Besant v. Narayaniah

The Besant v. Narayaniah Case is a suite filed by Jiddu Narayaniah, father of J. Krishnamurti in 1912 against theosophist Annie Besant for the custody of his son. The case argued for Narayaniah by C. P. Ramaswami Iyer was won by him and was a cause célèbre of the time though Besant later appealed to the Privy Council of the United Kingdom and got a ruling in her favour. Besant and C.P. Ramaswami Iyer who were in opposing camps during the trial eventually became friends after the case got over and jointly participated in the Home Rule Movement.
Krishnamurti's adoption by The Theosophical Society.
J. Krishnamurti belonged to a Niyogi Brahmin family from Chittoor district of the then Madras Presidency. In 1907, Krishnamurti's father Narayaniah settled down in Madras city and was offered a job at the headquarters of the Theosophical Society in Adyar. He brought his sons Narayanian and Nityananda with him.
In July 1909, the theosophist Charles Webster Leadbeater chanced upon Krishnamurti on the banks of the Adyar River and allegedly noticed signs of greatness in him. Convinced that Krishnamurti was destined to be a prophet, Leadbeater induced the Theosophical Society to adopt Krishnamurti and his younger brother Nityananda. Narayaniah was given a nominal compensation. Krishnamurti, eventually, came under the custody of Annie Besant who tutored him.
The suit.
Not satisfied with the terms of the settlement, Narayaniah sued Annie Besant and the Theosophical Society. The case was first brought to the Chingleput District Court whose sitting judge referred the case to the Madras High Court. Narayaniah's brief was argued by C. P. Ramaswami Iyer who later served as Advocate-General of Madras Presidency, cabinet minister and Diwan of Travancore. He was assisted by his juniors N. Chandrasekhara Iyer and M. Subbaraya Aiyar. Annie Besant did not solicit any lawyer and argued the case on her own.
Public opinion was strong in support of Narayaniah as many felt that he had been robbed of his sons. Among the prominent men who supported Narayaniah were S. Kasturi Ranga Iyengar, editor of "The Hindu" and retired judge S. Subramania Iyer. The case was eventually won by C. P. Ramaswami Iyer. On April 15, 1913, Judge Bakewell ordered Besant to hand over custody of the two young boys to their father.
Aftermath.
Besant approached the Privy Council which ordered a retrial. On 29 October 1913, after a hearing, judge C. A. White directed that the boys be handed over to her. The Brahmin leaders who had opposed Besant sided with her and supported her during the Home Rule movement. This alliance alienated other communities and was vehemently criticized by the media arm of the newly formed Justice Party. S. Subramania Iyer, however, refused to compromise with Besant and ridiculed the Society's projection of J. Krishnamurti as a messiah until his death in 1924.
By the time case went to Privy Council, children grew up. So it gave option to children to choose where to stay. JK wanted to stay with Besant. But Privy Council held that father’s rights over children are unalienable and not subject to any agreement.


R v Duarte

R v Duarte, [1990] 1 SCR 30 is a leading case decided by the Supreme Court of Canada on the right to privacy under section 8 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" ("Charter"). The Court held that a warrantless and surreptitious video recording of private communications violated section 8. Consent of only one party to a conversation is insufficient to be reasonable.
Background.
Mario Duarte was under investigation by the police for drug-related offences. An undercover officer arranged a meeting with Duarte in a rented apartment room where the police had set up a video camera. He challenged the constitutionality of the provision allowing for the recording. The trial judge agreed. The Crown appealed.
In a decision by Cory JA, the Court of Appeal for Ontario found that the video camera did not violate the reasonable expectation of privacy, as a camera was analogized to an extension of memory. Cory saw this as a "small step" beyond the use of human recall, and relied upon the older American cases of "United States v White" and "Lopez v United States".
Reasons of the court.
La Forest J, for the majority, found that the surreptitious monitoring by law enforcement constituted an unreasonable search. He characterized the issue as a balance between the right to privacy and the right "of the state to intrude on privacy in the furtherance of its responsibilities for law enforcement".
In the current circumstances, La Forest argued that the expectation of privacy should be determined based on whether "the person whose words were recorded spoke in circumstances in which it was reasonable for that person to expect that his or her words would only be heard by the person he or she was addressing".
Aftermath.
In response to this decision, the Parliament of Canada amended the "Criminal Code" to include provisions on electronic interception of communications, which included judicial authorization where consent is not available, "number recorder warrants" and "tracking warrants".


Executionist movement

The Executionist movement was a 16th-century political movement in the Kingdom of Poland and, later, the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. It was popular among lesser, middle and even some higher nobility, and it also enjoyed the support of the Polish king. In Polish, the movement is variously known as "ruch egzekucyjny", "egzekucja praw" ("execution [enforcement] of the laws"), or "egzekucja dóbr" ("execution of property"). The movement sought the revendication of public and state lands which were illegally held by various magnates. The followers of the movement were known as "popularyści" ("popularists"), or "zamoyszczycy" ("Zamoyskites", after the main movement supporter Jan Zamoyski).
The movement opposed the abuse of the existing laws by the higher nobility (magnates), and demanded the "execution", or actual implementation, of already existing legislation.
Major supporters of the movement included:
The movement's goal was to reform the country, increase the rights of the lesser and middle nobility in parliament ("Sejm") at the expense of the magnates, the priesthood and to a lesser extent, the monarch. The Executionist movement succeeded in having some of its demands implemented. However, by the early 17th century it declined and lost power before having attained most of its goals. The latter are largely viewed by modern historians as having been potentially salutary, had they been implemented.
The Execution movement's demands included:
Additional demands and ideologies at various times also included:


Hans Otto Erdmann

Hans Otto Erdmann (18 December 1896 – 4 September 1944) was a German Army officer, and member of the German Resistance.
Biography.
Erdmann was born in Insterburg, East Prussia (modern Chernyakhovsk, Russia). In the First World War Erdmann served as an officer in the German Army and later worked as a postal clerk. In 1935 he joined the Wehrmacht and was deployed at the Generalkommando in Königsberg in 1944 in the rank of Oberstleutnant (Lieutenant Colonel).
In June 1944 Claus von Stauffenberg informed Erdmann about the planned assassination of Hitler. In the Operation Valkyrie plans, Erdmann was supposed to organize the occupation of public buildings and broadcasting stations in East Prussia.
After the 20 July plot had failed, Erdmann was arrested on 17 August 1944 and sentenced to death by the "Volksgerichtshof" under Günther Nebelung on 4 September 1944, along with Kurt Hahn, Gerhard Knaak, Heinrich Graf von Lehndorff-Steinort and Max Ulrich von Drechsel. All were hanged on the same day at Plötzensee Prison in Berlin.


Poul Steenstrup

Poul Steenstrup (10 December 1772 – 9 October 1864) was a businessman and Industrial entrepreneur who served as a representative at the Norwegian Constituent Assembly in 1814.
Biography.
Poul Steenstrup was born the son of a Danish landowner at Egtved, in Vejle, Denmark. He studied surgery and science at the University of Copenhagen but did not take the final examination. In 1797, he came to Buskerud in Norway where he attended the Royal Norwegian Mining Academy ("kongelige norske Mining Academy") in Kongsberg . From 1801 he undertook a three-year scholarship trip to German and Austrian ironworks and factories, principally in Freiberg and Vienna.
Upon returning to Norway, he served as mining inspector at the Kongsberg Silver Mines. He was superintendent and manager of Kongsberg Ironworks ("Kongsberg Jernverk") from the start of operations in 1809 until it was privatized in 1824. In 1813 he managed to win the backing of Prince Regent Christian Frederik (later Christian VIII of Denmark) to establish Norway's first factory, the Kongsberg Arms Factory ("Kongsberg Våpenfabrikk") which opened in 1814. He was director of the Kongsberg Silver Mines from 1833 to 1840.
Poul Steenstrup represented Kongsberg at the Norwegian Constituent Assembly in 1814. He was associated with the independence party ("Selvstendighetspartiet"). Steenstrup was also a member of the Norwegian Parliament during 1824-1826.
Personal life.
Poul Steenstrup was married to Mathea Bernardine Collett (1779-1847), daughter of timber merchant Peter Collett. They were the parents of eight children including Peter Severin Steenstrup.
Honors.
He was appointed Knight of the Swedish Order of Vasa in 1816.


Thomas Bryn

Thomas Bryn (29 March 1782 – 6 September 1827) was a Norwegian jurist, magistrate and civil servant. He served as a representative at the Norwegian Constitutional Assembly.
Thomas Bryn was born at Kongsberg in Buskerud, Norway. Bryn was the son of Thomas Thomassen Bryn (1756-1830) who was director of mining at the Kongsberg Silver Mines. He first worked as a printer's assistant and later clerk in Buskerud. After a few years of service, he traveled to the University of Copenhagen to study law. In 1805, he earned his law degree and returned to Kongsberg. He some found work in the administration of District Governor Herman Wedel Jarlsberg. In 1808, he married Susanne Lind (1783 - 1827). The couple had eight children. The family lived at Klubbgaarden in Larvik and owned the Lunde farm in Tjølling. In 1810 he was appointed judge in Østre Råbyggelaget. In 1816, he became Magistrate ("sorenbirkeskriver") in Larvik.
Thomas Bryn represented Råbyggelaget Amt (now Aust-Agder) at the Norwegian Constituent Assembly in 1814, together with Even Torkildsen Lande and Ole Knudsen Tvedten. At Eidsvoll, he supported the position of the union party ("Unionspartiet").
He was elected to the Parliament of Norway in 1814 and 1827. His diary from 1814 was later printed. When Henrik Wergeland was preparing his work on Norway's constitutional history, he came across this diary and used it as one of their sources. It was also used in an impeachment case in 1845.


Uniform Bill of Lading Act

The Uniform Bills of Lading Act was adopted in 1909 and passed by the US Uniform Law Commission. The act addressed the judicial and legislative treatment of issues such as the extent of the carrier's liability to the consignee of the goods or to the buyer of the bill of lading based upon the carrier's issuance of the bill. It governed the relationship between persons with interest in the goods, and carriers who transported those goods. It set / described how a carrier could limit its liability.
Background.
A bill of lading is a legal document used in the transportation industry between a shipper of a particular good and a carrier detailing the type, quantity and destination of the good being transported. This document must accompany the shipped goods and be signed by an authorized representative from the carrier and the shipper. The bill of lading can serve as a Proof of Delivery when the goods are delivered to the destination and signed for by the consignee. These statements reflect either the shipper's representations to the carrier or the carrier's notations from its own inspection of the goods. If the bill of lading specifically notes the defective condition of the goods or their packaging, it is "claused" or "fouled." If no defects are noted, it is called a "clean" bill of lading.
Bill of Lading description.
The Bill of Lading designates that a carrier shall assume all risk of loss, damage, delay and liability in the transportation of any goods for shippers from the time of carrier's receipt of such goods and from a shipper until proper delivery has been made. Carriers are responsible for full actual loss. If the consignee of goods finds the freight damaged or unacceptable the bill of lading also serves as a legal instrument to dispute the delivery of goods in accordance to the provisions of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 1005, Section 14706 (the Carmack Amendment), and applicable state law to rectify any losses that happened due to the carrier.


William Jones (judge)

Sir William Jones (1566–1640) was a Welsh judge, and a Member of Parliament (MP) for the Welsh Borough of Beaumaris.
Life.
From a family settled in North Wales, he was eldest son of William Jones of Castellmarch, Carnarvonshire, by Margaret, daughter of Humphry Wynn ap Meredith of Hyssoilfarch. Educated at first at Beaumaris free school, he went at the age of fourteen to St. Edmund's Hall, Oxford, where he did not graduate.
He entered Furnival's Inn five years later, was admitted a member of Lincoln's Inn on 5 July 1587, and called to the bar there on 28 January 1595. He was Lent reader of the inn in 1616 and was made a serjeant and knight on 14 March 1617; on 13 May of the same year he was appointed Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench for Ireland, in succession to Sir John Denham, who had been transferred to the English court of exchequer. While the Irish chancellorship was vacant he was a commissioner of the great seal.
He was a Member of Parliament three times for Beaumaris (1597, 1604 and 1614) and for Caernarvonshire in 1601.
In 1620, he resigned his judgeship, and returned to the English bar. His name occurs in his own and in George Croke's ‘Reports’ from Michaelmas 1620 to Michaelmas 1621. On 25 September 1621, he was appointed a judge of the Court of Common Pleas, and on 20 March 1622 was selected as a member of a commission to go to Ireland. He complained to Lionel Cranfield, 1st Earl of Middlesex that the commissioners refused to recognise him as a judge, or entitled to any precedence on the commission, and that he was placed junior on it. While in Ireland, upon the complaint of the general body of suitors, he revised the scale of costs in the Dublin courts. He remained a member of the Irish commission at any rate till November 1623.
On 6 August 1623, he was appointed a member of the Council of Wales, in January of the following year was a member of another Irish commission, and on 17 October 1624 was transferred from the Common Pleas to the Court of King's Bench. As a member of the Star Chamber he appears to have been in favour of leniency, at least in the cases of Baron Morley and Sir Henry Mayne; but in 1627 he was one of the judges who refused to admit Sir John Eliot and his companions to bail (28 November). He was one of the judges who tried Eliot, Denzil Holles and Benjamin Valentine in 1630, and he delivered the judgment of the court.
In 1636, he signed an opinion in favour of ship money, and in 1638 he gave judgment for its legality. He died at his house in Holborn on 9 December 1640, and was buried in Lincoln's Inn Chapel.
Works.
Thomas Hearne in his "Curious Discourses" prints a paper by Jones on the early Britons, read before the Society of Antiquaries in Elizabeth I's reign, and calls him a person of learning in British antiquities. Jones's ‘Reports of Cases from 18 James I to 15 Charles I’ appeared in 1675.
Family.
He married in 1587 Margaret, eldest daughter of Griffith ap John Griffith of Kevenamulch, Carnarvonshire and secondly, Catherine, daughter of Thomas Powys of Abingdon, Oxfordshire, widow of Dr. Robert Hovenden.
His sons Charles reader at Lincoln's Inn, and William were also MPs.


History of the Houston Police Department

The history of the Houston Police Department started with the founding of the City of Houston. While the department's beginning was humble, it grew more advanced as technology became available and was able to handle the various challenges that would plague various cities as well as some of the more distinctive aspects of its geography.
Chronology.
Early history.
The first constable of the then recently incorporated City of Houston was elected in 1837, making him the city's first law enforcement officer. The police force itself was not established until 1841 by Houston's first marshal, Daniel Busley.
There was little patrolling of the city during the next 20 years. It was up to the individual businessmen to hire guards to protect their establishments. In 1866, Marshal Isaac C. Lord began to establish HPD as a proper police force by setting hiring rules, regulations, and requirements in hiring practices for recruits. The new policies were reviewed by the city council and were added to the City Charter (Art 308–344). Isaac C. Lord lobbied and succeeded in adopting the dress uniform which states, "The dress of the members of the police force shall be navy blue, indigo die and all wool." (Art 333, 1866)
It was also during this period on March 10, 1860, that C. Edward Foley became the first to fall in the line of duty while on patrol.
In 1873, during Reconstruction, R. Van Patton was appointed City Marshal. It was during his tenure that the force hired its first black officers. The officer complement at this time was 12, with an even number of black and white officers. The second-in-command Deputy Marshal was the first black officer to hold that position among those hired. During this year, the "Manual of the Houston Police Force" was written and the salary was set at $60 a month where it would stay until 1915.
1894 was the year where the department hired its first two police detectives and purchased a patrol wagon. The term "Wagon call" is still used to this day when it is required to transport prisoners.
In 1900, The title "City Marshal" was changed to "Chief of Police", however it remained an elected position. J.G. Blackburn was the last person to have the title "City Marshal" and with re-election, the first to have the title "Chief of Police." In the same year, the first female matron was hired and the name of the force was changed to "The Houston Police Department."
1910–1919.
On August 23, 1910, the first police chief was appointed by the mayor instead of being elected. Later that year, Houston purchased its first police car, along with the formation of the city's first traffic squad to help maintain order to Houston's bustling streets at that time.
On April 21, 1911 Mayor Baldwin Rice hires Frank Hamer to assist special officers who were investigating a gang that had killed several HPD officers. Frank Hamer would later become a legendary Texas Ranger.
The first raise in several decades occurred in 1915 from $60 to $75 a month along with the reduction of work hours (from 12 hours to 8) on their shift.
At the beginning of the First World War, there were two military bases in Houston. One was Ellington Field along (Then Known as) Galveston Road and Camp Logan (Later to become Memorial Park). These two camps Trained, Housed Bomber Cadets and The 24th Infantry Regiment, respectively. The Northern troops resented the segregation of Houston and things came to a head when a black soldier was arrested for interfering in the arrest of a black woman. A clash between the black soldiers and the Houston Police Department erupted shortly thereafter that resulted in the deaths of 16 whites (5 of them police officers), several black soldiers, two white soldiers, and one Hispanic soldier. It was only after Mayor Moody called for federal troops and Martial law declared was the riot eventually quelled.
In 1918 HPD hired Eva Jane Bacher as its first policewoman and in 1921 was assigned to the Public Moral and safety squad (Which later turned into the Vice Division), making her the first female Detective.
1920–1929.
In 1920, HPD revised its application examination to cover its duties, responsibilities, various procedures and firearms policies.
Additionally, the following tools and policies were added to the police department in
1921:
In 1925, the City of Houston initiated the delivery of complimentary municipal healthcare services for all city employees at the Historic Jefferson Davis Hospital, located in Houston's Historic First Ward. HPD moved to its new building that same year.
On October 19, 1926, Magnolia Park, the first substation was opened. The assigned officers were close to the ship channel and were kept busy with prohibition violations and were charged with intercepting all forms of liquor.
The remainder of the decade saw the following milestones:
1927:
1928:
1929:
1930–1939.
In 1930, the Touchy Furniture Store Robbery highlighted a deficiency in the firepower of HPD's weapons. Several .38 caliber shots struck but failed to penetrate the suspect's vehicle as it got away resulting in the deaths of 2 officers. As a result, the city started to issue .44 caliber guns instead.
Also in 1930:
In 1933 The Police and Fire Departments were merged briefly under the Department of Safety. Two-way radios were installed in the patrol cars and received called from the police radio station KGZB. This allowed for "Scout Cars" to be deployed more effectively and designed to create a feeling of friendliness and safety between the department and citizens.
The milestones of the 1930s included:
1935:
1936:
1937:
1939:
Additionally in 1939, HPD started its first Police Academy Class held at the Sam Houston Coliseum under the direction of Captain L.D. Morrison that lasted 5 weeks. The first class that graduated was on August 16, 1939 and is referred to as the Class of '39.
1940–1949.
In 1940, HPD had grown to 466 officers. With the increased use of the police radios, a PBX operator was hired to handle police calls.
In the same year the Department started giving voluntary blood tests to determine the intoxication of suspected drunken drivers.
In 1941, Neal Picket was elected Mayor of Houston named Ray Ashworth as Chief of police. This move sparked controversy because he was originally the Chief of Police from San Antonio. Counsel members were hoping to hire a new chief from within the rank and file of the current police department. Ashworth quickly instituted the following changes:
In 1945, The Houston Police Officers Association (HPOA) was established.
1950–1959.
In October 1950, a new City ordinance took effect that reduced the police work week from 48 to 40 hours.
In 1951, Chief Morrison announced a "booster squad" designed to be deployed at certain crime-infested parts of the city that proved to be quite effective in cutting down crime in areas they worked in.
Also in that year, the first of the three-wheeled motorcycles to direct traffic and write tickets.
In 1953 The 100 Club, a 501(c)(3) charity, was founded by Leopold L. Meyer, Ray R, Elliot, R.H. Abercrombie, William A. "Bill" Smith and James Marion West Jr to help Police officers by providing assistance when officers are hurt or killed in the line of duty.
In 1954, Chief Jack Heard was appointed Chief of Police. Under his tenure he implemented the following changes:
Chief Heard would also be elected to Harris County Sheriff in 1972.
1956 Carl Shuptrine was appointed Chief and in 1957 he reassigned 70 officers from downtown foot patrol to patrol cars to help get to Houston's newly annexed areas. This was an effort to "decentralize" the Police Department and to economize manpower. This included 17 civilian jailers and in 1959 purchased two lots for future substations.
1960–1969.
In 1960, some of the requirements were trainee applicants during this time frame were to be:
Other milestones for the 1960s include:
1960: The Central Intelligence Division was created to track "hoodlums".
1962:
1964: Herman B. Short was appointed as the New Chief.
1965: The State of Texas established the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officers Standards and Education (TCLEOSE)
1966:
1967:
In May 1967, protests erupted at Texas Southern University due to the Vietnam War and racial tensions of the time. In the aftermath of the police raid, one officer was found dead and 488 students were arrested. Mayor Welch then planned community relations training program for police officers in the aftermath of the riot. He appointed 300 neighborhood aides from impoverished areas to provide a communication link to City Hall.
In 1968, the Department incorporated a hookup system between the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles in Austin for immediate vehicle registration verification purposes and established a direct link with the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) in Washington, DC. Another feature added was the teleprinter, which simultaneously typed an offense report as a new record was entered into the system.
By the end of 1969, the department had grown to 1,577 Officers and 223 civilian personnel.
1970–1979.
In 1970, the Helicopter Patrol Division was formed with three leased Hughes 300 helicopters which gave the city the largest helicopter division in the nation. Bulletproof vests were also introduced to the rank and file and an initial purchase of 30 were made.
The Houston Police Department and the "People's Party II" clashed in the area of St. John's Baptist Church on 2800 Dowling Street. Members of the People's Party II had dared any HPD unit to drive down Dowling. As a result, Chief Short declared that any citizen of Houston or HPD would not be denied access to any public street. This resulted in a gun battle in which the leader, Carl Hampton, was killed.
Other milestones in the 1970s include:
1970:
1972: Chief Short issued a written version of a long-standing verbal policy against officers accepting rewards.
1973: City Council approves time-and-a-half overtime for all city employees.
1975:
1976:
1977:
1978 The department hired a psychologist (Dr. Gregory Riede) to screen police applicants and provide counseling services.
1979: The department announced a new neighborhood crime program called, "Houstonians on Watch". The program combined police patrol with citizen awareness and designed to cover selected high-crime areas.
One of the more significant advances came in 1979 when The Houston Police Department became one of only five police departments in the nation to have an automated fingerprint identification system (AFIS). AFIS was described as a computerized minutia-based fingerprint identification system, capable of storing approximately 375,000 criminal fingerprint records with descriptive information and an additional 12,000 unidentified latent fingerprints.
1980–1989.
In 1982, Mayor Kathryn J. Whitmire was elected the first female mayor of the City of Houston and appointed Lee P. Brown as Chief of Police, who was the first person of color appointed to be Chief of Police and the first to hold a Doctorate. Brown succeeded Harry J. Caldwell.
He instituted several changes including "Neighborhood Oriented Policing. " which is described as the following:
"Neighborhood Oriented Policing is an interactive process between police officers assigned to specific beats and the citizens that either work or reside in these beats to mutually develop ways to identify problems and concerns and then assess viable solutions by provided available resources from both the police department and the community to address the problems and/or concerns."
Along with community policing, he instituted the following changes as well:
1983:
1984:
1985:
1986:
1987: The first command station (Westside) was opened.
1988:
1990–1999.
In 1990 Chief Brown left Houston to be the Police Commissioner for the New York Police Department. On January 20 of that year, Mayor Whitmire announced that Deputy Chief Elizabeth "Betsy" Watson as the new Chief of Police making her the first female to hold that position.
Chief Watson established the Personal Concerns Program that gave attention to and provided action to employees demonstrating behavior problems. The Chief also requested and was approved by city council to abolish the deputy chief rank and replaced it with assistant chiefs to flatten the department's hierarchy.
Since the Police Academy was closed for three years, this resulted in the loss of 600 positions, dropping the number below 4,000 personnel. Against the wishes of Chief Watson, the 60 College credit hour requirements were dropped.
In March 1991, The Texas Supreme Court ruled on the long running lawsuit known as Lee V. City of Houston. The Court held that "if a particular job assignment require no knowledge of police work in the Department, and entails no supervision of classified officers, the position need not be classified." But it held that the Act did prohibit non-classified employees from supervising classified employees.
With the election of Robert "Bob" Lanier in November 1991 and his swearing in ceremony two months later, he pledged to put the equivalent of 655 additional officers on the streets of Houston. After 47 days in office, Mayor Lanier announced the replacement of Chief Watson with former HPD Deputy Chief Sam Nuchia who was then serving as an assistant U.S. Attorney in Houston.
Immediately up on his appointment Chief Nuchia he went to a "back-to-basics" policing approach that would make crime fighting his first priority. He did away with one man units in patrol cars and made as many two-man units as possible.
Of the 655 officers added to the patrol duties, 361 were on patrol, 150 in investigative positions, and 144 on special assignments. The Airport Police department and City Marshals were merged into the HPD.
Other achievements of the decade included:
1993:
1994:
1995:
1996: Planning for police services were undertaken with the beginning of the Kingwood annexation process.
In January 1997, Chief Clarence Bradford was sworn in as the new Chief of Police.
One of the first priorities he accomplished was the elimination of the promotional ranks of sergeant and lieutenant. Judge Lynn Hughes granted a motion making it possible for the Police Department to fill vacant sergeant and lieutenant through promotions. However, the promotions were to be acting positions and would not accrue pension or seniority until the case known as the Edwards Lawsuit was settled.
It was also during 1997 that then Governor George W. Bush signed into law the new "meet and confer" legislation for the Houston Police Department. The legislation provided for officers to vote for a representative organization to negotiate for them with the City administration on a compensation package that would be brought before City Council.
On April 6, Houston Police Officer Cuong Huy "Tony" Trinh (Badge No. 5891) was killed in an armed robbery while working off duty in a convenience store. The robbery suspect, Chuong Tong, was sentenced to death awaiting execution by lethal injection. Trinh was a 2-year veteran of the department.
In December 1997 the new 26-floor high-rise police headquarters (the former Houston Natural Gas Building) located at 1200 Travis was dedicated. The Mayor, Past chiefs of Police, other dignitaries and guests were on hand for the opening ceremony. The new facility was equipped with the latest security system and would house 2,200 employees.
Lee P. Brown, the former Chief of Police, was elected as City Mayor in November 1997 and took the oath of office in January 1998. He had become the second former head of the police Department to become the Mayor of Houston (I.C. Lord was the first in 1875).
On May 23, 1998, Sergeant Kent Dean Kincaid, a 13-year veteran, was murdered while confronting two criminals who threw an object at his car's windshield. The several suspects, were arrested and sentenced to death.
On May 19, 1999, Houston Police Officer Troy Alan Blando was shot to death while investigating auto theft on the Southwest Freeway. Blando was a 20-year veteran of the force and leaves behind a wife and son.
2000–2005.
2000:
The Houston Police Department announced the discontinuation of their "baby blue" livery that was painted on their Chevrolet Caprice Police vehicle and on their popular fleet of 1997, 1998 and a small percentage of some 1999 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor patrol cars. The paint was a special order and cost significantly higher and the city settled with white cars utilizing the blue "Houston Police" logo. The last remaining "baby blue" car was retired from the department in late 2006 or early 2007. Some of the retired "baby blue" cruisers are sold at auctions with all police equipment stripped and returned to be reused in other cruisers.
September 20, Police Officer Jerry Keith Stowe died in the line of duty due to trauma injuries he suffered on August 27, 1986 when he was ambushed and beaten with a 2x4 wood and a metal pipe when investigating a disturbance call.
2001:
On January 10, Officer Dennis E. Holmes died in the line of duty suffering from a fatal heart attack while apprehending a suspect.
On May 22, Officer Alberto Vasquez (Badge 5437) was shot and killed in the line of duty while patrolling an apartment complex in Southwest Houston. He and three other officers were arresting the suspects of narcotics violation.
2002:
On March 7, Officer Keith Alan Dees (Badge 3807)was killed in a motorcycle accident on the North freeway. His motorcycle crashed into a stopped car, killing him.
On November, an investigative report made by KHOU about improper lab procedures and accuracy of results. It also pointed out various deficiencies of various lab personal in experience and education. The severity of the lack of credibility lay question of a number of cases, including those that were later convicted and put on death row. The scandal involving the DNA Lab would last well into the decade. The other major milestones affecting HPD are:
December: HPD suspends DNA testing after an investigate report and audit.
2003:
January: Harris County District attorney Chuck Rosenthal announces plans to retest DNA evidence from hundreds of cases.
March: Josiah Sutton, convicted with faulty DNA evidence, is released from prison after serving more than four years for a rape he did not commit.
April: On April 3, 20-year veteran Officer Charles Roy Clark (Badge No. 4018) was shot and killed in the line of duty during an exchange of gunfire at a robbery at the ACE America Cash Express on 6408 Martin Luther King Boulevard, near the 5700 block of South 610 Loop. Clark returned fire, unfortunately his weapon jammed on him, leading him to be killed. The clerk who was working there was also murdered by the armed robbers. All suspects were arrested, charged with capital murder, and was sentenced to death by lethal injection.
October: The toxicology division, which tests for alcohol and drugs, is shuttered after its head fails a proficiency test.
2004:
August: Police Chief Harold Hurtt reveals that evidence from thousands of cases dating back to the 1970s was improperly stored in HPD's property room.
October: George Rodriguez is released from prison after serving 17 years for a rape he did not commit. He was convicted on faulty work of the lab's serology division.
2005:
2006–2009.
2006:
2007:
2008
2009
2010—2019.
At the beginning of the year, HPD's Theft Division acquired access to LeadsOnline, a privately owned online database of pawned merchandise to tap into the databases of the city's 133 pawnshops, junk yards, and thrift stores, as well as across the country. The access to this database allows to be able what was pawned, by who, and where. It has been considered a success because of the amount of property recovered and arrests made and has been said that it has more than made up for its $90,000 cost.
2011:
2012:
2019:


Judith Auer

Judith Auer (née Vallentin) (19 September 1905 – 27 October 1944) was a resistance fighter against the Nazi régime in Germany.
Early life.
Auer was born in Zürich. Her father was the communist writer, Erich Vallentin. After her parents' untimely death in 1917, Judith was brought up by a well-to-do Jewish family. She completed her "Abitur" and began studies in music in the hopes of becoming a pianist.
In 1924, as a student, she joined the Young Communist League of Germany, and the next year, moved to Berlin. There, she met and married Erich Auer, a functionary in the Communist Party of Germany (KPD), in 1926. In 1927, she joined the KPD. In 1928, Auer went to Moscow with her husband and worked at the Comintern's offices.
In 1929, her daughter Ruth was born. To earn money, Auer learned typing and shorthand and took a job at a KPD establishment.
Resistance activities.
After Hitler seized power in Germany in 1933 and the KPD was banned by the new régime, Auer eventually found herself working for AEG at the Kabelwerk Oberspree ("cable works"), first as a shorthand typist, and later as a buying agent. It was here that Auer first came into contact with the resistance group around Fritz Plön, a welder, who himself had contacts with the resistance group around Anton Saefkow, Franz Jacob, Bernhard Bästlein and Karl Klodt, the Saefkow-Jacob-Bästlein Organization. Auer had also had a long friendship with Änne Weiß, who became Saefkow's wife. Auer managed her resistance group's finances and used business trips to do courier work, especially with a view to establishing links with resistance fighters in Thuringia, such as Theodor Neubauer. She also hid Franz Jacob in her flat for several months after he fled from Hamburg.
Arrest and execution.
Auer was arrested at her workplace on 7 July 1944 and was later tortured. Along with Bruno Hämmerling and Franz Schmidt, she was sentenced to death at the Volksgerichtshof. Auer was hanged at Plötzensee Prison in Berlin on 27 October 1944.
Legacy.
There are streets named for Auer in Berlin, Leipzig and Jena. In the former East Germany, there are several public institutions named after her, as well.


Anders Rambech

Anders Rambech (2 September 1767 – 14 September 1836) was a Norwegian district stipendiary magistrate and politician.
He was born at the mountain village of Kvikne in Tynset, Hedmark, Norway. He worked as a clerk in the office of Magistrate of Orkdal in Sør-Trøndelag. In 1793, he graduated with a Law degree from the University of Copenhagen. From 1800. he served as magistrate in Orkdal. When the copper mines in his home town was closed in 1812, he arranged for assistance for the poor.
Anders Rambech represented Søndre Trondhjems amt at the Norwegian Constituent Assembly in 1814, and was elected to the Parliament in 1815, 1818, 1824 and 1827.


State ratifying conventions

State ratifying conventions are one of the two methods established by Article V of the United States Constitution for "ratifying" proposed constitutional amendments. The only amendment that has been ratified through this method thus far is the 21st Amendment.
Constitutional text.
Article V reads in pertinent part (italics added):
Use of the convention ratification option.
Ratification of a proposed amendment has been done by state conventions only once—the 1933 ratification process of the 21st Amendment. The 21st is also the only constitutional amendment that repealed another one, that being the 18th Amendment, which had been ratified 14 years earlier.
As is true for a state "legislature" when ratifying a proposed federal constitutional amendment, a state ratifying "convention" may not in any way change a proposed constitutional amendment, but must accept or reject the proposed amendment as written.
Purpose.
The convention method of ratification described in Article V is an alternate route to considering the pro and con arguments of a particular proposed amendment, as the framers of the Constitution wanted a means of potentially bypassing the state legislatures in the ratification process.
To some extent, the convention method of ratification loosely approximates a one-state, one-vote national referendum on a specific proposed federal constitutional amendment, thus allowing the sentiments of registered voters to be somewhat more directly felt on highly sensitive issues. The theory is that the delegates of the conventions—who presumably would themselves be average citizens—might be less likely to bow to political pressure to accept or to reject a given amendment than would be the case with state legislators. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that a popular referendum is not a substitute for either the legislature or a ratifying convention—nor can a referendum approve of, or disapprove of, a state legislature's, or a convention's, decision on an amendment ("Hawke v. Smith", 253 U.S. 221, [1920]). This ruling was challenged in "Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission", in which the United States Supreme Court defined the term "legislature" broadly to include "the power that makes laws", which the court held included direct lawmaking by the people of the state. The majority opinion stated that the Article V use of the term "legislature" applied only to the representative body of the states as a "federal" function, as opposed to a "state" function of the legislature as prescribed in . This conflict over the interpretation of the word "legislature" creates potential constitutional questions over the role that popular referendums could play in state ratifying conventions.
New Mexico law provides that the members of its legislature would themselves be the delegates and form such a ratifying convention—if Congress were to again select that particular method of ratification. The issue having never come before the federal courts, it is unknown whether this New Mexico state law violates Article V.
Applicable state laws.
In a state's legislature, the ratification method is procedurally simple—merely propose a resolution, memorial, or proclamation of ratification and vote it up or down in each chamber of that state legislature. But using the convention method of ratification is a bit more complicated because it is, by necessity, separate and different from a state legislature. As early as the 1930s, state lawmakers enacted laws to prepare for the possibility of Congress specifying the convention method of ratification. Many laws refer to a one-off event, with an ad-hoc convention convened solely for the purposes of the 21st amendment. Other laws, however, provided guidelines for ratifying conventions in general.
Vermont example.
Once Congress has proposed a federal constitutional amendment which Congress specifies is to be ratified by the convention method, Vermont's governor has 60 days to call for an election of delegates to that convention, and the setting of a date for those elections. Note that the Vermont code does not contemplate the calling of ratifying conventions from a national amendment convention, though the same procedures would likely be followed.
Fourteen persons are elected to be members of the ratifying convention. Those 14 would be elected statewide, meaning that each voter would cast votes for fourteen people, with the top fourteen vote-getters being elected. The election must take place from three to twelve months after the governor's call. The convention must begin 20 to 30 days after the election. The convention itself is held in the Senate chamber in the state capital.
The candidates who are seeking to become delegates are selected from a list of 28 possible Vermont citizens. All 28 candidates are selected by the governor, lieutenant governor, and speaker of the house. The persons selected must agree to be placed on the ballot - 14 of whom are opposed to ratification, 14 of whom are in favor. The ballots are to be plainly marked so that voters can decide based on the candidate's stand on the issue, or on name recognition. The state has 14 counties - each county is to have one "pro" and one "con" candidate. Voters can vote for all "For" or all "Against", or any combination thereof.
The elected delegates meet on the appointed date, with the majority of those elected being a quorum. The Vermont code does not detail how the convention is to conduct its business aside from the fact that there will be a chairman and that the secretary of state will be the secretary of the convention, and those two persons will certify the results of the convention's vote. The convention might only last 15 minutes, or it could drag out for several days for debate. However long the convention takes, delegates are provided a stipend of $10.00 and reimbursement of actual expenses.
Florida example.
In Florida, the convention is made up of 67 members. The governor has 45 days to call an election to be held from five to ten months after Congress proposes the constitutional amendment. Anyone can apply to be a member of the convention, with the state qualifications for the Florida House of Representatives used as an eligibility test. Candidates can officially declare that they are "for" or "against" the proposed amendment, or they may apply as unannounced. An application fee of $25 and a 500-name petition are also required. On the ballots, candidates are listed in three categories: "for", "against", and "undecided". There is also provision for write-in candidates. The vote is at-large, meaning that the 67 top vote-getters statewide win the 67 seats in the convention. The convention begins on the second Tuesday following the election. Delegates are not compensated per diem or for expenses.
New Mexico example.
The procedure in New Mexico is vastly different. To start, the governor has only 10 days to call a convention—with each sitting member of the New Mexico Legislature automatically a delegate to the convention. Therefore, no special election is ever called for determining delegates. The convention is held in the chamber of the House of Representatives. New Mexico's code provides that, after three days, compensation to delegates will end.


R v Cook

R v Cook, [1998] 2 SCR 597, is a leading "Charter" decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court held that Canadian police located in the United States were still subject to the "Charter" when interrogating a suspect for a murder in Canada.
Background.
Deltonia Cook was arrested by US police in Louisiana at the request of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Initially upon arrest he was read his Miranda rights by the US police officers. He requested access to a lawyer but the police never followed through with the request. When the Canadian police arrived they questioned him but it was not until 20 minutes into the interrogation that they informed him of his right to retain and instruct counsel under section 10(b) of the "Charter".
At trial the Crown sought to admit as evidence parts of the statements Cook made in the interrogation. Cook challenged the evidence as a violation of his rights under section 10(b).
Reasons of the Court.
The court held that acts of any Canadian police force performing duties outside of Canada are subject to the "Charter".
In this particular case, the court found that there was a violation of the accused’s right to counsel and right to silence. These violations were flagrant and the evidence would not have been otherwise been discovered thus rendering the trial unfair. Consequently, the evidence of Mr. Cook’s statement was excluded.
Justices L'Heureux-Dubé and McLachlin dissented, stating that the "Charter" did not apply, and that the police were working as part of an American investigation and were acting under their authority.


Humphrey Winch

Sir Humphrey Winch (1555–1625) was an English-born politician and judge. He had a distinguished career in both Ireland and England, but his reputation was seriously damaged by the Leicester witch trials of 1616, which resulted in the hanging of several innocent women.
Family.
He was born in Bedfordshire, second son of John Winch (died 1598) of Northill. He married Cicely Onslow, daughter of Richard Onslow (died 1571), Speaker of the House of Commons, and his wife Catherine Harding. They had two surviving children, including Onslow, who married a sister of Sir John Burgoyne, 1st Baronet, and was the father of Sir Humphrey Winch, 1st Baronet. Later notable descendants included Anne, Duchess of Cumberland and Strathearn.
Political career.
He matriculated from St John's College, Cambridge; was called to the Bar in 1581 and became a bencher of Lincoln's Inn in 1596. He enjoyed the patronage of Oliver St John, 3rd Baron St John of Bletso. Through St John's influence he was elected to the House of Commons as MP for Bedford in 1593, and served in each successive Parliament up to 1606.
In the earlier part of his career in Parliament he was identified with the Puritan faction in the Commons. He gave great offence to Queen Elizabeth I in 1593 by supporting a proposal by Sir Peter Wentworth, the chief spokesman in the Commons for the Puritans, to introduce a Bill to settle the royal succession, a subject on which the Queen absolutely forbade any debate in Parliament, let alone any attempt to legislate for it. His offence was compounded by the fact that the meetings to discuss the Bill were held in his chambers at Lincoln's Inn. Compared to the fate of Wentworth, who was sent to the Tower of London and died there three years later, Winch's punishment was mild enough: he was forbidden to leave London for a time, but allowed to continue to attend Parliament. His disgrace was temporary, but thereafter he confined his speeches in the Commons to non-contentious matters.
Judge.
In 1606, despite his earlier conflict with the Crown, he was recommended to King James I as a man who was suitable for judicial appointment, by reason of his legal ability and integrity. For this purpose he was made a serjeant-at-law and knighted, then appointed Chief Baron of the Irish Exchequer.
He received glowing reports as a judge, being praised as "understanding and painstaking". Francis Bacon said that Winch's qualities of "quickness, industry and dispatch" made him a model for other judges to emulate. He was conscientious in going on assize and was regular in attendance at the Court of Castle Chamber (the Irish equivalent of Star Chamber). After two years he was promoted to the office of Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench in Ireland.
Winch, like many (though by no means all) transplanted English officials disliked the Irish climate and complained of its effect on his health. He also grumbled about the lack of staff to support him and the "humiliating" fees he received. From 1610 onwards he was lobbying for a sppedy return to England. Despite the reluctance of the Dublin Government to lose a valued Crown servant, he was transferred to the English Court of Common Pleas in 1611. He returned to Ireland on official business in 1613, and was regarded as an expert on Irish matters, sitting on the Privy Council committees on Irish affairs.
Leicester witch trials.
"See main article: Leicester boy"
Winch's illustrious reputation as a judge was dealt a serious blow by his conduct at the summer assizes in Leicester in 1616. Fifteen women had been charged with witchcraft on the sole evidence of a young boy called John Smith, who claimed that they had possessed him. The judges, Winch and Ranulph Crewe, found the boy to be a credible witness: while six of the accused were spared the death penalty in favour of a prison sentence, nine were condemned to death and hanged. A month after the hangings King James I visited Leicester. The King had always shown a keen interest in witchcraft, but, although he was a firm believer in the reality of witches, he could be sceptical about individual cases, and was quite shrewd in detecting impostors. He examined the boy John Smith and promptly declared him to be a fraud. The boy broke down and confessed that he had lied, and the five surviving
convicts (one had already died) were released from prison.
Death.
Despite the damage to his reputation caused by the witchcraft trials fiasco, Winch remained on the bench until he died suddenly at Chancery Lane from a stroke in February 1625. An impressive memorial was raised to him in his local church at Everton.


Davenport Lyons

Davenport Lyons was a London-based law firm that entered into administration on 25 April 2014. Although most of their work concerned corporate acquisitions, in 2007 their actions against file sharers became news in the United Kingdom. This subject became widely publicised in late 2008 because of the number of innocent people receiving letters from the company, it was reported on "Watchdog" that Atari stopped using this company for this reason.
They were incorporated in 2001 and in 2008 listed 16 associates and 41 partners. Prior to their entry into file-sharing related intellectual property litigation, they were best known for their involvement in the case of a London tailor near Savile Row.
Notable case.
Robin Shaw was named Lawyer of the Week by "The Times" in September for having acted for HarperCollins in the case brought by the BBC to prevent the publication of the autobiography of Ben Collins, the mystery driver known as the Stig in "Top Gear", the BBC TV series. The High Court refused to grant the injunction and the book, The Man in the White Suit, has now been published.
Complaints and investigations.
Davenport Lyons had been accused of trying to extort money from people for alleged copyright infringement. The law firm had accused up to 25,000 people of downloading material such as computer games, music and even pornography that the computer users allegedly know nothing about. This has led to a barrage of complaints against the law firm and investigations by organisations such as Which?.
Solicitors Regulation Authority.
In 2008 an official complaint was made by the Consumers' Association to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) about Davenport-Lyons' "campaign of letters alleging illegal filesharing".
The case against Davenport Lyons partners David Gore and Brian Miller was the subject of a 7-day hearing at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), starting 31 May 2011.
On 8 June 2011, the SDT found that all allegations against the pair had been proven. They were fined £20,000 each, ordered to pay interim costs of £150,000, and suspended from practising for three months. The SRA said:
Groups against Davenport Lyons.
In response to Davenport Lyons' initial campaign against suspected file sharers, the pressure group 'Being Threatened' was created, to enable those wrongly accused to take action. They offer the same support and advice to people now being targeted in a similar manner by law firm . British technology news site "The Register" reported that some staff transferred from Davenport Lyons to ACS:Law to continue the work.
Administration.
Davenport Lyons entered into administration on 25 April 2014. It will be acquired by Mayfair-based law firm Gordon Dadds.


Rafael Cancel Miranda

Rafael Cancel Miranda (July 18, 1930 – March 2, 2020) was a poet, political activist, member of the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party and an advocate of Puerto Rican independence. On March 1, 1954, Cancel Miranda and three other Nationalists (Lolita Lebrón, Andrés Figueroa Cordero, and Irvin Flores Rodríguez) attacked the United States Capitol building, firing 30 shots and injuring five congressmen. The four were arrested, convicted, and sentenced to long prison terms. In 1979, Cancel Miranda's sentence was commuted by United States President Jimmy Carter.
Early years.
Cancel Miranda was born in the town of Mayagüez, located on the western coast of Puerto Rico. His father, Rafael Cancel Rodríguez, was president of the Mayagüez chapter of the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party and his mother was a member of the Daughters of Freedom, an organization which was the women's branch of the Nationalist Party. His father, a businessman and owner of a furniture store, had been imprisoned because of his political beliefs.
Ponce massacre.
In March 1937, when Cancel Miranda was seven years old, his mother and father traveled to the city of Ponce to participate in a march organized by the Nationalist Party. He and his sisters couldn't go because they were sick with measles. The march, which was scheduled for March 30 (Palm Sunday), was organized to commemorate the ending of slavery in Puerto Rico by the governing Spanish National Assembly in 1873, and to protest the incarceration by the U.S. Government of Nationalist leader Pedro Albizu Campos on sedition charges.
Upon learning of the planned protest, however, the colonial Governor of Puerto Rico at the time, General Blanton Winship, who had been appointed by US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, demanded the immediate withdrawal of the permits. They were withdrawn a short time before the march was scheduled to begin. As "La Borinqueña", Puerto Rico's national anthem, was being played, the demonstrators began to march. They were then fired upon for over 15 minutes by the police from four different positions. About 235 people were wounded and nineteen were killed. Among the dead were 17 unarmed civilians and two police officers at the hands of the Insular Police.
 Ultimately, responsibility for the massacre fell on Governor Winship, and he is considered to have, in effect, ordered the massacre. Many were chased by the police and shot or clubbed at the entrance of their houses as they tried to escape. Others were taken from their hiding places and killed. Leopold Tormes, a member of the Puerto Rico legislature, told reporters how a policeman murdered a nationalist with his bare hands. Dr. José N. Gándara, one of the physicians who assisted the wounded, testified that wounded people running away were shot, and that many were again wounded by the clubs and bare fists of the police. No arms were found in the hands of the civilians wounded, nor on the dead ones. About 150 of the demonstrators were arrested immediately afterward; they were later released on bail. The incident is known as the Ponce massacre.
The white nurse's uniform of Cancel Miranda's mother was soaked with blood as she crawled over bodies in search of her husband. Miraculously, they both managed to return home unharmed. After the family returned home, Cancel Miranda committed his first political act in his first grade class in school when he refused to salute the American flag which at the time was mandatory.
Political activist.
Cancel Miranda joined the Cadets of the Republic ("Cadetes de la República"), the youth organization of the Nationalist Party, and organized nationalist youth committees in different towns. His group had a radio program and a small newspaper. As a cadet, Cancel Miranda went to welcome Albizu Campos in December 1947, when the Nationalist Party leader returned from the United States after serving out a ten-year prison sentence – first in the U.S. penitentiary in Atlanta, then in New York – on charges of conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. government and "inciting rebellion" against it. Following World War II, there was widespread resistance to Washington's attempt to impose English as the main language of instruction in Puerto Rico's schools. Cancel Miranda was among those who participated in a school strike to this respect, two months before his graduation and was expelled from school. He then went to San Juan to finish high school.
Puerto Ricans became U.S. citizens as a result of the 1917 Jones-Shafroth Act and those who were eligible, with the exception of women, were expected to serve in the military, either voluntarily or as a result of the military draft (conscription). In 1948, Cancel Miranda, then eighteen and in high school, refused to be drafted into the military. One day, he was walking to school in San Juan with other students, and there was a car with four FBI agents at the corner of his house. He handed his books to the other students to take them to the place where he was living. The men arrested him and charged him with refusing the U.S. draft. The U.S. Federal Court in Puerto Rico sentenced him to two years and one day and he was sent to a prison in Tallahassee, Florida, where he remained from 1949 to 1951. During his stay in prison he confronted a prison guard because of the racist segregation inside prison walls. Under Jim Crow legislation at the time, the prison dormitories were segregated.
Self exile in Cuba.
In the 1950s, the United States entered the Korean War. Believing that he was to be drafted by the US Military and that he would once again face a prison term for refusing, Cancel Miranda followed the advice of his wife and his sister Zoraida and went into a self exile in Cuba. Cancel Miranda arrived in the city of Miranda using a different identity, Robert Rodríguez. Cuba at that time was governed by Carlos Prío Socarrás. He moved to Havana where, with the help of Albizu Campos' son, Pedro Albizu Meneses, he found a job with the Public Works Department. After a while, he went to work for the Raymond Concrete Pipe Co. which was building the Línea Street Tunnel, which connects the two banks of the Almendares River.
On October 30, 1950, a Nationalist Party uprising occurred in Puerto Rico. The uprising was a call for independence against the United States Government's rule of Puerto Rico. It was also a protest against the approval of the creation of the political status the "Free Associated State of Puerto Rico" or how it is legally known, the "Commonwealth of Puerto Rico" ("Estado Libre Asociado") for Puerto Rico which was considered a colonial farce. Numerous Nationalists were arrested, among them Cancel Miranda's father. In 1951, he published an article in a Havana paper to commemorate the first anniversary of that uprising. The United States embassy learned about it and demanded that the Prío Socarrás government turn him over along with another Puerto Rican, Reynaldo Trilla, but the Cuban authorities ignored them.
Aracelio Azcuy, a politician of the Civil Damages Office and supporter of Prío Socarrás, used to ask Cancel Miranda to campaign for him, to write his speeches. On March 10, 1952, Fulgencio Batista led a military coup overthrowing Prío Socarrás' government. After the coup, Batista's police arrested Cancel Miranda and Trilla. They were sent to the Tiscornia prison until August 1952, when they both were expelled from Cuba.
Assault on the House of Representatives.
Cancel Miranda migrated to Brooklyn, New York City, where he joined his wife. He found work in a shoe factory as a press operator. In New York, he met fellow Nationalists Lolita Lebrón, a sewing machine operator, Irvin Flores Rodríguez, a furniture factory employee and Andrés Figueroa Cordero, who worked in a butcher shop.
Attack preparations.
Albizu Campos had been corresponding with 34-year-old Lolita Lebrón from prison and chose a group of nationalists who included Cancel Miranda, Irvin Flores Rodríguez and Andrés Figueroa Cordero to attack locations in Washington, D.C. Upon receiving the order she communicated it to the leadership of the Nationalist party in New York and, although two members unexpectedly disagreed, the plan continued. Lebrón decided to lead the group, even though Albizu Campos did not order her to directly take part in the assault. She studied the plan, determining the possible weaknesses, concluding that a single attack on the House of Representatives would be more effective. The attack was planned for March 1, 1954, as the anniversary of inauguration of the "Conferencia Interamericana" (Interamerican Conference) in Caracas. Lebrón intended to call attention to Puerto Rico's independence cause, particularly among the Latin American countries participating in the conference.
Trial and imprisonment.
Cancel Miranda and his comrades were charged with attempted murder and other crimes. The trial began on June 4, 1954, with judge Alexander Holtzoff presiding over the case, under strict security measures. A jury composed of seven men and five women was assembled, their identities were kept secret by the media. The prosecution was led by Leo A. Rover, as part of this process 33 witnesses testified. Ruth Mary Reynolds, the "American/Puerto Rican Nationalist" and the organization which she founded "American League for Puerto Rico's Independence" came to the defense of Cancel Miranda and the three other Nationalists. Cancel Miranda and the other members of the group were the only defense witnesses, as part of Lebrón's testimony she reaffirmed that they "came to die for the liberty of her homeland". On June 16, 1954, the jury declared the four guilty. Rover pursued death penalty, but Holtzoff decided to implement the maximum imprisonment penalties. On July 13, 1954, the four nationalists were taken to New York, where they declared themselves not guilty on the charges of "trying to overthrow the government of the United States". Among the prosecution's witnesses was Gonzalo Lebrón Jr., who testified against his sister. On October 26, 1954, judge Lawrence E. Walsh found all of the accused guilty of conspiracy, sentencing them to six additional years in prison.
The four Nationalists were incarcerated at different prisons. Figueroa Cordero was sent to the federal penitentiary in Atlanta; Lebrón to the women's prison in Alderson, West Virginia; and Flores Rodríguez to Leavenworth, Kansas, where Oscar Collazo, who in 1950 attacked the Blair House in a failed attempt to assassinate US President Harry S. Truman, was incarcerated. Cancel Miranda, considered to be the primary shooter, received a prison sentence of 85 years and was sent to Alcatraz in the San Francisco Bay.
Imprisonment.
Alcatraz.
In July 1954, Cancel Miranda, inmate number 1163, was sent to Alcatraz where he served six years of his sentence. Alcatraz Island operated as a Federal Bureau of Prisons federal prison from August 1934 to 1963. While incarcerated, Cancel Miranda worked in the brush factory and served as an altar boy at Catholic services. His closest friends were fellow Puerto Ricans Emérito Vázquez and Hiram Crespo-Crespo. On the recreation yard, he played chess with Harlem gangster Ellsworth "Bumpy" Johnson. He also befriended Morton Sobell, an American convicted of espionage; they remained friends until Sobell's death in December 2018.
During visitation, Cancel Miranda was not allowed to see his children. His wife was allowed to see him in the visiting room, where there was a glass partition, and they could talk using a phone, but were not allowed to speak in Spanish. Due to Cancel Miranda's good behavior in prison, he was transferred to USP Leavenworth in 1960.
Leavenworth.
Cancel Miranda spent 10 years in Leavenworth. In 1970, he, Andrés Figueroa Cordero (he was transferred from the federal penitentiary in Atlanta), Irvin Flores Rodríguez and Oscar Collazo organized a prisoners' strike to protest their treatment by the guards. Cancel Miranda was charged with organizing the strike and sentenced to solitary confinement for five months. His wife, who had traveled to visit him during that time, was allowed to see him for one hour. During his imprisonment, in Leavenworth, a photo from a local newspaper reminded him of one of his Cuban experiences, which allowed him to recognize that a genuine revolution was taking place in that country.
Marion.
Cancel Miranda was transferred to the Marion Penitentiary, a Federal Bureau of Prisons facility located in Southern Precinct, unincorporated Williamson County, Illinois. By the late 1960s, there were increasing numbers of prisoners engaged in political activity, and Cancel Miranda joined them.
In prison, he read books on sociology and learned to play the guitar. He also became involved in the defense of Corky Gonzales and the "Crusade for Justice". Every September 16, Cancel Miranda would join the Mexican and Chicano prisoners in marking Mexico's independence day with a work stoppage. He was also involved in the African-American struggle. Together they produced newspapers like the Chicano prisoners' paper "Aztlán" and the "Militant". In 1972, he was placed in the Control Unit, where he was held for eighteen months, after a big strike in Marion. In the early years there was no campaign for the release of the Nationalist prisoners. An Afro-American prisoner named Ed Johnson wrote to Michael Deutsch, a lawyer, and invited him to visit the Control Unit. The campaign for the release of the Nationalists began with Michael Deutsch and Mara Siegel from the People's Law Office.
When Cancel Miranda's father died in 1977, his supporters campaigned to allow him to attend the funeral. He was eventually granted a seven-hour furlough in Puerto Rico to attend the funeral.
Pardon and later years.
In 1979, President Jimmy Carter commuted the sentence of Cancel Miranda, Lolita Lebrón and Irving Flores Rodríguez after they had served 25 years in prison. Andrés Figueroa Cordero was released from prison earlier because of ill health. Governor of Puerto Rico Carlos Romero Barceló publicly opposed the commutations, arguing that it would encourage terrorism and undermine public safety. Cancel Miranda and the other Nationalists received a hero's welcome upon their return to Puerto Rico.
President Carter also commuted the sentence of fellow nationalist Oscar Collazo, to time served on September 6, 1979, after spending 29 years in jail. Collazo had been eligible for parole since April 1966, and Lebrón since July 1969. Both Cancel Miranda and Flores Rodríguez became eligible for parole in July 1979. However, none had applied for parole because of their political beliefs.
Cancel Miranda authored nine books and remained active in the struggle for Puerto Rican independence. He continued to carry the cause of independence to other countries and returned occasionally to the United States on speaking tours on behalf of Puerto Rican political prisoners.
In 1979, at the International Conference in Support of Independence for Puerto Rico, held in Mexico City, Cancel Miranda. Irvin Flores Rodríguez, Lolita Lebrón, and Oscar Collazo were recognized as the embodiment of the directive of their teacher Albizu Campos to exercise valor and sacrifice before representatives of fifty-one countries.
That same year Cancel Miranda was awarded the Order of Playa Girón. The Order of Playa Girón is a national order conferred by the Council of State of Cuba on Cubans or foreigners
for their leadership in the struggle against imperialism, colonialism and neo-colonialism, or who have contributed to peace and the progress of humankind. It was established in 1961 and is named after the Playa Girón (Girón beach), site of the Cuban victory in the Bay of Pigs Invasion. In 2006, he was awarded the Order of José Martí by the Cuban government for his work. It is the highest honor Cuba accords to non-Cubans.
A musical production of his poetry, "Por Las Calles de Mi Patria", was well received in Puerto Rico and in the United States. The poems are those he had sent to his father while in prison. He had thought them lost and was surprised to find them published by his father. The musical production is dedicated to those active in the struggle for independence.
Oscar López Rivera founded the Rafael Cancel Miranda High School in Chicago in his honor. The school is now known as the Dr. Pedro Albizu Campos High School and the Juan Antonio Corretjer Puerto Rican Cultural Center.
He died in San Juan, Puerto Rico on March 2, 2020.


Halliwells

Halliwells LLP was an English law firm practising from offices in Manchester, London, Liverpool and Sheffield, with 116 partners and around 850 employees. The LLP was established in 2004 to take over the practice of Halliwell Landau. Key individuals involved in its management were senior partner Alec Craig and managing partner (then executive chairman) Ian Austin, London office head Clive Garston, Liverpool office head and then managing partner Jonathan Brown, and Sheffield office head Suzanne Liversidge.
Insolvency.
On 20 July 2010, the High Court made an order putting Halliwells into administration. Dermot Power and Shay Bannon of BDO LLP were appointed administrators.  Halliwells' practice was sold as a pre-packaged insolvency to four other firms: Hill Dickinson, Barlow Lyde & Gilbert, Gateley, and Kennedys.
At the time, this was the largest English law firm to go into administration.
The administrators initially blamed market conditions and high rents for the firm's failure. An additional factor behind the firm's failure was a property transaction connected to Halliwells' decision to become an anchor tenant in the Spinningfields business development in Manchester. The firm received a reverse premium of £20 million from the landlord, which was shared between the firm's 32 equity partners, who each took between £250,000 and £1 million. This was kept secret from the junior partners. The administrators have sued the 32 recipients and have alleged that Halliwells’ equity partners altered the minutes of a meeting about the reverse premium before passing them on to the rest of the firm. There has been an attempt to resolve the dispute by mediation. Ian Austin and Suzanne Liversidge have each spoken publicly about Halliwells' failure and denied any personal responsibility.
In March 2012, 36 of the former junior partners who were not told about the reverse premium threatened to sue the 32 equity partners who took the £20 million.


Johanna Kirchner

Johanna "Hanna" Kirchner (née Johanna Stunz; 24 April 1889 – 9 June 1944) was a German opponent of the Nazi régime.
Johanna Stunz came from a social-democratic family from Frankfurt, Hesse-Nassau. Her grandfather was one of Frankfurt's first social-democratic aldermen. At 14, she joined the Socialist Worker Youth, and at 18 became a member of the Social Democratic Party of Germany ("Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands" – SPD). She worked avidly in the women's movement. In Frankfurt, she became friends with Eleonore Wolf, whose life was taking a similar path.
During the First World War, Kirchner, now a mother of two daughters, busied herself in communal welfare, dedicating herself to needy women's and children's welfare. After that, she worked in the Workers' Welfare organization ("Arbeiterwohlfahrt"; AWO), which she founded together with Marie Juchacz in 1919. Her special concern here was children who were underfed as a result of the war and the widespread inflation that struck Germany later. Many of these children suffered from damaged health and stunted growth. They had had their childhood taken away from them by events over which they had no control. Kirchner took many of these children to Switzerland for their health. During the "Ruhrkampf", a brief civil war in Germany in 1920, Kirchner helped evacuate thousands of children from the Ruhr district, sending them to stay with families in Hesse.
In 1933, Adolf Hitler came to power, and the dedicated anti-fascist had to go underground, as her help in freeing an anti-Nazi from the Gestapo became known, leading to the danger of her possible arrest. She fled, without her family, to Saarbrücken, which was then still under League of Nations administration. There she worked at kitchen jobs and as a waitress, also caring for German émigrés through, among other means, the Persecuted Anti-Fascists' Aid Committee ().
When the Second World War broke out in 1939, Kirchner fled to Forbach, Metz (both in Alsace-Lorraine, France), and then finally Paris. Even while abroad, she helped the resistance movement in Germany: she led the Saar Refugees' Committee ("Saarflüchtlingskommitee"), drew up plans and reports for the SPD's executive in exile, and produced and distributed illegal leaflets.
Even though Kirchner belonged to the SPD and Eleonore Wolf did illegal work for the Communist Party of Germany (KPD), they worked quite closely together in the Saar region as they organized the emigration of many officials of the workers' movement out of the Reich. (See: Red Help). From this they also published, under Wolfgang Abendroth's editorship "die Einheit der Arbeiterbewegung in der antifaschistischen Arbeit" ("The Unity of the Workers' Movement in Anti-Fascist Work").
In 1942, Kirchner was arrested by the Vichy Régime and handed over to the Gestapo. She was sentenced to ten years' hard labour ("Zuchthaus") for treason, the first year of which she spent in a prison in Cottbus, which she shared with several female members of the Red Orchestra resistance group, whose goal was to hasten the Nazi régime's collapse. These women's solidarity greatly helped Kirchner overcome the ordeal of being thrown in prison. However, Kirchner's case was brought back before the "Volksgerichtshof" in 1944. This time, Roland Freisler, the Chief Justice at the "Volksgerichtshof", sentenced her to death, and she was beheaded at Plötzensee Prison in Berlin. The judgment accused Kirchner of having "treasonably rooted herself in the evilest Marxist high-treason propaganda". It also accused her of "treasonably gathering cultural, economic, political, and military intelligence and communicating" the same.
"Keep Goethe's words in mind," wrote Kirchner in a letter to her children on the day of her death, "'Die and become'. Don't cry for me. I believe in a better future for you."
Legacy.
Since 1990, the city of Frankfurt am Main, Kirchner's birthplace, has yearly awarded the Johanna Kirchner Medal to those who fight against oppression, and stand up against terror, torture, and murder.


Georg Burchard Jersin

Georg Burchard Jersin (20 January 1767 – 5 October 1827) was a Norwegian Lutheran minister who served as a representative at the Norwegian Constitutional Assembly.
Georg Burchard Jersin was born at Leikanger in Sogn og Fjordane, Norway. He was the son of the parish priest. He attended Bergen Cathedral School in 1786. He was enrolled at the University of Copenhagen where he earned his cand. Theol. in 1793. He was assigned as an assistant parish priest at Voss in Hordaland from 1794. He replaced his father as parish priest in 1808.
He represented Søndre Bergenhus amt (now Hordaland) at the Norwegian Constituent Assembly at Eidsvoll in 1814. At the Assembly, Jersin voted with the independence party ("Selvstendighetspartiet").


Agreement on the status and functions of the International Commission on Missing Persons


Seven Member Rule

The Seven Member Rule (House) / Five Member Rule (Senate) in the United States Congress is an important but seldom used statute that allows members from the legislature's oversight committees to compel offices within the executive branch to release information. This is a "checks and balances" measure to allow effective oversight.
Passed in 1928, the law states that
It was used by Republicans in 1994 during the S&L crisis investigations, and by Democrats in 2001 investigating the 2000 US Census. In 2017 House Democrats sued, invoking the law, to compel the General Services Administration to release documents relating to the lease of the government-owned Old Post Office Pavilion to the Trump International Hotel — the source of much controversy.


Delisle v Canada (Deputy AG)

Delisle v Canada (Deputy AG), [1999] 2 SCR 989 is a Supreme Court of Canada decision on the freedom of association guarantee under section 2(d) of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms". The Court defined the freedom as only applying to individuals and not associations themselves. Accordingly, they found the exclusion of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) from the public services legislation did not violate section 2(d).
Gaétan Delisle was a member of the RCMP and president of an RCMP labour association. He brought a challenge to the federal "Public Service Staff Relations Act" (PSSRA) and part of the "Canada Labour Code" on the grounds it violated his right to association.
Bastarache J, writing for the majority, held that the PSSRA did not violate the "Charter" because it did not affect members of the RCMP from forming their own independent associations. He further ruled that, "The fundamental freedoms protected by s. 2 of the Charter do not impose a positive obligation of protection or inclusion on Parliament or the government, except perhaps in exceptional circumstances which are not at issue here."
Note that much of this case has been overruled by Health Services v BC (2007)


R v Feeney

R v Feeney, [1997] 2 S.C.R. 13 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the right, under section 8 of the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" against unreasonable search and seizure. The Court held that the police are not permitted to enter into someone's house without a search warrant.
Background.
On the morning of June 8, 1991, 85-year-old Frank Boyle was found dead in his Likely, British Columbia home from several severe blows to the head with a crowbar. At the scene, the police found a Sportsman brand cigarette, and later found Mr. Boyle's truck abandoned in a ditch. On a tip from local residents, the police located the driver of the truck, Michael Feeney, sleeping in a trailer behind the residence of a friend of his.
The police knocked on the trailer door, and shouted "police", but there was no reply. Guns drawn, the police entered. They found Feeney in bed and shook his leg to get his attention. The police asked him to get up and go outside where the light was better. Upon getting Mr. Feeney outside the police noticed his clothes were covered in blood. They read him his rights, he acknowledged he understood them, and they arrested him.
Upon questioning him, Mr. Feeney said that the blood was from getting hit by a baseball the day before. The police further noted the same brand of cigarettes in the Trailer as was found in Mr. Boyle's house. He was taken to an RCMP detachment, finger printed, made to use a breathalyzer, and for the first day or so was unsuccessful in contacting a lawyer. During this time he was questioned further, admitting he had hit and robbed Boyle. Once a search warrant was obtained, the police found Boyle's stolen property in the trailer. It was only after all of this that he finally met with a lawyer.
At trial in the Supreme Court of British Columbia he was convicted of second degree murder.
Reasons of the court.
The majority was written by Sopinka J, La Forest, Cory, Iacobucci and Major JJ concurring.
Section 8 of the "Charter".
Sopinka first considered the leading case of "R. v. Landry" [1986] on warrantless arrests in a dwelling, which held that a police officer could only arrest if there are "reasonable and probable grounds" to believe that the person is on the premises, the proper announcement is made before entering, and that the officer reasonably believes that the person has committed or will commit an indictable offence. "Reasonable and probable grounds" must be found on subjective and objective grounds ("R. v. Storrey" [1990]), however, Sopinka held that there were no such grounds in this situation. The officer had admitted that he didn't think he had proper ground to enter at the time. He then went one step further and held that "R. v. Landry" is bad law in post-Charter law and that any entry into dwellings must be done with a warrant.
http://csc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1986/1986scr1-145/1986scr1-145.pdf
Section 24(2) of the "Charter".
Exclusionary rules of evidence based on section 8 violations of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. A "voire dire" is held by the trial judge to review the evidence in question before it is presented to the court or jury. This helps to ensure that any evidence brought before the courts has been legally seized by the police and that it does not bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
Dissent.
Two dissents were written, one by L'Heureux-Dubé J., with Gonthier and McLachlin JJ concurring, and another by Lamer CJ.


Karnovs Lovssamling

Karnovs Lovssamling (Karnov's Law Collection, often referred as Karnov) is a compilation that contains all significant laws of Denmark. The laws are commented on with interpretations, rulings, administrative decisions and references to literature. In addition, the compilation is updated following legislative changes, so the work the current laws with changes in a single version.
History.
Karnovs Lovssamling was first produced in 1924, under the title "Hvermands Lovbog" ("Everybody's Laws"), by district court prosecutor Magnus Karnov (1882-1962), from Sønderborg. It contained the most common Danish laws, and the motive for the release was the Southern Jutland reunion with Denmark. While the country had been under German rule, German law had been applied, but after the reunification, Danish law was introduced gradually. The lack of a comprehensive law such as the German "Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch" inspired Karnov to create his own collection. Commentary was added later, and the concept was also expanded to Norway and Sweden.
Although the book edition in the characteristic pale yellow color with the inscription "KARNOV" on the back is the classic symbol of a lawyer, it is currently overtaken by the online edition, which is updated on a regular basis. The physical law collection is published today in a smaller edition and is a digest of 4-5 volumes. The law collection is published annually and updated ten times annually, with lesser books ("Karnov's Yellow Booklets"). , "Karnov" is published by Karnov Group (formerly Thomson Reuters Professional).
Construction.
The law collection is organized in 23 different subjects, such as state and administrative law, health laws or finance. Each topic is again divided into subtopics. In addition to the purely systematic structure, "Karnov" is also equipped with a number of registers or indexes, to enable relevant provisions to be found in several ways.
The online version has different search and storage options and integration with other electronic products from the same publishing house - especially the "Ugeskrift for Retsvæsen". There are also a number of additional modules for Karnov providing the ability to find the laws, histories and old legislative versions, announcements, circulars and guides.
The law has been commented using a very comprehensive notary. Each law begins with the law's history and relevant sources. Each provision of the law is provided with notes as needed. Some provisions are not commented at all, some have a single note and some provisions have note references for almost every word. The notes contain comments on the provision or the part of the provision to which it refers. The comments consist partly of actual interpretations or interpretations, partly by references to and summaries of judgments and other practices, and partly by references to other rules and in-depth literature. The notes are far more extensive than the statutes themselves.
Smaller special versions have also been made for special subjects, the largest special edition of which is "EU Karnov". In addition, there are also "Property Karnov", "Company Karnov" and "Health Karnov", where the relevant laws are selected and collected (with comments) in a single volume.
The academic content is handled by an editorial staff. , the editorial board was composed of Doctor of Jurisprudence Bo von Eyben of the University of Copenhagen, Dr. Jan Pedersen of Aarhus University, and Supreme Court Judge Thomas Rørdam. In addition, there is a broader editorial and a wide range of specialist specialists who write and edit the content in the comment section. Over time, some of the country's top lawyers have been in the main editorial staff.


Patrick Finglas

Patrick Finglas (died 1537) was a leading Irish judge and statesman of the sixteenth century, who was regarded (except perhaps in his last years)as a mainstay of the English Crown in Ireland. He was also the author of an influential "Breviat", or tract, called "Of the Getting of Ireland, and of the Decay of the same", concerning the decline of English power in Ireland.
Little is known of his parentage, but Francis Elrington Ball states that he came from a long established family who lived in and took their surname from Finglas, County Dublin. He later held estates at Piercetown, near Dunboyne, County Meath, and at Westphailstown in County Dublin. He was at Lincoln's Inn 1503-6 and became Serjeant in 1509. He was considered one of the ablest lawyers of his time, and also a gifted writer.
Career.
Finglas was appointed Chief Baron of the Irish Exchequer by Henry VIII in 1520, and afterwards, by patent dated at Westminster 8 May 1534 he was constituted Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench for Ireland in the place of Sir Bartholomew Dillon, recently deceased. He resigned the latter office in 1535, due apparently to suspicion about his loyalty during the rebellion of Silken Thomas, since he was evidently prepared to negotiate with the rebels. Despite his
doubtful loyalties, he later served a second brief term as Chief Baron until his death in 1537. He was a member of the Privy Council of Ireland.
The Breviat.
He wrote "A Breviat (summary) of the getting (conquest) of Ireland, and of the Decaie (decay) of the same." An original manuscript of this work is in the Public Records Office It is described in the calendar as "An Historical Dissertation on the Conquest of Ireland, the decay of that land, and measures proposed to remedy the grievances thereof arising from the oppressions of the Irish nobility".
The measures proposed included the settlement of the province of Leinster by "English lords and gentlemen", the securing of castles and other strongholds, and more controversially, the suppression of all monasteries, which Finglas regarded as potential centres of rebellion. He did not urge the expulsion of the native Irish people, arguing that they would be a useful element in society if properly governed. The "Breviat" probably built on an earlier treatise, "The Decay of Ireland" (1515), by Sir William Darcy, the long-serving Vice-Treasurer of Ireland.
Reputation.
Finglas was regarded for much of
his career by the English Crown as one of the principal supporters of English rule in Ireland; in 1520 the Lord Deputy of Ireland, the Earl of Surrey, praised him to Cardinal Wolsey as one of "the best willed and most diligent to do the King's Grace true and faithful service of all the learned men of this land." Only in his last years were doubts raised about his
loyalty to the Crown during the Silken Thomas rebellion.
Family.
He married Isabella (or Elizabeth) Golding, daughter of Robert Golding of Churchtown, Dublin. They had at least three children: Thomas, Patrick and Genet.
Thomas in 1532 was described as "capite" (tenant in chief) of Westphailstown, and was given permission to make a sub-lease of his lands to the Rector of Howth. He married Anne Cusack, daughter of John Cusack of Cussington, and sister of Sir Thomas Cusack, later Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and had issue. Like his father he was an energetic political reformer.
Genet married Sir Thomas Fitzwilliam and had four children, including Richard, the eldest son and heir. Their grandchildren included Thomas FitzWilliam, 1st Viscount FitzWilliam.
Later descendants included a second Genet Finglas (died 1627), who married firstly John Bathe, Attorney General for Ireland, secondly the distinguished soldier Sir William Warren, and thirdly Terence O'Dempsey, 1st Viscount Clanmalier. She was the daughter of Patrick Finglas of Westphailstown, who was probably the younger son of the judge.


Court of Common Pleas (Ireland)

The Court of Common Pleas was one of the principal courts of common law in Ireland. It was a mirror image of the equivalent court in England. Common Pleas was one of the four courts of justice which gave the Four Courts in Dublin, which is still in use as a courthouse, its name.
History.
According to Elrington Ball the Irish Court of Common Pleas, which was known in its early years as "the Common Bench" or simply "the Bench", was fully operational by 1276. It was headed by its Chief Justice (the Chief Justice of the Irish Common Pleas, as distinct from the Lord Chief Justice of Ireland, who was the head of the Irish Court of King's Bench). He had two (occasionally three) justices to assist him. Traditionally its workload was less heavy than that of the Court of King's Bench, and its judges had the reputation, which was probably unjustified, for being less learned than those of the other courts of common law, King's Bench and Exchequer. They were also more likely than their colleagues to be Irish-born, and to be fluent in Irish.
Along with the Irish Court of Exchequer, it moved for a time to Carlow in the fourteenth century, due to the disturbed political conditions in Dublin; but the judges, finding that Carlow was also suffering from political unrest, returned within a few years to Dublin.
Abolition.
Under the Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Ireland) 1877, the Court of Common Pleas was merged into the new High Court of Justice in Ireland as one of its constituent divisions; the Chief Justice of the Irish Common Pleas retained his old rank. After the first decade of its existence it was decided that the High Court could be made to work more efficiently by merging the Common Pleas and Queen's Bench Divisions, and the term "Common Pleas" fell into disuse.