German strategy began The Blitz phase of the aerial campaign.  On the night of 19/20 November 1940, the Luftwaffe raided Birmingham.  The Germans hoped to follow up their attacks on the West Midlands after a highly effective raid against Coventry on 14 November 1940.  Pathfinders from  (Battle Group 100) led 369 aircraft from  (KG 26, Bomber Wing 26),  (KG 54), and  (KG 55) to the city.

Cunningham took off this night from RAF Middle Wallop in Hampshire to patrol north of London.  When the direction of the raid was known, he was ordered to proceed to the East Midlands.  GCI vectored Cunningham and his temporary radar operator John Phillipson; a former ground radar operator, onto an enemy aircraft, but the crew were forced much further westward.  Search lights attracted their attention, and Phillipson was able to make a contact and guide him.  Soon visual confirmation was made.  A tell-tale sign of an aircraft was a blank patch of sky surrounded by a cluster of stars.  Keeping in the enemy's blind spot, he flew below it and adjusted his speed to match the German pilot.  After closing the range as much as he dared, he pulled up and fired with all four cannons, downing the Junkers Ju 88 bomber, which exploded upon hitting the ground near Wittering, Cambridgeshire at 00:35.  Cunningham's victim, 3./KG 54 Ju 88 flown by  Kaspar Sondermeister, was not claimed as destroyed.  However, after interrogation of the two German survivors who affirmed the circumstances, Cunningham was granted the victory.

Cunningham had to wait a month for his next victory, on 23 December 1940.   (KG 1) sent 100 bombers led by  100 to attack Manchester.  GCI vectored Cunningham onto the enemy aircraft.  It was not yet dark, and Cunningham identified the machine as a Heinkel He 111.  Flying at , he saw the Heinkel above the Beaufighter at .  Cunningham engaged the enemy  south of West Lulworth.  The enemy climbed to .  Following, Cunningham opened fire at .  The He 111 was engulfed in fire.  The bomber was high enough for the crew to jettison the bombs and incendiaries and glide to France, where it crash-landed at Cherbourg.  Two of  Georg Deininger's crew were wounded.  The 3./KGr 100 machine was written off.  The crew were unaware that they had been a victim of a night-fighter.  They supposed they had been shot down by a flak ship.

On 2 January 1941, Cunningham nearly added a third.  The Germans attacked Cardiff in the city's heaviest raid of the war.  Cunningham engaged an He 111 that had an even spread of three aerial masts along its rear fuselage; indicative of a pathfinder.  He expended all the Beaufighter's ammunition against it from the working cannons, one cannon jammed.  It dived into clouds at  at an angle of 50 degrees.  A 2./KGr 100 machine returned to France with a wounded gunner, and Cunningham received credit for a probable victory.  On 12 January, he claimed a damaged He 111, his first, with operator Jimmy Rawnsley.  Cunningham was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) on 28 January 1941 for his achievements, including 25 night sorties.

On 9 February, upon the invitation of Sholto Douglas and Charles Portal, Chief of the Air Staff, Cunningham arrived at the Air Ministry.  He was ordered to report to Geoffrey de Havilland at Hatfield, though neither of the senior officers would say why.  When Cunningham met Geoffrey de Havilland, he was summoned to a hangar.  It was the first time Cunningham had laid eyes on the de Havilland Mosquito.  Cunningham flew W4050, the prototype, on 9 February 1941.  He was greatly impressed by the "lightness of the controls and generally pleasant handling characteristics".  Cunningham concluded that when the type was fitted with AI equipment, it would be a perfect replacement for the Bristol Beaufighter.

Cunningham claimed a third victory on 15 February 1941.  The Luftwaffe carried out air attacks on Liverpool and Humberside.  Over Newton Abbot, Devon, he engaged a He 111 from  (KG 27).  It crashed outside Totnes.  The bomber, 1G+FR, belonging to 7./KG 27, was completely destroyed.   Eberhard Beckmann and his crew were killed.  The fifth victory eluded Cunningham for some time.  On 12 March, he was twice vectored onto enemy aircraft by Rawnsley.  He could only claim a Ju 88 and He 111 damaged.  On the night of the 3 April 1941, he accounted for his fourth enemy aircraft.  Although claimed as a He 111, the identity of the aircraft was likely the Ju 88 A-5,  ('factory number') 4224, code V4+AR of 7./KG 1, on a mission to raid Avonmouth.   Ernst Menge and his crew,  Wilhelm Hahn, Robert König, and Wilhelm Schreiber, were posted as missing in action.  On the night of the 7 April, he became a fighter ace.  A He 111 of 9./KG 26 was intercepted as its bombers attacked Portsmouth and Portland Harbour.   Erwin Hartmann crashed into the Channel with his crew.  A No. 87 Squadron RAF pilot, Flight lieutenant Derek Harland Ward claimed the victory, as he saw a glow which he fired at before it hit the sea.  Cunningham was credited with the victory, however, as the Heinkel was about to crash when Ward fired at it.  The 87 Squadron war diary acknowledged this fact in its entry for that night.

Two nights later, on 9 April, he accounted for another He 111, followed by another plus a probable victory on 11 April.  It is possible his victim on the later mission was He 111 P-2,  2002, 1G+HT of 9./KG 27.  Pilot Leo Roth and crew members  Wilhelm Franke, and  Walter Rüggeberg and Fritz Unterieser were killed.  A pilot from 307 Squadron also claimed the machine, which crashed at Prowers Farm, Lydlinch, Dorset at 01:35.  One 8./KG 55 He 111 was lost with its crew over the Channel, and a Stab./KG 26 machine was lost over northern France when the crew abandoned their damaged aircraft.  Cunningham's comrade in 604, Roderick Aeneas Chisholm, accounted for a 5./KG 54 Ju 88 near Portsmouth.

On 15 April, Cunningham was to have his most successful night, shooting down three bombers (victories no. 8–10).  On patrol near the south coast, he engaged a He 111 over Monmouthshire, which he shot down with only 40 rounds.  He returned to Middle Wallop, only to be sent on patrol for a second sortie.  He took off and headed south, towards Southampton.  GCI was too busy to employ him, and his request to investigate a searchlight cone towards Marlborough was granted.  Rawnsley directed him into attack range, and he duly shot down the He 111, which crashed into derelict houses in Southampton.  He was sent by GCI after another enemy, but lost the contact.  Appearing over Southampton again, he spotted yet another He 111 in the moonlight.  He closed to  and shot it down.  It crashed in the area of Lymington.  Cunningham's 9th victory was  2857, code G1+ES, belonging to 8./KG 55.  The Heinkel, piloted by  Günther von Seidlitz, crashed onto No. 10–12 Padwell Road, Southampton at 02:00.  Seidlitz and  Franz Hümmer were killed in action and  Horst Rosenberg and Herbert Sauer were taken prisoner.  In April, having shot down at least ten aircraft in night-fighting operations, Cunningham was decorated with his first Distinguished Service Order (DSO).

On 3 May, Cunningham accounted for another Heinkel.  Four nights later on 7 May 1941, Cunningham achieved a victory, his 12th, in front of King George VI.  Sholto Douglas accompanied the King when he appeared at Danebury Hill, not far from Middle Wallop.  The King met Cunningham and Rawnsley, congratulated the airmen on their success, and asked Cunningham to get another on that night.  The King then was driven to the GCI station Sopley outside Bournemouth to tour the facility.  Eager to impress the King, Cunningham drove to dispersal and prepared to go on patrol.  The Luftwaffe attacked Liverpool, which took their flight path over 604's patrol area.  Cunningham took off and intercepted a He 111 north of Bournemouth.  The controller asked the King to go outside, as they might have an opportunity to witness the battle.  Although they did not see it, the King heard the results: the roar of engines, and rattle of cannon fire.  The Heinkel, from 7./KG 27,  1639 code IG+DR, eventually crashed near Andersea Farm south of RAF Weston Zoyland at 23:30.  Pilot  Heinz Laschinski and  Otto Willrich survived, though the pilot was badly burned.  Flight Engineer  Fritz Klemm and  Heinz Schier were killed by gunfire.  On the night of 31 May/1 June 1941, Cunningham and Rawnsley accounted for another He 111, as the Luftwaffe completed its last major raid of the Blitz.  It was one of 24 German bombers lost on that night.  The following morning, Cunningham was promoted to temporary squadron leader.

Propaganda
In early 1941, the British press, with permission from the Air Ministry, was allowed to approach Cunningham and write about his experiences.  One of the motivating reasons for the lack of censorship was morale.  In the early stages of the Blitz, the perception among the civilian population was that the Germans could attack at will over Britain during the night.  Publication of Cunningham's exploits was an attempt to assure the public that the RAF was fighting back, and imposing losses upon the Luftwaffe.  Cunningham was singled out for attention for this purpose, though Rawnsley's contribution to his success was virtually ignored.

The Air Ministry did not want to allow the enemy to learn that the RAF night fighter aircraft had airborne radar.  German night fighters would not be equipped with such devices on a large scale until much later.  Instead, a legend was created to explain Cunningham's successes.  As he was the first night fighter ace, the press was allowed to publish his picture.  The captions read that his eyesight was so exceptional it allowed him to see in the dark with the same visual ability as a domestic cat.  It was also said that his diet of carrots provided him with vitamin A, which allowed him to maintain excellent night vision.  Cunningham detested the ensuing public adulation, but he accepted the 'Cat's Eyes' tag as a necessary deception.  The propaganda story served its purpose for the populace when it was released to the public in January 1941.  But the success of night defences also told the Germans that the RAF was either improving its techniques, or it had something new.

The premier night fighter aces in the RAF; Cunningham, Braham, and Branse Burbridge, did not appreciate press attention.  In the case of Cunningham and Burbridge, this may have stemmed from deeper religious convictions about combat and killing.  Burbridge became a priest during the war, and neither he nor Cunningham cooperated with biographers when approached to have their exploits described in print after the war.  During the war, Braham also shunned the lime-light.  The Daily Express asked to interview him, but he declined.  Much to Braham's embarrassment, his father gave interviews about his famous son in 1943.  When no stories were forthcoming, the newspapers soon lost interest.  Braham and Cunningham were certainly aware of each other as a result of the press attention, and a competitive rivalry developed.  In his book Scramble, Braham mentioned with pride the night he surpassed Cunningham's score permanently.

Wing commander
The dynamics of the air war changed in June 1941.  The German invasion of the Soviet Union, Operation Barbarossa, opened up the Eastern Front.  The German bomber force was heavily committed to the theatre.  The escalation of the fighting in the Mediterranean and North African theatres also diverted German air strength.  Luftwaffe operations over Britain changed dramatically.  Small numbers of bombers would make hit-and-run attacks on selected targets near the coast for the remainder of 1941, replacing the mass raids of the preceding autumn and winter.  Cunningham used the decline in the pace of operations to train new crews.

Cunningham's practice of leadership was different from that of his day-fighter counterparts.  A day unit would fly in formation together, engage the enemy together, communicate by radio, and follow the directions and example of their commanding officer in combat.  Cunningham was not in a position to lead in this way.  The night fighter was a lone hunter.  When it took off, the crew would operate alone in the air.  Instead, he could ensure proficiency in battle only by teaching his men to master their aircraft and AI.  He was constantly in touch with scientists, and tracked new developments.  He also took new crews up in the Bristol Beaufighter to generate confidence in the machine.  Night pilots had to learn to fly on instruments alone, in adverse weather conditions, and for sustained periods.  Rawnsley contributed with training on the use of AI, and mock interceptions using target aircraft were flown regularly.

Cunningham still flew on operations.  Flying the new Beaufighter Mk.II powered by Merlin engines on an interception in July, he was hit by return fire from a He 111.  The engines spluttered, and one caught fire.  Already far out to sea, he flew back to base, extinguished the fire, and made a wheels-down landing.  The following month, he had greater success.  On the night of the 22 August 1941, he intercepted two He 111s.  One was claimed as damaged, but the second was confirmed.  The Heinkel He 111, an H-5 model,  4081, coded F8+BS belonging to 8./ (KG 40), fell into the sea north-west of Wells-next-the-Sea at 22:05.   G. Dohmen, H. Hädrich, and K. Dändel were never found.  The body of Rudolf Faath was washed ashore at Burnham Overy on 31 August.  On 1 September, Cunningham caught and downed a Ju 88, his 15th victory.  He was awarded a bar to his DFC on 19 September, by which time he was an acting wing commander (Wg Cdr).

The winter 1941–42 passed by with relative inactivity.  In the spring of 1942, Arthur Harris began his campaign over Germany in earnest, with an attack by RAF Bomber Command upon Lübeck.  Enraged by the attack, Adolf Hitler ordered the Luftwaffe to begin retaliatory strikes, which began the so-called Baedeker Blitz.  On 4 April, Cunningham engaged and damaged a Baedeker raider He 111 pathfinder operating over Exeter.  It was able to escape into cloud.  KGr  100, the specialist German pathfinder unit, was now operating with new navigational aids that allowed them to fly through and navigate in thick cloud and rain.  They deliberately operated whenever the weather proved more difficult for night fighters.  Nevertheless, Cunningham made an interception on the night of 23 May 1942.

Attempting his usual tactic, Cunningham approached from behind and below.  Suddenly, the Heinkel lurched into a tight left-hand turn, allowing the gunners to fire a broad-side.  The bomber disappeared into the mist.  Cunningham asked ground-controlled interception (GCI) for help.  They tracked the Heinkel flying north near Shaftesbury.  Engaging again, the German pilot managed to turn into a head-on position and dive past Cunningham almost upside down.  He continually evaded Cunningham by turning in underneath him at near-impossible angles.  Cunningham and Rawnsley came to understand that they were not dealing with a novice.  Soon a turning match began, and then the German attempted to escape by twisting and diving.  Cunningham forced him down to , but Rawnsley and GCI lost contact when the ground clutter hid the Heinkel's signal.  Cunningham returned to base.  News soon came through that the He 111 had crashed onto the slopes on Cranborne Chase.  Apparently, the Heinkel had broken through the clouds at only a hundred feet and dived vertically into the ground near the isolated village of Alvediston at 17:05.  Intelligence later determined that the machine was a He 111H-6,  4627, code 6N+FR, from 7./KGr 100.  The bomber disintegrated upon impact.  The pilot,  (squadron leader)  Siegried Langer was killed, along with his crew,  G. Schmidt,  D. Hoffmann, P. Gaidies, and  W. Worring.  It was a unique victory for Cunningham.  He had not fired his guns in the 150-minute chase.

Following this episode, Cunningham was promoted to temporary wing commander on 1 June 1942, and following the downing of his 16th enemy aircraft, he received a bar to his DSO on 24 July for, among other feats, "destroying an enemy aircraft without firing a single bullet... by diving through cloud at great speed, drove the enemy aircraft to the ground."

Cunningham and Rawnsley were soon ordered to staff positions.  Before they departed Middle Wallop and 604 Squadron, they had a chance to test the new  AI Mk. VIII radar, which had a range of two or three miles (3–5 kilometres).  The new radar was a radical improvement.  All the information was displayed on a single tube.  The ground echo was reduced, but could still be seen on screen when flying low, but it did not interfere with the overall picture.  Cunningham was to take over as director of all training units from Rory Chisholm, who left 604 to become a staff officer at group headquarters.  Rawnsley was due to take an instructor job at 62 Operational Training Unit (62 OTU) at RAF Usworth.  Cunningham managed to persuade the CAS to deploy him to headquarters at No. 81 Group RAF, the training organisation for RAF Fighter Command.  Rawnsley was also promoted to squadron leader and was awarded the DFC and Distinguished Flying Medal (DFM).  The pair remained grounded for six months, until January 1943.

Last tour
In January 1943, Cunningham was allowed back onto operations.  He was given command of No. 85 Squadron RAF, equipped with the de Havilland Mosquito NF.II and based at RAF Hunsdon.  He selected Jimmy Rawnsley as his operator.  The new radar set displayed the entire picture.  A small cathode-ray tube set on the left side of the instrument panel gave Cunningham a composite image.  The duo decided Rawnsley should control the interception in the initial stages, until they reached a point where the enemy could take evasive action.  Then Cunningham would take over while Rawnsley would call out the ranges and free the pilot from looking at his ray-tube.

On the night of 3 March 1943, the Luftwaffe was active again.  Cunningham scrambled too late to get contact by ground-controlled interception (GCI).  Searchlights operated in a box-shape, separated by evenly spaced markers, and he climbed towards a box.  Each fighter was given a box and flew to its allotted marker beacon.  There he orbited until the lights illuminated a target or formed a cone where he could pick up an airborne interception radar (AI) contact.  Soon he had a contact, a Dornier Do 217; he closed in, but his cannons jammed.  After he had sat behind the Dornier for some time and tried in vain to encourage the guns to fire, the German crew suddenly became aware of his presence and dived away.  Cunningham was furious: three-quarters of the squadron got airborne, but only he had seen an enemy.  Unsatisfied with ground- and aircrews, he used his influence in the small night-fighter community to bring in personnel from his old unit, 604, which was languishing in Cornwall.  With the new VIII radar a uniform facility, Cunningham took over a Mosquito NF.XII; the first Mosquito to have a smooth 'bluff' nose dome over the dish antenna.

At this time, the Luftwaffe was sending increased numbers of Focke-Wulf Fw 190 fighters over England, at night and at low-level.  They were able to hit coastal targets, and their speed and agility meant they were difficult to intercept.  The German pilots were disadvantaged in some respects: there was a lack of night-flying experience in these units, and the Fw 190s did not carry radar and had a short range.  Aside from a small mirror, the pilot could not always see behind him well enough at night.  On 16 May 1943, the Fw 190s lost four and probably a fifth to 85 Squadron.  On 13 June 1943, Cunningham intercepted a Fw 190 not far from his airfield at West Malling.  The GCI controller telephoned the crew-room to notify them the commanding officer was closing on an enemy aircraft heading to London.  They heard both aircraft, and the brief burst of fire followed by the explosion.  To his amazement, Cunningham later learned the pilot;  Ullrich from 3./ (Fast Bomber Wing 10, SKG 10), was thrown through the canopy as the Fw 190A-5, , 840047 code CO+LT, fell earthwards.  He opened his parachute and with a broken arm, was picked up by a searchlight crew.

On the night of 23 August, a Fw 190 was claimed off Dunkirk, and on 8/9 September 1943, a Fw 190A-5 off Aldeburgh proved his 19th victory, and his last claim for that year.  The Fw 190 was seen to crash into the sea by the Coastguard.  Cunningham achieved his 20th and final air victory on the night of 2/3 January 1944.  He chased a Messerschmitt Me 410 to France, near Boulogne, before shooting it down.  The machine,  017, code U5+FE, belonging to 14./ (KG 2), crashed at Marquise.   Helmut Schülze and Heinz Beger were killed.

In January 1944, the Luftwaffe initiated Operation Steinbock.  Cunningham filed two claims during the offensive, which lasted until May 1944.  On the night of 20/21 February 1944, he claimed a Junkers Ju 188 damaged at 22:09 near Staplehurst.  A Ju 188 was lost, and its destruction was attributed to another pilot.  On the night of 23/24 February, he claimed a probable victory against another Ju 188 off Beachy Head.  One Ju 188E-1 landed at Coulommiers after surviving an attack by a night fighter.   260222, code U5+AN from 5./KG 2 returned with two crewmen injured;  Johann Triebel and Wihelm Spönemann.  During these missions, Cunningham was nearly shot down.  Closing in on a Ju 188 from astern, the gunners suddenly opened fire and the Junkers took evasive manoeuvres.  A round struck the windscreen, nearly shattering it.  Glass fragments struck Cunningham in the face; these were later removed in a field hospital.  Later, a captured German crew told intelligence officers Neptun, a new radar, was being used in the rear of German aircraft to detect night fighters.  Bombers thus became more difficult to surprise.  Cunningham's last encounter with the enemy in 1944 was in pursuit of a Me 410.  He had to give up when his windscreen iced over near the French coast.

On 3 March 1944, he was awarded another bar to his DSO.  The citation saying "his iron determination and unswerving devotion to duty have set an example beyond praise".  On 11 April 1944, Cunningham was decorated by the Soviet Union with the Order of the Patriotic War, 1st Class.

Group captain
In March 1944, Cunningham relinquished command of 85 Squadron.  He was appointed group captain (Gp Cpt) in command of Night Operations at No. 11 Group RAF.  At 26, he was one of the youngest to hold that rank.  Air marshal Roderick Hill asked him to report to de Havilland in company with Adolph Malan.  They were to test-fly the de Havilland Vampire.  Cunningham commented that the machine would make an ideal night fighter.  Although he was not familiar with the workings of the de Havilland Goblin turbojet, he recommended that if the cockpit was extended to allow for a navigator and the fuel tanks were enlarged, the type could make a formidable interceptor.  While test-flying, Cunningham and Rawnsley carried out a sortie over Normandy from RAF Uxbridge.  They overflew the British sector on the 9 June 1944 as the Battle for Caen began.  They were vectored onto enemy aircraft but were unable to hold their contacts.

On 13 June 1944, the V-1 flying bomb offensive began and Cunningham was tasked with assisting with their interception.  He also coordinated his efforts with No. 100 Group RAF, which were engaged in intruder operations over occupied Europe.  Cunningham was concerned at using Mosquitoes for intercepting V-1s, because of the dangers of the bomb exploding and damaging the attacking fighter.  One of his former commanding officers and current Group captain Edward Crew; an ace with 15 enemy aircraft and 31 V-1s shot down, was forced to bail out when the nose of his Mosquito was split open.  The operations did not last long, and by August 1944, the Mosquitoes were back on bomber support missions.  He was promoted to wing commander (Wg Cdr) (war-substantive) on 1 September 1944.

Towards the end of the war, he spent most of his time flying throughout Europe and meeting various commanding officers and units.  He took advantage of his position to fly other types he had not had the chance to operate.  He flew Supermarine Spitfires frequently on such trips. Soon after the Normandy Campaign, he took leave to visit his mother in Ireland.  She was staying with his sister Mary, (and his niece) whose husband had been killed in action at Anzio in Italy.  He remained with 11 Group until the capitulation of Germany on 8 May 1945.

In July 1945, he was sent to the Far East.  A group was created which was a collection of RAF forces that were to be used to recover Singapore from the Japanese.  Cunningham and Rawnsley flew out to Rangoon via Malta, Cairo, Baghdad, and Karachi.  Soon after they arrived, they learned of the atomic attacks against Japan.  On 2 September 1945, Japan surrendered, and the Second World War was over.  Cunningham was offered a permanent commission in the RAF; but he feared his career, if he stayed, would become mired in administration, policy-making, staff courses, and committees.  It would mean flying would become a secondary occupation.  He decided to return to de Havilland.  The company had asked the RAF to release him the previous summer, but had been refused.  He was formally de-mobilised in November 1945, and re-joined de Havilland on 1 December.

Post-war activities
Cunningham relinquished his RAF commission officially on 1 August 1946, retaining the rank of group captain (Gp Cpt), but remaining in the re-constituted Auxiliary Air Force (AAF) with the permanent rank of squadron leader (Sqn Ldr).  He reformed his old auxiliary squadron at the request of the Air Ministry in 1946, but took no active part in its running, serving as a reserve officer in the Royal Auxiliary Air Force (RAuxAF) until his retirement as a reserve squadron leader on 1 August 1967.

At de Havilland, he was awarded a salary of £1,500 in a company that had expanded enormously during the war.  The number of employees rose from 5,000 to 38,000.  The turnover of the company had gone from £1.5 million before the war, to £25 million, and was now supported by around 100 factories.  Cunningham took the title of chief test pilot of the de Havilland Engine Company under the supervision of Geoffrey de Havilland Jr.  Cunningham served as a pilot and consultant in a series of deals with the Swedish Air Force and Swiss Air Force.  Both countries were keen to employ him, but Cunningham visited only to deliver and advise on the de Havilland Vampire and British airborne radar design.  In 1990, the Swiss presented him with the spade-grip from the control column mounted on a wooden stand when they withdrew the last of their Vampires.  When the Swedes retired the aircraft type in 1997, he was invited to celebrate its 50 years of Swedish service.

On 27 September 1946, Geoffrey de Havilland Jr was killed test-flying the DH.108 Swallow over the Thames estuary.  Cunningham had taken off at the same time to deliver the first Vampire in Switzerland.  Cunningham only learned the next morning, from Swiss newspapers at breakfast in Geneva, that de Havilland was missing.  Cunningham knew the family well and contacted de Havilland's father, whose other son John had been killed in a collision while flying a Mosquito in 1943.  With the agreement of de Havilland senior, Cunningham took over Geoffrey Jr.'s post at £2,000 per year.

In March 1948, he set a world flight altitude record of  in a Ghost-powered Vampire.  The flight lasted for 45 minutes, reaching  in 13.5 minutes.  The following year, he went on to test the de Havilland Comet, the world's first jet airliner which first flew on 27 July 1949.  In 1951, Cunningham was made an Officer of the British Empire (OBE), and was raised to Commander of the British Empire (CBE) in 1963.  On 23 May 1952, he flew the Comet, now a highly successful export, carrying the recently widowed Queen Mother and Princess Margaret on a four-hour tour around the Alps.  At one point, he supervised the Queen Mother as she took the controls.  She was to dine with members of the No. 600 Royal Auxiliary Air Force squadron later that night, and was anxious to say she had piloted an aircraft.  Cunningham continued to test-fly prototypes such as the re-built Comet 3 and 4 in the late 1950s.  In 1955, he was awarded the Gold Medal of the Royal Aero Club.  On 23 October 1956, he travelled to the United States and received the Harmon Trophy from President Dwight D. Eisenhower.  It was the most prestigious American trophy for services of civil aviation.

On 1 December 1958, he was appointed a member of the de Havilland board, but the company was sold and merged into Hawker Siddeley in 1960.  With the Siddeley company, he was instrumental in the development in the Hawker Siddeley Trident in 1962.  Cunningham worked under the managing director Arnold Alexander Hall, whom he had first met in 1940 to iron out the malfunctions in the Beaufighter gun sight.  Later, Cunningham acted as a consultant and advisor to the Chinese Government from 1972 to 1979, as the company sought to increase its revenue by selling aircraft to China.  At their insistence, he postponed his retirement for three years to complete a series of aircraft sales.  On 1 May 1975, the British Government announced the nationalisation of the industry, and British Aerospace (BAe) consumed all the nations' manufacturers.

Cunningham had one serious accident whilst flying.  On 20 November 1975 at Dunsfold Aerodrome, Surrey, a number of birds were ingested by the engines of the British Aerospace BAe 125 just after takeoff.  Forced to make an emergency landing, Cunningham put the aircraft down onto the runway at , but it careered across a public road where it collided with a car carrying six people, who were killed; no-one died on board the HS-125.  Cunningham suffered two crushed vertebra, but he remained chief test pilot at Hawker Siddeley until 1978, when British Aerospace was formed.  He retired from British aerospace in 1980.

In his retirement, Cunningham devoted himself to aviation affairs of a charitable nature while building a retirement fund for himself.  In 1980, he was appointed Chairman of the Sir Geoffrey de Havilland Flying Foundation, a charity to devoted to helping young people with aspirations in aviation.  Over a number of years, former senior RAF officers had been attracted to investing in Lloyd's of London as a Lloyd's 'name'.  Cunningham's commitment was one of unlimited liability, and so when Lloyd's ran into financial difficulty in 1988, he was faced with enormous debts.  He was forced to live frugally until the end of his life.  Having never married, John Cunningham died a bachelor aged 84 on 21 July 2002.

Honours and awards
In recognition of his wartime exploits and his contribution to civil aviation, he was appointed a Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) in the 1963 Birthday Honours.  He was awarded the Segrave Trophy for his services in 1978.

Sale of medals
Following Cunningham's death in 2002, his service medals and flying memorabilia passed to the de Havilland Aircraft Company Trust.  The medals were subsequently sold on 6 September 2012 for £384,000 to help raise funds for an education centre, museum, and flying scholarships for young people on behalf of the Bentley Priory Battle of Britain Trust Appeal.

References

Citations

Bibliography

Air Pictorial (1992). February, Volume 54, Issue 2. Air League of the British Empire.

Further reading

External links

Cunningham, John (oral history) — Imperial War Museum interview with John Cunningham on 13 June 1989 (catalogue number 10729)

1917 births
2002 deaths
Britannia Trophy winners
British test pilots
British World War II flying aces
Commanders of the Order of the British Empire
Companions of the Distinguished Service Order
De Havilland
De Havilland Comet
Foreign recipients of the Silver Star
Harmon Trophy winners
People educated at Whitgift School
Recipients of the Distinguished Flying Cross (United Kingdom)
Royal Air Force group captains
Segrave Trophy recipients
The Few
Military personnel from Surrey
Flight altitude record holders
Royal Air Force pilots of World War II
British aviation record holders
People from Croydon

John Cunningham (RAF officer)


Joselito is the name for:

First name / given name
Joselito (singer), Spanish 1950s child actor and singer
Joselito Agustin (1976–2010), also known as Aksyon Lito, Filipino journalist
Joselito Altarejos, Filipino film and television director, producer
Joselito Pimentel, better known as Lito Pimentel, Filipino film and television actor
Joselito Vaca, Bolivian football midfielder

Known as Joselito
Jojo Duncil, real name Joselito Duncil, (born 1983), Filipino professional basketball player
José Gómez Ortega,  Joselito, Spanish matador
José Romero Jiménez,  Joselito, Spanish football forward
Lito Atienza, full name José Livioko Atienza, Jr., a.k.a. Joselito Atienza, Filipino politician, former city mayor of Manila

See also
Joselito vagabundo, 1965 Mexican film

Joselito


Dyera costulata, the jelutong, is a species of tree in the family Apocynaceae. It grows to approximately 60 metres (200 ft) tall with diameters of 2 metres (5 to 6 ft), or even to 80 m (260 ft) tall with diameters to 3 m (10 ft), and boles clear and straight for 30 m (90 ft). It grows in Malaysia, Borneo, Sumatra and southern Thailand. Its natural distribution is scattered locales in low-elevation tropical evergreen forest.

In addition, jelutong can be tapped for latex and from the 1920s through the 1960s, jelutong latex was an important source of chewing gum.

Jelutong has been traditionally overharvested, and is a threatened species in many areas. It is a protected species in parts of Malaysia and Thailand. The tree is grown commercially for timber.

Sawdust from this species has been known to cause allergic dermatitis.

Uses
Jelutong is used for its wood. Along with balsa it is technically a hardwood with many properties similar to that wood. These properties such as the low density, straight grain and fine texture mean it is easy to work with and hence popular with model makers and within the patternmaking trade. The roots are used as a cork substitute.

References

Further reading
Meding, B., A.T. Karlberg and M. Ahman. (1996). Wood dust from jelutong (Dyera costulata) causes contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis 34(5):349-53.
Photos of latex harvest

Rauvolfioideae
Least concern plants
Trees of Thailand
Flora of Malesia
Taxa named by Friedrich Anton Wilhelm Miquel

Dyera costulata


Andrew Rogers (born 15 August 1964) is a former Australian rules footballer who played with Essendon and Geelong in the VFL/AFL.

Originally from South Australian National Football League (SANFL) club Woodville, Rogers was recruited by Essendon with pick six in the 1987 VFL Draft. He had played 63 games at Woodville from his debut in 1985 and in 1987 represented South Australia in interstate matches against Victoria and Western Australia, performing well enough to be selected in the All-Australian team.

Rogers made eight senior appearances for Essendon in 1988 but after being unable to cement his place in the side crossed to Geelong. He was at Geelong for four seasons, playing finals football, including the 1992 AFL Grand Final which they lost and was to be his last game in the league.

When he returned to South Australia in 1993 he rejoined his old club Woodville who, while Rogers was in the AFL, had merged to become Woodville-West Torrens. As vice-captain, Rogers played in their inaugural premiership team that year, with a Grand Final victory over Norwood. He was club captain from 1995 to 2000 and just like with his AFL stint, his SANFL career ended in a losing Grand Final. The 2001 decider was his 179th and last game for the merged club, for whom he won 'best and fairests' in 1993, 1995 and 1996.

Rogers coached North Shore Australian Football Club in the Sydney AFL competition in 2022, taking the Bombers to the Grand Final in his first season at the helm; but it would be another losing Grand Final.

References

Andrew Rogers at the SANFL Hall of Fame
Holmesby, Russell and Main, Jim (2007). The Encyclopedia of AFL Footballers. 7th ed. Melbourne: Bas Publishing.

1964 births
Living people
Essendon Football Club players
Geelong Football Club players
Woodville-West Torrens Football Club players
Woodville Football Club players
All-Australians (1953–1988)
Australian rules footballers from South Australia
South Australian Football Hall of Fame inductees
South Australian State of Origin players

Andrew Rogers (footballer)