Dred Scott

Dred Scott (c. 1799 – September 17, 1858) was an enslaved African-American man in the United States who unsuccessfully sued for his freedom and that of his wife, Harriet Robinson Scott, and their two daughters in the "Dred Scott v. Sandford" case of 1857, popularly known as the "Dred Scott decision". Scott claimed that he and his wife should be granted their freedom because they had lived in Illinois and the Wisconsin Territory for four years, where slavery was illegal and their laws said that slaveholders gave up their rights to slaves if they stayed for an extended period.
In a landmark case, the United States Supreme Court decided 7–2 against Scott, finding that neither he nor any other person of African ancestry could claim citizenship in the United States, and therefore Scott could not bring suit in federal court under diversity of citizenship rules. Moreover, Scott's temporary residence outside Missouri did not bring about his emancipation under the Missouri Compromise, as the court ruled this to have been unconstitutional, as it would "improperly deprive Scott's owner of his legal property".
While Chief Justice Roger B. Taney had hoped to settle issues related to slavery and Congressional authority by this decision, it aroused public outrage, deepened sectional tensions between the northern and southern states, and hastened the eventual explosion of their differences into the American Civil War. President Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, and the post-Civil War Reconstruction Amendments—the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments—nullified the decision.
The Scotts were manumitted by a private arrangement in May 1857. Dred Scott died of tuberculosis a year later.
Life.
Dred Scott was born into slavery 1799 in Southampton County, Virginia. It is not clear whether Dred was his given name or a shortened form of Etheldred. In 1818, Dred was taken by Peter Blow and his family, with their five other enslaved people, to Alabama, where the family ran an unsuccessful farm in a location near Huntsville. This site is now occupied by Oakwood University.
The Blows gave up farming in 1830 and moved to St. Louis, Missouri, where they ran a boarding house. Dred Scott was sold to Dr. John Emerson, a surgeon serving in the United States Army, who planned to move to Rock Island, Illinois. After Scott learned this, he attempted to run away. His decision to do so was spurred by a distaste he had developed for Emerson. Scott was temporarily successful in his escape as he, much like many other runaway slaves during this time period, "never tried to distance his pursuers, but dodged around among his fellow slaves as long as possible." Eventually, he was captured in the "Lucas Swamps" of Missouri and taken back. (Blow died in 1832, and historians debate whether Scott was sold to Emerson before or after Blow's death. Some believe that Scott was sold in 1831, while others point to a number of enslaved people in Blow's estate who were sold to Emerson after Blow's death, including one with a name given as Sam, who may be the same person as Scott.)
As an army officer, Emerson moved frequently, taking Scott with him to each new army posting. In 1836, Emerson and Scott went to Fort Armstrong, in the free state of Illinois. In 1837, Emerson took Scott to Fort Snelling, in what is now the state of Minnesota and was then in the free territory of Wisconsin. There, Scott met and married Harriet Robinson, a slave owned by Lawrence Taliaferro. The marriage was formalized in a civil ceremony presided over by Taliaferro, who was a justice of the peace. Since slave marriages had no legal sanction, supporters of Scott later noted that this ceremony was evidence that Scott was being treated as a free man. But Taliaferro transferred ownership of Harriet to Emerson, who treated the Scotts as his slaves.
Emerson moved to Jefferson Barracks in Missouri in 1837, leaving the Scott family behind in Wisconsin and leasing them out (also called hiring out) to other officers. In February 1838, Emerson met and married Eliza Irene Sanford at Fort Jesup in Louisiana, whereupon he sent for the Scotts to join him. While on a steamboat on the Mississippi River, between the free state of Illinois and the Iowa district of Wisconsin Territory, Harriet Scott gave birth to their first child, whom they named Eliza after their new mistress. They later had a daughter, Lizzie. They also had two sons, but neither survived past infancy.
The Emersons and Scotts returned to Missouri, a slave state, in 1840. In 1842, Emerson left the Army. After he died in the Iowa Territory in 1843, his widow Irene inherited his estate, including the Scotts. For three years after Emerson's death, she continued to lease out the Scotts as hired slaves. In 1846, Scott attempted to purchase his and his family's freedom, offering $300, about $ in current value.
Irene Emerson refused his offer. Scott and his wife separately filed freedom suits to try to gain their freedom and that of their daughters. The cases were later combined by the courts.
Dred Scott v. Sandford.
Summary.
The Scotts' cases were first heard by the Missouri circuit court. The first court upheld the precedent of "once free, always free". That is, because the Scotts had been held voluntarily for an extended period by their owner in a free territory, which provided for slaves to be freed under such conditions. Therefore the court ruled they had gained their freedom. The owner appealed. In 1852 the Missouri supreme court overruled this decision, on the basis that the state did not have to abide by free states' laws, especially given the anti-slavery fervor of the time. It said that Scott should have filed for freedom in the Wisconsin Territory.
Scott ended up filing a freedom suit in federal court (see below for details), in a case that he appealed to the US Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that African descendants were not U.S. citizens and had no standing to sue for freedom. It also ruled that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. This was the last in a series of freedom suits from 1846–1857, that began in Missouri courts, and were heard by lower federal district courts. The US Supreme Court overturned the earlier precedents, and established new limitations on African Americans.
In detail.
In 1846, having failed to purchase his freedom, Scott filed a freedom suit in St. Louis Circuit Court. Missouri precedent, dating to 1824, had held that slaves freed through prolonged residence in a free state or territory, where the law provided for slaves to gain freedom under such conditions, would remain free if returned to Missouri. The doctrine was known as "Once free, always free". Scott and his wife had resided for two years in free states and free territories, and his eldest daughter had been born on the Mississippi River, between a free state and a free territory.
Dred Scott was listed as the only plaintiff in the case, but his wife, Harriet, had filed separately and their cases were combined. She played a critical role, pushing him to pursue freedom on behalf of their family. She was a frequent churchgoer, and in St. Louis, her church pastor (a well-known abolitionist) connected the Scotts to their first lawyer. The Scott children were around the age of ten when the case was originally filed. The Scotts were worried that their daughters might be sold.
The "Scott v. Emerson" case was tried by the state in 1847 in the federal-state courthouse in St. Louis. Scott's lawyer was originally Francis B. Murdoch and later Charles D. Drake. As more than a year elapsed from the time of the initial petition filing until the trial, Drake had moved away from St. Louis during that time. Samuel M. Bay tried the case in court. The verdict went against Scott, as testimony that established his ownership by Mrs. Emerson was ruled to be hearsay. But the judge called for a retrial, which was not held until January 1850. This time, direct evidence was introduced that Emerson owned Scott, and the jury ruled in favor of Scott's freedom. His family had a taste of freedom.
Irene Emerson appealed the verdict. In 1852, the Missouri Supreme Court struck down the lower court ruling, arguing that, because of the free states' anti-slavery fervor was encroaching on Missouri, the state no longer had to defer to the laws of free states. By this decision, the court overturned 28 years of precedent in Missouri. Justice Hamilton R. Gamble, who was later appointed as governor of Missouri, sharply disagreed with the majority decision and wrote a dissenting opinion.
In 1853, Scott again sued for his freedom; this time under federal law. Irene Emerson had moved to Massachusetts, and Scott had been transferred to Irene Emerson's brother, John F. A. Sanford. Because Sanford was a citizen of New York, while Scott would be a citizen of Missouri if he were free, the Federal courts had diversity jurisdiction over the case. After losing again in federal district court, the Scotts appealed to the United States Supreme Court in "Dred Scott v. Sandford". (The name is spelled "Sandford" in the court decision due to a clerical error.)
On March 6, 1857, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney delivered the majority opinion. Taney ruled, with three major issues, that:
The Court had ruled that African Americans had no claim to freedom or citizenship. Since they were not citizens, they did not possess the legal standing to bring suit in a federal court. As slaves were private property, Congress did not have the power to regulate slavery in the territories and could not revoke a slave owner's rights based on where he lived. This decision nullified the essence of the Missouri Compromise, which divided territories into jurisdictions either free or slave. Speaking for the majority, Taney ruled that because Scott was considered the private property of his owners, he was subject to the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, prohibiting the taking of property from its owner "without due process".
Rather than settling issues, as Taney had hoped, the court's ruling in the Scott case increased tensions between pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions in both North and South, further pushing the country toward the brink of civil war. Ultimately after the Civil War, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution settled the issue of Black citizenship via Section 1 of that Amendment: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside ..."
Abolitionist aid to Scott's case.
Scott's freedom suit before the state courts was backed financially by Peter Blow's adult children, who had turned against slavery in the decade since they sold Dred Scott. Henry Taylor Blow was elected as a Republican Congressman after the Civil War, Charlotte Taylor Blow married the son of an abolitionist newspaper editor, and Martha Ella Blow married Charles D. Drake, one of Scott's lawyers who was elected by the state legislature as a Republican US Senator. Members of the Blow family signed as security for Scott's legal fees and secured the services of local lawyers. While the case was pending, the St. Louis County sheriff held these payments in escrow and leased Scott out for fees.
In 1851, Scott was leased by Charles Edmund LaBeaume, whose sister had married into the Blow family. Scott worked as a janitor at LaBeaume's law office, which was shared with Roswell Field.
After the Missouri Supreme Court decision ruled against the Scotts, the Blow family concluded that the case was hopeless and decided that they could no longer pay Scott's legal fees. Roswell Field agreed to represent Scott "pro bono" before the federal courts. Scott was represented before the U.S. Supreme Court by Montgomery Blair. (The abolitionist later served in President Abraham Lincoln's cabinet as Postmaster General.) Assisting Blair was attorney George Curtis. His brother Benjamin was an Associate Supreme Court Justice and wrote one of the two dissents in "Dred Scott v. Sandford".
In 1850, Irene Emerson remarried and moved to Springfield, Massachusetts. Her new husband, Calvin C. Chaffee, was an abolitionist. He was elected to the U.S. Congress in 1854, and fiercely attacked by pro-slavery newspapers for his apparent hypocrisy in owning slaves. In response, Chaffee said that neither he nor Mrs. Chaffee knew about the case until it was "noticed for trial". He wrote to Montgomery Blair, saying "my wife ... desires to know whether she has the legal power and right to emancipate the Dred Scott family."
Given the complicated facts of the Dred Scott case, some observers on both sides raised suspicions of collusion to create a test case. Abolitionist newspapers charged that slaveholders colluded to name a New Yorker as defendant, while pro-slavery newspapers charged collusion on the abolitionist side.
About a century later, a historian established that John Sanford never legally owned Dred Scott, nor did he serve as executor of Dr. Emerson's will. It was unnecessary to find a New Yorker to secure diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts, as Irene Emerson Chaffee (still legally the owner) had become a resident of Massachusetts. After the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Roswell Field advised Dr. Chaffee that Mrs. Chaffee had full powers over Scott. However, Sanford had been involved in the case since the beginning, as he'd secured a lawyer to defend Mrs. Emerson in the original state lawsuit, before she married Chaffee.
Post-case freedom.
Following the ruling, the Chaffees deeded the Scott family to Taylor Blow, who manumitted them on May 26, 1857. Scott worked as a porter in a St. Louis hotel, but his freedom was short-lived; he died from tuberculosis in September 1858. He was survived by his wife and his two daughters.
Scott was originally interred in Wesleyan Cemetery in St. Louis. When this cemetery was closed nine years later, Taylor Blow transferred Scott's coffin to an unmarked plot in the nearby Catholic Calvary Cemetery, St. Louis, which permitted burial of non-Catholic slaves by Catholic owners. A local tradition later developed of placing Lincoln pennies on top of Scott's gravestone for good luck.
Harriet Scott was buried in Greenwood Cemetery in Hillsdale, Missouri. She outlived her husband by 18 years, dying on June 17, 1876.
Prelude to Emancipation Proclamation.
The newspaper coverage of the court ruling and the 10-year legal battle raised awareness of slavery in non-slave states. The arguments for freedom were later used by U.S. President Abraham Lincoln. The words of the decision built popular opinion and voter sentiment for his Emancipation Proclamation and the three constitutional amendments ratified shortly after the Civil War: the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments, abolishing slavery, granting former slaves citizenship, and conferring citizenship to anyone born in the United States and "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" (excluding those subject to a foreign power such as children of foreign ambassadors).
Accounts of Scott's life.
Shelia P. Moses and Bonnie Christensen wrote "I, Dred Scott: A Fictional Slave Narrative Based on the Life and Legal Precedent of Dred Scott" (2005). Mary E. Neighbour, wrote "Speak Right On: Dred Scott: A Novel" (2006). Gregory J. Wallance published the novel "Two Men Before the Storm: Arba Crane's Recollection of Dred Scott and the Supreme Court Case That Started the Civil War" (2006).


Jacob Hersleb Darre

Jacob Hersleb Darre (20 November 1757 – 15 December 1841) was a Norwegian vicar. He served as a representative at the Norwegian Constitutional Assembly.
Jacob Hersleb Darre was born in Overhalla in Nord-Trøndelag, Norway where his father was parish priest. He was a student at the Trondheim Cathedral School from 1776 and graduated cand. theol. from the University of Copenhagen in 1784. He started his career as a personnel chaplain with his father in Overhalla. In 1792 he became assistant pastor in Orkdal. During the period 1797–1833, he was pastor in Klæbu.
He represented "Søndre Trondhjems Amt" (now Sør-Trøndelag) at the Norwegian Constitutional Assembly at Eidsvoll in 1814. At the Assembly, he was joined by fellow delegates Lars Larsen Forsæth and Hans Christian Ulrik Midelfart. At Eidsvoll, all three delegates supported the independence party ("selvstendighetspartiet").
Jacob Darre were married in 1795 with Louise Caroline Steenbuch (1773-1860) who was the daughter of a parish priest. They were the parents of Hans Jørgen Darre, Bishop of Nidaros diocese. The diary of Jacob Darre, which dated from 1814, was published after his death in 1846.


Rosa Aschenbrenner

Rosa Aschenbrenner (born "Rosa Lierl": 27 April 1885 – 9 February 1967) was a German politician (KPD / SPD). After the Second World War, she became increasingly marginalised from the political mainstream because of her opposition to rearmament.
Life.
Provenance and early years.
Rosa Aschenbrenner was born into a Roman Catholic family at Beilngries, a small town a short distance to the north of Ingolstadt in Upper Bavaria. She was the eldest of her parents' eight recorded children. Her father was a clock maker who also kept an agricultural smallholding. He was also chairman of the local Catholic Workers' Association, and Rosa Aschenbrenner grew up as a Roman Catholic, though by the end of her political career, slightly unusually for Bavaria in those times, she would be describing herself as "without religion" ("konfessionslos"). From 1898 she was in domestic service. In 1908 she joined the "Women's and girls' Education League" ("Frauen- und Mädchenbildungs-Verein") in Munich. She married Hans Aschenbrenner the next year and joined the Social Democratic Party (SPD) in 1908 or 1909.
She worked as a hairdresser between 1909 and 1914. During the next few years she took work as a seamstress with the army clothing supply department and in slaughter houses and stock yards. It was in 1914 that she joined the SPD "Women workers Committee" "Arbeiterinnenausschuss"). When First World War broke out in 1914, many in the SPD leadership came out in support for the government position, but in 1917 the party split, primarily over differences as to whether or not to continue supporting the war. Rosa Aschenbrenner chose the break-away party, which was launched that year as the Independent Social Democratic Party ("Unabhängige Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands" / USPD). She quickly became a USPD left-wing activist.
Democratic politics.
Aschenbrenner was briefly arrested in 1919. On 7 July 1920 she was elected deputy chair of the Munich district USPD leadership. She had already been selected and elected as a USPD member to the newly democratic on 6 June 1920. During the course of the further re-alignment of left wing politics that followed the German Revolution of 1918–19 she participated at the "unification party conference" in December 1920 at which the larger part of the USPD united with the newly emerging Communist Party ("Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands" / KPD). Later, in 1921, attended the 6th Party Conference of the Communist Party at Jena. After 22 December 1920 Aschenbrenner is not for the USPD, but for the Communist Party.
A member of the party's regional district leadership ("Bezirksleitung") for South Bavaria from 1921, she took responsibility for women's issues. After 1925, and till she left the regional party leadership team in 1929, she served as the regional party treasurer. In November 1921, however, she suffered a health crisis when she had to undergo a debilitating operation. She left the on 7 December 1921, formally resigning her mandate on 22 January 1922. She recovered and returned to the political fray, but for the next few years her focus switched to work with the "Frauenhilfe für politische Gefangene" organisation which had been created during a period of political repression in the revolutionary aftermath of the war, as a left-wing vehicle for women to provide support to political prisoners. The organisation had been set up by the ADGB (Trades Union Confederation), but during 1923 it was dissolved, primarily because of the overlap between its residual activities and those of the Rote Hilfe Deutschland (RHD - Communist welfare organisation): from around 1925 Aschenbrenner, like others affected, switched her energies over to the RHD.
In 1924 there was another to the . Aschenbrenner stood as a candidate. This time she remained a member of the "Landtag" till 1932, though by that time she was of the Communist Party.
In 1928 the German Communist Party embarked on a period of internal feuding. Aschenbrenner belonged to the pragmatic non-ideological wing of the party whose leaders included August Thalheimer and Heinrich Brandler. Aschenbrenner and members of her faction were particularly critical of the policies advanced by the party leadership under Ernst Thälmann, which followed the so-called social fascism and revolutionary union opposition strategies being mandated from Moscow. In 1928 she received a formal "warning" against deviations from the party line.
Party split.
In June 1929 Rosa Aschenbrenner announced her resignation from the Communist Party, and went on to denounced as politically catastrophic the party line being pursued by the leadership. The Communist Party leadership, which valued discipline and loyalty, expelled her husband from the party in July, after he rejected their instruction to divorce his wife. Aschenbrenner now, on 11 June 1929, joined the Communist Party of Germany (Opposition) ("Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands (Opposition)" / KPO) which had been coalescing round Heinrich Brandler and August Thalheimer since the end of the previous year. This led to her being pilloried by the Communist press as a "political corpse" ("politischer Leichnam"). She remained in the KPO for less than a year, however. In the northern part of Bavaria the KPO had been able to set up a regional power base in Nuremberg, centred around Karl Grönsfelder, but in the south of Bavaria, the region surrounding Munich, the KPO never really established itself, and in May 1930 Rosa Aschenbrenner rejoined the centre-left Social Democratic Party (SPD)) from which she had broken away in 1917.
Nazi years.
The Nazis took power in January 1933 and lost little time in converting the German state into a one-party dictatorship. Party political activity (unless in support of the Nazi party) became illegal. On 17 March 1933 Aschenbrenner was taken into "protective custody" ("Schutzhaft"). She was released after two or three months, but remained under police surveillance. She was arrested again in 1936 or 1937 for "Violation of the Treachery Law ("Verstoßes gegen das Heimtückegesetz"). Her crime had involved listening to forbidden foreign radio stations. On this occasion she was sentenced to a six-week or four-month jail term: sources differ on the duration of her second prison term, but there is agreement that she underwent two periods in jail between 1933 and 1945, covering several months. During the twelve Nazi years till 1945 Aschenbrenner supported herself with cleaning jobs.
After the war ended.
The end of the war found Bavaria in the US occupation zone, which meant an end to one-party dictatorship and widespread consensus between occupiers and occupied on the need for a rapid return to democratic political systems and structures. Aschenbrenner was a founder member of the recreated SPD (party)). She was one of the 51 SPD members to the 180-person Bavarian Constitutional Assembly mandated to created a new constitution for Bavaria. During the later 1940s she may have returned briefly to sit in the Bavarian Regional Legislature ("Bayerischer Landtag"), but sources, strangely, are not consistent on this. In any event, twelve years under Hitler had opened the way for an increasingly consensual approach to politics. Aschenbrenner's own experiences had left her with an increasingly powerful commitment to pacifism, and by opposing the military rearmament that was being promoted by the United States, she found herself increasingly seen as a left-wing extremist and marginalised within the SPD. During the 1950s her political energies became concentrated on municipal politics, and she sat as an SPD city councillor in Munich till 1956. As a city councillor she sat on committees involved in reconstruction, social and civic matters, health and the Oktoberfest.
Rosa Aschenbrenner died at Munich on 9 February 1967.


Wilhelm Beuttel

Friedrich Wilhelm Beuttel (10 August 1900 – 27 July 1944) was a German communist and resistance fighter against Nazism.
Beuttel, a tailor, was born into a metal workers' family in Karlsruhe but grew up in Friedberg. He joined the Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany (USPD) in 1917, but left it for the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) together with the left wing of the USPD in 1920. In 1922, Beuttel was elected city councilor of Friedberg for the KPD. From 1929–1931, he attended a communist training course at the International Lenin School in Moscow. After returning to Germany, he became organizational head of the Frankfurt am Main branch of the KPD and was elected to the state parliament of Hesse in 1932.
After the Nazi Party came to power in 1933, Beuttel fled to Paris. There, he took over the leadership of the Rote Hilfe, a communist aid organization supporting leftist victims of political repression. He was transferred from Paris to Amsterdam in 1936, and went underground before German troops invaded and occupied the Netherlands in 1940, while his partner, Maria Rentmeister, was arrested by the Gestapo. In the late summer of 1942, Beuttel returned to Germany in order to support the anti-Nazi resistance struggle.
In early February 1943, Beuttel was arrested by the Gestapo. He was sentenced to death by the People's Court and executed in Cologne on 27 July 1944.


Public Law 93-408

Public Law 93-408 is an American statute that established the Youth Conservation Corps (YCC). It was established in 1974 by the 93rd United States Congress and President Gerald Ford as Public Law 93-408, an act to amend the Youth Conservation Corps Act of 1970.
"The Congress finds that the Youth Conservation Corps has demonstrated a high degree of success as a pilot program wherein American youth, representing all segments of society, have benefited by gainful employment in the healthful outdoor atmosphere of the national park system, the national forest system, other public land and water areas of the United States and by their employment have enhanced and maintained the natural resources of the United States, and whereas in so doing the youth have gained an understanding and appreciation of the Nation's environment and heritage ... it is accordingly the purpose of this act to expand and make permanent the Youth Conservation Corps and thereby further the development and maintenance of the natural resources by America's youth, and in so doing to prepare them for the ultimate responsibility of maintaining and managing these resources for the American people."
References.
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/32/be/aa.pdf


Poondi murder case

Poondi murder case was a murder trial conducted in British India between October 1911 and June 1913. The trial was a "cause célèbre" of the early 20th century Tanjore District.
Dhanabhagyam, the daughter-in-law of Vaidyanatha Pillai, was murdered under mysterious circumstances in the early hours of 21 October 1911. Vaidyanatha Pillai was convicted for organising the murder and sentenced to death by the First Class Magistrate at Mannargudi. The sentence was confirmed by the District and Sessions Court at Tanjore. In June 1913, Swaminathan, the lawyer for the defendant, appealed to the Privy Council of the United Kingdom for a re-trial which was granted. The re-trial overturned Vaidyanatha Pillai's conviction and acquitted him.


Former McLean County Courthouse

The Former McLean County Courthouse in Washburn, North Dakota was built in 1905 to replace a courthouse that had burned down, and was used as a courthouse until 1917, when the new McLean County Courthouse was built.
The building is now used as one of the buildings of the McLean County Historical Society Museums.
It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1985.


List of Supreme Court of Canada cases

The Supreme Court of Canada is the court of last resort and final appeal in Canada. Cases that are successfully appealed to the Court are generally of national importance. Once a case is decided the Court will publish written reasons for the decision that consist of one or more reasons from any number of the nine justices. Understanding the background of the cases, their reasons and the authorship can be important and insightful as each judge may have varying beliefs in legal theory and understanding.


Untouchables (law enforcement)

The Untouchables were special agents of the U.S. Bureau of Prohibition led by Eliot Ness, who, from 1930 to 1932, worked to end Al Capone's illegal activities by aggressively enforcing Prohibition laws against his organization. Legendary for being fearless and incorruptible, they earned the nickname "The Untouchables" after several agents refused large bribes from members of the Chicago Outfit.
Due to its significant success and enduring legacy, the unit has subsequently had a lasting impact on the techniques and methods of modern organized crime law enforcement units.
Mission.
Shortly after taking office in 1929, Herbert Hoover, the 31st President of the United States, gave Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon and Attorney General William D. Mitchell a plan for attacking large bootlegging gangs with small teams of Prohibition agents working under special United States attorneys. Neither Mellon nor Mitchell moved to implement Hoover's plan until attorney Frank J. Loesch of the Chicago Crime Commission approached the president in March 1930, asking his help in bringing down Al Capone. Hoover, facing the political fallout of the Wall Street Crash of 1929, instructed his administration to make the Capone case a priority.
At that time, Capone was already under investigation by agents from the Treasury's Bureau of Internal Revenue. In 1929, an investigation led by U.S. attorney George E. Q. Johnson into a Chicago Heights bootlegging gang allied with the Capone mob had uncovered financial records suggesting members of the Chicago Outfit could be found guilty of evading federal income tax. Agents of the Treasury Department's Intelligence Unit, serving under Elmer Irey, used this evidence to convict Capone's brother Ralph of tax fraud in April 1930, but they lacked sufficient evidence to charge Capone when Loesch met with Hoover. In June 1930, Special Agent Frank J. Wilson was placed in charge of this investigation.
In late 1930, Attorney General Mitchell, impatient with Johnson's lack of progress on the Capone case, decided to implement President Hoover's idea for sending a small squad of Prohibition agents to break up the Capone gang. Johnson selected twenty-seven-year-old Eliot Ness, a special agent with the Prohibition Bureau who had played key roles on the Chicago Heights case and an investigation into Ralph Capone's bootlegging operations, to head this elite squad.
Ness was ordered to lead raids against the Outfit's illegal breweries and distilleries, depriving Capone of the income he needed to pay the corrupting graft that was his greatest protection against prosecution, while also gathering evidence that could be used to prosecute Capone and his associates for conspiracy to violate the Volstead Act. Ness selected several agents, most from outside Chicago, whom he believed to be trustworthy, before beginning an extensive wire-tapping operation to gather information for the raids.
The squad located several Capone breweries and stills in and around Chicago and began raiding them in March 1931. Within six months, Ness's agents had destroyed bootlegging operations worth an estimated $500,000 (the equivalent of $8,579,503 in 2020 dollars) and representing an additional $2 million in lost income for Capone (equivalent to over $34.3 million in 2020). Their efforts reportedly inflicted significant financial harm on Capone and his organization while Frank Wilson and the Intelligence Unit worked to build their tax evasion case.
Failed attempts by members of the Capone mob to bribe or intimidate Ness and his agents inspired Charles Schwarz of the "Chicago Daily News" to begin calling them "untouchables," a term Schwarz borrowed from newspaper stories about the untouchables of India. George Johnson adopted the nickname and promoted it to the press, establishing it as the squad's unofficial title.
In June 1931, Capone was indicted first for income tax evasion and then for five thousand counts of conspiracy to violate the Volstead Act, the latter based on evidence gathered by Ness and his Untouchables. Capone pled guilty to all charges after George Johnson agreed to recommend a -year sentence. But Federal Judge James H. Wilkerson refused to accept Johnson's agreement and, once Capone changed his pleas, brought the tax case to trial. Although Capone would never be prosecuted on the Prohibition charges, that indictment formed the basis of a tax suit brought by the federal government following Capone's conviction for income tax evasion.
Ness and the Untouchables continued to attack the Outfit's beer and liquor empire during and after Capone's trial, their efforts resulting in estimated lost income in excess of $9 million. In recognition of this work, Ness was promoted to Chief Investigator of the Prohibition Bureau for Chicago in 1932. By that point, the Untouchables had essentially been disbanded, though Ness would continue to lead raids against Outfit breweries and distilleries until the repeal of Prohibition in 1933.
Members.
Because corruption was endemic among law-enforcement officials, Ness searched records of all Prohibition agents to create a reliable team. The initial group, aside from Ness himself, numbered six. Over the course of the investigation, some agents left the squad for various reasons, while others were brought on as manpower shortages within the Prohibition Bureau allowed.
The primary ten.
In June 1931, after Capone pleaded guilty to conspiracy to violate the National Prohibition Act, the Prohibition Bureau credited ten agents with building the case against him. These may be considered the core members of the Untouchables:
Other members.
Other agents known to have served with the squad, but who were not named among its primary members, include:
Disputed members.
Given the Untouchables' enduring fame, other names have often been attached to the squad in error. These include:


Service du travail obligatoire

The (; STO) was the forced enlistment and deportation of hundreds of thousands of French workers to Nazi Germany to work as forced labour for the German war effort during World War II.
The STO was created under laws and regulations of Vichy France, but it was used by Nazi Germany to compensate for its loss of manpower as it enlisted more and more soldiers for the Eastern Front. The German government promised that for every three French workers sent it would release one French prisoner of war. Those requisitioned under the STO were accommodated in work camps on German soil.
French forced laborers were the only nationality to have been required to serve by the laws of their own state rather than by German orders. This was an indirect consequence of the autonomy negotiated from the German administration by the Vichy government.
A total of 600,000 to 650,000 French workers were sent to Germany between June 1942 and July 1944. France was the third largest forced labor provider, after the USSR and Poland, and was the country that provided the largest number of skilled workers. 250,000 POWs also had to work for the Reich from 1943 onwards, having been "transformed", voluntarily or involuntarily, into civilian workers.
History.
On 22 June 1942, Pierre Laval, Prime Minister in the Vichy regime, announced the enactment of the "", whereby French workers were encouraged to volunteer to work in Germany to secure the release of French prisoners of war. Fritz Sauckel, dubbed the "slavemaster of Europe", was appointed "Generalbevollmächtigter für den Arbeitseinsatz" (General Plenipotentiary for Labour Deployment) on 21 March 1942 and charged with obtaining labor from across Europe. His appointment was roughly concurrent with the return to power of Pierre Laval. Until that time less than 100,000 French volunteers had gone to work in Germany. The refusal to send 150,000 skilled workers was one of the causes of the fall of the Darlan government.
In 1942 and 1943, Sauckel used intimidation and threats to meet his objectives. Laval negotiated, procrastinated and complied in turn, so that relations between the two men were tumultuous, Sauckel alternately praising Laval for his cooperation or condemning him for obstruction. Sauckel's increasing labor requirements between spring 1942 and early 1944 were known as "actions Sauckel" (Sauckel actions).
The law of 4 September 1942, signed by Philippe Pétain, Marshal of France and Chief of State of Vichy France, as well as by Laval, was entitled "" or "Law of 4 September 1942 on the use and guidance of the workforce". It required all able-bodied men aged 18 to 50 and single women aged 21 to 35 to "be subject to do any work that the Government deems necessary".
After Hitler ordered, on 15 December 1942, the transfer to the Wehrmacht of 300,000 German workers, Sauckel required, on 1 January 1943, in addition to the 240,000 French workers already in Germany, a further quota of 250,000 men to be dispatched by mid-March. To satisfy this second "action Sauckel", the law of 16 February 1943, signed by Prime Minister Laval for Joseph Barthélemy, the Minister of Justice, deemed it necessary that all males over 20 be subject to the "service du travail obligatoire".
Regulations were issued the same day and subjected males born between 1920 and 1922, roughly all males between the ages of 20 and 23, to the service. Previous requisitions under the relève theoretically concerned only workers. With the introduction of the STO, recruitment would henceforth be made by whole age groups. Young people in the classes of "1940", "1941" and "1942", that is to say those born between 1920 and 1922, were obliged to go to work in Germany (or France) as a substitute for military service. The Class of "1942" was the most affected and exemptions or suspensions initially promised to farmers or students were removed in June 1943. Theoretically, the STO also applied to young women but, for fear of the reactions of the people and the Church, women were not generally called up. Those called up in the second "action Sauckel" included 24,000 young men of the , the uniformed organization for young men that replaced military service in France between 1940 and 1944. These provided the last contingent of the "1942" class.
A third "action Sauckel" followed: On April 23, 1943, the Germans made new demands for 120,000 workers in May and another 100,000 in June. On August 6, 1943, they demanded an additional 500,000. These goals were never achieved because increasingly potential conscripts evaded the requisitions. The STO caused the departure into hiding of nearly 200,000 evaders, of whom approximately one quarter became full-time members of the French resistance.
Finally it was the Germans themselves who put an end to the demands of Sauckel. On 15 September 1943 the Reich Minister of Armaments and War Production Albert Speer concluded an agreement with Vichy government minister Jean Bichelonne exempting many French companies working for Germany from Sauckel's requisitions. However, this meant that the French economy increasingly became integrated with that of Germany.
Sauckel continued his labor levies, formally in parallel with the new policy of Speer, but the fourth "Sauckel Action" launched in 1944 turned out to be unproductive in obtaining additional workers.
The STO accentuated the movement of French public opinion against the Vichy regime and contributed to the Resistance. But it also brought the latter a task of considerable magnitude: to find money, food, weapons, etc. for thousands of young men who suddenly flocked to the resistance. STO conscripts also formed the first among 35,000 who escaped from France to North Africa to join the Free French or the French Liberation Army.


The Exonerated (play)

The Exonerated is a 2000 play by Jessica Blank and Erik Jensen that debuted Off-Broadway in October 2000 at 45 Bleecker Theater and ran for over 600 performances. It won numerous awards including the Lucille Lortel Award for Unique Theatrical Experience, the Drama Desk Award for Unique Theatrical Experience, and the Outer Critics Circle Award for Outstanding Off-Broadway Play. It was adapted into a 2005 film by the same name.
Plot.
The work combines first-person narrative with legal records to tell the stories of six wrongfully convicted inmates: Delbert Tibbs, Kerry Max Cook, Gary Gauger, David Keaton, Robert Earl Hayes and Sunny Jacobs, and their paths to freedom. The production is performed as an anthology by 10 actors seated behind music stands. Their accounts of the freed convicts emphasize their lives after being sentenced to death, including much of the legal proceedings that gained their exoneration.
Cast.
The original cast was as follows:
Productions.
During the summer of 2000, Jensen and Blank traveled to interview 40 former death row inmates who had been freed by the state after having served as much as 22 years in prison. After previews beginning on October 1, the play debuted Off-Broadway on October 10, 2002 at 45 Bleecker Theater, directed by Bob Balaban. The original run lasted from October 10, 2002 to March 7, 2004.
A revival of the play ran from September 19, 2012 to December 2, 2012 at the same theater, with a rotating cast that included Brian Dennehy, Stockard Channing, Delroy Lindo, Brooke Shields, and Lyle Lovett. The play was later performed for a 16-week run at the Riverside Studios theater in London, where it was supported by death penalty opponent Amnesty International.
In December 2002, the play was performed by a cast that included Richard Dreyfuss, Danny Glover and Mike Farrell, for Illinois Governor George Ryan, other politicians, and attorneys. A group of exonerated individuals also attended.
Ryan was reviewing how to handle death row inmates in light of the publicity surrounding those who had been convicted during Chicago Police Commander Jon Burge's tenure, which ended when he was fired in 1993. He had been the subject of numerous complaints to the police board and suits against the city for abusing suspects and coercing confessions. In 2006 the results of an investigation were presented to the city of Chicago, saying there was evidence sufficient to indict Burge, but the statute of limitations for the crimes had been exceeded.
Ryan declared a moratorium on the use of the death sentence in the state in 2000. In early January 2003, shortly before he left office, he pardoned four men whom he believed to be innocent. On January 11, 2003, having lost confidence in the state's penal system, Ryan commuted the death sentences of 167 prisoners on Illinois’ death row to life imprisonment. He said that would allow them to appeal their convictions.
In 2005, the play was adapted into a film of the same name, starring Susan Sarandon, Danny Glover and Brian Dennehy. That February, Simon & Schuster published Jenson and Blank's memoir, "Living Justice: Love, Freedom and the Making of The Exonerated".
In 2018 a notable revival took place at The Secret Theatre in Queens, NY, produced by Richard Mazda. It was unusual in that the cast acted out all of scenarios as they were described, a departure from the traditional reader's theatre staging. The director was DeMone Seraphin, assisted by Krysta Hibbard. Movement by Tamrin Goldberg and Fight Direction and Dramaturgy by Meron Langsner. The cast consisted of James Washington, Laura Lockwood, Alphonso Walker Jr., Chelsea Davis, Mark Keeton, Tommy Norton, Greg Warren, Ruby Littman, Tyler Waage, and Sean Jarrel. The final performances were attended by Kerry Max Cook.
Awards.
The original production, which ran for 608 performances, won the 2003 Lucille Lortel Award for Unique Theatrical Experience, the 2003 Drama Desk Award for Unique Theatrical Experience, and the 2003 Outer Critics Circle Award for Outstanding Off-Broadway Play. It has also won the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers' Champion of Justice Award and Court TV's Scales of Justice Award.


Semple Fraser

Semple Fraser LLP was a Scottish commercial law firm, with over 150 staff, including 21 partners, and offices in Glasgow, Edinburgh and Manchester. It was founded in Glasgow in 1990 and collapsed in 2013.
History.
The firm was formed in 1990 and began with 20 staff based in an office in Glasgow city centre. The founding partners – Alister Fraser, Paul Haniford, David Semple and Cesidio di Ciacca – took advantage of the recession in the property industry in the 1990s to double the space they occupied and grow the business. The Edinburgh office opened in 1998. The firm became an LLP in June 2004 and a multinational partnership in July 2005. Semple Fraser opened their first and only English office, in Manchester, during 2009.
In 2010, according to the legal referral site Legal 500, Semple Fraser's real estate and environment teams were first-tier in the Scottish legal market. Chambers, another legal directory, stated in 2011 that Semple Fraser had "the best EU and UK waste law team in Scotland". Vincent Brown, former head of the firm's waste and environment groups, wrote the legal textbook "Environmental Pollution Law and Commercial Transactions" (2004), which analysed the impact of environmental legislation on commercial transactions.
Semple Fraser entered administration in March 2013, due to difficult economic conditions following the onset of the Great Recession. The bankruptcy resulted in 62 redundancies. Parts of the defunct business were sold to rival firms in Glasgow, Edinburgh, and Manchester - including Maclay Murray and Spens (now part of Dentons), Dundas and Wilson (now part of CMS), and Weightmans.
Main practice areas.
Semple Fraser had the following main practice areas:


Common Burying Ground and Island Cemetery

The Common Burying Ground and Island Cemetery are a pair of separate cemeteries on Farewell and Warner Street in Newport, Rhode Island. Together they contain over 5,000 graves, including a colonial-era slave cemetery and Jewish graves. The pair of cemeteries was added to the National Register of Historic Places as a single listing in 1974.
History.
The Common Burial Ground was established in 1640 on land given to city of Newport by John Clarke. It features what is probably the largest number of colonial era headstones in a single cemetery, including the largest number of colonial African American headstones in the United States. The predominantly African-American northern section of the cemetery is commonly referred to by local African-Americans as "God's Little Acre".
The Island Cemetery was established by the city in 1836, and transferred to the private Island Cemetery Corporation in 1848. Many members of Newport's most prominent families have been buried there over the years. Notable people buried there include Medal of Honor recipient Hazard Stevens, Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry, Commodore Matthew C. Perry and financier August Belmont.
In 2016, three gravestones were discovered which had been lost for years. One stone, found in Pennsylvania, was a 12 x 24 marker for a 1-year-old child. The others were 1835 stones for a Newport woman, which were found in a Newport yard during a renovation. The recovered stones were reset in the Common Burying Ground in 2016 by the Newport Historic Cemetery Advisory Commission.


History of English law

History of English law is the history of the legal system and laws of England.
Coverage of the history of English law is provided by:


Henryk Rossman

Henryk Rossman (1896–1937) was a Polish lawyer and political activist of the nationalist movement, co-founder of the National Radical Camp and later splinter faction ONR-ABC. He was one of the inmates of Detention Camp Bereza Kartuska.


Anna Hanika

Anna Hanika (27 June 1903 - 14 March 1988) was an Austrian accounts clerk who became a resistance activist during the Nazi years.
Life.
Anna Hanika was born in Vienna, the youngest of her parents' three recorded children. Therese and Karl Hanika's family was unusually spread out in terms of the children's ages. When Anna was born Anton, her brother was 18 and her sister Joanna was 12. Her mother was 48. Anna's father died when she was still only 6. The duration of her schooling was restricted to the minimum required by law in order that she might devote herself to the care of her widowed mother. War ended in 1918. The economic destruction of the previous four years had destroyed the family's savings. Anna's elder sister Johanna became a Carmelite nun. Anna was also a committed Roman Catholic, but she stayed on at home to look after her mother. From 1923 she provided for the family by working as an accounting clerk with the Christian-Socialist Trades Union of Service Workers. After institution ceased to exist in 1938 she took similar work with a German-owned ball-bearing manufacturer.
At work she came into contact with people who later because operatives and members of Austrian Resistance groups which would emerge after 1938 under the leadership of , and Roman Scholz. She also acquired a fiancé, a deputy inspector with the Vienna Electricity Company, Rudolf Wallner. It was at the end of 1939 that she was persuaded by Wallner to become a member of the which had been set up a year earlier in the wake of the 1938 annexation of Austria by Nazi Germany. The group's origins lay in a commitment to the creation of a separate "Danube federation", a catholic grouping of states in the Upper Danube region that would include Bavaria and Austria (as defined after 1919). As the oppressive nature of Nazi government became increasingly apparent, the movement became more simply an anti-government operation. It never numbered more than a few hundred members, but its existence threatened the Nazi state which was a one-party state.
Haniks's responsibilities in the group involved administration of membership fee collection and advertising it to potential new supporters. She recruited several members of her own social circle, including Margarete Skroch und Stefanie Wotraubek with whom she sang in the local church choir.
Since taking power in Germany at the start of 1933 the Nazis had become extremely adept at dealing with political opposition groups. The was soon infiltrated by Otto Hartmann, a stage and movie actor who turned out to be a Gestapo spy. Hartmann's information enabled the Gestapo to "roll up" the group and, in July 1940, to arrest its three leaders, , and Roman Scholz. A month later the lower tier of the group's activists was taken into custody "for investigation" including Anna Hanika. They were charged with "preparing to commit high treason" which was the standard charge under a wide range of such circumstances. Hanika was held in investigative custody for more than two and a half years, first in Krems and then in Vienna. Family members attempted, apparently without success, to have her released. However, on 10 March 1943 she was indeed released "on health grounds". Hanika had been caring for her increasingly dependent elderly mother, who died while she was still being held in detention by the authorities. When she was released she had indeed fallen seriously ill, and not able to work, which at least freed her up to take care of Gerhard Kastelic, the younger son of whose own mother had died young, leaving the boy a semi-orphan without a mother and with a father in jail.
Several of Hanika's co-defendants were sentenced to death, including , Alfred Miegl and her fiancé, Rudolf Wallner. Following her release Hanika was able to visit Wallner in his jail till 10 May 1944 when he was executed. She also took Gerhard Kastelic to visit his father till Jacob Kastelic's execution on 2 August 1944. Anna Hanika's own trial took place only on 3 March 1944. The special "People's Court" found her guilty, as charge, of preparing to commit high treason and sentenced her to a jail term. However, her period in investigative detention between 1940 and 1943 had exceeded the term of her sentence, which was accordingly determined to have been already served.
War ended in May 1945 which marked the end of the Nazi regime. Vienna was already occupied by allied forces. On her release from Jail in 1943 Hanika had told her fellow activist that she would keep an eye on his sons, and appears to have bought up the younger of them from her release in 1943. When the boys' aunt, Jacob's sister, died in 1954 she also adopted the older of them and brought them both as her own children, ensuring they received good educations at the Kollegium Kalksburg (school). Both boys later obtained doctorates in law.
Before all that happened, in October 1945, with friends, she identified the bodies of her executed comrades at the Anatomy Institute and arranged their proper burial. In 1947 she appeared as a witness at the trial of Otto Hartmann, the Gestapo spy who had betrayed the activists back in 1940.
Anna Hanika became an active member of the : she devoted much time and effort to documenting the and its members. She recorded her recollections of the death of in a shocking written report. She was also active in other charitable enterprises, supporting missionary work in Africa by organising collections of medical supplies. However, during her final decades she was increasingly troubled by her longstanding heart problems, and in 1987 she moved into a retirement home run by in Gumpendorf. Here, in March 1988, she died.


Guardians of the Laws

Guardians of the Laws or Guard of Laws () was a short-lived supreme executive governing body of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth established by the Constitution of May 3, 1791. It was abolished, together with other reforms of the Constitution, after the Polish defeat in the summer of Polish–Russian War of 1792.
Executive power in the reformed Commonwealth government, according to Article V and Article VIIrested in the hands of "the king in his council", the council being a cabinet of ministers known as the Guardians of the Laws.
The ministries could not create or interpret the laws, and all acts of the foreign ministry were provisional, subject to parliament (Sejm)'s approval. This council was presided over by the king and comprised the Roman Catholic Primate of Poland (who was also president of the Education Commission) and five ministers appointed by the king: a minister of police, minister of the seal (i.e. of internal affairs – the seal was a traditional attribute of the earlier Chancellor), minister of the seal of foreign affairs, minister "belli" (of war), and minister of treasury. In addition to the ministers, council members included – without a vote – the Crown Prince, the Marshal of the Sejm, and two secretaries. This royal council was a descendant of similar councils that had functioned over the previous two centuries since King Henry's Articles (1573) and the recent Permanent Council. Acts of the king required the countersignature of the respective minister. The ministers, however, were responsible to Sejm, which could dismiss them by a two-thirds vote of no confidence by the members of both houses. The stipulation that the king, "doing nothing of himself, ... shall be answerable for nothing to the nation", parallels the British constitutional principle that "The King can do no wrong." (In both countries, the respective minister was responsible for the king's acts.) Ministers could be also held accountable by the Sejm court, and Sejm could demand an impeachement trial of a minister with a simple majority vote.
The decisions of the royal council were carried out by commissions, including the previously created Commission of National Education, and the new Commissions for Police, the Military and the Treasury, whose members were elected by Sejm.


Richard Rede

Richard Rede (died after 1416) was a leading Irish statesman and judge of the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries. He held office as Chief Baron of the Irish Exchequer, Lord Chief Justice of Ireland, Deputy Lord Chancellor of Ireland and Deputy Treasurer of Ireland.
He was born in County Meath. Rede (also spelled Reid) had been a common Irish name, especially in Ulster, since the thirteenth century. Little seems to be known about his parents. His wife was Elizabeth Netterville, daughter and heiress of Richard Netterville of Dowth. One branch of the family would later become one of the most prominent landowning families in Meath, and acquired the title Viscount Netterville.
The Netterville inheritance.
Elizabeth Netterville, whose father died when she was very young, was made a royal ward. The question of her inheritance, which was considerable, led to bitter disputes between neighbouring landowners, each of whom hoped to gain control of her estate by marrying her to his own heir.
King Richard II appointed John Humbleton, one of his esquires of the body, as her guardian in 1394. Elizabeth was kidnapped by members of the Darcy and Cusack families, who no doubt hoped to gain control of her lands. She was soon released, but six years later the Crown was informed that these families still hoped to cheat her out of her inheritance. By 1400 Humbleton, no doubt finding that the wardship had been more trouble than it was worth, had granted custody of Elizabeth to Rede, who married her soon afterwards, but this was not the end of the trouble over her inheritance.
Career.
Richard spent much of his career moving between Ireland and England, and seems to have been uncertain which country he wished to permanently settle in. In England he served on a commission of the peace in Kent in 1394 and on a similar commission in Middlesex in 1407. He acted as executor of Robert Braybrooke, Bishop of London, in 1404.
At the same time he maintained close links with Ireland: he was Chief Baron in 1399-1401 and Lord Chief Justice in 1404-6. Thomas Cranley, Lord Chancellor of Ireland, was due to his advanced age and ill health frequently forced to act through deputies: Rede served as his Deputy in 1404.
Abduction and ransom.
On 5 April 1401 while he was traveling from Drogheda to Trim, Rede was abducted near Skryne by Thomas Fleming, 2nd Baron Slane, and imprisoned in a nearby castle belonging to Thomas's son Christopher. He was held hostage until he paid a ransom of £1000 (a vast sum at the time) to Christopher, and he was also robbed of £200 and numerous official records. What lay behind the episode, which was exceptional even in that violent age, is unclear. It has been suggested that the Flemings, like the Darcys and Cusacks, had previously had hopes of gaining the Netterville lands which Rede had acquired through his marriage to Elizabeth Netterville: while the latter families' abduction of Elizabeth in 1394 seems to have been fruitless, the Flemings' abduction of her husband brought them a substantial profit.
The outraged Rede petitioned the new King Henry IV to visit "suitable punishment" on the Flemings for their crimes, so that a "suitable example be made of all who would plan such things". The King's Council endorsed the petition, and for a time it seemed that the Flemings would suffer heavily for their treatment of Rede: in June 1401 a powerful commission was appointed to arrest and imprison Lord Slane and his wife Elizabeth Preston. This was however an era when the nobility found it easy to obtain a royal pardon for even the most heinous crimes, and in October 1401 Lord Slane, on payment of £30 (a derisory sum compared to the £1200 he had extracted from Rede), was duly pardoned.
Later years.
After being superseded as Lord Chief Justice in 1406 he returned to England and asked for permission to reside there permanently. Given his ill-treatment by the Flemings and his failure to obtain adequate redress for his wrongs, this was natural enough. Rather surprisingly, he returned to Ireland two years later and apparently died in Ireland. He was Deputy Treasurer of Ireland in 1413. He and his wife were both still alive in 1416, and were still expanding their holdings with purchases of land in County Louth.


Tillinghast Licht

Tillinghast Licht LLP was a Providence, Rhode Island based law firm, from 1818 to 2008. Established in 1818 by Charles Foster Tillinghast, Sr., a scion of one of the oldest families in Rhode Island, it was one of the oldest law firms in Rhode Island.
In 1816, Tillinghast was admitted to the Rhode Island bar and opened his first office, in the village of Chepachet. The following year, he returned to Providence and partnered with Samuel W. Bridgham, under whom he had studied at Brown University. Six years later, Tillinghast opened his own office.
In 1842, Tillinghast partnered with Charles S. Bradley, who would later become Rhode Island’s chief justice. In 1843, Tillinghast represented Providence for a single term in the Rhode Island General Assembly. Tillinghast & Bradley was well known in Rhode Island until the firm dissolved in 1858. At that time, Tillinghast and his son James, who had joined the firm in 1851, continued as Tillinghast & Tillinghast. That name would continue after Charles died in 1864 and James continued to practice with his sons, William Richmond and Theodore Foster Tillinghast.
In the early 20th century, with William Tillinghast still a member of the firm, Tillinghast & Tillinghast merged with another firm to form Tillinghast & Collins. It was the first of several mergers in the last century, all that saw the Tillinghast name remain preeminent. Between 1913 and 1916, later famous civil liberties advocate Zechariah Chafee practiced for Tillinghast & Collins.
In the 1970s, Tillinghast, Collins & Tanner joined with Graham, Reid, Ewing & Stapleton. In the 1990s, Tillinghast Collins & Graham merged with Licht & Semonoff to form Tillinghast Licht & Semonoff. The name was later shortened to Tillinghast Licht. In 2000, it merged with the Boston firm of Perkins Smith & Cohen and called its Rhode Island office Tillinghast Licht Perkins Smith & Cohen, but the firms split only a few years later, and Tillinghast Licht returned to its former name.
In May 2008, Tillinghast Licht announced that it will wind down business in the next few months, with six key lawyers joining Adler Pollock & Sheehan.


Constitution of Turkey

The Constitution of the Republic of Turkey (), also known as the Constitution of 1982, is Turkey's fundamental law. It establishes the organization of the government and sets out the principles and rules of the state's conduct along with its responsibilities in regards to its citizens. The constitution also establishes the rights and responsibilities of the latter while setting the guidelines for the delegation and exercise of sovereignty that belongs to the Turkish people.
The constitution was ratified on 7 November 1982. It replaced the earlier Constitution of 1961. The constitution was amended nineteen times, three of them through a referendum: 2007, 2010, 2017, one of them partly through referendum: 1987. As of April 2016, 113 of the 177 articles of the Constitution of 1982 were amended overall.
History.
The first constitution of the Ottoman Empire was adopted in 1876 and revised in 1908.
Since its founding, the modern Turkish state has been governed under four documents:
The current constitution was ratified by popular referendum during the military junta of 1980-1983. Since its ratification in 1982, the current constitution has overseen many important events and changes in the Republic of Turkey, and it has been modified many times to keep up with global and regional geopolitical conjunctures. Major amendments were made in 2010. A minor amendment to Article 59, on the permissible means for challenging "decisions of sport federations relating to administration and discipline of sportive activities," was made in March 2011. Following the 2017 constitutional referendum, fundamental changes were introduced including changing the parliamentary system in Turkey to a presidential system.
Overview.
Part One: Founding principles.
The Constitution asserts that Turkey is a secular () and democratic () republic () that derives its sovereignty () from the people. The sovereignty rests with the Turkish Nation, who delegates its exercise to an elected unicameral parliament, the Turkish Grand National Assembly.
The declares the immovability of the founding principles of the Republic defined in the first three Articles and bans any proposals for their modification. The also invokes the principles of nationalism, defined as the "material and spiritual well-being of the Republic". The basic nature of Turkey is laïcité (), social equality (), equality before law (), the Republican form of government (), the indivisibility of the Republic and of the Turkish Nation ()." Thus, it sets out to found a unitary nation-state based on the principles of secular democracy.
Fundamental Aims and Duties of the State is defined in . Constitution establishes a separation of powers between the Legislative Power (), Executive Power (), and Judicial Power () of the state. The separation of powers between the legislative and the executive is a loose one, whereas the one between the executive and the legislative with the judiciary is a strict one.
Part Two: Individual and Group Rights.
Part Two of the constitution is the bill of rights. guarantees "fundamental rights and freedoms", which are defined as including the:
Article Five of the Constitution sets out the "raison d'être" of the Turkish state, namely "to provide the conditions required for the development of the individual's material and spiritual existence".
Many of these entrenched rights have their basis in international bills of rights, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which Turkey was one of the first nations to ratify in December 1948.
Equality of citizens.
Besides the provisions establishing Turkey as a secular state, goes further with regards to equality of its citizens by prohibiting any discrimination based on their "language, race, color, sex, political opinion, philosophical convictions or religious beliefs" and guaranteeing their equality in the eyes of the law. Borrowing from the French Revolutionary ideals of the nation and the Republic, Article 3 affirms that "The Turkish State, with its territory and nation, is an indivisible entity. Its language is Turkish". Article 66 defines a Turkish civic identity: "everyone bound to the Turkish state through the bond of citizenship is a Turk".
Freedom of expression.
Article 26 establishes freedom of expression and Articles 27 and 28 the freedom of the press, while Articles 33 and 34 affirm the freedom of association and freedom of assembly, respectively.
Group rights.
Classes are considered irrelevant in legal terms (A10). The Constitution affirms the right of workers to form labor unions "without obtaining permission" and "to possess the right to become a member of a union and to freely withdraw from membership" (A51). Articles 53 and 54 affirm the right of workers to bargain collectively and to strike, respectively.
Part Three: Fundamental Organs.
Legislative Power.
Article Seven provides for the establishment of a unicameral parliament as the sole organ of expression of sovereign people. Article Six of the Constitution affirms that "sovereignty is vested fully and unconditionally in the nation" and that "the Turkish Nation shall exercise its sovereignty through the authorised organs as prescribed by the principles laid down in the Constitution". The same article also rules out the delegation of sovereignty "to any individual, group or class" and affirms that "no person or agency shall exercise any state authority which does not emanate from the Constitution". Article 80 (A80) affirms the principle of national sovereignty: "members of the Turkish Grand National Assembly represent, not merely their own constituencies or constituents, but the Nation as a whole".
"Part Three, Chapter One" (Articles 75-100) sets the rules for the election and functioning of the Turkish Grand National Assembly as the legislative organ, as well as the conditions of eligibility (A76), parliamentary immunity (A83) and general legislative procedures to be followed. Per Articles 87 and 88, both the government and the parliament can propose laws, however it is only the parliament that has the power to enact laws (A87) and ratify treaties of the Republic with other sovereign states (A90).
The President of the Republic is elected by the parliament and has a largely ceremonial role as the Head of State, "representing the Republic of Turkey and the unity of the Turkish Nation" (A104).
Judiciary.
Article Nine affirms that the "judicial power shall be exercised by independent courts on behalf of the Turkish Nation". "Part Four" provides the rules relating to their functioning and guarantees their full independence (A137-140). The judiciary conforms to the principle of separation of powers not only through its independence from the executive and legislative branches of government but by being divided into two entities, Administrative Justice and Judicial Justice, with the "Danıştay" (The Council of State) the highest court for the former (A155) and "Yargıtay" (High Court of Appeals) the highest court for the latter (154).
"Part Four, Section Two" allows for a Constitutional Court that rules on the conformity of laws and governmental decrees to the Constitution. It may hear cases referred by the President of the Republic, the government, the members of Parliament (A150) or any judge before whom a constitutional issue has been raised by a defendant or a plaintiff (A152). The Constitutional Court has the right to both "a priori" and "a posteriori" review (respectively, before and after enactment), and can invalidate whole laws or decrees and ban their application for all future cases (A153).
Executive.
Per Article Eight, the executive power is vested in the President of the Republic and the Council of Ministers. "Part Three, Chapter One, Section Two" (Articles 109-116) lays out the rules for the confirmation and functioning of the executive, consisting of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers (A109).
"Part Three, Chapter Two, Section Four" organizes the functioning of the central administration and certain important institutions of the Republic such as its universities (A130-132), local administrations (A127), fundamental public services (A128) and national security (A117-118). Article 123 stipulates that "the organisation and functions of the administration are based on the principles of centralization and local administration".
National security.
The Turkish Armed Forces (TAF) are subordinate to the President, in the capacity of Commander-in-Chief. The Chief of General Staff of the TAF is responsible to the Prime Minister in the exercise of his functions, and the latter is responsible, along with the rest of the Council of Ministers, before the parliament (A117).
National Security Council is an advisory organization, comprising the Chief of General Staff and the four main Commanders of the TAF and select members of the Council of Ministers, to develop the "national security policy of the state" (A118).
Revision and amendments.
In Article 175, it also sets out the procedure of its own revision and amendment by either referendum or a qualified majority vote of 2/3 in the National Assembly. It does not recognize the right to popular initiatives: Only the members of Parliament can propose modifications to the Constitution.
A revision of the Constitution was approved on September 13, 2010 by a 58 percent approval given by the 39 million people who voted. The change would allow the National Assembly to appoint a number of high-court judges, would reduce the power of the military court system over the civilian population and would improve human rights. The changes also remove the immunity from prosecution the former leaders of the early 1980s military coup gave themselves.
Critique.
Ethnic rights.
The Constitution of 1982 has been criticized as limiting individual cultural and political liberties in comparison with the previous constitution of 1961. Per the Treaty of Lausanne which established the Turkish Republic, legally, the only minorities are Greeks, Armenians and Jews, which also have certain privileges not recognized to other ethnic communities, per the treaty. According to the European Union, the constitution denies the fundamental rights of the Kurdish population because some articles, especially article 42, are against minority rights. The Council of Europe’s European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) published its third report on Turkey in February 2005. The commission has taken the position that the parliament should revise Article 42 of the Constitution, which prohibits the teaching of any language other than Turkish as a first language in schools. The Turkish constitutional principle of not allowing the teaching of other languages as first languages in schools to its citizens, other than the official one is criticized by the EU, human rights organizations and minorities of Turkey. The Kurds, who comprise between 10 and 20% of the Turkish population are not allowed to get education in their mother tongue because of this article.
Currently Circassian, Kurdish, Zaza, Laz languages can be chosen as lessons in some public schools. Since 2003, private courses teaching minority languages can be offered, but the curriculum, appointment of teachers, and criteria for enrollment are subject to significant restrictions. All private Kurdish courses were closed down in 2005 because of bureaucratic barriers and the reluctance of Kurds to have to "pay to learn their mother tongue." In 2015, only 28 schools provided Kurdish language as a selective course. Also, neither private nor public schools are still allowed to use Kurdish language or other languages than Turkish as a first language.
Freedom of expression.
The constitution grants freedom of expression, as declared in . Article 301 of the Turkish penal code states that "A person who publicly denigrates the Turkish Nation, the Republic or the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and three years" and also that "Expressions of thought intended to criticise shall not constitute a crime".
Orhan Pamuk's remark "One million Armenians and 30,000 Kurds were killed in these lands, and nobody but me dares talk about it." was considered by some to be a violation of Article 10 of the Constitution and led to his trial in 2005. The complaint against Orhan Pamuk was made by a group of lawyers led by Kemal Kerinçsiz and charges filed by a district prosecutor under the Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code. Pamuk was later released and charges annulled by the justice ministry on a technicality. The same group of lawyers have also filed complaints against other lesser-known authors on the same grounds. Kerinçsiz was indicted in the 2008 Ergenekon investigation, along with many others.
Influence of the military.
Although modified several times in the last three decades, specifically within the framework of European Union reforms, the 1982 constitution is also criticised for giving the military too much influence in political affairs via the National Security Council. Turkish Armed Forces see themselves as the guardians of the secular and unitary nature of the Republic along with Atatürk's reforms and have intervened by taking over the government three times: in 1960, in 1971 and in 1980.


Howrey

Howrey LLP was a global law firm that practiced antitrust, global litigation and intellectual property law. At its peak Howrey had more than 700 attorneys in 17 locations worldwide.
History.
The firm was founded as Howrey, Simon, Baker, & Murchison in July 1956 by four antitrust attorneys: Jack Howrey, a former chairman of the Federal Trade Commission under President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Bill Simon, Hal Baker and Dave Murchison. It was the first national antitrust firm. It hired its first patent lawyer partner in 1972, and by 1985, Howrey numbered 150 attorneys with a list of clients across the country.
In 2000, Howrey & Simon merged with Arnold, White & Durkee, an intellectual property specialty firm founded in 1956 in Houston, Texas with offices in six cities and 120 attorneys. This combination resulted in the new firm of Howrey, Simon, Arnold & White, with 350 lawyers, one of the largest antitrust and intellectual property practices in the world, and laid the groundwork for the firm’s expansion overseas. Between 2000 and 2008, the firm expanded to more than 700 attorneys and 17 offices in the United States, Europe and Asia.
Howrey provided over 45,000 hours of free legal assistance to more than 250 "pro bono" clients. The firm was awarded the 2003 Thomas L. Sager Award by the Minority Corporate Counsel Association for its commitment to promoting diversity in the workplace.
Partner departures and dissolution.
About 60 attorneys departed from Howrey in the year before January 2011, including co-chairs of the firm's antitrust and litigation practices. Winston & Strawn reportedly considered merger with Howrey in late January, but instead offered to take most of Howrey's partners. The firm continued to lose partners as a group of 11 attorneys from Howrey's Chicago office moved to Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, including the office's managing partner and the class action defense practice leader.
On March 9, 2011, the Executive Committee of Howrey LLP announced that, pursuant to a vote by the firm’s partnership, it would dissolve the existing Howrey partnership, effective March 15, 2011 and commence an orderly wind down of its affairs. On March 31, 2011 Howrey LLP closed its doors laying off all of its employees. In April 2011, Trepel McGrane Greenfield LLP, a law firm headquartered in San Jose, California, representing a group of alleged creditors of Howrey LLP, filed an involuntary chapter 7 bankruptcy petition against the law firm with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California. That involuntary chapter 7 case was converted to a chapter 11 bankruptcy case in June 2011 at the request of the law firm. On July 6, 2011, Howrey filed schedules of assets and liabilities with the bankruptcy court which listed assets of $138.7 million and liabilities of $107 million.


Plon (Society) v. France

In the case of PLON (SOCIETE) v. FRANCE where indirectly the court protected the dead president’s private life and dignity against the publishing company stating that the interim ban on distribution of the book until such time as the relevant courts had ruled on its compatibility with medical confidentiality and the rights of others could be regarded as “necessary in a democratic society” for the protection of the rights of François Mitterrand and his heirs and successors.


Andreas Michael Heiberg

Andreas Michael Heiberg (1 December 1767 – 21 March 1815) was a Norwegian jurist and politician. He served as a representative at the Norwegian Constitutional Assembly.
Andreas Michael Heiberg was born at Straumsnes in Bergen, Norway. His father was a bailiff in Bergen who later served as district governor of Bornholm, Denmark. He grew up in Denmark and took his legal examination in 1789. He first served as a bailiff in the town of Svaneke on Bornholm. He was also district magistrate at Østre Herred in Bornholm. From 1810 he was a local magistrate and town clerk in Fredrikstad in Østfold.
He represented Fredrikstad at the Norwegian Constituent Assembly at Eidsvoll in 1814. At the assembly, he supported the independence party ("Selvstendighetspartiet").


Juan Roberto Melendez-Colon

Juan Roberto Melendez-Colon (born May 24, 1951) is a public speaker and human rights activist who was wrongly convicted of murder and spent over 17 years on death row. He was released from prison on January 3, 2002, making him the 99th death row inmate in the United States to be exonerated and released from prison since 1973.
Early life.
Melendez was born in Brooklyn, New York, in 1951, then fled to Puerto Rico when he was 8 years old to escape an abusive stepfather. At the age of 17 he returned to the United States mainland and eventually raised a family with his common-law wife.
In 1974 Melendez was arrested in Florida for an armed robbery and spent over six years in prison. He then returned to life as a migrant farmer until FBI agents arrested him in Pennsylvania at the age of 33. He was charged for the 1983 Florida murder in his Auburndale beauty salon of Delbert 'Mr. Del' Baker, a man Melendez claims to have never met.
The case.
In his own defense, Melendez testified that he was with a woman named Dorothy Rivera on the evening of September 13, 1983–an alibi which was supported by the testimony of four witnesses. There was also no physical evidence tying Melendez to the murder scene.
Despite a lack of physical evidence, Melendez was convicted largely on testimony of David Luna Falcon, an informant with a criminal record and whose parents were said to have had a "falling-out" with Melendez. Witnesses testified during Melendez's trial that Falcon had a grudge against Melendez and had threatened to kill him prior to reporting to the police that Melendez had confessed his involvements in Delbert Baker's murder.
There was also some crucial testimony which was omitted at trial, such as:
Melendez was also at a disadvantage in that he was unable to read or write English and was said to have a ninth-grade education level.
In the end, Melendez was found guilty and sentenced to death.
Appeals and release.
Melendez's conviction and death sentence were upheld on appeal three times by the Florida Supreme Court. Sixteen years after his conviction, Melendez was nearing the end of his appeals when his current attorneys conducted a search through the files of Melendez's original defense lawyer and discovered the taped confession made by Vernon James. They were also able to locate other witnesses who recalled that Vernon James had confessed to the murder before he died.
In light of the new evidence, Justice Barbara Fleischer determined that Melendez was entitled to a new trial. In turn, the state of Florida declined to prosecute a second time since the key witness at the original trial, David Falcon, was then dead and another witness for the prosecution had since recanted his testimony.
Melendez spent a total of 17 years, eight months and one day of incarceration before being released from the Union Correctional Institution on January 3, 2002. Upon release he received $100 compensation from the state. He has not received any further compensation, nor an official apology from the state of Florida.
Melendez now lives in New Mexico and also tours the world to tell his personal story and to discuss the issues surrounding the death penalty. He is also a member of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty and the Journey of Hope ... from violence to Healing.


Apple Computer, Inc. v. Mackintosh Computers Ltd.

Apple Computer, Inc. v. Mackintosh Computers Ltd. [1990] 2 S.C.R. 209, is a Supreme Court of Canada case on copyright law regarding the copyrightability of software. The Court found that programs within ROM silicon chips (in this case, the Autostart ROM and Applesoft in Apple II+ systems) are protected under the Copyright Act, and that the conversion from the source code into object code was a reproduction that did not alter the copyright protection of the original work.
Background.
The defendant Mackintosh Computers Ltd. was a manufacturer of unlicensed Apple II+ clones that were capable of running software designed for Apple II+ computers. At issue in this case were the Autostart ROM and Applesoft programs embedded in the computer chips of Apple's computers.
At trial, the defendants conceded that they copied the chips in question by burning the contents of Apple's ROM chips into their own EPROMs They further conceded that software written in assembly code was copyrightable under the "Copyright Act" as literary works. However, the defendants argued that they had not infringed Apple's copyright in the assembly code because they had copied only the contents of the ROMs in question.
The trial judge found that the software burned into Apple's ROMs were both a translation and reproduction of the assembly language source code, thus were protected by s. 3(1) of the "Copyright Act".
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Two of the appellate judges held that the object code was a reproduction of the assembly code, while the third held that the object code could be considered either a translation or a reproduction, both protected by copyright.
Ruling.
The Supreme Court held that the machine code embedded in the Apple ROM chips was an exact reproduction of the written assembly code, and as such were protected by s. 3(1) of the "Copyright Act". The court further rejected the argument that the machine code fell under the merger doctrine, holding that the programs were a form of expression.
The Supreme Court declined to follow the case of "Computer Edge Pty. Ltd. v. Apple Computer, Inc." decided by the High Court of Australia, which had virtually identical facts. In that case, the court held that the chips contained a "sequence of electrical impulses" which could not be subject to copyright.
Aftermath.
Not long after the case, the Copyright Act of Canada was amended to explicitly include software as a "literary work" within the Act.


Wrongful conviction of Steve Titus

The wrongful conviction of Steve Titus was a miscarriage of justice in which Steve Gary Titus (1949–1985), an American businessman, was convicted wrongly of rape. Titus was dismissed from his job after the conviction and, though the charges were soon dismissed, he became long term unemployed. The crime was later determined to have been committed by serial rapist Edward Lee King. Journalist Paul Henderson was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Investigative Reporting for his work on the case. Jack Olsen's book "Predator" examined the investigation of the crime and the life of the real criminal.
Crime.
On October 12, 1980, a female hitchhiker was raped in SeaTac, Washington. The assault took place south of Seattle-Tacoma International Airport on land owned by the Port of Seattle. Port of Seattle Police described the rapist as 25 to 30 years old, driving a royal blue car with temporary license plates and cloth seats, and having a beard. The rape was reported to have occurred at 6:45 p.m. The victim walked to a nearby house, and after approximately 10 minutes of conversation, telephoned the police at 7:22 p.m. There were tire prints found near the scene which matched that of a Michelin XYZ tire, which was standard on 1981 Honda Accord LX cars, a model that was first sold in September, 1980. The victim reported that there was a large brown folder in the car and that the rapist wore a three piece suit.
Steve Titus was arrested and later identified by the victim in a line-up. Like the rapist, he had a beard. He had a new car, a royal blue Chevrolet Chevette. However, the car had neither Michelin tires nor cloth seats. The car had a large brown folder which Titus later claimed was planted in the car by the police. He did not have any suits.
Psychologist Elizabeth Loftus argued at trial that the victim had elicited a false memory of the attacker due to a biased line up. When shown a line up of suspects the victim had initially claimed that Steve Titus was the man who looked the most similar to the attacker. Later in court the victim said that she definitely knew it was him. Her perceptions had been changed throughout the process of going to court through cues which created a false memory.
At trial prosecution testimony was changed and evidence of innocence was explained away by prosecution experts and law enforcement officers. As a direct result, Titus was convicted wrongly of Rape in the First Degree, a crime that had a mandatory prison sentence. Working with investigative reporter Paul Henderson of the Seattle Times, Titus' new attorney, Jeff Jones, whom Titus had hired to pursue an appeal of his conviction, was able to convince the trial judge to grant a new trial based upon evidence developed by Henderson, arguing that Titus' trial attorney had been ambushed by surprise testimony which directly contradicted evidence contained in the Port of Seattle Police investigative reports. Subsequently, as a result of good police work by a local municipal police officer who had been reading the new articles about the case, a lead was developed as to a new suspect. That lead was followed up by the King County Sheriff's Office whose investigation resulted in the arrest of Edward Lee King, named by the pseudonym "Mac Smith" in Jack Olsen's book "Predator: Rape, Madness, and Injustice in Seattle", who eventually confessed to the crime.
Exculpatory evidence.
The timeline was an important factor in the case. Titus left his parents home at 6:10 p.m on October 12, 1980 after attending his father's birthday party where there were other guests. He was seen by a coffee shop waitress at 6:20 p.m. on the day of the rape. The waitress at different times thought she had seen him at 6:30 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Titus made a long distance telephone call from his apartment at 7:00 p.m. on the day of the rape. The distance between the rape scene and Titus' apartment would have required a journey-time of 19½ minutes according to a Seattle Times reporter. These times would not have allowed Titus to be at the location where the victim was raped at the time she indicated the crime had occurred. He was convicted on March 4, and the conviction was overturned June 8. He only spent one night in jail after conviction.
After charges against him were dismissed, Titus sued the Port of Seattle and its Police Department, based upon evidence that their officers had changed and planted evidence, as well as convinced the victim to alter her testimony. Just before the trial, Titus died of heart failure. His parents settled and got $2 million to be paid over 20 years. The policeman accused of fabricating evidence died six years later of heart failure. Paul Henderson was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for investigative journalism for his reporting on this case and later became a private investigator specializing in freeing innocent people who have been convicted wrongfully.
Jack Olsen wrote a book entitled "Predator: Rape, Madness, and Injustice in Seattle" detailing both the conviction of Titus and the life of Edward Lee King, a convicted rapist who later confessed to this rape, and who is thought to have committed more than 50 rapes.
Edward Lee King is currently incarcerated at Stafford Creek Corrections Center in Aberdeen, Washington.


Code of the District of Columbia

The Code of the District of Columbia is the codification of the general and permanent laws relating to the District of Columbia. It was enacted and is revised by authority of the Congress of the United States.
History.
Commissioners were appointed by virtue of "An act to improve the laws of the District of Columbia, and to codify the same," approved March 3, 1855. The commissioners were required "to revise, simplify, digest, and codify the laws of said District, and also the rules and principles of practice, pleadings, of evidence, and conveyancing."
An act of congress stated that "it is expedient that the laws of the District of Columbia should be arranged in appropriate titles, chapters and sections; that omissions and defects therein should be supplied and amended; and that the whole, rendered concise, plain, and intelligible, should be established and known as the Revised Code of the District of Columbia".
The laws which it was made their duty "to revise and simplify," consisted, in the language of the Maryland declaration of rights, of such of the English statutes as existed at the time of the first emigration to Maryland, and "which by experience have been found applicable to local and other circumstances, and of such others as have been since made in England or Great Britain, and have been introduced, used, and practiced by the courts of law and equity;" also of the declaration of rights, constitution, and statutes of Maryland, passed prior to the 27th day of February, 1801, as modified by the constitution and laws of the United States. The sources of law flowed from 3 distinct sources.
The law of March 3, 1855 required that the code should be approved by a majority of the board appointed to consider the same code. The members of that board certified to the President of the United States that they had considered its provisions and unanimously approved it. Pursuant to said law, the code was submitted to the people of the District for their consideration in November of 1857.
Revision.
By Act of Congress of July 30, 1947 (ch. 388, 61 Stat. 638), the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives is authorized to print bills to codify, revise, and reenact the general and permanent laws relating to the District of Columbia and cumulative supplements thereto, similar in style, respectively, to the Code of Laws of the United States, and supplements thereto, and to so continue until final enactment thereof in both Houses of the Congress of the United States.


Kurt Kresse

Kurt Kresse (15 May 1904 – 11 January 1945) was a German communist and resistance fighter against Nazism.
Biography.
Kresse was born into a working-class family in Leipzig. In his youth, he worked as a miner and from 1924 onwards as a book printer. He joined the Young Communist League of Germany (KJVD) in 1920 and the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) in 1924. He served as member of the district leadership of the KPD in Western Saxony and as chairman of the workers' sports club "Fichte West" in Leipzig.
After the Nazi Party came to power in 1933, Kresse was arrested and spent time in prison and in Colditz concentration camp. After his release, he joined the resistance group around Georg Schumann. Kresse's tasks included rebuilding the underground KPD organization, making contacts with other anti-fascists and committing acts of sabotage against the war production.
On 19 June 1944, Kresse was arrested again. He was sentenced to death by the People's Court in Dresden on 21 November 1944, and executed by hanging on 11 January 1945 in Dresden together with fellow resistance fighters Georg Schumann and Otto Engert. After the fall of the Nazi regime, his remains were buried in the Südfriedhof.
A street in southwest Leipzig, Kurt-Kresse-Straße, was named after him in August 1945. A sporting field in Leipzig, Kurt-Kresse-Kampfbahn, also bears his name.


Nicholas Fastolf

Nicholas Fastolf (??? - 1330) was an English-born judge who was a leading member of the early Irish judiciary; according to some sources he was the first judge to hold the office of Lord Chief Justice of Ireland. He was an ancestor of Sir John Fastolf, who is generally thought to have inspired Shakespeare's character Falstaff.
Family.
He was born in Norfolk, one of the three sons of Thomas Fastolf of Reedham and Great Yarmouth. His brothers were Thomas Fastolf, Bishop of St David's and Lawrence Fastolf, auditor of the prerogative court of Canterbury.
Nicholas' wife was called Cicely and they had several children. Elrington Ball believed that he was the direct ancestor of Sir John Fastolf, which, since both the judge's brothers were in holy orders, seems probable. In that case Hugh Fastolf, who was MP for Great Yarmouth from 1361 to 1377, is likely to have been his grandson.
Career.
He sat as a burgess for Great Yarmouth in the Parliaments of 1309 and 1314 and became a Serjeant-at-law. In 1324 he was sent to Ireland as Lord Chief Justice. Elrington Ball regarded his appointment as a step of great importance in the development of the Irish judiciary, since, while some sources name Walter l'Enfant as the first Lord Chief Justice of Ireland, Ball believed that it was Fastolf who was the first. He exchanged the position for that of Chief Justice of the Irish Common Pleas in 1327, but returned to his earlier office the following year.
He was granted lands in County Meath: in Dublin he lived in considerable state in a mansion on Rochel Street (now Back Lane) near Dublin Castle, and he made a special contract with the Mayor of Dublin for a private water supply. He returned to England in 1330, and is heard of there acting as an itinerant (circuit) justice, but died soon after 1330; his executors were his widow and his brother Lawrence.
Elrington Ball calls him "a man of wealth and distinction".


Irish Poor Law Extension Acts

The Irish Poor Law Extension Acts were a set of 1847 Acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which altered the Irish Poor Law system. The passing of the Acts meant that the full cost of the Irish Poor Law system fell upon Irish property owners.
The legislation consisted of three separate acts, the main one being 'An Act to make further Provision for the Relief of the destitute Poor in Ireland' (8 June 1847), 10 Vic., c.31.
See also.
Christine Kinealy, 'This Great Calamity. The Great Irish Famine, 1845-52', Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1994 and 2006.


Theodor Haubach

Theodor Haubach (15 September 1896 in Frankfurt am Main – 23 January 1945 in Berlin) was a German journalist, SPD politician, and resistance fighter against the Nazi régime.
Theodor Haubach spent his childhood and youth in Darmstadt. In 1914, right after his "Abitur", he took part in the First World War as a volunteer, and was wounded repeatedly. After the horror of his wartime experiences, Haubach resumed studying.
From 1919 to 1923, he studied philosophy, sociology, and economics and eventually graduated. As of 1920, Haubach, like his friend Carlo Mierendorff, was an SPD member and worked together actively with the Young Socialists. From 1924 to 1929 he was editor of the newspaper "Hamburger Echo", and later (1929-1933) an associate at the Reich Interior Ministry and with the Berlin Police President. From 1924 Haubach was the leading member of the "Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold", an association that campaigned fiercely for the Weimar democracy and actively struggled under the emblem of the "Three Arrows" against the Nazis, who were grasping for power.
Beginning in February 1933, Haubach, like many SPD members, was persecuted by the Nazi régime. After his first arrest in 1934, he was detained in Esterwegen concentration camp. From 1935, he worked as an insurance representative, and later established contacts with the Kreisau Circle. After the failed attempt on Hitler's life at the Wolf's Lair in East Prussia on 20 July 1944, Haubach was arrested and sentenced to death by the Nazi "People's Court" ("Volksgerichtshof"). Now very ill, Theodor Haubach was put to death on 23 January 1945 along with Helmuth James Graf von Moltke at Plötzensee Prison in Berlin.