To protect the health, safety, and welfare of all members of the Longwood community by taking all reasonable measures to assure that a drug-free workplace is maintained and that employees perform their duties unimpaired by the effects of drugs or alcohol. (In accordance with Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 and the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act of 1989).
Alcohol: Any product as defined in The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, Section 4.1-100 of the Code of Virginia, as amended.
Controlled Substance: drug or substance found in section 54.1-3401 and Schedules I through IV of Sections 54.1-3446 through 3456 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, and Section 202 of the Federal Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 81).
violations of the Federal or State criminal drug statutes, alcohol beverage control laws, or laws that govern driving while intoxicated.
Criminal Drug Statute: A criminal statute prohibiting the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, use, or possession of any controlled substance.
Drug: Any controlled substance or prescribed or non-prescribed medication, taken into the body, other than alcohol, which may impair one's mental faculties and/or physical performance.
Employee Assistance Program (EAP): A confidential assessment, referral, and short-term problem-solving service available to eligible employees and family members. Enrollment in the EAP is automatic as part of the health plan coverage.
Employee: Administrative faculty, professional faculty, teaching faculty, classified and non-classified, full-time and part-time, salaried, and hourly persons, and any and all other individuals, except independent contractors, employed by Longwood.
Workplace: Any site where official duties are being performed by employees.
An employee's failure to report to his or her supervisor the employee's conviction of any offense, as required in Employee Responsibilities.
Shall provide its employees a copy of this policy, including a description of the health risks associated with the illicit use of drugs or the abuse of alcohol, and a general description of criminal sanctions under Federal and State law, for the unlawful possession or distribution of illicit drugs and alcohol (required by the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act of 1989).
Inform its employees of the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace, and availability of drug and alcohol counseling, and rehabilitation and employee assistance programs.
Inform any contracting or granting agency within ten (10) days after receiving notice from an employee of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring at the workplace, when the subject employee is a sponsored program employee.
Within thirty (30) days of receiving notice of an employee's conviction for a criminal drug statute offense occurring in the workplace, take appropriate disciplinary action against such employee and/or require such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program, as required by the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988.
Employees experiencing a problem with drug or alcohol abuse or dependency are encouraged to seek counseling assistance. Supervisors are encouraged to assist employees seeking such assistance. Notwithstanding an employee's voluntary participation in a drug or alcohol rehabilitation program, the employee is expected to perform his/her duties according to developed job standards and expectations.
The State's Employee Assistance Program (EAP) is available to eligible state employees for counseling and referral for drug and alcohol related problems as well as other personal problems.
Supervisors should consult with EAP or other state operated substance abuse programs prior to referring a state employee to a drug or alcohol assistance or rehabilitation program (under current health care benefits, not all treatment programs are covered).
Management is encouraged to consult with EAP or other state operated substance abuse programs in determining whether a state employee referred to an assistance or rehabilitation program has satisfactorily participated in such program.
Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services and the Department of Health may be contacted to provide assistance and referral information.
Employees may be granted leaves of absence (leave without pay if no leave balances are available) to participate in rehabilitation programs for treatment of drug or alcohol abuse at discretion of management.


Watch Hong Kong from the perspective that you might not seen before in 4K resolution.
Watch Hong Kong from the perspective that you might not seen before in 4K resolution. Barry Leung the talent video director from Hong Kong will take you to the unbelievable stunning landscape of Hong Kong island. He will take you over the famous Victoria Harbour area during the sunset.
You can watch more of his drone video at his channel or visit AdAsia Holdings for more detail.


text:
You are here » Home » 2019-06-16 » All about Networking Websites this week of June 16th, 2019
All about Networking Websites this week of June 16th, 2019
Networking Websites is an important subject that interests many people. If you want to know more about Networking Websites. For the week of June 16th, you are in the right place. Get all that is good to know about Social Media, specifically Networking Websites
Mostly, we surf the Internet to learn more about Networking Websites. This can be a breeze for someone who knows how to do, but to make things easier we will compile all on one place, here.
View the best websites that will give you the information needed about Networking Websites from search engines and social medias. News are also available below for you to be aware of everything that is happening in the world about Networking Websites. Finally, view the most popular or recently published videos, photos, images and illustrations related to Social Media and "Networking Websites".
Post Your Articles Instantly In Our Large Growing Network Of High Quality Announcement Blogs To Get More Targeted Traffic To Your Websites. Our Blog Post Utilty Makes It Simple And Easy To Get Instant Permanent Backlinks In Our Seasoned And Aged Blogs. [Read...]
This In-depth 60 Module Mlm Lead Generation Coaching Program Is A Game Changer, Using The Power Of The Internet To Help People Build Their Teams Online. This Is A 1st In Mlm, An Industry Of 83 Million People, Unlimited Market. 75% Front End 50% Recurring. [Read...]
2.70+ Per Hop = Insane Conversions! Earn Loots Of Cash Through Cpa Networks. Make $150+ Per Sale! Lots Of Free Stuff For Affiliates! The Best Cpa Product On The Market... Period... Sign Up & See The Real Proof: Http://loot4leads.com/vip_invite.html [Read...]
Pack Editable Psd Templates For Social Networks. Are More Than 50gb Of Files. - 600 Psd Templates Price / Info - 27,000 Fonts - Bonus [Read...]
Blogging Guru Is A Brand New Internet Marketing Course To Teach How To Start Making Money Online Through Blogging And Also Affiliate Marketing! With 10 Hours Of Step-by-step Training, This Will Be The #1 Blogging Course! Blogging.guru/affiliateprogram [Read...]
If I Could Show You How To Get Multiple Streams Of Traffic To Your Websites, Blogs And Sales Pages By Using Simple Cheap And Easy To Do Methods, Would You Be Interested? Im Not A Traffic Guru! They Wouldnt Show You Their Secrets Anyway! [Read...]
Rightwriter Grammar Analysis Software Speed Reader-x Speed Reading Software Other Products Available For Promotion. [Read...]
Keyword Research Tool Researches Entire Niches In Seconds. Find Lsi Keywords, Long Tail Keywords, Niche Influencers And Much Much More. [Read...]
That's all we have for now, come back here next Sunday for new resources on Networking Websites.
Social Marketing Agency […]Social Advertising […]Make A Free Social Network […]Social Media Campaign […]Examples Of Social Media […]Social Media […]Social Media And Business Marketing […]Marketing Through Social Media […]How To Use Social Media […]Social Media Marketing Services […]Social Media Engagement […]Social Networking […]Social Media Marketing Expert […]Social Media Video […]Socail Media Marketing […]Social Media Companies […]On Social Media […]Social Media Expert […]Build Social Networking Site […]Social Media Marketing For Business […]Social Media For A Business […]Good Social Networking Sites […]What Is Social Media Websites […]Online Social Networks […]All Social Networking Sites […]Social Media How To […]Social Media Bar […]Social Network For Companies […]Benefits Of Social Media […]A Social Network […]About Social Media […]Online Social Media Marketing […]Social Media Marketing Articles […]What Is The New Social Media […]Social Media 101 […]Social Media For Business […]Latest Social Media […]Seminar Social Media […]Social Community Sites […]Social Media Pr […]Seo Social Media […]Social Network Marketing […]All The Social Networks […]Help With Social Media Marketing […]New Social Media Tools […]Social Network Application […]Social Media Seo […]Social Media School […]Social Media Marketing Strategy […]Build Social Network […]Social Media Integration […]Social Network […]Social Media Services […]Advertising In Social Media […]Best Social Media Site […]Social Networking For Business […]For Social Media […]Monitoring Social Media […]Social Media And Networking […]Marketing On Social Media […]Top Social Media […]Social Media Solutions […]Social Media Policy […]Social Media Case Studies […]Network Website […]Social Media Marketing Trends […]New Social Media Sites […]Marketing For Social Media […]Social Media Games […]Social Media Tracking […]Social Media Business Plan […]Social Media Marketing Management […]Social Marketing Sites […]Social Media Outlets […]Social Media Marketing Courses […]Social Media Monitoring […]Online Social Sites […]Social Networking Websites […]Social Media Management Tools […]Social Sites […]Socia Media […]Social Media Analytics […]Social Media Statistics […]Social Network Sites […]Web Social Media […]Why Social Media Marketing […]Social Media Optimization Services […]Social Networking Sites For Adults […]Social Media Blog […]Social Media Business […]Make A Social Network […]New Social Networking Sites […]Social Media Sites […]Social Media Site For Business […]Best Social Media […]Social Media Software […]Blogs On Social Media […]What Is A Social Media […]Small Business Social Media Marketing […]Social Media Monitoring Software […]Top Social Media Marketing Sites […]Social Media Sales […]Social Media Conference […]Business Social Network […]Social Media Marketing Firm […]Why Social Media […]Social Network Creator […]Technology And Social Media […]Social Networking Tools […]Social Media Studies […]Social Media Marketing Companies […]Building A Social Network Site […]Social Media Specialist […]World Social Networking Sites […]Social Media Apps […]Marketing Social Media […]Free Social Network Sites […]Advertising Through Social Media […]Social Media Firm […]Cyber Network […]Business Social Media Sites […]Social Networking Companies […]Social Media Marketing Solutions […]Social Media Pages […]Social Medi […]Social Media Listening […]How To Social Media Marketing […]Best Social Networks […]Social Networking Application […]Social Media Advertising Sites […]Social Media Blogging Sites […]Social Media Dashboard […]Social Media Plan […]Top Social Network […]Social Media Website […]Social Network Online […]Tools Of Social Media Marketing […]Business Social Media […]Social Media Tips […]Top 5 Social Networking Sites […]Social Media Channels […]Latest Social Sites […]Social Media Outsourcing […]Social Media Marketing Websites […]Social Media Marketing Help […]Social Media Agency […]Social Media Platforms […]Social Media Manager Software […]Other Social Networking Sites […]Social Media Monitoring Companies […]New Social Media […]Social Media Marketing Sites […]Socil Media […]What Is A Social Media Website […]Social Media Widget […]Information About Social Media […]Social Media Marketing Plan Template […]Social Networking Website […]Social Platform […]Other Social Media […]Pr Social Media […]Social Media Report […]Social Media Websites […]Social Community […]Free Social Network […]Social Media Design […]New Social Network Sites […]Social Media Market […]New Social Network […]Social Internet Sites […]Social Media Marketing Business […]Social Media Education […]Marketing Using Social Media […]Social Media Marketing Packages […]The Best Social Media Sites […]Social Media Marketing Seminar […]Social Media Consultant […]Marketing And Social Media […]Social Media Recruiting […]Smo Company […]Online Media Websites […]Social Media Training […]Social Networking Blogs […]Social Media Workshop […]Free Social Networking Websites […]Company Social Network […]Social Media Marketing Pdf […]What Is Social Media Marketing […]Online Social Media […]Socail Media […]Social Media Development […]Social Media Courses […]Best Social Networking Sites […]Social Media Internet Marketing […]Social Media Communication […]Internet Social Media […]Benefits Of Social Media Marketing […]Latest Social Media Platforms […]Internet Social Networks […]Social Media Content […]Measuring Social Media […]Social Media Metrics […]What Is Social Media […]Social Networking Apps […]Social Media Marketing Specialist […]Open Social Network […]List Of Social Networking Sites […]Social Media Marketing Agency […]Social Media Marketing 101 […]Social Media Script […]Social Media Research […]Social Media For Marketing […]Social Network Design […]Social Media Template […]Best Social Media Campaigns […]Network Social […]Social Media Strategist […]Social Media Today […]Social Media Certification […]All Social Media Sites […]Social Media Marketing Jobs […]Social Media Marketing Plan […]Business Social Networking Sites […]Social Network For Business […]Social Media Management Company […]Family Social Network […]Media Social […]Latest In Social Media […]Social Media Measurement Tools […]Business On Social Media […]Social Media Information […]Marketing By Social Media […]Latest News In Social Media […]Social Media App […]Social Media And Business […]Social Marketing Campaigns […]New In Social Media […]Social Media Classes […]Using Social Media […]Social Media Sites For Business Marketing […]Social Media Marketing Conference […]Social Media Guru […]Top Ten Social Networking Sites […]Social Network Platform […]Social Media Events […]Successful Social Media Campaigns […]Newest Social Media Sites […]Social Marketing Services […]Social Media Checker […]Social Media Proposal […]Create Free Social Network […]Social Media Promotion […]Top Social Media Agencies […]Social Network Analysis […]Social Media Management Software […]Corporate Social Network […]Social Networks List […]Social Media For Small Business […]Social Media Marketing Statistics […]B2b Social Media […]New Media Marketing […]Social Media Marketing Tips […]Using Social Media For Marketing […]Social Media Com […]Free Social Media Sites […]List Of Social Networking Websites […]New On Social Media […]Social Media Marketing Ideas […]Social Media Marketing […]Social Media Roi […]Social Media Networks […]Social Media Marketing Books […]Use Of Social Media […]Social Media Marketing Training […]Social Media Guidelines […]Social Network Sites List […]About Social Media Marketing […]Social Media And Marketing […]Own Social Network […]Top Social Networking Sites […]Corporate Social Media […]Social Media Small Business […]Social Media Tracking Tools […]Social Media Marketing Campaign […]Social Network Aggregator […]Social Media News Today […]Social Media Agency London […]Top Social Media Marketers […]Social Media Marketing Tools […]Social Networking Platforms […]Make Social Network […]Marketing With Social Media […]Social Media Hub […]Build Your Own Social Network […]Social Media Coach […]Social Media Programs […]Create A Social Network […]Social Media Logos […]Social Marketing Plan […]Social Media Marketing Definition […]Social Media Crm […]Social Media News […]Social Media Sites For Business […]Marketing On Social Networks […]Social Media Marketing Service […]Best Social Network Sites […]Social Network Advertising […]Latest On Social Media […]Top Social Media Sites […]Best Social Media For Marketing […]Social Networking Pages […]Social Marketing Strategy […]Social Media Marketing System […]Social Media Advertising […]Social Media All […]Business And Social Media […]Social Media Strategy Template […]Top Social Network Sites […]Social Media Consultancy […]Social Media Webinars […]Social Media For New Business […]Make A Social Networking Site […]What Is The Social Media […]Social Media Assistant […]Best Social Media Marketing […]Social Media Trends […]Social Media Marketing Blog […]Social Media Marketing Tactics […]Social Media Magazine […]Social Media Press Release […]Social Media Training Courses […]Social Media Seminar […]Social Medial […]Social Media Seminars […]Manage Social Media […]Social Networking Sites […]Social Networking What Is It […]Social Networking Facts […]In Social Media […]Social Media In Marketing […]Social Media Marketing Tool […]Social Media Marketing How To […]Online Social Websites […]Social Media Monitoring Tools […]Social Media Manager […]Social Media Marketing Software […]Social Media Books […]All The Social Media […]Social Media For Companies […]Social Media Academy […]Social Media Rss Feeds […]Networking Sites […]Social Media Social Media […]Social Media Analysis […]Website Social Media […]Social Networking Sites For Business […]Social Media Marketing Manager […]Social Media Service […]Social Media Marketing News […]Other Social Media Sites […]Best New Social Media […]Social Media Buttons […]Social Network Search […]Social Media Marketing Proposal […]Social Media Management Services […]Create A Social Networking Site […]Social Marketing Companies […]Social Media Tools […]Social Media Packages […]How Social Media […]Social Network Groups […]Social Media For Business Marketing […]Social Media News Release […]Social Media Ideas […]Best Social Media Marketing Companies […]Newest Social Media […]Social Media Marketing Consultant […]What Is Social Networking […]Social Media Definition […]Best Social Media For Business Marketing […]Using Social Media For Business […]What Is A Social Network […]Outsource Social Media Marketing […]Social Media Tools For Business […]B2b Social Media Marketing […]Social Media Technology […]Learn Social Media Marketing […]Social Media Marketing Online […]Social Media Online […]

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


I realized that I had a ton of coins on MyNintendo Rewards and they were all about to go to waste so it was time to make a move. I don't buy digital games all that often, but when I do you can bet that they will be quality titles. Well, City Connection isn't all that good to be honest and it's not very well known for a good reason, but the actual gameplay is fairly unique. With modern tech it probably could have even been very good. As it stands, the game is very forgettable and won't be remembered as well as something like Mario or Legend of Zelda.
The game starts you off right away as you drive through town. The levels are all on what is essentially 3 screens worth of ground to cover. You have to drive on everything to make the stage all white which clears the level. The stages typically have 3-4 levels of height to go through and you will have to dodge the cops and an evil cat as you do this. All you can do is drive back and forth as well as jumping. Once you master the controls you will also find that jumping and then changing directions is incredibly handy. The game is rather fast so it is very difficult not to bump into anything. One bump costs a life though so be careful as 3 bumps means that you are out.
The game has roughly 5 levels before it starts looping back to the beginning forever and ever. There is no story or ending to be found so watch out or you'll be playing old levels. I was nearly done with beating the game a second time before I realized this. It's rather disheartening since it means that the game was really slapped together without a care in the world. I only made it through the game because of the save points that you can exploit with the Wii U. Prepare to save it every other second here as cars will teleport out of nowhere and the cat likes to move around as well. The cat is invincible so just don't mess with him. He will chase you if you stay on any layer of the stage too long so do a lot of jumping. Of course, when you jump you are vulnerable as a car can easily jump out of nowhere to intercept you so watch out for that.
You only counter to the cars is that you can fire back with some oil bullets. This won't work on cars that teleport though so watch out for that as they aren't fully materialized into this plane of existence. Again, I like the concept of having to paint a whole town. It's sort of like De Blob, the execution just wasn't on point. The Police Cars just seem unfair with how they teleport around and there is almost no way you can win without the extra save points. There isn't any incentive to win either since the game has absolutely no replay value or even a real ending to congratulate you on a job well done.
There isn't much to say about the graphics either. They are just really old and I suppose you can't fault the game for that. It's all right I guess, but probably one of the worst animated games that I have seen in a while. The little screencaps after each level are okay if not for the fact that they reuse them very quickly. Those couldn't have been very expensive so I think the game could have added many more of them. There is really only one theme in the game so you better enjoy it or that will hurt the game as well. It's not bad, but there isn't any real personality to the theme either so it's just there. It's kind of like elevator music in that respect. This game needs a modern reboot to help restart the franchise.
Overall, I can't say that the game is very fun. It's unique and is good to play for a few minutes, but it's not a game that I would recommend spending money on. It just isn't worth that kind of attention and I've seen free games that had a lot more heart and depth to them. If you really want a good challenge then I guess this could be the ticket for you, but there are better options out there like Ninja Gaiden. I'd never heard of this game before I bought it and I can now see why.
This entry was posted in 5 Star Games, Game Reviews, Games, Reviews and tagged Car, City Connection, Game Review, NES, Racing, Retro, Retro Review, Review, Video Game, Video Game Review by dreager1. Bookmark the permalink.


text:
523 F. 2d 140 - Government of Virgin Islands v. Gereau 74-2019 74-2020 74-2021 74-202274-2023
523 F2d 140 Government of Virgin Islands v. Gereau 74-2019 74-2020 74-2021 74-202274-2023
1 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1
GOVERNMENT OF the VIRGIN ISLANDS
Beaumont GEREAU et al., Appellants in Nos. 74-2019, 74-2020,
74-2021, 74-2022,74-2023.
Nos. 74-2019 to 74-2023.
Argued June 23, 1975.
Decided Sept. 3, 1975.
William M. Kunstler, Center for Constitutional Rights, New York City, Mario N. DeChabert, Christiansted, St. Croix, V. I., for Gereau.
Chauncey Eskridge, Chicago, Ill., for La Beet.
Margaret L. Ratner, and Michael D. Ratner, New York City, for Ballentine.
Leroy A. Mercer, Christiansted, St. Croix, V. I., for Smith.
Ronald T. Mitchell, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, V. I., for Joseph.
Julio A. Brady, U. S. Atty., Christiansted, St. Croix, V. I., John J. Barry, Sp. Asst. U. S. Atty., District of the Virgin Islands, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, V. I., for appellee.
Before VAN DUSEN, ROSENN and WEIS, Circuit Judges.
VAN DUSEN, Circuit Judge.
Defendants-appellants contend that the District Court of the Virgin Islands, Division of St. Croix, erred in denying their motion for a new trial.1 Rejecting this contention, we affirm the district court.
On August 13, 1973, defendants were found guilty of first degree murder, first degree assault, and robbery.2 The jury which returned the guilty verdicts had deliberated for nine days.3 The jurors were polled individually and each acknowledged the verdict as his own. Two days later, defendants filed a motion requesting a new trial on the ground that the verdict had not been freely assented to by all the jurors. The motion was supported by the affidavits of two jurors, Rodgers and Allick, who represented that their verdict was the result of certain "pressures,"4 but the trial judge found that these affidavits were "involuntarily made out of fear" engendered by the President of the Virgin Islands Senate (formerly related by marriage to Allick and "friendly with all of the defendants, save Raphael Joseph" p. 24 of opinion cited at note 1), Mario Moorhead and John Ross, who were "sympathizers of the defendants." See I-B at page 146 below, and page 26 of Memorandum Opinion cited at note 1 above. These same two affidavits were presented to Chief District Judge Almeric Christian, who ordered a post-trial hearing to inquire into the allegations that the verdict was influenced by "unauthorized communications with the jury during its sequestration and deliberation." Report of the Special Master, Crim. No. 97/1972 at 1. Since neither the trial judge nor Chief Judge Christian was available to conduct the hearing,5 the parties consented to the appointment of a special master.6 Upon conclusion of the hearing,7 the master submitted to the trial judge a report containing both findings of fact and conclusions of law. On September 24, 1973, the trial judge, determining that the special master's findings were not clearly erroneous, entered an order denying the motion for a new trial. The September 24, 1973, order was appealed, along with the judgments of conviction. Government of the Virgin Islands v. Gereau et al., 502 F.2d 914 (3d Cir. 1974). This court then vacated the order denying a new trial and remanded so that the trial judge could review the record of the hearing De novo "and enter findings without reliance on those made by" the special master. Id. at 937. Pursuant to the mandate of this court, the trial judge proceeded to make his own findings from the record compiled at the hearing before the special master. No additional hearing was had.8 On the basis of his De novo review, the trial judge entered an opinion and order which set forth his factual findings and again denied defendants' motion for a new trial. This appeal followed.
Defendants press two arguments in seeking to persuade us that the trial court's refusal to grant a new trial was an abuse of "its sound discretion."9 First they attack certain of the trial judge's fact findings as unsupported by the evidence adduced before the special master.10 Second they contend that the Government had the burden of proving that none of the incidents which formed the basis of the new trial motion was prejudicial to the defendants. This burden, they claim, was not sustained.
I. FINDINGS OF THE TRIAL JUDGE
A. Standard of Review
Where, as here, the findings of the trial court are based on non-demeanor evidence, there is a diversity of views as to the proper scope of appellate review. Some adopt the position that the "clearly erroneous" standard of F.R.Civ.P. 52(a) should apply to all findings of fact; others espouse the practice of De novo review on the theory that the trial court has no advantage over the appeals court in assessing inanimate evidence. Compare 9 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, §§ 2585-2587 (1971), with 5A J. Moore, Federal Practice, P 52.04 (2d ed. 1974). Our circuit has not, however, taken either of these approaches.
Some of the past decisions of this court have reviewed cases tried solely on papers, without oral testimony, differently, depending on whether the facts set forth in the papers are stipulated or disputed. In the former circumstance, it was recognized that "the Court of Appeals may, within certain limits, substitute its factual conclusions and inferences for those of the" trial court. Demirjian v. C. I. R., 457 F.2d 1, 4 (3d Cir. 1972). See also Consolidated Sun Ray, Inc. v. Lea, 401 F.2d 650, 659 n. 34 (3d Cir. 1968), Cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1050, 89 S.Ct. 688, 21 L.Ed.2d 692 (1969). In the latter situation, the court has scrutinized facts not dependent on demeanor evidence according to the clearly erroneous standard. United States v. United Steelworkers of America, 271 F.2d 676, 685 & 688 (3d Cir.), Aff'd, 361 U.S. 39, 80 S.Ct. 1, 4 L.Ed.2d 12 (1959).11
The present case is sufficiently distinct from both Demirjian and United Steelworkers that neither case is necessarily controlling.12 Cf. Orient Mid-East Lines, Inc. v. A Shipment of Rice, 496 F.2d 1032, 1037-38 and n. 8 (5th Cir. 1974); Gulf Shores Leasing Corp. v. Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., 441 F.2d 1385, 1388 n. 1 (5th Cir. 1971). On the basis of Universal Athletic Sales Co. v. Salkeld, 511 F.2d 904, 907 (3d Cir. 1975), and Congoleum Industries, Inc. v. Armstrong Cork Co., 510 F.2d 334, 336 at n. 3 (3d Cir. 1975), which are our two most recent decisions on this issue, we affirm all the challenged findings of the trial judge except two13 on the ground that we are "in as good a position to determine the question as is the district court."14
B. Affidavits of Allick and Rodgers
After careful review of the record, we have concluded that these findings of the trial judge are fully supported by the evidence:
"It is my findings that jurors Allick and Rodgers were coerced by Messrs. Ross and Moorhead into making the affidavits, that the affidavits were involuntarily made out of fear by which both Allick and Rodgers were possessed."
See trial judge at 26 and notes 4 and 13 above.
In evaluating the testimony of Allick, the trial judge made these comments, Inter alia, concerning pressures on Allick to change his verdict and his fears about returning to the community at the end of the trial:
(1) ". . . I give considerable importance to Allick's post-verdict contacts with friends of the defendants. I find, as will be more fully discussed below, that Allick was subjected to pressures to change his verdict. His testimony must therefore be scrutinized, and I give considerable weight to his recently acquired interest to have the verdict changed."
(trial judge at 17)
(2) ". . . I find that Allick also had fears about returning to the community and particularly to his friends in Frederiksted."15(trial judge at 20)
With reference to Rodgers' credibility, the trial judge stated:
(1) "Throughout the hearing for a new trial, juror Rodgers displayed a poor power of recollection, and much of his testimony was either vague, incomprehensible, or inconsistent. For that reason plus the suspicious circumstances surrounding the taking of his affidavit (to be discussed later) I find him less than credible."
(2) "It is my finding that juror Rodgers did not understand what the affidavit was all about at the time he signed it and that he did not understand it at the time of the hearing."
(trial judge at 25) (footnote omitted)
C. Findings Without Adequate Support in the Record
Juror Agneta Cappin16 testified that one of the jury attendants, Matron Foye, spoke to her about the case.
"She just asked me how everything is going and I tell her not so good. And I say two of them that don't understand, they don't come in yet. And she say to me she want them to hurry up so she can get to go home, that is all."
H.T. 152.
Matron Foye denied the conversation. H.T. 299. The trial judge, finding both women to be credible witnesses, chose to believe Foye rather than Cappin because he knew that Foye "was grateful for the opportunity to earn extra income as a jury matron." Trial judge at 19. We do not consider these credibility findings to lack adequate support in the record. However, we do hold that the trial judge's reliance on his personal, subjective belief about the needs and motives of Matron Foye was an improper ground for rejecting Cappin's concededly credible testimony.
In basing his fact-finding on personal knowledge, the trial judge was, in effect, taking judicial notice of extra-record, adjudicative facts. See generally K. Davis, An Approach to Problems of Evidence in the Administrative Process, 55 Harv.L.Rev. 364, 406-07 (1942). "With respect to judicial notice of adjudicative facts, the tradition has been one of caution in requiring that the matter be beyond reasonable controversy." Advisory Committee's Notes to F.R.E. (Federal Rules of Evidence) Rule 201(b); Cf. F.R.E. Rule 201(a) and (b). A second hallmark of facts properly the subject of judicial notice is that they be either matters of common knowledge or "capable of immediate and accurate determination by resort to easily accessible sources of indisputable accuracy . . . ." Weaver v. United States, 298 F.2d 496, 498 (5th Cir. 1962); 9 Wright & Miller, Supra, § 2410 at 339. Facts possessing these characteristics are entitled to be considered by a judge without first being proved through the routine processes of introducing evidence.17 The necessary cachet is not, however, bestowed merely by a judge's knowledge of a particular fact.
"There is a real but elusive line between the judge's Personal knowledge as a private man and these matters of which he takes judicial notice as a judge. The latter does not necessarily include the former; as a judge, indeed, he may have to ignore what he knows as a man, and contrariwise.
"It is therefore plainly accepted that the judge is not to use from the bench, under the guise of judicial knowledge, that which he knows Only as an individual observer outside of court. The former is in truth 'known' to him merely in the fictional sense that it is known and notorious to all men, and the dilemma is only the result of using the term 'knowledge' in two senses. Where to draw the line between knowledge by notoriety and knowledge by personal observation may sometimes be difficult, but the principle is plain."
(Footnotes omitted.)
J. Wigmore, Evidence, § 2569 at 539-40 (3d ed. 1940). It is apparent that the trial judge's knowledge about Matron Foye falls into this latter category of personal knowledge and, therefore, does not qualify for judicial notice. It follows that the trial judge erred in rejecting Cappin's testimony on the ground stated.
Similarly untenable is the trial judge's finding that juror Torres could not have heard any rumors while she was resting in the judge's chambers, since that finding was based solely on the judge's personal knowledge of the soundproofing in his chambers. Trial judge at 10.
As an antidote to these errors in the fact-finding process, our inquiry into the validity of the verdict will assume both that Cappin's testimony was accurate, see United States v. Brumbaugh, 471 F.2d 1128, 1130 (6th Cir.), Cert. denied, 412 U.S. 918, 93 S.Ct. 2732, 37 L.Ed.2d 144 (1973), and that Torres could hear discussions outside the judge's chambers.18
II. IMPEACHMENT OF THE VERDICT
Any attempt to impeach a jury verdict initially encounters two evidentiary obstacles: (1) producing evidence competent to attack the verdict, and (2) establishing the existence of grounds recognized as adequate to overturn the verdict. And even where both obstacles are cleared, there must be a finding that the party seeking to impeach the verdict has suffered prejudice from the misconduct of the jury.
A. The Evidentiary Obstacles: Competency and Sufficiency
1. Competent Testimony.
It is frequently said to be the rule that a juror may not impeach his own verdict once the jury has been discharged.19 McDonald v. Pless,238 U.S. 264, 267, 35 S.Ct. 783, 59 L.Ed. 1300 (1915). The rule was formulated to foster several public policies: (1) discouraging harassment of jurors by losing parties eager to have the verdict set aside; (2) encouraging free and open discussion among jurors; (3) reducing incentives for jury tampering; (4) promoting verdict finality; (5) maintaining the viability of the jury as a judicial decision-making body. McDonald, supra ; United States v. Dioguardi, 492 F.2d 70 (2d Cir.), Cert. denied, 419 U.S. 829 (1974); Miller v. United States, 403 F.2d 77 (2d Cir. 1968). Courts applying the rule were, however, early aware that any flat prohibition against receiving such testimony contravened another public policy: that of "redressing the injury of the private litigant" where a verdict was reached by a jury not impartial. McDonald, supra, 238 U.S. at 267, 35 S.Ct. at 784. In order to accommodate these conflicting policies, Miller, supra, at 82, the courts, often continuing to recite the canon of "no impeachment," evolved a more flexible rubric. This latter rule interdicted reception of a juror's evidence only where it was offered "to show matters which essentially inhere in the verdict itself."20 Hyde v. United States, 225 U.S. 347, 384, 32 S.Ct. 793, 808, 56 L.Ed. 1114 (1912); Domeracki v. Humble Oil & Refining Co., 443 F.2d 1245 (3d Cir.), Cert. denied, 404 U.S. 883, 92 S.Ct. 212, 30 L.Ed.2d 165 (1971). Such matters include both "the mental process of any juror or of the jury in arriving at a verdict," Capella v. Baumgartner, 59 F.R.D. 312, 315 (S.D.Fla.1973), and the method by which the verdict is reached.21 McDonald, supra ; Hyde, supra ; Domeracki, supra. See also Note: Impeachment of Jury Verdicts, 53 Marquette L.Rev. 258, 269 (1970). The same accommodation of policies produced the general rule's major exception, which provides that " '(a) juryman may testify to any facts bearing upon the question of the existence of any extraneous influence, although not as to how far that influence operated upon his mind.' "22 Mattox v. United States, 146 U.S. 140, 149, 13 S.Ct. 50, 53, 36 L.Ed. 917 (1892), quoting Woodward v. Leavitt, 107 Mass. 453. "Extraneous influence" has been construed to cover publicity received and discussed in the jury room,23 consideration by the jury of evidence not admitted in court,24 and communications or other contact between jurors and third persons, including contacts with the trial judge outside the presence of the defendant and his counsel.25 By contrast, evidence of discussions among jurors, intimidation or harassment of one juror by another,26 and other intra-jury influences on the verdict27 is within the rule, rather than the exception, and is not competent to impeach a verdict.
2. Grounds sufficient to overturn a verdict
Those incidents of jury misconduct which may be attested by the jurors and those which furnish a basis for setting aside a verdict overlap extensively. Indeed, courts often seem to treat the two concepts interchangeably in deciding whether a verdict may be successfully impeached. See Jorgensen v. York Ice Machinery Corp., 160 F.2d 432 (2d Cir. 1947); Comment, Impeachment of Jury Verdicts, 25 U.Chi.L.Rev. 360, 363Ff. (1958) (hereinafter Comment ). For this reason, it is not possible to abstract from the cases any neat and comprehensive list of grounds upon which a verdict may be overborne. It is possible, however, to categorize roughly common fact patterns which have been held to call a verdict into question. Other than incompetency of a juror during jury service, see United States v. Dioguardi, supra at 79, and Jorgensen v. York Ice Machinery Corp., 160 F.2d 432, 435 (2d Cir. 1947), these are all incidents of "extraneous influence:"28 (1) exposure of jury to news items "about the matter pending before the jury," Remmer v. United States, 347 U.S. 227, 229, 74 S.Ct. 450, 451, 98 L.Ed. 654 (1954);29 (2) consideration by the jury of extra-record facts about the case;30 (3) communications between third parties and jurors where relevant to the case to be decided;31 (4) pressures or partiality on the part of the court.32 The first three types of jury conduct render a criminal verdict vulnerable because they are Prima facie incompatible with the Sixth Amendment. See United States v. Thomas, 463 F.2d 1061 (7th Cir. 1972); United States v. McKinney, 429 F.2d 1019 (5th Cir. 1970), Cert. denied,401 U.S. 922, 91 S.Ct. 910, 27 L.Ed.2d 825 (1971). That Amendment guarantees, Inter alia, "an impartial jury," the right to confront witnesses, and the assistance of counsel at every critical stage of the trial. Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1, 90 S.Ct. 1999, 26 L.Ed.2d 387 (1970). Where jurors communicate with outsiders about the merits of the case they are deciding, their impartiality may be compromised unless the communication is tempered by "known rules of the court and the instructions and directions of the court made during the trial . . . ." Remmer, supra, 347 U.S. at 229, 74 S.Ct. at 451. And where jurors consider evidence, in the form of either fact or opinion, which has not been introduced in court, the confrontation and counsel rights of an accused are obviated as regards the particular evidence received. Parker v. Gladden, 385 U.S. 363, 364, 87 S.Ct. 468, 17 L.Ed.2d 420 (1966); Comment, Impeachment on Jury Verdicts by Jurors: A Proposal, 1969 Ill.L.F. 388.
The fourth category of cases those in which an incident impugns the disinterestedness of the court can also be viewed as turning on Sixth Amendment values. Thus, in Turner v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 466, 85 S.Ct. 546, 13 L.Ed.2d 424 (1965), the Court held that a new trial was required because the two principal prosecution witnesses were deputies who also had charge of the sequestered jury. The Court found that in a trial where credibility was a crucial issue, the status of the two witnesses lent a credibility to their testimony which was not developed by evidence at the trial. "In the constitutional sense, trial by jury in a criminal case necessarily implies at the very least that the 'evidence developed' against a defendant shall come from the witness stand in a public courtroom where there is full judicial protection of the defendant's right of confrontation, of cross-examination, and of counsel." Id. at 472-73, 85 S.Ct. at 550.
In addition to the Sixth Amendment, however, the duty of the court " to protect the integrity of its own processes," McKinney, supra, Godbold, J., dissenting at 1032-33, requires that no verdict be the product of partiality, or its semblance, on the part of the court. This duty is the more binding because of the weight jurors are likely to accord information emanating from court personnel. See Quercia v. United States, 289 U.S. 466, 53 S.Ct. 698, 77 L.Ed. 1321 (1933); United States v. Pittman, 449 F.2d 1284 (9th Cir. 1971); Truscott v. Chaplin, 403 F.2d 644 (3d Cir. 1968).
As normal jury pressures and intra-jury influences may not be impeached by juror evidence, so also they constitute no grounds for overturning a verdict. See cases cited at notes 26 and 27, Supra ; United States v. Grieco, 261 F.2d 414 (2d Cir. 1958), Cert. denied, 359 U.S. 907, 79 S.Ct. 582, 3 L.Ed.2d 572 (1959). Nor, indeed, is a verdict invalid merely because the jurors' generalized knowledge about the parties, or some other aspect of the case, is an ingredient of the decision. Though "the specific guarantees of an impartial jury and of confrontation," as well as "the more general one of due process," proscribes consideration of specific extra-record facts about the case on trial, it is not necessary that the jurors be "totally ignorant about a" case. United States ex rel. Owen v. McMann, 435 F.2d 813, 817 (2d Cir. 1970), Cert. denied, 402 U.S. 906, 91 S.Ct. 1373, 28 L.Ed.2d 646 (1971).
"We cannot expunge from jury deliberations the subjective opinions of jurors, their attitudinal expositions, or their philosophies. These involve the very human elements that constitute one of the strengths of our jury system, and we cannot and should not excommunicate them from jury deliberations."
McKinney, supra at 1022-23.
B. Misconduct Alleged By Defendants
The trial judge determined that several rumors were circulating among the jurors during their deliberations. He found that at least some of the jurors learned of killings which had occurred on St. Croix during the trial, and concluded that "(t)he news must have come from the outside since it was true." Trial judge at 8. The judge further found that "general rumors of FBI investigations of jurors' families" were circulated among the jurors. Because a similar report was broadcast over a local radio station, the trial judge surmised that the rumor was common throughout the island and had "filtered into the jury room from outside."33 Trial judge at 11, 10. Neither the actual source of these rumors nor the means by which the jury learned of them was found by the trial judge. Other rumors which he identified concerned the investigation of three jurors regarding specific events in their pasts. None of these specific rumors was credited with an outside source by the trial judge. Rather, he considered that the specific rumors were juror-generated. We find nothing in the record to refute this conclusion.
The defendants characterize all these rumors as threats. They point to the rumors and to the alleged conversations between certain jury attendants and jurors, see Part I and note 13, Supra, as instances of impermissible outside influences on the verdict which require that it be set aside. We disagree.
The only rumors that can even qualify as outside influences are those which were assigned an outside source by the trial judge. The rumors about specific jurors are clearly in the category of intra-jury discussions which meet neither the competency nor the sufficiency criteria for overriding the verdict. The rumors concerning other killings on St. Croix and the FBI investigation of persons involved in the case are not so easily categorized. It is clear that they are not "extraneous influences" merely by virtue of having an outside source, however. See II-A, Supra. It is also apparent that the rumors are dissimilar from the types of occurrences which were roughly categorized above as "extraneous influence" cases. Although it may appear, superficially, that they might qualify as communications between jurors and third parties, closer examination establishes that the rumors do not resemble that class of cases either.
The third-party communication cases break down, factually, into three major subclasses: (1) cases where jurors glean from non-jurors facts or opinions concerning the liability or guilt of a defendant; (2) cases involving attempts by outsiders to influence the verdict through intimidation or bribery of jurors; (3) cases where jurors come into personal contact with persons related to one side or another of the controversy before the jury. See generally Comment, supra at 366-69.
The trial judge made no finding that any contact, either direct or indirect, with any non-juror, brought the FBI investigation and murder rumors to the jury's attention. In fact, the trial judge was not able to discover the origin of these rumors. See pages 151-152 above. Absent a finding as to the rumors' origin, the element of bias, obvious in the types of third-party communications cases discussed above, is lacking here.34 Perhaps more importantly, absent such a finding, the rumors themselves are, at most, only tangentially germane to the jury's decision-making. For the rumors are fundamentally unlike the communications typically found objectionable; they are not "pertinent to the disposition of an ultimate issue in the controversy, that is, to the jury's consideration of the guilt or innocence of the defendant." United States v. Burke, 496 F.2d 373, 377 (5th Cir. 1974). Only if the rumors carried the coercive force of threats or bribery would we be justified in treating them, factually, as "extraneous influences." Unlike a bribe or threat, however, the rumors did not represent either investigation or other killings as contingent upon any particular verdict outcome. Since the rumors were nebulous, had no identified source and since the jurors appeared to regard them as emanating from other jurors, we can discover no coerceive or intimidating effect in these rumors.35 As the Second Circuit observed in United States v. Gersh, 328 F.2d 460, 464 (1964), "(s)omething more than the mere fact of an unknown and here uncompleted contact with a juror is needed . . . ."36
In determining that the rumors in this case do not qualify as "extraneous influences," we rely not only upon factual distinctions but upon our analysis of the rationale underlying the "extraneous influence" cases. No Sixth Amendment values are implicated by these rumors.37 Where no coercive or biasing effect can be attributed to the statements, the impartiality of the jury is not impugned. Where the statements are in no sense "evidence developed" against the defendants, neither confrontation nor counsel rights are abused.
Nor is the integrity of the court put in jeopardy by the spread of such rumors among the jury. The rumors had no official source. See note 13, Supra. Since "a complete sanitizing of the jury room is impossible," McKinney, supra at 1022, as well as unnecessary, McMann, supra at 817, the court has not failed in its duty to sequester the jury merely because rumors such as these managed to penetrate to the jury room. See also Rideau v. Louisiana, 373 U.S. 723, Clark, J., dissenting, at 733, 83 S.Ct. 1417, 10 L.Ed.2d 663 (1963).
Finally, were we to set aside the jury verdicts because of these rumors, we would be defeating the purposes served by the competency-sufficiency rules in this area of the law. See II-A, Supra. If rumors such as these, filtering into the jury from no known source, were held sufficient to impeach these verdicts, jury tampering and harassment would be encouraged and we "would add unduly to the already fragile state of criminal convictions." McMann, supra at 817. Particularly in a locale like the Virgin Islands, where the small area and population are conducive to the rapid spread of information about anything that occurs, and "where it might be impossible to find 12 jurors who were totally ignorant about a defendant," we find it difficult to imagine any verdict which would not be subject to challenge on the basis of claims like those raised here. McMann, supra at 817-18. In our view, we cannot allow impeachment by incidents of this type. United States v. Kafes, 214 F.2d 887, 889 (3d Cir. 1954).
Conversations between jurors and jury attendants, however, stand on a different footing than do the rumors just discussed. Numerous cases treat such communications as "extraneous influences." See cases cited note 25, Supra. See also United States v. Brumbaugh, supra. Thus, the occurrence of the conversation between Matron Foye and juror Cappin, see Part I, Supra, would require us to set aside the verdict, if that conversation were prejudicial to the defendants.38
C. Prejudice
Even though a party establishes, by competent evidence, an act of jury misconduct sufficient to set aside a verdict, the verdict will stand unless the party has been prejudiced by the misconduct. Although there is normally a presumption that a verdict is valid, United States v. Robbins, 500 F.2d 650 (5th Cir. 1974), certain types of misconduct possess such a high potential of prejudice that they are considered Prima facie prejudicial. Remarks by jury attendants to jurors, where those remarks relate to the jury's deliberations, are usually of this latter type. See Remmer,supra; Mattox, supra ; United States ex rel. Tobe v. Bensinger, 492 F.2d 232 (7th Cir. 1974). Thus, we will assume, as defendants contend, that the government has the burden of proving that Foye's remark to Cappin was not prejudicial.39 We conclude that the Government carried this burden.
In United States v. Brumbaugh, supra at 1129, the following exchange took place between a juror and a court bailiff:
"COURT
"Q During this time that you were with the bailiff, was there any conversation between you and him concerning the deliberations of the jury and the state of those deliberations?
"A If I recall right, he asked me how it was going? and I answered, '9 to 3.'
"Q Was there any other conversation between you concerning the matter I mentioned?
"A He said 'For or against?' And I didn't say nothing. I didn't even answer him. And then he said
"Q Just one minute, please. Can you tell me, please, in terms of where you were when this conversation occurred?
"A On the elevator at the elevator door.
"Q You say he said to you, 'For or against?' and you said you did not answer?
"A I did not answer.
"Q Then what further followed; any further conversation?
"A. Well, he said that, 'It's always some woman or something holding it up,' to that effect, or something like that, and I still did not answer. I didn't say no more.
"Q Can you tell me whether this conversation in any way influenced you one way or the other as to your own participation in this case?
"A No, it did not influence me in no way.
"Q Did you report this to your fellow jurors, the fact that you had this conversation with the bailiff?
"A No."
Although the juror involved was voting not guilty at the time, the trial court's determination that no prejudice resulted from the incident was upheld on appeal. The trial court's finding was based, in part, upon the juror's averment that he had not been affected by the bailiff's remarks.
In the present case, Cappin did not indicate whether she considered herself influenced by the matron's statement.40 However, the trial judge found that she had voted guilty from the first ballot to the last.41 Trial judge at 6; see also H.T. 152. Since Cappin did not mention the incident to any of the other jurors, no juror could have been moved by the remark to change his vote. See Bailey v. United States, 410 F.2d 1209, 1215 (10th Cir.), Cert. denied sub nom., Freeman v. United States, 396 U.S. 933, 90 S.Ct. 276, 24 L.Ed.2d 232 (1969).
It thus appearing that no prejudice accrued to the defendants from the only occurrence which was both legally cognizable and sufficient to impeach the jury verdict, we find no abuse of discretion in the trial judge's refusal to order a new trial. The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.
Memorandum Opinion and Order filed September 20, 1974, in Criminal No. 97/1972
See Government of the Virgin Islands v. Gereau et al., 502 F.2d 914 (3d Cir. 1974)
The case was submitted to the jury at 2 P.M. Saturday, August 4, 1973. A verdict was reached by 2:30 P.M. Sunday, August 12, 1973, but was not announced until the following day. In all, the jury deliberated for some 50 hours. See N.T. 6540-41; Order dated August 8, 1973, in Criminal No. 97/1972; Hearing re Motion on Tampering with Jurors (hereinafter referred to as "HT") at 20
"The affidavit of Mr. Allick states:
'I'm a concerned citizen writing to you on the Verdict of Guilty voted by the twelve jurors. I was one of the twelve, and I have to say that the verdict I turned in was not from my free will. It was involuntary and due to pressure of information being carried in and out of the jury room. Because I am concerned about the justice system in these Virgin Islands that I am writing his letter. Sincerely.'
"That of Mr. Rodgers recites:
'The verdict delivered after nine (9) days of deliberation does not represent my honest judgment. My verdict was not voluntary. It was the end product of pressures applied by Judge Warren Young, who refused two verdicts and the majority of the jury who, to me seemed to have predetermined verdict. Sincerely.' "
Rodgers testified that the wording of the affidavit was not his, but was dictated by Johnny Ross, who urged Rodgers to aid "civil rights" by signing an affidavit. Rodgers identified his signature on the affidavit, but stated that he had signed "a piece of paper" in the office of one of the defendant's attorneys without looking at the paper he signed. H.T. 99-102; 105-111. See also 85-87; 100-11; 286-94.
With reference to the credibility of Allick and Rodgers, see note 13 below and part I-B at pages 146-147 below. In this court's previous decision in this case (see note 2 above), claims that (1) the trial judge was disqualified from conducting the proceedings in the district court (502 F.2d at 931-33), and (2) the trial judge had coerced the jury's verdict through requiring continuing deliberations and through its instructions (502 F.2d at 935-36), were rejected.
Judge Young was not on the island at the time, and Chief Judge Christian was involved in another trial
In a letter of October 2, 1973, from counsel for defendants to Chief Judge Christian (attached to Motion to Further Augment the Record, filed January 19, 1974, at No. 73-1775), such counsel agreed that Judge Marsh was appointed "to preside over the hearing but not to make a finding of fact." In response Chief Judge Christian states in his October 5, 1973, letter (attached to the same Motion):
"Your recollection that my appointment of Judge Marsh contemplated no more than that he would preside over the hearing, and that the testimony taken was to have been sealed and handed over to Judge Young on his return, is correct. You may recall that initially I had thought of having the deputy clerk-in-charge preside over the examination of jurors, but later changed my mind and asked Judge Marsh, my feeling being that with a judicial officer presiding, matters would proceed in a more orderly fashion."
The hearing took three days: August 18, August 24 and August 29. Testimony was taken from all jurors, two court attendants and the President of the Virgin Islands Senate
In remanding, this court left to the trial judge the decision whether he should preside over a new hearing so as to have "the opportunity to observe witnesses and assess the credibility of those giving conflicting testimony." 502 F.2d at 937, n. 14
See, E. g., Mattox v. United States, 146 U.S. 140, 147, 13 S.Ct. 50, 36 L.Ed. 917 (1892); 6A J. Moore, Federal Practice, P 59.08(4) at 59-136 to 138; 59-152 (1974)
As part of this argument, defendants propose that we remand for a hearing before the trial judge where "there is a direct conflict in the testimony and the issue is material." Brief for Appellants at 62. Such a hearing, they claim, is necessary to the trial judge's ability to make credibility choices among witnesses. We reject this proposal for four reasons: (1) our former decision indicated that, in our view, no such hearing was essential (see 502 F.2d at 937, n. 14); (2) the defendants requested no hearing following our remand; (3) when the special master was appointed, the understanding of the parties was that "the raw material from the testimony of the jurors would be turned over to" the trial judge so that he could make his findings from the testimony, letter from defense counsel to Chief Judge Christian dated October 2, 1973 (see note 6 above); (4) the trial judge considered the adequacy of the record developed by the special master, the "reliability and credibility problems reasonably expected to arise in a new hearing after a year's passage of time," his opportunities to observe the jurors during the trial, and his knowledge of the local accent, idiom and grammatical usage in deciding that no further hearing was necessary. Our own reading of the record confirms the correctness and propriety of these considerations. Particularly because of the poor recollection of many jurors at the hearing held within a week of their verdict, we see nothing to be gained from any further hearings
The Steelworkers court did acknowledge that the clearly erroneous standard was "inapplicable so far as it has to do with the trial court's opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses and like matters." 271 F.2d at 685. Moreover, the court discounted the importance of the disagreement among the affiants in that it found "no variances in the affidavits basically material to the findings made by the court below or to the issues with which we are immediately concerned." Id. at 688
Demirjian's standard is inapplicable both because the facts here are not stipulated, but disputed, and because our earlier remand would be rendered nugatory were we to ignore the findings which we directed the trial judge to make. Yet, since at least some of the facts in issue here are material, we are reluctant to employ in this case the clearly erroneous standard of the Steelworkers case. Nor are we satisfied that the trial judge's credibility assessments come within the exception to the clearly erroneous standard spelled out in Steelworkers, premised as it is on the proposition that the appeals court is as favorably situated as the trial court in appraising the evidence. "Credibility involves more than demeanor. It apprehends the over-all evaluation of testimony in the light of its rationality or internal consistency and the manner in which it hangs together with other evidence." Carbo v. United States, 314 F.2d 718, 749 (9th Cir. 1963); Indiana Metal Products v. N. L. R. B., 442 F.2d 46, 52 (7th Cir. 1971). In this case the trial judge's thorough acquaintance with the circumstances surrounding the hearing into the validity of the verdict gives special weight to his credibility findings. The trial judge's observation of certain incidents related in the jurors' testimony, his knowledge of the circumstances under which the jury was sequestered, and his familiarity with the local accent, idiom and grammatical usage, as well as with other peculiarities of the vicinage, give him a distinct advantage over this court in evaluating the jurors' testimony. See also note 10 Supra. Moreover, insofar as demeanor becomes important in assessing credibility, the trial judge did have the opportunity to observe the jurors' demeanor during three stages of the trial, though not at the hearing: (1) when he questioned them individually on the voir dire preceding trial; (2) during the course of the trial; and (3) when he polled the jurors individually upon the return of the verdict. Such demeanor evidence does not carry the weight assigned to direct observation of a witness while testifying, but we do not consider it a negligible factor in determining how much deference we should allot to the trial court's findings
We have examined the record carefully in view of the defendants' claim that other evidence in the record is so contradictory that the trial judge could not properly make these challenged findings. Much of the other evidence cited by defendants is irrelevant to the findings attacked; some is, in our estimation, of lesser quality than that relied upon by the trial judge. Still other evidence referred to by defendants is not present in the record at all, such as the contention that matters overheard by juror Torres while she was resting in the judge's chambers had an official cast. It is clear from the record that none of the jurors, including Torres, knew where she was resting during her illness. Our reading of the record convinces us that the following findings attacked by defendants are sustainable on the grounds set forth in the trial judge's opinion:
(1) "(N)o discussion concerning a possible perjury prosecution ever took place within the confines of the jury room" (Memorandum Opinion and Order, filed Sept. 20, 1974, Crim. No. 97/1972 (hereinafter referred to as "trial judge") at 15);
(2) That Matron Foye had not made certain statements to juror Rodgers (trial judge at 17-18);
(3) The vote changed to 11-1 for conviction on Thursday, August 9 (trial judge at 6);
(4) That Marshal Sutterfield did not make any statement to juror Allick to the effect that the trial was costing the Government a lot of money (trial judge at 16-17);
(5) That the credibility of jurors, Allick, Isaac and Rodgers was diminished because they were pressured to impeach their verdicts after the jury was dismissed (trial judge at 26).
Finding (4) was conceded by defendants to be non-material. Brief for Appellants at 15.
In addition to the reasons stated by the trial judge for discounting Allick's testimony at the hearing, we note that Allick, as the one juror who consistently voted for acquittal until August 12, 1973, would have a special stake in overturning the verdict. See, E. g., H.T. 165, 197, for testimony indicating Allick's bias.
See Salkeld, supra at 907, and note 12 above. We note that all these challenged findings which we affirm have adequate and reasonable support in the record. See Olympic Towing Corp. v. Nebel Towing Co., 419 F.2d 230, 232-33 (5th Cir. 1969)
The trial judge's opinion continued as follows:
"He was nineteen years old, a black, a school chum of defendant Joseph and understandably susceptible to peer pressure. When Allick signed the verdicts, he stood up and made the puzzling remark that now he could not go back to the local college in St. Thomas. At the time, none of the jurors questioned his remark, but I find it significant that he feared any such consequence from signing guilty verdicts. Moreover, shortly after he signed the verdicts, he sent the following note to me:
'Dear Judge Young,
Some of us would like to know what kind of protection will be provided for all of us.
With this we mean Personal Protection.
/s/ Laura Torres
Foreman Myron Allick'
"Although, as the jury foreman, he would sign all notes to the Judge, I believe that the fear of possible reprisals was his own fear as well as that of Torres and other jurors.
"In voir dire, Allick showed concern that the estimated length of the trial might interfere with his entering the College of the Virgin Islands in August. However, at the post trial evidentiary hearing, he testified that, after signing the verdicts, he made plans with one of the U.S. Marshals to go away. After being driven around by Senator Claude Molloy to talk with other jurors about impeaching their verdicts and after being 'interviewed' by Johnnie Ross and Mario Moorhead, he signed the affidavit which, in effect, told the community that the guilty verdict was really not His verdict. Significantly after those events, Allick no longer needed 'Personal Protection' nor did he, in fact, go through with his plan to leave the islands (as did almost all of the other jurors).
"I have selected another incident from the transcript which I find sheds some light on Allick's post-verdict actions. At page 42, United States Attorney Brady asked Allick if he recalled when he was in court the day of the verdict. After receiving an affirmative answer, Brady asked if he recalled any one of the defendants speaking to him as he left the courtroom. The response is as follows:
'A. (Allick) Maybe so but my mind was not really clear.
'Q. (Brady) You did not hear anything?
'A. I did not really take it down. Like I hear him say, you know, something I couldn't say that he said this. I really, you know, I just hear some grumbling something like that.'
"That response clearly indicates to me a cover up for Allick's post-verdict fear. It actually happened as described by Allick. From my bench I saw and heard a remark being made by one of the defendants to Allick, but I could not hear what was actually said. Since the incident went no further than the remark itself, I let it pass. Moreover, under the circumstances immediately following the dramatic jury poll, whatever remark was made by one of the defendants to Allick could hardly have been an amenity. It had to be unnerving, and I do believe that it made Allick an easy subject for those who, in my opinion, improperly tampered with a jury verdict by coercive pressures exerted not only upon Allick, but upon Rodgers, . . . ."
(trial judge at 20-23) (footnotes omitted).
Juror Cappin is referred to as "Coppin" in the trial judge's opinion
They may, however, be subject to rebuttal. See 5 J. Moore, Supra, P 43.09 at 1371-72; F.R.E. Rule 201
The defendants concede that this latter finding is not material. See Brief for Appellants at 20
The origin of the rule is Lord Mansfield's opinion in Vaise v. Delaval, 1 Term.Rep. 11, 99 Eng.Rep. 944 (K.B.1785). For a sketch of the rule's development and permutations, see ABA Standards Relating to Trial by Jury, Approved Draft, 1968, Commentary to § 5.7(a)
Other variations of the rule may be found in the ABA Standards, note 19 Supra. Some federal courts have allowed a juror to testify regarding overt acts, which can be corroborated by other jurors. This circuit has not adopted this approach, which was disapproved by Congress when it adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence in January 1975. See Congressional Conference Report concerning F.R.E. Rule 606(b):
"The Conference adopts the Senate amendment (which) . . . does not permit juror testimony about any matter or statement occurring during the course of the jury's deliberations."
(Federal Rules of Evidence Annotated, West Pub. Co., p. 55)
Wigmore considers the parol evidence rule as the basis for excluding juror testimony. 8 J. Wigmore, Evidence, § 2346 (McNaughton ed. 1961). See also Note: Impeachment of Jury Verdicts, 53 Marquette L.Rev. 258, 262-63 (1970). A second evidentiary basis for the rule is the privilege accorded communications among deliberating jurors. See Wigmore, Id.; Note, id.; Clark v. United States, 289 U.S. 1, 53 S.Ct. 314, 77 L.Ed. 993 (1933)
The rule and exception are now embodied in F.R.E. Rule 606(b):
"Upon an inquiry into the validity of a verdict or indictment, a juror may not testify as to any matter or statement occurring during the course of the jury's deliberations or to the effect of anything upon his or any other juror's mind or emotions as influencing him to assent to or dissent from the verdict or indictment or concerning his mental processes in connection therewith, except that a juror may testify on the question whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury's attention or whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear upon any juror. Nor may his affidavit or evidence of any statement by him concerning a matter about what he would be precluded from testifying be received for these purposes."
See also Hearings on H.R. 5463 Before the Comm. on the Judiciary of the United States Senate, 93rd Cong., 2d Sess., at 357 (1974). Rule 606(b) does not, of course, apply to this case, which preceded it. However, the Congress recognized that the rule, as adopted, tracked the existing case law.
Marshall v. United States, 360 U.S. 310, 79 S.Ct. 1171, 3 L.Ed.2d 1250 (1959); Mattox v. United States, 146 U.S. 140, 13 S.Ct. 50, 36 L.Ed. 917 (1892); United States v. Kum Seng Seo, 300 F.2d 623 (3rd Cir. 1962); United States v. Thomas, 463 F.2d 1061 (7th Cir. 1972); United States v. McKinney, 429 F.2d 1019 (5th Cir. 1970)
Farese v. United States, 428 F.2d 178 (5th Cir. 1970), and cases cited therein at 180-81; United States ex rel. Owen v. McMann, 435 F.2d 813 (2d Cir. 1970)
Parker v. Gladden, 385 U.S. 363, 87 S.Ct. 468, 17 L.Ed.2d 420 (1966) (bailiff expressed opinion on case to jurors); Remmer v. United States, 347 U.S. 227, 74 S.Ct. 450, 98 L.Ed. 654 (1954) (attempted jury tampering not revealed to defendant or counsel by trial judge); United States ex rel. Tobe v. Bensinger, 492 F.2d 232 (7th Cir. 1974) (bailiff, in answer to jury queries directed to judge, told jury they must deliberate until they reached a verdict); United States v. Brumbaugh, 471 F.2d 1128 (6th Cir.), Cert. denied, 412 U.S. 918, 93 S.Ct. 2732, 37 L.Ed.2d 144 (1973) (improper remark by bailiff to juror); Truscott v. Chaplin, 403 F.2d 644 (3d Cir. 1968) (inquiry by judge whether jury close to verdict); United States v. Gersh, 328 F.2d 460 (2d Cir. 1964) (phone calls to juror); Wheaton v. United States, 133 F.2d 522 (8th Cir. 1943) (bailiff instructed jury)
United States v. Kafes, 214 F.2d 887 (3d Cir. 1954); United States v. Blackburn, 446 F.2d 1089 (5th Cir. 1971), Cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1017, 92 S.Ct. 679, 30 L.Ed.2d 665 (1972); United States v. Stoppelman, 406 F.2d 127 (1st Cir.), Cert. denied, 395 U.S. 981, 89 S.Ct. 2141, 23 L.Ed.2d 769 (1969)
See, E. g., United States v. Kohne, 358 F.Supp. 1046 (W.D.Pa.1973), Aff'd, 487 F.2d 1395 (3d Cir. 1973), Cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918, 94 S.Ct. 2624, 41 L.Ed.2d 224 (1974), and cases there cited at 1051-52
See Part II-A-1 Supra
"Drunkenness, bribery, receiving incompetent documents, or privately interviewing a party, do require (setting aside a verdict); but there are many irregularities, which, however proved, do not, and among them is an agreement to abide by the vote of the majority."
Jorgensen v. York Ice Machinery Corp., 160 F.2d 432, 435 (2d Cir. 1947). See also Comment, supra at 366Ff.
See, E. g., cases cited note 23, Supra
See, E. g., cases cited note 24, Supra. See also People v. DeLucia, 20 N.Y.2d 275, 282 N.Y.S.2d 526, 229 N.E.2d 211 (1967)
See cases cited note 25, Supra ; Bailey v. United States, 410 F.2d 1209 (10th Cir. 1969) (jury accosted by individuals urging them to acquit defendants); Richardson v. United States, 360 F.2d 366 (5th Cir. 1966) (conversation between Government witness and juror)
See cases cited note 25, Supra. See also Jenkins v. United States, 380 U.S. 445, 85 S.Ct. 1059, 13 L.Ed.2d 957 (1965); Turner v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 466, 85 S.Ct. 546, 13 L.Ed.2d 424 (1965) (government witnesses also jury attendants); Snyder v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 245 F.2d 112 (3d Cir. 1957); United States v. Pittman, 449 F.2d 1284 (9th Cir. 1971) (Government agent who was prominent prosecution witness was allowed in jury room to play tape)
These rumors were "clearly false." See trial judge at 9-10
See, E. g., Remmer v. United States, note 25 Supra ; Richardson v. United States, note 31, Supra. See also Part II-A-2, Supra
Defendants argue that Remmer, supra, establishes that FBI investigation of jurors, if known to the jurors, is inherently coercive. In Remmer, however, the juror who was being investigated had previously been offered a "profit" if he voted to acquit. As the Court recognized, such a juror might well feel pressured by an investigation to vote for conviction in order to demonstrate he had not succumbed to bribery. Jurors who had not been similarly importuned would not be subject to this sort of pressure
Moreover, the linchpin of Remmer was the trial court's failure to inform the defendant and his attorney that the juror had been approached. The case was remanded for an adversary hearing to "determine the circumstances, the impact thereof upon the juror, and whether or not it was prejudicial," since the "trial court should not decide and take final action Ex parte on information such as was received in this case . . . ." 347 U.S. 229-30, 74 S.Ct. 451. See also Fillippon v. Albion Veiu Slate Co., 250 U.S. 76, 39 S.Ct. 435, 63 L.Ed. 853 (1919). This crucial issue is not raised by the present case.
Gersh involved anonymous phone calls made to the forewoman of the jury. Each time the caller hung up as soon as the juror answered; nothing was ever said. The Second Circuit considered that these calls, which were not connected to the defendants and which had no articulated objective, raised no issue of jury prejudice
For this reason, the cases discussed under II-A-2 at pages 150-151 above are inapplicable
See note 13, Supra
We recognize that not all juror-jury attendant exchanges would be presumptively prejudicial. Each case turns on its own facts. Cf. Truscott v. Chaplin, 403 F.2d 644, 645 (3d Cir. 1968)
Because there is no subjective evidence as to prejudice resulting from this remark, we need not resolve the issue, raised by defendants, whether prejudice can be established by subjective evidence. Compare Miller v. United States, 403 F.2d 77, 82 (2d Cir. 1968), with United States v. Robbins, 500 F.2d 650, 653 and n. 5 (5th Cir. 1974)
Where the verdict is impugned, jurors are "competent to testify in refutation of impugning testimony." 6A J. Moore, Supra, P 59.08(4) at 59-143


text:
Seasonal Riding
Cheap Electric Bike Deals
Submit a Brand
Submit a Rider
Submit a Bike Park
Hope Technology R4+ LED 2016
Reviews / Lights
Hope needs no introduction, renowned for high-quality engineering and manufacture; they have been making lights alongside all their other products for many years. The R4+ represents the latest version of their 2000 lumen (1500 measured) light. The light unit is a beautifully machined piece, with 4 Cree LEDs held within a solid and fantastically detailed case, with etched logos, plenty of curves and a bayonet fitting on the base.
Buy Lights on
This is a truly lovely piece of kit to fondle, and the robust and reassuring attachment into either the bar or helmet mount is a joy to behold.
Cable options allow for the external battery pack to be frame mounted, or carried in a pack if used on your helmet. There is also a head torch strap for use off the bike for when/if you feel the need to go for a run at night. The battery has a five bar indicator and a test button to keep you up to date with burn time. 2.25 hours of run time on high should give plenty of time for an evening jaunt in the winter. A back-lit button with different colours allows for output level to be determined on the two power sequences, each with three different levels.
Hope R4+ LED
With the larger four-cell battery, the R4+ was set up as a bar mount, with the battery easily strapped to the frame. The bar mount is solid, and the twisting bayonet mounting is excellent, just a quick twist to install with enough force to inspire total confidence. The battery pack has rubberised ends to protect it, but this also reduces the rattle when it is strapped to the underside of a top tube. The cable is spiralled to allow for some stretch in the system and not have any spare cable dangling around, and although this seems a pretty basic feature, it's really useful.
Obviously, the first test is on full power, and immediately it is evident that the light is thrown in an excellent way onto the trail ahead. The spread is excellent, with a strong central beam, and a very gradual reduction in penetration towards the sides. It feels like Hope are using every last lumen to great effect, and even into the peripheral vision, there is useable light. It's always hard to explain how light looks on the trail, but this illumination gives a very pleasant feel on the eye, it's a lovely display, rather than harsh bright glare or a single spotlight. In conjunction with a helmet light, the combination was excellent, with The R4+ providing a perfect backdrop for a spotlight beam to pick out the crucial detail or look round corners.
Switching between modes is simple, with a press and hold to get onto the second power modes, which are all lower level and ideal for secondary functions like commuting. The three colour back-lit button allows for a quick glance if you're not sure what mode is on.
The construction is top drawer, as would be expected from Hope and it oozes quality. The bar mount is a beautiful thing and provides a brilliant attachment system for the light. The light spread is fantastic, and although it doesn't have the raw power for serious trail penetrating vision, it provides a great all-round light spread that would be complimented well by a focused head light. The helmet mount is good, but while the Velcro straps are capable, they aren't as impressive as the rest of the package, and with the big battery (a smaller one is available), it's probably best suited for a bar light. Robust and dependable, this is a great workhorse light to see you through multiple winters of night riding.
The mechanically awesome bayonet fitting
Look into the light
Headtorch strap, for when you forget your bike
This review was in Issue 44 of IMB.
For more information visit Hope Technology
Mapdec Cycle Works K20 CREE 2000
Lights - 2016
Exposure Lights MaXx D MK8
Exposure Lights Diablo Mk7
Hope Technology Vision R1
Hope Technology Vision 4
Ravemen Lights PR1600
Ravemen Lights TR300
Gloworm Lights XSV
Gloworm Lights Alpha 1200
BBB Cycling Scope 1500
DMR Bikes | View in Mag
By Hope Technology
Hope Technology Carbon Bar and AM/Freeride Stem
Hope has been pushing into new territory over the past few years, experimenting with new materials and new products. Not only have they got their heads around carbon manufacturing, but also they've made entire bikes from it, and all this designed, tested and manufactured in Barnoldswick, UK. As well as bike creation, they've been busy making their carbon handlebars, which…
Hope Technology Tech 3 E4 Brakes
When it comes to high-powered brakes, Hope has to be in the mix. Having been involved in disc brakes since the very beginning, they obviously know their stuff, proven by the legions of fans that will have nothing else on their bike. Looking like they've come straight from a lump of metal (because they have), the E4s represent Hopes top…
Hope Technology Enduro – Pro 4
Purveyors of fine quality British engineering, Hope have been at the forefront of component manufacturing for what seems like forever. Having developed an almost legendary reputation in the bike industry, they represent durability and reliability to the core, alongside an 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' mentality towards product development. For many years now the Pro II hubs have…
Julbo Eyewear | View in Mag
Dakine | View in Mag
By Ewen Turner
Ewen Turner is a self-confessed bike geek from Kendal in the Lake District of England. He runs a coaching and guiding business up there and has a plethora of knowledge about bikes with an analytical approach to testing. His passion for bicycles is infectious, and he's a ripper on the trails who prefers to fit his working life around his time on the bike.
Tried this? What did you think?
The number one online mountain bike magazine.
Latest Mountain Bike News
9-5 With Lil Robbo | Life Isn't Just About Riding Bikes, Well... Mostly...
by Nukeproof Bikes
12 views | 1
Commencal Mete Power TR | "Just Buy One, You'll See" They Say!
by COMMENCAL Bicycles & Skis
12,976 views | 2
© 2009 - 2021 A Mountain Bike Magazine by Next Element Ltd


"In Oliver Payne's collages (images below) stickers of Japanese Bullet Hell Games are arranged on torn out pages of an ancient Greek sculpture catalogue. Payne transforms the violent imagery of these videogames into psychedelic explosions of color. Greek statues serve as a background and a reminder of the fantasy worlds produced in Japanese arcade games, which often picture rural Europe. Sounds of an arcade field recording give a notion of manic playfulness towards the exhibited works.


Birthday party ideas for a Project Runway themed birthday party. Fun and easy ideas to make your party fabulous!
Make your own Project Runway invitations by gluing on scraps of fabric onto the front side of plain note cards. Or cut one piece of fabric the size of the front of the note card and glue on the front at the top only.
Write party information on the front of the card underneath the piece of fabric.
Glue pieces of pretty measuring tapes to the front of note cards.
If you will be having a fashion challenge include a small piece of the fabrics or items they will be using so they can start thinking of a design before the party.
Decorate the party with mannequins and/or dress forms. Place feather boas, pearls, and other accessories on the mannequins and dress forms.
Decorate the party table to look like a runway by placing a white or black table on the table and then placing a row of books down the center of the table - cover the books with the opposite color tablecloth that you used on the bottom of the table to give the runway depth.
Helium balloons in white and blue make a party instantly fabulous or use Chinese lanterns.
Set up several work stations for the guests to work on their projects. You can have them spread out over the room or in the center so the guests face towards each other and can socialize as thy work on their projects.
Set up a "Mood" store that will hold the items that the designers can choose from for their projects.
Drape yards of tulle around the party area in bright colors or blue and white for a elegant feel.
Have several fashion rounds where the guests have the opportunity to make fashion creations. Divide into teams, or if you have enough dress forms let each guest have their own. Or you can divide into teams of 2 and the team mates can alternate being designer and model for each round. Assign each guest to a sewing station and provide each station with scissors, masking tape, needles and thread and measuring tape.
In the "Mood Store" set out all sizes and colors of paper bags for the guests to use to make a paper dress. You can also set out different colors of ribbon, buttons and accessories for them to use to embellish their creation. Give the guests 15 minutes or so to finish this round.
For this round designers get 1 or 2 rolls of aluminum foil and they must create a complete ensemble including shoes, dress, hat, jewelry, etc. Foil can be used to make any style of garment ... give them help by suggesting high heel shoes, purses, bathing suits, pants, skirts, hair bows, etc. Give them about 15 - 20 minutes for this round.
One of my favorite episodes of Project Runway was when the contestants had 15 minutes to shop in a party store and they could only use items from the store. In the "Mood Store" set out lots of different party items - table cloths, hula skirts, napkins, cups, etc. - that the guests can use to create a fashion item. Ask family and friends for old party items they won't use anymore or look at garage sales for some great (and strange!) items.
Give guests 5 minutes to pick out their items and about 20 minutes to create their design.
Now that the designers have had some practice give them choices of fabric to choose from to make their creations. You may want to already have these cut into yard lengths before the party. Give them lots of fun embellishments to use such as fringe, feathers, trims and buttons.
Take pictures of all the designs and give them to guests as a party favor in a pretty frame.
This is a fun craft and they guests get to take home their creations as a party favor! See our Flip Flop craft page for full directions and instructions.
Set out a buffet of finger style foods for the kids to munch on as they are working or when they are finished with their projects. Some good food choices are pretzel sticks, cheese, finger sandwiches, cookies and crackers. Let them sip on sparkling cider from champagne glasses. Have messy foods like chocolate, frostings and pizza after the sewing competitions.


Who is Violet Von Westenholz – and did she introduce Prince Harry and Meghan Markle?
Prince Harry's fiancee Meghan Markle, pictured at Wimbledon on July 4, 2016 with her friend Violet Von Westenholz, rumoured to be the matchmaker between her and Harry.
PR guru Violet Von Westenholz might be responsible for one of the most talked-about love stories in history – Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's romance.
Violet is the latest name rumoured to be responsible for introducing the Prince to his future wife, US former actress Meghan.
The newly engaged couple beamed as they told the BBC's Mishal Husain how during their first-ever televised interview how they had been set up on a blind date by a mutual friend.
But they kept the identity of said friend a closely-guarded secret, admitting they were keen to protect her 'privacy'.
'We were introduced by a mutual friend, who we will protect her privacy,' Harry revealed.
Naturally, a guessing game soon swept the nation, with names previously linked to either Meghan or Harry being banded around as potential matchmakers.
Fashion designer Misha Nonoo – who is pals with both Meghan and is the ex-wife of Harry's friend Alexander Gilkes, Markus Anderson – the Canadian friend of Meghan's and Made In Chelsea's Millie Mackintosh – who is well-connected and befriended Meghan last summer, have all been connected to the role of cupid so far.
But now the attention has turned to Miss von Westenholz, a 33-year-old PR director for fashion designer Ralph Lauren.
According to the Daily Telegraph, Violet and Harry have known each other since they were both teenagers.
And the plot thickened about her being their mystery cupid on Tuesday when she seemed to refuse to deny – or confirm – she had been the one responsible for setting them up.
She was then seen at Wimbledon the following day with none other than Violet.
And rather than being bowled over by his Prince status, the Suits actress admitted she only cared about knowing if he was a 'nice' man.
'Because I'm from the States, you don't grow up with the same understanding of the Royal Family,' she added.


In case you've got a health website, security of information of your customers is your primary concern and you need to protect it at all times. Among the worst things that can happen to your website and the privacy of your clients is hacking. You need to make sure that you do everything it can take to keep your site from reach by hackers. Following are a few of the tips that you can use when trying to secure your health website from reach by hackers.
You need to ensure that you run software updates. This is important, as it will guarantee security of information. There are a few sensitive inquiries which don't have to the public eye, like queries on weight loss detox cleanse and surgery on lap band. Once your client entrusts you with this kind of information, you need to ensure that it is protected. Updating your software will ensure that this is achieved effectively. Running applications updates might be frustrating however the solitude of the client is much more important and you need to do all you can to protect it.
Passwords are an essential element of all internet accounts. Consequently, you need to ensure that you choose the right passwords for your websites. When you have a strong password, you will scare hackers away by building a strong and repulsing password. It's wise that you come up with a password which has letters, letters and alphanumeric all arranged in a random manner. The letters ought to be a mixture of lower and upper case to make the password quite powerful. You should make a habit of renewing your password regularly to make it hard to predict. You also need to create different passwords for different accounts. It is very risky to have one password used in most of your websites.
It is wise that you avoid public Wi-Fi connections. For most people, free, sure and unsecured public Wi-Fi that is readily available is a good deal. This is also a fantastic means of hackers to make their way in your health site, And receive your clients information and hold it for a ransom. Hackers may have Hid themselves at a coffee store preying on among the customers for their information. You also have to make certain that you advice your customers against using public Wi-Fi to access their accounts. This will make certain you don't get into trouble. In accordance with this, you also must be on the lookout for any suspicious Email. There are some spam Emails that may contain virus which will be used as back doors into your health website. You need to spot them and eliminate them before they cause damage.


Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Stefaans, Aug 21, 2007.
We often get a client wanting to know why a certain email did not reach him, just to find it was one of his Exim Filters that deleted it. If we can log all Exim Filter activity to a file, e.g. /var/log/exim_filters_log, it would be a great help to see which rule triggered the deletion.
I think a few lines in exim.conf should take care of this, but I have not been able to figure it out. Can anyone point me in the right direction?


text:
using System;

namespace SharpDL.Graphics
{
    public struct Matrix
    {
        public float Row1Col1 { get; private set; }

        public float Row1Col2 { get; private set; }

        public float Row2Col1 { get; private set; }

        public float Row2Col2 { get; private set; }

        public Matrix(float row1col1, float row1col2, float row2col1, float row2col2)
            : this()
        {
            Row1Col1 = row1col1;
            Row1Col2 = row1col2;
            Row2Col1 = row2col1;
            Row2Col2 = row2col2;
        }

        public float this[int index]
        {
            get
            {
                switch (index)
                {
                    case 0: return Row1Col1;
                    case 1: return Row1Col2;
                    case 2: return Row2Col1;
                    case 3: return Row2Col2;
                    default: throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException();
                }
            }

            set
            {
                switch (index)
                {
                    case 0: Row1Col1 = value; break;
                    case 1: Row1Col2 = value; break;
                    case 2: Row2Col1 = value; break;
                    case 3: Row2Col2 = value; break;
                    default: throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException();
                }
            }
        }

        public float this[int row, int column]
        {
            get { return this[row * 2 + column]; }
            set { this[row * 2 + column] = value; }
        }

        /// <summary>
        /// Calculates the inverse matrix of the passed 2D matrix.
        /// </summary>
        /// <param name="matrix"></param>
        /// <returns></returns>
        public static Matrix Invert(Matrix matrix)
        {
            // [a b]  ==>  [d -b]
            // [c d]  ==>  [-c a]
            // determinant = 1 / (a * d - b * c)

            float determinant = 1 / ((matrix.Row1Col1 * matrix.Row2Col2) - (matrix.Row1Col2 * matrix.Row2Col1));

            float newRow1Col1 = matrix.Row2Col2;
            float newRow1Col2 = matrix.Row1Col2 * -1;
            float newRow2Col1 = matrix.Row2Col1 * -1;
            float newRow2Col2 = matrix.Row1Col1;

            newRow1Col1 /= determinant;
            newRow1Col2 /= determinant;
            newRow2Col1 /= determinant;
            newRow2Col2 /= determinant;

            return new Matrix(newRow1Col1, newRow1Col2, newRow2Col1, newRow2Col2);
        }

        public static Matrix CreateScale(float scaleX, float scaleY)
        {
            return new Matrix()
            {
                Row1Col1 = scaleX,
                Row1Col2 = 0,
                Row2Col1 = 0,
                Row2Col2 = scaleY
            };
        }
    }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Retro-fit to AP5, AP6, VC, VE, VF, VG, VH, VJ, VK, CL & CM Valiant.
You will require a custom conversion bracket to fit this alternator to your Hemi 6, Slant 6, or Small Block engine.
Click Here To View Available Brackets.
This is a Delco style alternator with the mounting ear straight up and down with a plug-in that will use a factory regulator harness.
Adjustable between 13.5 and 18.5 volts. Great for 12V or 16V systems.


Last year there were stories that Mastodon's long-awaited Emperor Of Sand album was going to be their proggiest yet, which caused much debate amongst their fans. While their expertise in harnessing the power of the progressive is unquestioned, when the Atlantan four-piece are rollocking along in a purer metallic fury, it remains wondrous to behold. So, it's extra comforting that this record has proven to be a masterpiece of contemporary, heavy music.
While previous Mastodon albums delve into stories of oceans and mountains, their seventh conjures images of deserts and barren wastelands, with danger lurking just below the surface. Telling the tale of a wanderer facing a death sentence, inspired by the band's own experiences with cancer in their immediate families, Emperor Of Sand isn't just a concept on paper; the music within is powerful, defiant and steeped in anguish, and shows the quartet at their most vulnerable. For a band whose sound has previously been akin to that of a fire-breathing monster, a towering metal monolith that destroys all it sees, Emperor…is not so much a beast baring its teeth, but rather its wounds. And while softwareuiphraseguid="835d4e16-4af3-436e-8174-ac53521cef3c">Emperor Of Sand isn't lyrically overt about the cruelty of cancer, the references to life and death throughout are dripping in metaphor. This is music Mastodon needed to write: powerful, passionate metal written and performed by one of the most creative and ambitious bands in our world, and carrying such a weight that it's capable of levelling mountains.
With more in common musically with Blood Mountain and The Hunter than 2014's hit'n'missOnce More 'Round The Sun, there are riffs here the size of planets pushing the metal ever onward with a spiritual spine to juxtapose the heaviness. Guitars have played a fundamental role in shaping Mastodon's sound over the past two decades and this record is no exception. With six-strings dancing around each other on opener Sultan's Curse and the roaring solo on Andromeda, Emperor Of Sand creates a true smorgasbord for the senses. Just as Gojira's Magma was considered magnificent on so many levels last year, this is a rich, beautiful record with layer after layer of tear-stained sand to sift through.
Those who saw Mastodon's headline performance at Bloodstock last summer might be thinking that the band are bored of metal and are more interested in prog, but here they've retained their razor-sharp metallic edge. The rumbling highway of Show Yourself, the gigantic guitars of Roots Remain and the instant heaviness of Clandestiny prove that Mastodon are still very much a metal band. But the MVP award on the tracklist goes to Steambreather. Backed by a cosmic downtuned groove, the bellowing chorus and heavyweight instrumentals fuse together into a Herculean beast that earworms its way into your brain, and is guaranteed to become a set staple.
Big choruses, however, are the real cornerstone of this album. From tales of falling into a pit of lies, saving yourself and a prophecy being realised, these are huge sweeping lines of life, death, and the joy of existence. It's not a happy record, but it's defiant, emotionally raw and hugely resonant. Being alive is the one thing we all have in common, but it takes a band as special as Mastodon to put life into perspective.


FOR SALE IS THE EXACT ITEM LISTED IN THE TITLE, AND PICTURED IN THE SCAN. CARD HAS BEEN PROFESSIONALLY GRADED BY PSA... SEE SCAN AND JUDGE THE CONDITION & CENTERING FOR YOURSELF.
GOOD LUCK, AND THANKS FOR LOOKING!! CHECK OUT OUR OTHER AUCTIONS FOR MORE GREAT CARDS & SUPPLIES... WE ADD MORE NEW ITEMS DAILY, SO KEEP CHECKING BACK!!!!!!!! The item "1952 TOPPS #311 MICKEY MANTLE ROOKIE CARD RC, NEW YORK YANKEES PSA 3.5 (26026)" is in sale since Thursday, December 07, 2017.
This item is in the category "Sports Mem, Cards & Fan Shop\Sports Trading Cards\Baseball Cards". The seller is "bakendave" and is located in San Diego, California. This item can be shipped to United States.


Sometimes and now, deluxe the joker Catwoman batman photo can help for us to suffer your very bad day. The unique, brightly photoshoped the joker Catwoman batman photo can affect your happiness and creates sensation for you to be incredible. There are so many suggestions in background screens, but you can get several as stated by your sentiment and glamour. If You want to gain photo, ready for rainy days or very gloomy evenings and gain selection of mood altering background screens to have for your screen device? We have lots of top class, High Quality background screens to suggestion from in order that you perhaps will be inquiring in.